Originally posted by: SimsNaiken
I have been tooting the consent horn and I’ll explain my stand again.
I did not deny that his touch was innocent in context. But the bottom line remains as always if and when you are told by ANYONE man or woman don’t touch me.
The immediate response of a 40+ yr old GROWN mature man cannot be IT WAS NOT A BIG DEAL. That’s the problematic thought I cannot defend nor get behind.
Ejaz has confessed he has an issue with touch he of all people should understand that consent matters. You cannot argue with someone that it was an innocent touch if they JUST told you do not touch me. NEVERmind how trivial that matter or the context.
In my world Consent overrules context.
I touched you cause I think we are friends a Pat on the back to say wayta’go you say hey don’t touch me I say Whoa dude sorry it wasn’t intended to discomfort you. Period. In my head I can be like that wasn’t even such a big deal but my feelings at that time don’t matter. It matters you said don’t touch me. Finish.
Context comes after consent.
I see people trying to justify the touch and making all kinds of comments.
It’s very important to understand consent while context is important.
I hope I made some sense to you? Or are we at an impasse?
Firstly, hey! Nice to see you around. I remember you and I were on the same page last season. Anti Shuklapur vaasi's. So, I'll base that as premise and assume henceforth that you're aware of just how much I condemn people invading private spaces.
Outside world, I agree with you without a doubt. Consent overrules context.
Within that mad house? Context is just as important as consent, especially so in this case.
You're speaking solely based on this one particular incident and I'm speaking on the basis of the understanding of the seasons so far. Everyone in that house has touched each other without consent or permission. Sometimes intentionally, sometimes unintentionally. All kinds of pushes and touches, all kinds of invading private spaces and all kinds of non consensual physical interactions.
Eijaaz has been screaming at the top of his lungs that he has an issue with touch. He still gets touched till date? Did him speaking out lout make any difference to the HM's behaviour whatsoever? Not so much. Does Rubina saying the same make any difference? Nope. Has she previously stated that she has an issue with touch? Not that I remember. Should this anyway be a basic right and understanding in people, absolutely. But has it worked on the show that way? Never. Will it ever? I doubt so.
What does that leaves us with? Context. It is through intention, context and then the said action all put together are we able to understand what x person might have done or was aiming to. Then again, there'll be differences here in comprehension. If someone scores zero on all three levels, intention, context and action, then for sure he should be fired off/told off.
In this particular case, Eijaaz neither intended nor has done any kind of violation of consent or physical space. The grown 35 year old woman in question has also put him through tons and tons instances of mocking, ridiculing and shaming for matters that absolutely are none of her concern whatsoever. Most recent? This episode when she took a dig at him about having made rounds to the medical room for his ongoing health/medical issues.
A fully grown and functional woman should also understand and know well that she has no right to dictate people on how much should they be consuming or what should they be consuming. Everyone is an adult over there, they can handle themselves unless she happens to be the rationing authority which she is not. Verbal responses wise, I'm sure we can quote each other innumerable examples of filth spewed by them all at each other.
I hope now I made some sense to you?
Edited by annihilation - 4 years ago