You make some excellent points. But I have a couple of questions or requests for clarifications. You write:

"Consent only occurs when a woman clearly says yes. Consent is not being naked, it’s not kissing, and it’s not touching or flirting. It’s a clear, freely given yes, which is not the same as the absence of a no."

If a man and a woman are, by mutual consent, alone in a house, or an apartment, or a dorm room, or even a bedroom, and are engaged in some extended kissing, and the woman then stands and removes all her clothes, but does not give a “freely given yes,” is not a consent nevertheless thereby implied? Did she take her clothing off because, in that moment, she wanted him to paint her nude portrait? To follow your writing, even under those circumstances or similar circumstances, there is no consent absent her audibly spoken word "yes." The scenario which I have just described may not be consent to all varieties of sex or specific acts within that sexual experience, but doesn’t it sufficiently convey consent to conventional vanilla missionary position P in V sex? I think so. Beyond that most basic coupling, matters are still open to what else will happen in that scenario, and there is still some room for either further manifestation of consent, or declining.

But when that further “more advanced” situation develops, that consent or lack of it is usually signaled non verbally. (I could give a whole bunch of examples, but it is not my intent to be lurid.) Do you disagree? Some years ago, at some college or another, someone proposed handing out pre printed forms where a woman would sign the form indicating her consent to having sex, and without that signed form, consent was presumed to have been declined. I think that pushed the envelope a bit far from reality.

Second, there is a brief mention of an expression of "whether we explicitly wanted to or not." Is there consent only when it is explicit, and cannot be implicit from the circumstances. That would seem to be the unwaivering standard if you extract from the author's quoting DeAndre Levy saying "Consent only occurs when a woman clearly says yes." If it must be "said," (I assume that written consent would do, too) that would exclude presuming consent even in situations where the woman is the aggressor. I can see it now. "Pardon me ma'am, but would you kindly put your clothing back on until you have signed this form I conveniently have right here? Oh, and let me see if I can make a call and get a Notary Public to stop by to confirm that it was you that signed the document and did so voluntarily. You do have a photo ID handy, don't you?"

Third, the article also stated,

"I and many other women enjoy a man who takes charge and goes for what he wants. That doesn’t mean it’s not important to ensure that the other party wants it too. There’s a line between dominance and disregard." Exactly, but where is that line, and how do you know where it is in a particular situation. How does a man know how to distinguish "this is a situation where she will enjoy it if I take charge," and she will appreciate my doing so doing so, from, "well she hasn't given me formal consent, so I better hold off until she signs this form," and she may not like that because what she was expecting was the very show of confidence that he was hesitant to provide, out of fear that she would characterize that as an action taken without her consent. Part of that desire for a showing of confidence may be based upon her desire to feel that she is so sexually attractive, that he is motivated to, or at least finds it difficult to resist, move forward in their sexual interaction. If I credit so many articles for what they say about men being responsible for seeking some affirmative consent, it seems that men are being told that this this unexpressed and unclarified distinction is something they should intuitively understand, on pain of being accused of sexual misconduct if they are wrong. Obviously, I am not talking about where there has been an unequivocal expression of "no," or where a man has been obviously pushed away, but about whether neither "yes" nor "no" has been spoken, nor has there been there some unequivocal expression of "no." I don't have the solution, but is that really fair?

My point in all this is not to set up a straw man only to knock him down, but to shown that this is not as simple as many would have us believe. Are there overly aggressive men, without a doubt. Are there well intentioned men who are left wondering what is and is not appropriate, also without a doubt. If an explicit "yes" is the only acceptable standard, it puts undue responsibility on men, and, in some cases I believe, will result in some disappointment by women.

To me it all says that a woman may respond to a show of confidence with appreciation when it suits her, but may respond to THE VERY SAME show of confidence with a later assertion that she did not consent, when that suits her.