How do we eliminate the "gray"?

Hakvag says feminist theorists may be hesitant to blur the distinctions between sexuality and coercion because “perhaps an examination of sexual coercion and internalization of submission within heterosexuality hits too close to home and heterosexual feminists’ own practices” (122). For me personally, I think this statement rings true. As we discussed in our group work on Wednesday, reexamining what defines “normative heterosexuality” often becomes deeply personal because despite sexual identity, we are defined by (and act according to) the constructs of normative heterosexuality. This is not to say that some bodies do not act outside of these constructs, either, but it is essential to address how dominant heteronormative ideas shape identities, relationships, and discourses. Hakvag points to a particular discourse that’s emerging called “gray rape” where consent is unclear by both partners. She argues that this speaks to the need for a re-examination of coercion and normative heterosexual sex beyond just pointing out their blatant intersections; we need to address the root of the cause. I’m thinking about the ways heterosexual interactions are structured around coercion, or are perhaps even “inherently” coercive. Hakvag mentions a few, such as dating behavior and the pursuit sexual activity by men. Traister, in her article “The Game is Rigged”, echoes these examples, and furthers Hakvag’s argument that sexual coercion is deeply gendered. Clearly, coercion does not just exist exclusively within heterosexual relationships or heterosexual sex, but I am interested in the discussion of how it exists outside of sex and in other areas of our lives. Are other forms of coercion “distinctly gendered” within a patriarchal, heteronormative structure and how are they normalized? Traister says we need to “broaden the scope” (of sexual equality), because sex should be more than just consent. But can we even talk about sexual equality if we do not address the vast inequalities that exist within a deeply hierarchal, pervasively normalizing system? I would hope that these conversations could co-exist, the ideas of complicating consent and thinking about “better”/more equitable sex, but I’m not sure how effective (or even possible) this is without critiquing the “cultural scaffolding” that encompasses them.