For some reason, this passage reminded me of how Internet companies think about user consent:
“There are certain things black shamans can do—and certain things people trained by them can do. You’ve seen a sample already. There are worse things: transport into the false worlds, into the dream borders, binding forever in places which exist within the mind and have virtually no exits to the outside world. But to do any of these things, the shaman believes that his ritual demands consent. Listen to me, Marianne.”
“I’m listening. You said the ritual demands consent.”
“Remember it. The shamans believe the ritual is necessary to the effect, and they believe that consent is necessary to the ritual. The shaman says to his victim, ‘Will you have some tea?’ And the victim says, ‘Yes, thank you.’ That is consent. In my own library, your brother said to you, ‘Come, let me introduce you to …’ and you nodded yes. That was consent. So she then struck at you.”
“Did the people who went riding consent? If so, to what?”
“More likely, Madame went down to the stables before going to bed last night, taking a few lumps of sugar with her. ‘Here, old boy, have a lump of sugar,’ and the horse nods his head, taking the sugar. He has consented then, and they can use him. So also with dogs, with birds, with anything they can get to take food from their hands. The true victim was to be the horse, whatever horse you might be riding or anyone else might be riding. They are not over scrupulous.”
— Sheri S. Tepper, Marianne, the Magus, and the Manticore