The cruel optimism of sexual consent

  • Alisa KesselEmail author


This article intervenes in a critical debate about the use of consent to distinguish sex from rape. Drawing from critical contract theories, it argues that sexual consent is a cruel optimism that often operates to facilitate, rather than alleviate, sexual violence. Sexual consent as a cruel optimism promises to simplify rape allegations in the popular cultural imagination, confounds the distinction between victims and agents of sexual violence, and establishes certainty for potential victimizers who rely on it to convince themselves and others that their partners implicitly or explicitly agreed to sex. In each of these cases, the power of consent rests in its tendency to obscure sexual violence in a set of questions around victimhood and agency, rather than to clarify whether or when it has occurred. Following in the critical contract tradition, this article argues that the optimistic attachment to the clarifying power of consent helps to explain the persistent commitment to better sexual consent as a ‘solution’ to the problems of rape and sexual violence, and that this ‘solution’ is insufficient to the task.


sexual violence rape consent cruel optimism 



Although many friends and colleagues have contributed to my thinking on this piece, I want to extend special thanks to the colleagues who gave very particular and detailed feedback on drafts of this article: Vicki Hsueh, Shirin Deylami, Michaele Ferguson, Paul Apostolidis, Farhana Loonat, Jamie Mayerfeld, Gregg Miller, Jeanne Morefield, Mara Marin, Heather Pincock, Joel Schlosser, Tiffany MacBain, and Alison Tracy Hale. I also extend gratitude to the two anonymous reviewers and the editors of CPT who offered such careful and generative recommendations for revision.


  1. Alcoff, L.M. (2018) Rape and Resistance. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
  2. Beitsch, R. (2018) #MeToo movement has lawmakers talking about consent, Pew Trusts, 23 January,
  3. Berlant, L. (2011) Cruel Optimism. Durham: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Blinder, A. (2018) U.S. Reopens Emmett Till Investigation, Almost 63 Years After His Murder, New York Times, accessed 12 July.Google Scholar
  5. Bourke, J. (2007) Rape: Sex, Violence, History. London: Virago.Google Scholar
  6. Bradley, L. (2015) Critics of Sansa’s rape scene on Game of Thrones are missing the point, Slate, 19 May,
  7. Brodsky, A. (2017) Rape-adjacent: Imagining legal responses to nonconsensual condom removal. Columbia Journal of Gender and Law 32(2): 183–210.Google Scholar
  8. Brown, W. (1995) States of Injury: Power and Freedom in Late Modernity. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Brownmiller, S. (1975) Against Our Will: Men, Women, and Rape. New York: Fawcett Books.Google Scholar
  10. Brundage, J. (1987) Law, Sex, and Christian Society in Medieval Europe. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Crenshaw, K. (1992) Whose story is it, anyway?: Feminist and antiracist appropriations of Anita Hill. In T. Morrison (ed.) Race-ing Justice, En-gendering Power. New York: Pantheon, pp. 402–440.Google Scholar
  12. Davis, A.Y. (1983) Women, Race and Class. New York: Vintage Books.Google Scholar
  13. Davis, A.Y. (1990) Women, Culture and Politics. New York: Vintage Books.Google Scholar
  14. D’Cruze, S. (2012) Sexual violence in history: A contemporary heritage. In J.M. Brown and S.L. Valklate (eds.) Handbook on Sexual Violence. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  15. Donovan, K. and Brown, J. (2014) CBC fires Jian Ghomeshi over sex allegations, Toronto Star, 26 October.Google Scholar
  16. Dworkin, A. (1987) Intercourse. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  17. Ferreday, D. (2015) Game of thrones, rape culture, and feminist fandom. Australian Feminist Studies 30(83): 21–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Fischel, J. and O’Connell, H. (2016) Disabling consent, or reconstructing sexual autonomy. Columbia Journal of Gender and Law 30(2): 428–528.Google Scholar
  19. Freedman, E. (2013) Redefining Rape: Sexual Violence in the Era of Suffrage and Segregation. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Haag, P. (1999) Consent: Sexual Rights and the Transformation of American Liberalism. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Harris-Perry, M. (2011) Sister Citizen: Shame, Stereotypes, and Black Women in America. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Jones, R. (2016) Young men, get a “yes” text before sex CNN, 26 November 2013,, accessed 15 March 2016.
  23. Keating, C. (2011) Decolonizing Democracy: Transforming the Social Contract in India. University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Laiou, A.E. (ed.) (1993) Consent and Coercion to Sex and Marriage in Ancient and Medieval Societies. Washington, D.C.: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection.Google Scholar
  25. MacKinnon, C. (1987) Feminism Unmodified. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  26. MacKinnon, C. (2016) Rape redefined. Harvard Law and Policy Review,10, 431–477.Google Scholar
  27. MacKinnon, C. (2005) Women’s Lives, Men’s Laws. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press.Google Scholar
  28. Manne, K. (2018) Down Girl: The Logic of Misogyny. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  29. Marcotte, A. (2015) For Once, Game of Thrones treats rape with the gravity it deserves, Slate, 18 May.
  30. Marcus, S. (1992) Fighting bodies, fighting words: A theory and politics of rape prevention. In J. Butler and J. Scott (eds.) Feminists Theorize the Political. New York: Routledge, pp. 385–403.Google Scholar
  31. Mardorossian, C. (2014) Framing the Rape Victim: Gender and Agency Reconsidered. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar
  32. Martin, D. (2014) Breaking Down Jaime and Cersi’s controversial scene with last night’s Game of Thrones Director, Vulture, 21 April.
  33. Mills, C. (1997) The Racial Contract. London: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Mills, C. (2017) Black Rights/White Wrongs: The Critique of Racial Liberalism. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. North Carolina State Legislature. (2019) SB 563.
  36. Pateman, C. (1980) Women and consent. Political Theory 8(2): 149–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Pateman, C. (1988) The Sexual Contract. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  38. Petrilla, M. (2015) Can an app help reduce sexual assault on college campuses? Fortune, 1 September,
  39. Phillips, A. (2013) Our Bodies: Whose Property?. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Pitkin, H. (1965) Obligation and consent—I. American Political Science Review 59(4): 990–999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Richie, B. (2012) Arrested Justice: Black Women, Violence, and America’s Prison Nation. NewYork: New York University Press.Google Scholar
  42. Shanks, T. (2015) Affect, critique, and the social contract. Theory and Event 18(1): 1–15.Google Scholar
  43. Silman, A. (2015) “Game of Thrones” stars defend disturbing sex scene: “It wasn’t rape,” Salon. 8 April
  44. Simplican, S.C. (2015) The Capacity Contract: Intellectual Disability and the Question of Citizenship. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Stewart, E. (2019) Sen. Martha McSally coming forward about her rape could be a watershed moment for Republican women, Vox, 7March
  46. Tumulty, K. (2019) Sen. Martha McSally’s #MeToo rape revelation took guts—maybe as much as her actions in uniform, Seattle Times, 6 March,
  47. Zarya, V. (2018) Is Blockchain the answer to consensual sex? Fortune, 16 January

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Limited 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of Puget SoundTacoma, WA 98416USA

Personalised recommendations