Sexual Consent in the Post-MeToo World: A Study in Philosophy and Law

2017年和2018年的#MeToo运动是一场名副其实的文化和政治海啸，其全部影响仍在发挥作用。在其持续的后果中，世界继续考虑性骚扰，剥削甚至强奸的绝对规模和世俗性，这被揭示为许多女性经历的一个方面，在许多不同的生活领域。#MeToo是一个分水岭，可以肯定的是，我们对性、同意和权力的看法将永远不会相同。现在我们正处于余波之中——或者说余震之中——内在的问题是，事情应该如何改变，应该采取什么行动（可能包括法律）来灌输一种新的性伦理，以及应该对那些“我也是”运动认定有不当性行为的人采取什么措施，但刑法却没有（或尚未）对他们采取什么措施。某些纠正立场现在得到了近乎普遍的支持。它们包括对性领域权力不平衡运作的新认识；双方同意的性行为往往具有剥削性质，以及严重和随意的性骚扰对受害者（主要是女性）生活的严重后果，无论是在工作场所还是在工作场所之外。尽管如此，仍有一些问题继续分裂和困惑。何种程度的压力，或何种类型的欺骗，有效地使性行为的同意无效？如果一个人被揭露过去曾以当时社会可以接受的方式性骚扰他人，那么他应该受到怎样的惩罚？为了让B合理地得出A同意这种性行为的结论，A是否需要表达对性的肯定和热情的渴望？强奸的罪责（或犯罪意图）条件应该如何准确地表述？“相信女人”是什么意思，这一要求如何与无罪推定相互作用？我们是否应该在社会生活中，或者在我们的就业决定中，采用一种与刑法相呼应的无罪推定？当女性提出性侵犯指控时，这样做是否符合“相信女性”的倾向？在生活或法律上，是否会像美国大学校园中越来越多的情况那样，通过接受所谓的“肯定”同意标准来对抗#MeToo所暴露的令人震惊的性行为？这些问题既难又不舒服。该项目将借鉴哲学、法律和政治领域长期以来的前沿学术成果，进一步探索这些问题的答案。一系列录下来的对话将在网上播出，以一种易于理解的方式传播不同学科的学者对项目问题的看法。在为普通观众设计的电影和文字输出中，它将把更多的学术辩论注入到公共话语中，将当前的、局部的争议与长期存在于哲学中的更深层次的争议联系起来，并将为性同意和性不法行为的法律提供急需的清晰度。法律问题和道德问题将被分开分析。该项目的重大问题将通过参与现实生活案例来解决，其中许多案例来自媒体的关注，并将哲学、法律和政治方面的批判性思维应用于他们提出的问题。在法律领域，政策制定者和法律从业人员将与学术界直接对话，审议法律改革在促进更好的性行为方面可能发挥的作用。从根本上说，“我也是”运动的问题是正义的问题：性别正义、刑事正义，以及在一个不平等的世界里就性别问题进行谈判所涉及的正义。正如对待所有正义问题一样，我们不应期待简单的答案；但这个项目的目标是在这方面有所作为。

The #MeToo movement of 2017 and 2018 was a veritable cultural and political tsunami, whose full implications are still very much playing out. In its ongoing aftermath, the world continues to reckon with the sheer scale and mundaneness of the sexual harassment, exploitation, and even rape, which was revealed to be an aspect of so many women's experience, in so many different walks of life. #MeToo was a watershed moment, and it is safe to conclude that our thinking about sex, consent, and power will never be the same. Now that we are in the aftermath-or aftershock-the immanent questions are how things ought to be different, what actions ought to be taken (including, possibly, by the law) to inculcate a new ethic of sex, as well as what should be done about those whom #MeToo has found culpable of sexual misconduct, but whom the criminal law has not (or not yet). Certain corrective stances now enjoy near-universal support. They include a new appreciation of the operation of power imbalances in the sexual domain; of the often-exploitative character of consensual sex, and the serious consequences of both severe and casual sexual harassment on the lives of victims, largely women, inside the workplace and outside of it. Every bit as much, though, there are questions which continue to divide and to puzzle. What degrees of pressure, or which kinds of deceptions, effectively invalidate consent to sexual activity? What are the appropriate repercussions for a person who is revealed to have sexually harassed people in the past in ways that were, at the time, socially acceptable? Need A express an affirmative and enthusiastic desire for sex in order for B to reasonably draw the conclusion that A consented to that sex? How should the culpability (or mens rea) condition for rape be formulated exactly? What does it mean to "Believe Women", and how does this imperative interact with the presumption of innocence? Ought we to adopt a presumption of innocence in social life, or in our employment decisions, which echoes that of the criminal law? Is so doing compatible with the disposition to "believe women" when they make sexual assault allegations? Would the egregious sexual practices exposed by #MeToo be combatted by embracing, in life or law, a so-called 'affirmative' standard of consent, as is increasingly the case on American college campuses? These questions are as difficult as they are uncomfortable. This project will draw on long-standing and cutting-edge scholarship across philosophy, law, and politics, to further the answers to them. A series of filmed conversations broadcast online, will disseminate, in an accessible manner, the ideas of scholars working across different disciplines which bear on the project's questions. In both its filmed and written outputs, designed for a general audience, it will inject more of these scholarly debates into the public discourse, connecting up current, topical controversies with deeper ones of long philosophical standing, and will offer much-needed clarity about the law of sexual consent and sexual wrongdoing. Questions of law and ethics will be helpfully prised apart. The project's big questions will be tackled through engaging with real life cases, many familiar from the media attention they received, and applying critical thinking in philosophy, law, and politics, to the issues they throw up. In the legal sphere, policy-makers and legal practitioners will be brought into direct conversation with academics to consider what role legal reform may have to play in promoting better sexual practice. The problems of #MeToo are, at bottom, problems of justice: gender justice, criminal justice, and the justice involved in negotiating sex in an unequal world. As with all problems of justice, we should not expect simple answers; but this project aims to make a dent in them.