Line Crossed

[CyranoJ]

When did I switch?

Deliberate obtuseness isn't impressive, either.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

Deliberate obtuseness isn't impressive, either.

Neither is bullshit.

 

[AlinaX]

We discuss non-con here a lot and I'm not looking to restart old arguments.

Fat lot of good that did, eh?

 

[Bamagan]

Fat lot of good that did, eh?

Well. phrasing it as 'not looking' does sound kind of passive, doesn't it? I'll just set some bait and stare straight ahead and see if old arguments wander across my field of vision.

 

[AlinaX]

Maybe that was a bit British of me.

 

[lovecraft68]

At some point-if this thread stays on the first page-a poster is going to show up here and use the argument of "context"

Context is not something that should matter anywhere that has a rule that is actually enforced. If you have rules against underage (being mentioned around sexual activity) and an NC rule, and a snuff rule, then there should not be stories of minors being raped to death, but they're here, been reported and still remain here.

That's not me condemning what someone chooses to write-although I think this being an erotic site should be cause for consideration on what you post here-but once again giving an example of the make believe rules we're all supposed to adhere to even though they're a matter of convenience, whim, and favoritism.

I have some seriously nasty content that I could put here under "context" but knowing people come here to stroke, I won't chance them stroking to something that should be seen as horrible, so I'd never publish it here. I've also tried my hand at Dub con which is a tricky line to walk and after looking back on one my stories and seeing that I let it go over the line-and had a couple people here read it and agree-I pulled it because I didn't want the taint on me.

But I guess some people are so desperate for eyes on their work, they'll break the rule knowing they have a 70-30 chance of getting it through. So now we have a chicken and the egg situation. Is it authors just not caring about rules and submitting what they want, or is the reason they do that the fact the site proves over and over again, their rules are not real?

I feel people here police themselves in many ways because otherwise the site wouldn't be much higher than ASSTR in content.

 

[lovecraft68]

Someone posted this in the LW troll thread

Anonymous about 1 hour ago
Paul reflected on his shattered life, tracked Cheryl down, kidnapped her and took her to a barn. There he chopped her up with a chainsaw while she was still alive.

The site that pretends they don't want NC, that screens comments and would never let anything political through, is fine with letting comments like this be posted.

Let's talk again about what this site actually encourages where women are involved.

And its a great reminder to the people here who deny what lives in LW that they're defending the indefensible

 

[AlinaX]

LW's frequent hatred of women is the reason I very rarely read there. Torture and bloody vengeance porn is not erotica.

 

[vagrantx]

Torture [...] porn is not erotica.

 

[AlinaX]

Convince me otherwise.

 

[vagrantx]

Convince me otherwise.

I don't think it's possible to change someones views when it comes to such extreme genres; once you've discovered it you either like it or you don't. Heavy BDSM and torture-porn isn't like coffee or whiskey, it's not an acquired taste; it's something you have an... inherent tendency for.

My stories are, for lack of a better term, fucked up, but the people who like them really do like them for what they are.

Now, that being said. There's sex. It's text. It's erotica. There are no moral boxes to be ticked off to qualify as erotica - it's a pretty simple term.

 

[AlinaX]

If there's no pleasure in it for the victim(s), any eroticism in it is a darkness beyond what can be acceptable.

 

[vagrantx]

If there's no pleasure in it for the victim(s), any eroticism in it is a darkness beyond what can be acceptable.

Then we'd have to discuss and define what pleasure is. In my stories the characters do experience physical pleasure, but it's involuntary. Does that make it pleasurable? Highly doubt it. On another side of this multi-faceted coin are true masochists, people who derive pleasure from pain. Take Rain DeGrey (former talent, now a master class teacher of bdsm and rope-play in LA) for example - she's able to orgasm from having her calves caned. Pleasurable, sure, but is that pleasure?

Kink.com has shoots where the actresses are being waterboarded. No other stimuli. No pleasure. That's just pure torture, yes? But they love it. Though I'd argue the mental strain is less as they have the option of safe-wording at any point (by dropping a metal rod they're holding on to), it's still torture, and it's still porn. They get off on it, the viewers get off on it, the dom gets off on it. Erotica.

The lines are blurry. Very blurry.

 

[AlinaX]

I'm talking no pleasure. None. Nothing but fear and misery. No involuntary orgasms or masochistic fulfilment. No way for the reader to identify with the victim without feeling hurt by the cruelty of the author.

 

[vagrantx]

I'm talking no pleasure. None. Nothing but fear and misery. No involuntary orgasms or masochistic fulfilment. No way for the reader to identify with the victim without feeling hurt by the cruelty of the author.

I'm not a true sadist, I don't identify with pure sadism, but I understand their need for outlet. You may find it too dark, but that doesn't mean those kind of stories are not erotic to sadists. I mean, back it up to 120 days of Sodom, that's erotica. It's meant to excite. Its target audience may be small but it exists.

I think this whole thing boils down to don't yuck my yum.

 

[lovecraft68]

Then we'd have to discuss and define what pleasure is. In my stories the characters do experience physical pleasure, but it's involuntary. Does that make it pleasurable? Highly doubt it. On another side of this multi-faceted coin are true masochists, people who derive pleasure from pain. Take Rain DeGrey (former talent, now a master class teacher of bdsm and rope-play in LA) for example - she's able to orgasm from having her calves caned. Pleasurable, sure, but is that pleasure?

Kink.com has shoots where the actresses are being waterboarded. No other stimuli. No pleasure. That's just pure torture, yes? But they love it. Though I'd argue the mental strain is less as they have the option of safe-wording at any point (by dropping a metal rod they're holding on to), it's still torture, and it's still porn. They get off on it, the viewers get off on it, the dom gets off on it. Erotica.

The lines are blurry. Very blurry.

Kink.com is all staged and the women pretending this is their fantasy(and men as well, they have sites like Men in Pain and other hardcore femdom channels) are porn stars and the woman who runs it and her crew are professional Doms.

That's also visual porn, and trust me, the rules there are for real. Ever notice at the end of all the KDC vids they show the woman/man sitting there in her robe afterwards talking about how much she liked it?

Written porn on the other hand in many ways can be far more brutal because there are no real rules that could be enforced as a real person is not being portrayed. Going further look at the garbage out there in Hentai, the absolute brutality to female characters because they're not real so it can happen. (rape porn is illegal in visual form, no matter how brutal they're portraying it, these are actresses and actors, or the feds would shut them down quick.)

The issue with forced orgasms, victim likes it, no never means no, whatever the gimmick is here to try to say it's not actual rape porn, is dangerous misinformation even in a fictional sense because the people that come here make that part of their fantasy, that no matter what horrific things they do to the victim she likes it.

Know the term disassociation? Look it up, serial killers and serial rapists both have it.

The point here isn't really a debate on "define pleasure" the point is the joke of "Oh, we don't allow rape stories." But oh, yeah, they do but keep playing this game that's as tired as the people defending it. The reality is actual rape fantasy stories are less damaging then their sick game of "Oh it hurts, but I just came ten times!"

And if someone comes up with a "define rape" comment well we have had a couple of those here before because when you play sick games, you get sick crowds.

 

[AlinaX]

I'm not a true sadist, I don't identify with pure sadism, but I understand their need for outlet. You may find it too dark, but that doesn't mean those kind of stories are not erotic to sadists. I mean, back it up to 120 days of Sodom, that's erotica. It's meant to excite. Its target audience may be small but it exists.

I think this whole thing boils down to don't yuck my yum.

Interesting book. Never did finish it.

But lines have to be drawn somewhere, and if the only pleasure to be found is in cheerleading rapists, then that is well over the line for me.

 

[SimonDoom]

Then we'd have to discuss and define what pleasure is. In my stories the characters do experience physical pleasure, but it's involuntary. Does that make it pleasurable? Highly doubt it. On another side of this multi-faceted coin are true masochists, people who derive pleasure from pain. Take Rain DeGrey (former talent, now a master class teacher of bdsm and rope-play in LA) for example - she's able to orgasm from having her calves caned. Pleasurable, sure, but is that pleasure?

Kink.com has shoots where the actresses are being waterboarded. No other stimuli. No pleasure. That's just pure torture, yes? But they love it. Though I'd argue the mental strain is less as they have the option of safe-wording at any point (by dropping a metal rod they're holding on to), it's still torture, and it's still porn. They get off on it, the viewers get off on it, the dom gets off on it. Erotica.

The lines are blurry. Very blurry.

To me, it's not as blurry as people seem to think it is.

Masochism is the enjoyment of pain. I'm not a masochist, and I don't like to feel pain at all (I'm a "dish it out but can't take it" kind of guy), but some people are, and they derive genuine enjoyment from pain. If that's what the story presents, then I think it's OK by Lit standards. What Lit purports to avoid is stories where the character doesn't enjoy it at all and the LACK of enjoyment is what gives the reader pleasure.

Of course, Kink.com is contrived and play-acting, and it makes it very clear that it is that. I've watched some of their BDSM videos and it's all very clear that the character in the video is consenting. It's not trying to present non-con scenarios. So it really doesn't have similarity to the Lit non-con story category.

 

[alohadave]

Of course, Kink.com is contrived and play-acting, and it makes it very clear that it is that. I've watched some of their BDSM videos and it's all very clear that the character in the video is consenting.

Does anyone really think that they aren't actors and that it's not porn?

It's not like a supposed dark web snuff site, it's mainstream porn.

 

[SimonDoom]

Does anyone really think that they aren't actors and that it's not porn?

It's not like a supposed dark web snuff site, it's mainstream porn.

I don't know what other people believe. There are people who think characters in TV shows are real, so they hate or love the actors who play them because they can't tell truth from reality.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

I don't know what other people believe. There are people who think characters in TV shows are real, so they hate or love the actors who play them because they can't tell truth from reality.

I had a guy message me yesterday in chat after he had read one of my stories that is written in first person. He told me how sexy I am and commented on how hot my experience was. I had to break it to him that the story was a fiction told by a woman who was in fact not me but just a figment of my imagination. I think that he had some mild disappointment upon hearing that news.

 

[TarnishedPenny]

I had a guy message me yesterday in chat after he had read one of my stories that is written in first person. He told me how sexy I am and commented on how hot my experience was. I had to break it to him that the story was a fiction told by a woman who was in fact not me but just a figment of my imagination. I think that he had some mild disappointment upon hearing that news.

Sigh…

 

[Otto26]

I'd like to start by pointing out that I have never read a good, legally clear, definition of pornography that could be used to establish where any particular line exists. Every single one I've seen ultimately relies on the opinion of the beholder. So we can't say "Here is the line" and be done with it. We have to evaluate every piece on individual merits and accept that mistakes will be made in both directions. Don't look to the site to be 100% correct on every piece. Mistakes will be made.

In reference to the story AlinaX brings up in the original post: I see a lot of people who want unhappy endings for their protagonists. I was writing a story with someone who wanted her (probably his) character to sail off into the depths of space at the mercy of an insane artificial intelligence. Very much not my thing and that ended. In my opinion that story made violence against women the centerpiece of the story. Bad things happening to women was intended to be the mechanism that created arousal in the reader. I think if you reach that point you've crossed the line regardless of other merits. But that's just my opinion and it's easy to poke holes in. What if the bad fate doesn't happen to the main character? What if it happens to a supporting character and is used as a way to establish the mala fides of the villain(s)?

It's not a hypothetical question. I wrote a story in which an investigator found that a group of adult, submissive women had been trafficked into prostitution and, after escaping, had killed their tormentor. It's been up on the site for 17 years, has 22K views, and a 4.8 rating. I assume the site operators permitted this because their abuse was dealt with in brief, was the central motivation for a type of justice (snuff) being done, and all the explicit sex was between consenting adults. One of those adults derived pleasure from being beaten. Does it cross the line? Not for me. Because I'm very careful to craft scenarios that don't cross that line into the brutal reality of rape. But I'm certain it would cross the line for others.

For me a non-consensual scenario must remain in the realm of fantasy if it is the focus of the story. The victim must experience pleasure, the point of the act cannot be inflicting pain, it should at least try to cater to the 'fantasy rape' where the attacker is not doing things the victim hates. There must be some acknowledgement of guilt and there must be some explanation which the victim finds acceptable, no matter how ridiculous it may be. "I cannot control my desire for you," is utter horseshit in reality but can play to a fantasy where the victim enjoys being desirable. I could go on for paragraphs about this but I have one more point to make and won't presume upon your time.

If the non-consensual encounter approaches the reality of rape then it is dealt with briefly and clearly an evil act. I've got seven stories where characters are genuinely raped. I've got one story where the protagonist is violently gang-raped almost to death. It happens in a cut-scene so there's the 'we're gonna rape you' moment and the aftermath where she's very badly hurt and barely escapes. Bad guys thoroughly established, there's no extended description for someone to stroke to, and the bad guys die for their crime shortly thereafter. I don't find violence against women remotely arousing, quite the contrary, so where it's needed in a story I get it over with as briefly as possible. I don't want to write it and I certainly don't want other people coming to my stories for it. Do I cross the line sometimes? Yes. I've deleted stories. I've regretted deleting stories. The line moves from day to day and I try my best to stay on the right side of it and that's really all any of us can do.

 

[SimonDoom]

LW's frequent hatred of women is the reason I very rarely read there. Torture and bloody vengeance porn is not erotica.

You get no disagreement from me. But obviously, for some, it is.

I know your motive was good when you started the thread, but the truth is you cannot ever control where a thread will go, and on this subject in particular you have to assume people will fall back on the same old arguments despite your best efforts. It's OK. There's still been plenty of discussion along the lines of what I think you were aiming at.

 

[Bayzapper10]

there's a noticeable distinction between what I would consider 'true' NC/R stories (for lack of a better word) and the stories that only present themselves as such.
In the former case, the author creates a character who enjoys powerlessness, complete domination, etc. and then constructs a scenario where the character's desires are fulfilled, against their will or their better judgement, even if (or perhaps especially if) a large part of their personality feels guilt or shame for the indulgence of a kink they kind of wish they didn't have

That is a great distinction, just wanted to say it.

That is the craft of the author in most stories that may even be vanilla, the alchemy of blending desire, resistance, opportunity and will to the internal combustion point of a story that interests their reader.

I do agree with others that adding too much of either the author’s desire or catering to much to a reader is too fine a line. Write what you’re comfortable with, don’t cross your line, your readers can choose.