Indeed, it's two sides of the same coin. Florian has a point that we've pretty much only been discussing the initiator's perspective here.
Because of course, "no" is just as important to teach. It's been and continues to be a huge movement for a reason. But it has so far been putting most of the onus on the person who is not initiating. EC shifts some of that responsibility back while recognizing that in real life, "No means no!" is too simplistic a paradigm to prevent assaults and a-hole behaviour. I don't think anyone wants to argue that no one has any responsibility for saying no, but "No means no!" is only half the solution. We're discussing the other half.