I was walking down Middle Path when I first saw it: a bench. A bench that had not been there the day before. A bench that, all of a sudden, had been placed in my path. A bench with soft pink pillows. A bench that looked, at first, very comfortable. But when I read what it said – ‘This bench does not consent to your sitting on it” – it suddenly felt less comfortable.
The message was clear: no matter how inviting the bench looked, no matter how much I wanted to sit on the pillows, I couldn’t do it. Now, I certainly could have sat on the bench, but that would have defeated the purpose: just because the bench looks inviting, doesn’t mean it wants you to sit on it. I’m guessing that the artist who made the bench intended for it to be a piece that sheds light on campus assaults and sexual misconduct. In this collegiate world, where sexual misconduct reports have been growing on college campuses, where fraternities are shut down due to misconduct, and where campaigns are being created with consent in mind, it’s not unsurprising to find something that deals with consent here, at Kenyon College.
Due to the provocative nature of the piece, the consent bench yielded its fare share of criticism. And people at Kenyon interpreted it in many different ways.
One anonymous student stated: “I think the piece is incredibly strong and the message is clear… but, then again, there’s a large difference between sex or anything physical and a bench.” Another student commented similarly: “It seems like a great idea, but isn’t the bench’s only purpose, as defined by the nature of a bench, to be sat upon? The meaning is lost to me.” Other students agreed: “It doesn’t make sense to me.” When talking about it in class, one of my peers said: “The purpose of a bench is to sit on it. Why would you have a bench you can’t sit on? [But] I definitely believe they were trying to make a connection to consensual sex.”
Some had different ideas. A friend of mine believes that “the purpose of a bench is to sit on it. I thought it was a statement saying that maybe a woman’s internal purpose is to be a sexual figure and it’s sort of saying that people think that women could be taken advantage of because being a sexual being is their purpose. It makes you realize how women are defined in society.”
Others commented on how the pink pillows were too gender-specific, arguing that they were very specifically trying to make the bench symbolize a woman, completely leaving out any male victims of sexual assault.
But the opinion that struck me most was that of a very close friend whose opinions about consent and the way we teach it to girls were incredibly thought-provoking. She commented, “they [schools and educators] teach girls how to prevent it [sexual assault], but not boys that it is wrong. Girls are always taught not to drink, not to wear provocative clothing, and not to be in certain places at certain times since the time they’re in high school. Why are the majority of girls being taught only how to prevent sexual assault? Why aren’t we going to schools and telling people that sexual assault is wrong?”
Her point was excellent, and, I think, encapsulated the idea of the bench perfectly: that consent is, above all, the most important thing. Now, I know we don’t live in a world completely free of sexual assault, and that teaching people how to prevent assault is, indeed, a viable tactic that will keep them safe and may help them in the future – but perhaps if we begin to teach about consent the way we teach prevention, there won’t ever be a need for a consent bench. Maybe that’s the direction we should go towards – maybe we should all walk down the path in direction of the bench.
All images credited to Lindy Wittenberg.