The media and social networks are talking a lot about consent and that in principle is very positive both as support for the soccer player and for all women who are stolen kisses and touched in sports, at night and in all kinds of environments. However, international scientific evidence on consent is almost always ignored, which inevitably leads to hoaxes that limit and harm progress.
The scientific article, published in a top journal, clarifies the two models (prohibition or regulation) that apply to sexual contacts (including kissing on the mouth, whatever it is called) when there are institutional or other power relations between people. The prohibition model condemns any kind of sexual contact between, for example, a university professor and his female student, even if she says she has agreed to it; this is considered the only way to avoid relationships in which students feel forced by their professors. It is clear that, from this model of prohibition, Rubiales’ actions are clearly reprehensible and should have consequences since he occupies a position of power over the players. Taking due account of the globality of dimensions of communicative acts, and not only speech acts, but no matter also what exchange of words there was, it is a forbidden relationship.
The regulatory model considers that between two persons of legal age there can always be consensual relations, even if there are power relations between them, and therefore does not prohibit them. However, if the person who occupies the lower position in the power relationship (student-teacher, player-president) denounces, the other is automatically declared guilty. Also in this case, taking due account of the globality of dimensions of communicative acts, and not only speech acts, but no matter also how many words have been exchanged, it is a forbidden relationship.
The application to the Rubiales case is very clear. In both models (prohibition and regulation) his actions are reprehensible. There is no need to put the magnifying glass to analyze the body movements that both made or the words they uttered, the case is already clear. What some are doing in the media and social networks presenting details that in their denialist assessment introduce the doubt of whether or not there was consensus goes against scientific evidence and is a revictimization.
Primero del mundo en los rankings científicos internacionales en la categoría “Gender Violence”