[ SECRET POST #3450 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #3450 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.
[Cracked After Hours]


__________________________________________________



03.
[Disney's Sword in the Stone]


__________________________________________________



04.
[Pokémon Sun and Moon]


__________________________________________________



05.
(Charlie Hunnam)


__________________________________________________



06.
[Jodie Foster]


__________________________________________________



07.
[New Blood]


__________________________________________________



08.
[DC Rebirth]


__________________________________________________



09.
[Jane the virgin / Juana la virgen]











Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 29 secrets from Secret Submission Post #493.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

Is it ethically acceptable to have a sexual relationship with someone with autism? I don't just mean on the spectrum, I mean noticeably autistic? Not non-verbal, but still... noticeably autistic.

[(Anonymous)]

the phrase "noticeably" is as varied and broad by person and observer as the phrase "on the spectrum" so the same answer applies

[(Anonymous)]

Why do you want to know, is this just a thought exercise or are you actually wrestling with sexually abusing a handicapped person?

[dancingmouse]

Autism or not, it's not abuse if the person is of age and is capable of consent.

[(Anonymous)]

What's noticeably autistic?

[(Anonymous)]

"Noticeably autistic" is a useless measure. Are they of age? Do they understand sex enough to consent? Do they consent? That's all that matters.

+100000000

[(Anonymous)]

Thank you. THIS is the criteria to go on.

If they're of age? Okay, go to the next question.
Do they understand sex enough to consent? If no, then DON'T. If yes, go to next question.
Do they consent? If no, GTFO, DO NOT PASS GO, DO NOT COLLECT SEX. If yes, have a merry sexy time.

[dancing_clown]

This. For all the drama and wank this thread has created, this response here is the most digestible and reasonable one.

[(Anonymous)]

Circumstances vary, but in general, no, it's not ok.

What are the genders involved, just out of curiosity?

[(Anonymous)]

noticeably autistic isn't the best way to measure this, you know. True, I can't think if a better way to measure this, but you won;t be getting any guidance with this the way you have it.

[kallanda_lee]

If you think they are capable of consent....yes? My ex had autism, though they were high-functioning.

[(Anonymous)]

I want you to clarify what "noticeably" means. But to be honest that's really just so that I can yell at you for being ableist. I'm pretty sure this is ableist to begin with but I want you to dig a bigger hole for yourself.

[(Anonymous)]

I see your problem. If S/he isn't high functioning but is still verbal, they could say yes to sex, but how can you know they understand the emotional impact of the act?

I'd say no, just don't do it just to be safe. And it shouldn't matter, but I'd really don't do it if you're a man and the person with autism is a woman. If you're lucky the courts won't decide you're a rapist, but society will and there's no getting away from that.

[sparrow_lately]

If the person isn't fully capable of giving consent then your relationship is unethical and you know it. If you have to wonder if they're capable of giving consent, that might not be the be all and end all for them, but it says a whole lot about your relationship with them. :/

[(Anonymous)]

This trolling though!

[(Anonymous)]

Noticeably is subjective. Some people would say I am noticeable and some would say they don't notice (I've encountered both). It's really a useless denominator for measuring the ethics of it. I'd need more concrete information to judge.

Taking advantage of a person who cannot properly consent is bad. However I wish people would realize that assuming an autistic person is too mentally challenged to consent because they 'appear noticeable' is a pretty toxic mindset as well because it infantilizes the person.

[feotakahari]

If they can say yes and mean it, it's okay. (As for telling whether they mean it, how would you tell with someone who wasn't "noticeably autistic"?)

[(Anonymous)]

"Noticeably autistic" is definitely vague.

The important things to note are:

Are they of both a mental and physical age where they understand what sex is (basically, can they give informed consent?).

Are they capable of handling birth control?

Could they handle possible ramifications of sex (pregnancy/impregnating a partner or an STD)?

If the answer is "no" to any of these, stop. Do not pass go. Do not collect $200.

warning tl;dr serious answer

[herpymcderp]

A complicated question, OP. A fairly large percentage of people with autism are still capable of giving consent and understanding sex and sexuality. If this is the case, then it's not unethical to have sex with someone who is autistic.

If you're talking about someone with autism who also happens to fall into category of mental retardation, that is a different question. Autism and mental retardation are not necessarily the same thing, though there does tend to be some crossover. This is also not to say that someone with a degree of retardation is incapable of giving consent! It is to say that in these cases one must carefully consider whether or not coercion or power imbalance is a factor in decision making.

There are plenty of people with mental disabilities who enter into willing, healthy, and fulfilling sexual relationships... so it's really sort of a case of needing to assess individual capabilities and boundaries.

I think the best example I've heard came from a prof I had in my first year psych classes in undergrad, where she described a couple she was counselling. Both were sub 90 IQ, one was autistic. They had been married for five years, quite happily, and were able to live together with minimal outside interference. The big question in that relationship came about when the couple wanted to consider raising children, and that's where the real discussions about competency and ability came up. They eventually, with counselling, decided that they would not conceive as it would prove too much for either of them to manage in addition to their normal routines.

To me this really shows that sex and sexuality are not that big of a deal as long as consequences are understood by all parties.

tl;dr It depends on the people in question, anon.

(frozen comment) Absolutely not.

[(Anonymous)]

They cannot fully consent. I mean the whole sctick autists use to get out of consequences for their actions is "but I couldn't understand properly, I'm autistic", which means they cannot give full and informed consent to a sexual activity. Having sex with an autistic, even if they say yes, is in the same boat as sex with a drunk or sex with a minor, it is rape.

[(Anonymous)]

If you have to ask, you probably know that the person in question isn't capable of informed consent.

[(Anonymous)]

High functioning: I suppose so.

Low functioning: Certainly not, because they'd be too much at your mercy and easily manipulated. That's an unhealthy relationship, at best.

[(Anonymous)]

Autistic people aren't too stupid to have sex, thanks. Heck, even severely mentally handicapped people have sex sometimes.

[diet_poison]

wtf does "noticeably autistic" mean?

[insanenoodlyguy]

If they are capable of sexual consent and have an average intelligence or higher, I'd say it's fine. If they have significant impairments beyond mere social situations, you get increasingly muddy waters till it's not mud.