How "dark" is an erotic story allowed to be for fun?

[RaleighRotten]

I suppose it depends on what you mean by transgressive content! Does it merely depict darker themes? Does it endorse them? Is it a step-by-step guide on how to babytrap a woman? I think there's a certain amount of sense you'll need to apply on how 'responsible' you need to be. And of course, whether or not you want the response you garner from your audience and if you're prepared for it. Though, most people who want to publish 'harmful' content, are not going to be on this thread debating whether or not they want to publish their indepth guide on assault. They'll do it where they know they're not going to get any pushback.

Anyway, this is a longwinded way to say that dark fiction, extreme horror and gross things should be protected from censorship, though it might be a good idea to let people know what they're in for at the beginning, at least in vague terms? Or perhaps adequately foreshadow it or categorize it properly.

 

[FantasySharer1]

Once a character experiences true hate/horror/fear - it's too dark (for me).

Reluctance is always fun, even force/coercion as long as the character ends up realizing from the bottom of their heart: "i actually like this" or "this is exactly what I needed and I didn't know it I'm so happy I have it now".

Even a reluctant cuckold who hates watching his wife get fucked but at the same time can't stop the arousal that results and enjoys watching it - isn't too dark - because he still has some attraction to it at the end of day.

But if you take away all positivity and all you have is disgust/fear - then it's too much. I don't enjoy reading anyone *actually suffer*.

 

[MillieDynamite]

Well, suffering is part of the human existence. Forget the afterlife; we all have issues that hurt us deeply in our lives. Writing about them can be cathartic, and reading about them is as well. Just like watching horror movies releases your fears.

Once a character experiences true hate/horror/fear - it's too dark.

Reluctance is always fun, even force/coercion as long as the character ends up realizing from the bottom of their heart: "i actually like this" or "this is exactly what I needed and I didn't know it I'm so happy I have it now".

Even a reluctant cuckold who hates watching his wife get fucked but at the same time can't stop the arousal that results and enjoys watching it - isn't too dark - because he still has some attraction to it at the end of day.

But if you take away all positivity and all you have is disgust/fear - then it's too much. I don't enjoy reading anyone *actually suffer*.

 

[WeShallUnclench]

Once a character experiences true hate/horror/fear - it's too dark.

Reluctance is always fun, even force/coercion as long as the character ends up realizing from the bottom of their heart: "i actually like this" or "this is exactly what I needed and I didn't know it I'm so happy I have it now".

Even a reluctant cuckold who hates watching his wife get fucked but at the same time can't stop the arousal that results and enjoys watching it - isn't too dark - because he still has some attraction to it at the end of day.

But if you take away all positivity and all you have is disgust/fear - then it's too much. I don't enjoy reading anyone *actually suffer*.

Well, that is a little different, though - it's too dark for you, and thus you stay away. That's pretty standard.
I'd say almost ALL of us feel that way about some things, one way or another.

However, from your comment I don't get the impression that you'd tell other people they shouldn't write or read anything like that.

The thread question goes more in the direction of, do you think that there is such a thing as "evil"/"harmful" stories that shouldn't have been written like that? (even if they don't, for instance, violate any rules on Literotica)

 

[FantasySharer1]

Well, that is a little different, though - it's too dark for you, and thus you stay away. That's pretty standard.
I'd say almost ALL of us feel that way about some things, one way or another.

However, from your comment I don't get the impression that you'd tell other people they shouldn't write or read anything like that.

The thread question goes more in the direction of, do you think that there is such a thing as "evil"/"harmful" stories that shouldn't have been written like that? (even if they don't, for instance, violate any rules on Literotica)

As always, everything I ever write here is subjective with the exception of some basic morals like killing people in real life is bad, etc.

Yes, this is completely about my personal preferences.

I'm into sibling incest - who the heck am I to tell anyone anything about literotica standards for anything

To tell the truth I missed the "allowed" part of the question

 

[WeShallUnclench]

Nobody, ever, can be sure they are not having a negative influence. You could write and publish a happy Christmas story and somebody who's had horrible Christmas experiences might get triggered and shoot up a post office.

You don't know. Not only that, in the context of this place, you HAVE NO IDEA. None. Zero.

So this is not a standard that a moral person can follow.

Let's say we accept the premise "Authors should be mindful of the possible consequences of their stories" as a serious moral principle. Where does it get us? Without information, it gets us nowhere.

while I want to agree with this, also for obvious selfish reasons - we still haven't quite gotten to the bottom of this.

For one thing, the whole point of the influence argument is to ask if there is a relative risk, and if it's high enough we have to act accordingly. Sure, we don't know, but do we WORRY? Are there reasonable grounds to believe we might have a negative impact with some type of stories rather than others? Are there reasons to believe noncon stories are inherently more dangerous than fluffy romance stories?

There is also the flipside - if we choose to believe stories do not have a negative cultural influence, we also have to accept they do not have a positive one, either.

Thus, there would be no particular point to telling children stories about friendship and honesty.

For adults, there would be no point telling stories about how racism is an evil that needs to be overcome, stories that feature the perspectives of marginalized people, or about hope in the face of hopelessness.

It would all just be a chaotic spectacle of what is the most fun to tell. We might as well yell the names of our favorite colours and animals at one another.

Can we go that far?

 

[Anon_shy]

while I want to agree with this, also for obvious selfish reasons - we still haven't quite gotten to the bottom of this.

For one thing, the whole point of the influence argument is to ask if there is a relative risk, and if it's high enough we have to act accordingly. Sure, we don't know, but do we WORRY? Are there reasnable grounds to believe we might have a negative impact with some type of stories rather than others? Are there reasons to believe noncon stories are more dangerous than fluffy romance stories?

There is also the flipside - if we choose to believe stories do not have a negative cultural influence, we also have to accept they do n1ot have a positive one, either.

Thus, there would be no particular point to telling children stories about friendship and honesty.

For adults, there would be no point telling stories about how racism is an evil that needs to be overcome, stories that feature the perspectives of marginalized people, or about hope in the face of hopelessness.

It would all just be a chaotic spectacle of what is the most fun to tell.

Can we go that far?

The flipside idea seems logical, and obviously not correct. A feel good story is going to make someone have a release of dopamine, seratonin or whatever puts a smile on their face, make them more inclined to want to repeat it somehow.

A story that makes you angry without realising it may have the opposite effect and maybe reinforce your own moral thinking. I absolutely hate rape, it seriously angers me to read about it or see it on the news, reading about it will never make me want to inflict it or actually have it done to me.

The issue is with the person reading, maybe they get the opposite effect from both of those examples. I don't think that's the responsibility of the writer though, 8 billion people will never have the same way of thinking.

 

[SimonDoom]

For one thing, the whole point of the influence argument is to ask if there is a relative risk, and if it's high enough we have to act accordingly. Sure, we don't know, but do we WORRY? Are there reasnable grounds to believe we might have a negative impact with some type of stories rather than others? Are there reasons to believe noncon stories are more dangerous than fluffy romance stories?

I think the risk is quite low, generally, for most media. There's little evidence that violent video games and TV shows with sex and violence increase the incidence of violence.

It seems to me even LESS likely that written erotic stories would influence people badly. This is a place people come to indulge fantasies, for the most part. There's no particular reason to believe that people would be influenced to do harm. It's possible, but mere possibility isn't enough (for me) to refrain from writing something.

I have SOME limits, theoretically. If I knew that a particular way of tying somebody up during rope play was dangerous, I might refrain from specifically describing that method out of concern somebody might copy it with a partner. So I have some possible limits.

There is also the flipside - if we choose to believe stories do not have a negative cultural influence, we also have to accept they do n1ot have a positive one, either.

I wouldn't say that. I know my stories give pleasure, because my readers tell me so. That's enough positive influence for me. I write to entertain, not to teach lessons.

Thus, there would be no particular point to telling children stories about friendship and honesty.

For adults, there would be no point telling stories about how racism is an evil that needs to be overcome, stories that feature the perspectives of marginalized people, or about hope in the face of hopelessness.

I think this is a comparison of apples and oranges. In the case of "stories" or lessons that we give to teach good behavior, we often get feedback, such as in a classroom, that people respond positively. That's not, primarily, what this site is for. Some authors write stories of the type you discuss, and sometimes they get feedback, but most here write just to entertain. I know they have an impact in terms of either entertaining or not entertaining, but I cannot once recall, despite having over 11 million views, a reader telling me that my story influenced them to behave in some way "out there" in the real world.

It would all just be a chaotic spectacle of what is the most fun to tell.

I pretty much agree, although I might quibble with the word "chaotic." This place doesn't seem chaotic to me. But I agree my concern is about whether I am entertaining readers (and myself) or not, not whether I'm teaching good or bad lessons.

 

[StillStunned]

I've had some success with my Exhibitionist & Voyeur stories, told mostly from the perspective of the voyeur. Seven of them have the red H, with ratings ranging from 4.52 to 4.79, with a total of 75k views.

The one exception is rated 4.29, with 4k views, and the general consensus is that it's "creepy as fuck". It's told from the perspective of an obsessed voyeur and leans heavily into the sense of connection between the voyeur and the object of their (no gender is specified) desire.

The thing is, readers immediately recognise which stories are intended as lighthearted erotic fun, and which one is an exploration of a mental sickness. I doubt that anyone has been encouraged to peep on other people because "it sounds sexy in StillStunned's stories", but perhaps the creepy one has made people pause and think about what they're doing.

 

[ElectricBlue]

I think the risk is quite low, generally, for most media. There's little evidence that violent video games and TV shows with sex and violence increase the incidence of violence.

Here in Australia evidence shows the majority of teenagers are get their basic sex education from visual porn, with choking and anal sex "normalised".

Your mileage obviously varies, but here the evidence is in front of legislators to bring in protective laws, and the courts see domestic violence daily, with clear evidentiary links to gambling, porn, social media video content. Women are becoming afraid to teach in schools.

Sure, it's visual porn and fucktard manfluencers like Andrew Tate, but to deny there's no linkage from that type of content to domestic violence - here in Australia, you'd be laughed at, frankly.

Written porn isn't so.much problem, since teenage literary standards are falling.

 

[StillStunned]

Here in Australia evidence shows the majority of teenagers are get their basic sex education from visual porn,

But... but... does that mean they're lying when they click "I am over 18"?

 

[SimonDoom]

Sure, it's visual porn and fucktard manfluencers like Andrew Tate, but to deny there's no linkage from that type of content to domestic violence - here in Australia, you'd be laughed at, frankly.

Written porn isn't so.much problem, since teenage literary standards are falling.

I'm skeptical of the seemingly obvious connection between that content and actual behavior, because whenever I've looked hard at the evidence it's usually not as good as the pro-regulation crowd claims it is. But, regardless, you're right that it has nothing to do with erotic stories at Literotica. I don't imagine teenage boys are getting their ideas about sex, or how to treat women, from this place. The readership here probably skews much older. And in general I don't think the written word has the same kind of impact that visual material has.

 

[XerXesXu]

A good test is, 'Would you leave your children in this writer's care; would you want them to teach your children?' Read what they write and form an opinion. Invite others to read your work and ask.

Like most sites, Lit's open to children of any age, all sorts of criminals, pedophiles, rapists, sadists, the mentally deranged who'll form a significant proportion of your readership. When you write, do you care that you address such readers? Never mind other people, do you think you write like a responsible adult? Some don't care. No one's born a paedophile, rapist or sadist. They're formed from vulnerable people, children and adults. Would you target them solely to increase your readership. Some would.

 

[lovecraft68]

A good test is, 'Would you leave your children in this writer's care; would you want them to teach your children?' Read what they write and form an opinion. Invite others to read your work and ask.

Like most sites, Lit's open to children of any age, all sorts of criminals, pedophiles, rapists, sadists, the mentally deranged who'll form a significant proportion of your readership. When you write, do you care that you address such readers? Never mind other people, do you think you write like a responsible adult? Some don't care. No one's born a paedophile, rapist or sadist. They're formed from vulnerable people, children and adults. Would you target them solely to increase your readership. Some would.

This is a load of priceless pretentious and hypocritical crap coming from someone who had the audacity to not only publish an underage rape story but post the link here in a what I wrote and why.

Tell me, should people trust their kids with you? Are you fine with putting that idea in the heads of sadists, rapists, etc? Either you are, or you're just trying to sound morally superior to someone who doesn't know you.

Thank you for giving me this opening to remind the class-and more importantly the OP and any other new folks on this board who you really are.

 

[lovecraft68]

The thread question goes more in the direction of, do you think that there is such a thing as "evil"/"harmful" stories that shouldn't have been written like that? (even if they don't, for instance, violate any rules on Literotica)

The moral responsibility question-like many things here-has been discussed multiple times. That's not on you, you're new here, and even if you weren't, there's no rule saying you can't revisit something.

Unlike a lot of people here, I try not to go on and on and wax philosophical, nor do I try to play politics or put on an air of caring what others think.

Which leads to my simple answer of write whatever the hell you want. As @Plathfan said if a story could push someone over the edge its because they were on that edge for some time, and we didn't put them there. I grew up in the eighties and saw D&D blamed for mental illness and suicide, Heavy Metal and rock called satanic, and then the Washington wives vs Metal, Rap and all other "sinfull" music that was corrupting youth. Hey, you can go back to the 50's and Wertham's 'Seduction of the innocent' where he blamed comic books on youth's moral decay and helped create the comics code.

The Matix caused Columbine, it goes on and on.

Why? Well, I guess I will get philosophical here and dose people with base human nature. The reason people blame a story. song, painting, movie, etc.. for some event is the typical lack of accountability most people have. Can't be they're fucked up, or evil, or have mental health issues, nope, always someone else's fault. 2024 and we still play the devil made me do it because no way any shitty thing they did just be on them.

Write what you feel called to write. You have no responsibility on how its perceived, you can't control people. Whatever you write there will be people who like it, people who hate it, and some in between, what's important is you wanted to write it, you did, and that you're happy with the end result. You do you and fuck the rest is a bit harsh, but its the truth.

 

[XerXesXu]

This is a load of priceless pretentious and hypocritical crap coming from someone who had the audacity to not only publish an underage rape story but post the link here in a what I wrote and why.

Tell me, should people trust their kids with you? Are you fine with putting that idea in the heads of sadists, rapists, etc? Either you are, or you're just trying to sound morally superior to someone who doesn't know you.

Thank you for giving me this opening to remind the class-and more importantly the OP and any other new folks on this board who you really are.

Oh, hello LC68. You described yourself as simple, did you notice that no one rushed to contradict you? You're using very big words today, have you bought a dictionary?

Would you like me to post the link to the thread you mentioned, or would you rather slink away as you normally do after roaring like a kitten with its tail caught in the door?

NB: Lawyers don't lose sleep over the opinions of wolves.

 

[madelinemasoch]

I would generally agree that one can write whatever they're called to write, but I also admit I like certain things being portrayed in certain ways and dislike other portrayals. I think that anyone who's honest with themselves would say the same thing. There are always implicit messages and themes about sex, sexuality, gender relations, and norms in erotica stories that don't have to actually be screamed from the rooftops in order to be visible in the text. Different people prefer different portrayals based on not only what they're sexually interested in but the way they implicitly want the world to be like. I don't think this is a fact you can get away from unless you just simply aren't invested in the art as a medium for some kind of landscape setting and change in the way people think and behave about erotic subjects. It's not necessarily about what's ethically right and wrong but more about what one finds to be good and bad.

 

[Plathfan]

Around 6 million years ago, as forests receded and savannas expanded, our ancestors faced new challenges that demanded adaptation. Bipedal walking allowed them to use tools and access new food sources.

To survive, they added meat to their diet, which required hunting and killing. Defending their territory from rivals or raiding others when resources were scarce often involved brutal force. As they grew more intelligent, they also became increasingly violent and ruthless. The most effective strategy for eliminating rivals and spreading their genes was to kill the males and forcibly take the females.

And this was happening 2 million years ago. The idea that violence and sexual aggression have only increased in recent decades due to porn, video games, and social media is not just ignorant, it’s downright dumb.

With age, I’ve learned to keep my distance from the preachers and sweet talkers who chant, "Let's make the world better; it's our responsibility"—they often turn out to be the most dangerous.

 

[Voboy]

There are always implicit messages and themes about sex, sexuality, gender relations, and norms in erotica stories that don't have to actually be screamed from the rooftops in order to be visible in the text. Different people prefer different portrayals based on not only what they're sexually interested in but the way they implicitly want the world to be like.

This. I mean, we're writing about sex here. It doesn't get more elemental than that. It's the primary urge most people have. It's understandable that their kinks are going to be both long-term and deeply-held, and they're going to vary from person to person. Even within the same person, there'll be different things that turn us on sometimes vs other times.

People are people, and we're not going to please them all. That's true of both "dark" and "light" stories. We have a responsibility to our muse to produce the stories we're moved to write, and that's as far as it goes I think. We can't take responsibility for how readers react. That's on them. I think it's also on them to nope out of stories that squick them too much, rather than complaining about them!

 

[lovecraft68]

With age, I’ve learned to keep my distance from the preachers and sweet talkers who chant, "Let's make the world better; it's our responsibility"—they often turn out to be the most dangerous.

To use a modern term, there is nothing more regressive than a 'progressive' they set back every cause they touch fifty years or more because they want things to get worse or they have nothing to squeal about.

I prefer Jung's method of embracing the shadow self. Know what you are, shake hands with it, accept it, and you're the better for it.

To me, this is the point-and answer-to the OP's question.

If people didn't like dark, Horror wouldn't be such a huge genre and people wouldn't flock to rubberneck over documentaries about serial killers and often flat out glorify them

 

[Voboy]

If people didn't like dark, Horror wouldn't be such a huge genre and people wouldn't flock to rubberneck over documentaries about serial killers and often flat out glorify them

They'd also be able to resist slowing down to look at car crashes on the freeway.

 

[lovecraft68]

They'd also be able to resist slowing down to look at car crashes on the freeway.

And not watch the 'news'

 

[SimonDoom]

A good test is, 'Would you leave your children in this writer's care; would you want them to teach your children?' Read what they write and form an opinion. Invite others to read your work and ask.

I don't agree with this view. I think it is much more empirically plausible (though I have no way of testing for certain) that there is no connection between the kinkiness of what people write here and their fitness for watching over one's children. If that were true then I would be loath to leave my children in the company of many Lit authors that I suspect are, in fact, perfectly normal in their day to day lives.

 

[XerXesXu]

I don't agree with this view. I think it is much more empirically plausible (though I have no way of testing for certain) that there is no connection between the kinkiness of what people write here and their fitness for watching over one's children. If that were true then I would be loath to leave my children in the company of many Lit authors that I suspect are, in fact, perfectly normal in their day to day lives.

'much more empirically plausible (though I have no way of testing for certain)' Do you know what you mean by this strange concatenation of words?

'many Lit authors that I suspect are, in fact, perfectly normal in their day to day lives.' How many? 20,50.90% Figures please, not word salad.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

'much more empirically plausible (though I have no way of testing for certain)' Do you know what you mean by this strange concatenation of words?

'many Lit authors that I suspect are, in fact, perfectly normal in their day to day lives.' How many? 20,50.90% Figures please, not word salad.

You do not know the numbers any more than Simon does, so anything that you say in this thread is just as invalid is what he says by your own definition of word salad. The ranch or the vinaigrette is irrelevant.