It seems a lot of people really, REALLY don’t get what ‘consent’ means. From the famous “not everybody needs to be asked prior to each insertion” to the student that (allegedly) thought he’d surprise his partner with some non consensual BDSM to that fucking song to almost every damn comment on any article by anyone that suggests that yes means yes; it seems people really have a problem understanding that before you have sex with someone, and that’s every time you have sex with them, make sure they want to have sex with you. This goes for men, women, everyone. Whoever you are initiating sexytimes with, just make sure they are actually genuinely up for it. That’s it. It’s not hard. Really.

I talked about consent in all of the sex education workshops I ran, and I would sometimes explain it this way, really throttling the metaphor to death: Let’s say you want to invite your friend to get dinner at a restaurant. Do you say “Do you want to have dinner?” and leave it at that? Or do you ask more questions: “Anything you’re particularly in the mood for? Are you allergic to certain foods? Is there anything new you want to try?” What if you got to the restaurant, and your friend said, “Okay, I know I said I was in the mood for this, but I actually feel like I want something else instead.” And what if you were eating, and then your friend was full and wanted to stop?

I never added this, but I should have: What if your boss invited you out for dinner, not your friend? Would that change the way you answered? Would it be harder to tell them you weren’t interested in the restaurants they suggested? Does that power differential make it harder to say no, knowing that there could be consequences? Our culture has flattened this nuance when we talk about consent. Saying “no” is one thing (a very important thing), but what does it mean to face the potential of violence for your “no”? How will that change the quality of your “yes”? We are expected to ignore all of the ways we could be punished, or else learn to eat whatever is being served without complaint.

There’s an availability bias at the core of people’s (incorrect) perception that data protection is mostly about security - mostly created by security product vendors who only talk about security when at data protection events

Dear security product vendors, if you only talk about GDPR in terms of information security, you’re a) doing it wrong and b) doing everyone a disservice
How privacy-respectful is *your* product? How does it mitigate risk to the DATA SUBJECTS’ rights and freedoms?

Another case of passive constructions hiding perpetrators (e.g. 'a cyclist was hit by a car', er, no, a driver hit a cyclist). "interesting" that it's most commonly used to shield drivers, law enforcement, and sexual harassers.

‘Fallen victim’ ...it’s not a hole she didn’t see and stumbled into. It’s not something she has a choice over. Someone ELSE made an active choice to violate and betray her trust by sharing intimate details/footage/photos. This is not her fault in any way shape or form.

Love Island’s Zara McDermott has ‘fallen victim to revenge porn'

Our layered privacy notice is an example of how you can present your privacy information. Privacy notices must be accessible and should not be complicated for the reader. For more information or to read our Privacy Notice in full go to: https://ico.org.uk/global/privacy-notice/

But before you download any apps, here’s something to think about: The La Liga app, which is the official streaming app for Spain’s most popular football league, has reportedly been using the microphones on fans’ phones to root out unauthorized broadcasts of matches in public venues like bars and restaurants.