I love innovation. That's actually the meaning behind my provocative account name on steemit. Technology fascinates and attracts me, and I believe that technological innovation helps make our lives better and will continue to do so. But that is not always the case. Some applications of innovative technologies are, in my opinion, doing the opposite; they are using technology to (unintentionally) try and make our lives worse.
One such example that I've recently come across (HT to @didic) is LegalFling.io , a service that dubs itself as "the first blockchain based app to verify explicit consent before having sex". Technically, it's an app that works on Live Contract tokens on the Waves platform and kind-of lets people save their sexual consent on the blockchain in an attempt to give some kind of legal protection to the participants in sexual activities.
I find this utterly ridiculous and possibly dangerous.
Why Sex Cannot Be Regulated
Consent is a tricky thing. It has borders that can be flexible according to situation. For example, you might agree to anal penetration but change your mind as soon as you see how big my strap-on is. At this point, instead of just saying "no, that will not fit" you need to pull out your mobile phone and update your contract record on the blockchain. If that doesn't kill the mood, I don't know what can.
The way I see it, the only advantage to such a tool is its ability to enforce mindfulness. For example, when given the time to think and consider (and enter it into the blockchain), I might decide I am not that interested in the dude I just met at the party if I really need to think hard about what I want and do not want to be doing with them when I get home. The commitment of it makes me reconsider.
(Source: https://twitter.com/LuxAlptraum/status/951181937753944064)
And then there's the whole legal side of things, that creates an absurd situation when one's change of heart must be entered into the blockchain.
So going back to the above example, if you use the app to agree to BDSM and anal sex, and we sign our little Live Contract, and you then change your mind? Technically, there's nothing to stop me from raping you. Legally, you've given consent so you're obligated to your side of the deal. It's on the blockchain. So if you find yourself with a torn sphincter at the hospital - I have proof you wanted the buttsex.
The problem here is obvious. But that's not the only problem I see when looking at the app from a broader perspective.
The Legalification of Human Interaction
Consent, when it comes to sexual activities, is not something someone can turn into a legal contract. Sure, some countries (like Sweden) are even trying to make it legally required to get explicit consent before committing a sexual act. But any attempt to make consent a legally binding "yes or no" agreement is bound to fail because that's not how consent works.
The issue here isn't so much technological as it is psychological. Pseudo-legal agreements on the blockchain as part of foreplay cannot replace a human conversation about boundaries mutual activities planned. Sex and sexuality don't work that way. As much as some people might want to it.
(Source: LegalFling.io)
And this isn't only about consent. It's about putting legal contracts on human interaction.
Here's an example:
Let's say I've signed this type of blockchain agreement that forbids me from using explicit language in bed. Weird, but I'll go with it. I get up to the bathroom and stub my toe on the edge of the bed, which causes me to yell out a number of expletives. Can the dude sue me now, for breaking the contract?
And then there's the idea of ticking on and off a preference for BDSM activities. Saying yes or no to BDSM as a whole is ridiculous. While some consider BDSM light spanking and the odd costume on occasion, others have much more extreme desires. How in the world are we meant to put agreement on THOSE in legal terms, tokenized and forever sealed on the blockchain?
Consent is an ongoing, ever-changing state that cannot be tokenized. It is a process, rather than a contract. Unlike most contracts, where the people involved are legally bound to the mutually agreed-upon terms, in intercourse we conduct a physical and verbal exchange of desires, preferences and boundaries in real-time. An app simply cannot do that.
Why does this app even exist?
In my opinion this app was conceived because developers just aren't psychologists. If they were, they would understand that the blockchain is hardly the place for such contracts. Perhaps they would see that with all of its abilities and advantages, technology will never be able to replace the human interaction necessary for the continuous and true expression of explicit consent.
Edit: Some people theorized that this app is nothing but a hoax to attract attention to the Live Contracts ICO. This is quite possible, but I don't see how this brings positive attention to a serious startup (that doesn't even list the app on their website). Especially one with 2 female members on a team of 6.
-=-=-