ABSTRACT
Consent has become the dominant paradigm in legal and lay discourses for distinguishing sex from sexual violation. However, consent-based models of sexual offending are fl awed in a number of respects. The fi rst two parts of this chapter explore respectively the reasons why consent has been embraced as a framework for evaluating sexual encounters and the problems with this framework, concluding that consent is not an appropriate standard by which to distinguish sex from sexual violation. The third part of the chapter introduces negotiation as a potential alternative framework, focusing on two specifi c law reform proposals put forward by Lois Pineau and Michelle Anderson. This work offers valuable insights for rethinking the sexual offences so as to better refl ect the reality of sexual encounters, but also reproduces some of the problematic aspects of consent frameworks. The fi nal part of the chapter draws on these models alongside original empirical data to develop a concept of ‘freedom to negotiate’. This is proposed as a viable basis around which to reframe sexual offences law.
