I finally listened to that voice memo about that guy who wanted a second date,

I finally listened to that voice memo about that guy who wanted a second date, and I think I have a really unpopular opinion. I totally get creators who are like, consent is cool, and he was just trying to get consent. but I don't actually think he was trying to get consent. And as an attorney, I want to also explain why I think this is so problematic. First of all, he was being very disrespectful to the woman. Right? He was saying, what's the point of coming over? There's no point of having a relationship unless we can have sex, knowing full well that sex is something that, in general, casual sex is much less risky for the man than for the woman, because you could get, you know, STDs, you could get pregnant. Um, in general, women are less physically able to ward off an attack, a sexual attack. Right? So first of all, he was. Greg is doing something that's vastly seen as, like, a favour for the man. It's easier for the man or less risky for the man. And he was saying, there's no point in me even spending time with you or hanging out if you're not gonna give me this thing. Number two, in the voice note, he says, I already know. You said, I'm not sure. Or you said, no, you said you didn't necessarily wanna do that, but then, like, why would I even come over? To let me convince you more so she already expressed discomfort, and he's still pressuring her, which is not a good sign. And that's again, he's not trying to get consent. He's trying to put her in a situation where he feels he's pressuring her enough that she feels like she has to offer this guy sex to continue a relationship with him. Which leads me to the really big issue. What if you then revoke consent? The way that he framed that message was, if you agree for me to come over, I'm telling you up front, I don't wanna just date you. I'm coming over because I want to have sex with you. And so if I come over and you do not have sex with me, you're violating my consent, my contract that he's trying to create here, saying if I come over, you're guaranteeing me sex. So what happens if she changes her mind? He's going to argue. While you already consented. That's the only reason I came over. I relied on it. This is an argument I hear men say all the time, forgetting that an actual contract law. I can tell you this is an attorney. Also, this is not a contract! There is no specific performance. You cannot demand that somebody give you specific performance. If it is an act that requires your physical body. You service contracts, you cannot demand specific performance. You can demand damages, but basically, you can't require somebody do that act. Right? So somebody can back out at Any time saying, I don't care, I changed my mind. But he's pretending as if that would not be valid because the only reason he came to you in the first place was to have sex. And that is incredibly bad. Not to mention the number of cases I've seen where there's, like, a voicemail or a text like this, and then there is some form of assault or even rape, and then the guy argues after the fact. Well, it couldn't have been because she gave me consent, or I wouldn't have come over at all. I mean, didn't we literally see this with the Graham Plattner case? So, yeah, I. I really care about consent. I don't agree with all the creators out there who are saying this voice note is about consent. I think it's about manipulation, and I think it's about harm, and I would not go out with this person again. But I do agree posting a voice note of someone without their permission is sketchy, and, like, that's a whole other consent issue. And, like, maybe you should have blurred the voice. That's a whole other conversation. I'm a data privacy attorney as well, and I really care about that, but, like, really big issue here. The voicemail. Not okay. Follow me for more. If you're a superhero, you don't have to agree with me to follow me.