How Consent Can—and Cannot—Help Us Have Better Sex

Consent Is Not Enough: Rethinking the Path to Better Sex. The journey to understanding what makes sex just and pleasurable has long revolved around the concept of consent, but beneath the surface, the story is more complicated, more fraught, and in many ways unresolved. The struggle for legal recognition of marital rape in America, once unthinkable, emerged only in the late 1970s, highlighted by the harrowing case of Greta Hibbard in Oregon. Her story, and that of her husband's subsequent trials decades later, reveals how deeply social and legal systems have resisted seeing women as full agents in their intimate lives. Even now, despite legal advances, intimate partner rape remains distressingly common, and the battle for justice is ongoing. Legal frameworks have shifted, but the philosophical and cultural debates rage on. Feminists of past generations questioned whether real consent was ever possible for women under patriarchy, likening their predicament to that of serfs who may “choose” to work the land but have no real alternatives. Today, the conversation has moved—women are generally seen as able to consent, even in transactions of sex for money, but questions about power imbalances, vulnerability, and what counts as “free and intelligent” agreement persist. These questions become even thornier when considering children, people with disabilities, or those entangled in relationships with authority figures. The critique of consent runs in two directions. On one hand, some argue it's too permissive, failing to account for subtle forms of coercion or manipulation. On the other, it's seen as too restrictive, turning every misunderstanding or unenthusiastic encounter into a potential crime and threatening to stifle sexual exploration and autonomy. The rise of “yes means yes” on college campuses, and the backlash against it, has exposed the limits of rule-based approaches and the dangers of bureaucratizing desire. At the same time, movements like #MeToo have shown how sexual violence is still pervasive, how hard it is for victims to be believed, and how the pursuit of justice is often brutally uneven. New thinkers are trying to break this impasse by moving beyond consent as the ultimate standard. The latest wave of books suggests that focusing solely on agreement risks flattening the complexity of sex, dividing it into either “awesome” or “rape,” and reinforcing old stereotypes about male pursuit and female reluctance. Instead, the emphasis is shifting toward the idea of sexual agency—the ability not just to say yes or no, but to actively shape one's erotic life, to invite, reject, negotiate, and pursue pleasure as an equal. But agency doesn't exist in a vacuum. It depends on what philosopher Quill Kukla calls “scaffolding”—the practical, material supports that make it possible to act freely and safely. A locked door, affordable birth control, public transportation, financial independence—these can all be the invisible structures that determine whether someone can make real choices about sex. Too often, people are trapped in “monstrous architectures” that steal their agency, long before any question of consent arises. Ultimately, the quest for better sex cannot be reduced to a checklist or a legal contract. It demands a world where people have power over their own lives, where communication and desire are nurtured, and where justice means more than punishment. The conversation must move beyond the bare minimum of consent, toward building the conditions where everyone—regardless of gender, status, or history—can pursue sex that is not just legal, but truly good.