Linguistically Speaking

No!

Kulick argues that in sexual contexts, 'no' produces a feminine or subordinate subject position for the person who utters it. That is why 'no' may be construed (in the case of sadomasochism, must be) as submission rather than refusal; it is also why men who claim 'homosexual panic' are not necessarily asked whether, instead of physically attacking the man who approached them, they could not simply have said no. [...] [Thus], the utterance or non-utterance of 'no' in response to another's desire is performative of gender.

Cameron, Deborah and Don Kulick. 2003. "Introduction: Language and Desire in Theory and Practice." In: Language & Communication 23, 93-105.
barbara... - 10. Oct, 20:13

?!?!

very very weird way of looking at things..

si1ja - 11. Oct, 14:19

Yup

In my view, it makes some sense, though!
He basically looked at the interpretation of 'no' in three contexts: sadomasochistic practices; rape; and homosexual encounters. This interpretation of 'no' (a subconscious one, of course) may explain why in cases of sexual harrassment/rape there are often very contradictory views on whether the victim 'wanted' to do it or not.

 
Cartoons
Deutsche Literatur
Dialectology
Discourse Analysis
Entertainment
Feministische Linguistik
Global English
Highlight Quotes
Images
Links
Metaphor Theory
Narrative Theory
Nobel Prize Laureates
Pidgins & Creoles
Poems
Teaching
Profil
Logout
Subscribe Weblog