Consent is now everywhere. Between high-profile accusations from the likes of Harvey Weinstein and, more recently, comedian Aziz Ansari, the conversation has shifted from vague assumptions to honest, inevitable discussion. Some people participate in these changes. Some are looking for ways to protect themselves from future accusations.
Enter LegalFling.
The app was developed by Dutch company LegalThings and is currently under development and seeking funding. The premise is simple on the surface. Record sexual consent agreements and store them on the blockchain. The idea is that if something goes wrong, you have proof. The website advertises it as a way to have a “fun night” with a new partner. Open the app, scroll to your contacts and send your request. Settings, including hard limits, are sent automatically.
The company calls this “real-time contracting.” They claim this is a legally binding agreement. According to their website, the goal is to set clear rules and boundaries. Don’t break it. Of course they added a disclaimer. The weight of this matter in court depends entirely on your country of residence.
What does the contract actually include?
This app allows partners to set exact parameters. We are talking about clear language. Take photos and videos. Insist that your partner is free of STDs. Is condom use mandatory?
Boston criminal lawyer Keren Goldenberg likes to force communication. Most of us feel uncomfortable discussing happiness and boundaries. We felt unprepared. Apps fill this gap. This makes the feeling of discomfort tangible.
But here’s the problem. Goldenberg cautions that sex contracts are not the legally binding tools for obtaining consent that people think they are.
“Imagine a scenario where two people are going to have casual sex and ask for consent through an app. One of the participants then changes his mind and reports to the police that he was forced to do what he originally agreed to. That’s enough to charge the partner with sexual assault.”
This agreement may affect the defendant’s mental state. This shows why they “think” their partner agreed. If the plaintiff does not clearly state his wish, the agreement becomes part of the jury’s consideration. This is proof. This is not a final defense. It does not act as a shield.
Can I withdraw my consent with one click?
LegalFling’s website states that consent can be withdrawn at any time. One touch. Or it may only work for a few hours.
This highlights a fundamental misunderstanding of how consent works. This is not a set-it-and-forget-it checkbox. Astroglide sexologist Dr. Jess O’Reilly points out that affirmative consent doesn’t mean checking a box. Are you checking this box because you really want to behave this way, or is it because your partner is watching you and putting pressure on you?
People change their minds. My feelings change from day to day. The same partner can feel like a dream on Tuesday and a burden on Wednesday.
Is this really new?
It’s not as groundbreaking as it sounds. People start negotiating about sex informally. Many people use texting to set boundaries. Some people use apps like InTheMood to share their moods. LegalFling is based on existing digital methods. It adds legal force to something that would otherwise have no legal effect.
Kristen Gilbert, director of education at Options for Sexual Health, points out that many of us don’t have the experience to talk openly about our bodies and our values. Frankly, we’re not ready yet. Apps like this one try to bridge this communication gap.
But this trend also has a dark side. Instead of listening to the #MeToo experience, many reacted defensively. Such applications appeal to people who think the only solution is a contract. This suggests that intimacy is not a connection to be explored, but a responsibility to be managed.
Swedish precedent
The debate about consent is growing around the world. Sweden proposes changes to the Consent Act. According to the new proposal, someone could be prosecuted for rape if it is shown that the complainant did not give clear verbal consent or will. The previous law required that threats and violence be considered rape.
This shift from demands for violence to demands for affirmative action is significant. This is consistent with the idea that consent should be active rather than passive.
Conclusion
If you’re coming from the perspective of “I’m signing this contract so I can cover my ass,” you’re starting a sexual relationship in the wrong place. This is not a good basis.
Consent is ongoing. This is subtle. It is human. Blockchain entries cannot capture the complexity of a moment. You won’t be able to capture the hesitation, glee, or subtle energy shifts that indicate a “pause” before you speak.
Data can be stored in a distributed ledger. You can’t store trust. And intimacy requires both.
