Rape in erotica - women's opinions desired

[peterpan]

Why should I ask such a stupid question?

PeterPan: I'll tell you what. Let's turn the tables here. I'll take something bigger than a broom handle but smaller than a baseball bat and shove it up your arse. Then you can tell me why rape is wrong.

I imagine that even merely considering the prospect should answer your question. I'm not sure what the point of asking it is in the first place. Do you really need this explained to you? [/B]

DarlingBri please believe me that I have gone through this process long ago. I tortured myself with this because I was lead to believe that men had an inate tendency to project their desires onto women; that if I did not keep strict control of my thinking processes then I would end up like the men in the news saying 'she asked for it'

Yes this is rubbish, but children beleive what they are exposed to, and then you keep believing it long after you have rationally discounted it.

The effect of this is that I have never persued a relationship with a woman because I never got unabiguous signals that she was interested. I never practiced the tools of smalltalk because in my heart I knew that I was being dishonest. I was always too close to my lonelyness to not realise that all I was really saying was 'excuse me, while you are standing here may I hump up and down on your leg'

I have this need to be totally truthful. I wish I could step directly into a relationship where a woman already knew the most purile things about me, but of course women assume that anything you show is just the tip of the iceburg.

------

Anyway, my own conclusions were that pain is not necessary to make a real life non-concensual situation totally unenjoyable. Suppose a woman forced me to have sex, say by a weakening drug. Suppose she was attractive, made no attempt to hurt me. I would be nauseous with fear. Every second of the encounter I would wonder if the senario would change, even that enjoying it would somehow give permission for anything she did next. If she was gentle I would still fear that afterwards she would just as gently hold a pillow over my face. Or that a month later I would recieve a note in the mail saying welcome to the AIDS club. It would not just be fear of the physical effect, it would also be fear of realising that all that time she was filled with hatred or distain for me.

On the other hand, if these fears were magically avoided then I believe I could enjoy it. I would not feel violated just because a woman used me. I would suddenly feel useful. I suspect that only a male would think that way.

 

[nitengale]

But the persistent connotation of violence discourages many of these women from reporting their crimes, since their experiences do not "match" what they believe to be a rape. [/B]

I'd like to know the source of this information. Rape is violent crime, and if the courts wish to argue the degree, so be it. I am not sure I buy into the fact that women are NOW basing their decision to report the rape based on how it will be defined in the courts. The decision to report rape has been a long ongoing problem for women.

I have been a sexual assault nurse examiner for over four years, and I have yet to run into this as a problem. I think if the court systems starts downplaying the "degree" of rape someone has suffered does everyone an injustice, but I don't see how it will lessen the numbers of those who will report it?? I think the system is in place to set up the final ruling of the raspist, but again should have no bearing on the those reporting it.

A rape is a rape is a rape. A rape is a violent act.

I hate to sound like a pain in the ass on this issue, but it's one I work with on an ongoing basis.

 

[nitengale]

additional information...

Please bear with me as my passion for educating overwhelms me...

A significant number of sex crimes are not reported to law enforcement agencies. Many survivors fear they will not be believed or lack confidence in the criminal justice system and are concerned how their family and friends might react. Many survivors feel guilty or responsible for being victimized. In many cases those who have been sexually victimized have been treated with skepticism. Additionally, many survivors of sexual assault are reluctant to report the crime if their actions involved risky or illegal behavior. Some survivors fear offender retaliation, some are embarrassed and fear media attention.

Data collected through an informal survey (statewide:NJ) shows that among the reasons for survivors not reporting the crimes are fear of not being believed, lack of confidence in the criminal justice system, fear for their own safety, concern for their families, and concerns about privacy.

Again, I am always open to new information to support posts here regarding this subject!!

 

[DarlingBri]

Re: Why should I ask such a stupid question?

The effect of this is that I have never persued a relationship with a woman because I never got unambiguous signals that she was interested.

How about practicing small talk to get to know someone well? If you ask her to dinner and she says yes, then she's interested in having dinner. If, when asked, she says yes, she'd like to pursue a relationship, then yes, she'd like to pursue a relationship.

At a later stage, should you want unambiguous, "I'd like to make love to you; may I?" should solicit a response that's clear to you.

Throughout, asking a woman "Are you okay with this?" could give you the ongoing affirmation you need.

Sex is not bad and little boys are not dirty rapists. Try to overcome your childhood.

 

[peterpan]

"Try to overcome your childhood"? Ouch! That's a good line to remember when someone is being childish
---
hmmm.. those first questions certainly got attention, and I guess it is a while since I heard the difference between rape and ravishment fantacies described. But then I sort of fumbled the ball. The reason I asked this story in the authors section, apart from to get a more literate response, was because I was considering a tale much further in the ravashment direction and wanted to remove the real yukky stuff. In the stories I have written so far I usually have the woman trapped in some sort of unhealthy honour system that the ravishment breaks through. The ravashers have some secret knowledge of her heart and generally aren't even men. Happy endings and even romance. In other words one big hugely convoluted rationalisation. I consider these safe because they are impossible ten different ways.

I am considering doing a tale for egghunter (thread in story ideas section) but a requirement is that the character does not conciously enjoy the ravashment. Also the aggressors are men. I of myself find the idea of being brought kicking and struggling to orgasm exciting, but projecting these feelings into a woman, I am afraid of writing something that a woman would read as sadistic or hugely lacking empathy.

 

[NCmVoyeur]

(This is one of the most intelligent and thought-provoking threads I've witnessed; irresistable to toss in my two-cents' worth.)

My views on 'rape' in erotica and in women's fantasies generally reduce to one of two closely related ideas: 1) 'rape fantasy' as 'oxymoron' and 2) 'rape fantasy' as 'sex without moral culpability.'

Rape, by definition, is about loss of control. Fantasy, by its nature, is the essence of control. I can almost picture the female mind at work in contemplating the scene ("Shall my abductor be tall? or very tall? Blonde? No, dark . . . with 2 days' growth on his cheeks. Hmm, in my home? No, the beach, much better . . . ") In short, in fantasy, the mind controls every detail. It is 'rape' only in its most superficial elements. (OK, for the purist, an 'oxymoron' is a literary device, not merely a contradiction in terms. I'm going with the ever-increasing popular use of the term.)

Second, Mickie rather eloquently stated the view that the so-called 'rape fantasy' allows for the illusion of being 'sexual' and 'uninhibited' without seeming to 'act that way' of choice. It's sex without guilt; sex without voluntary act.

I personally don't generally care for 'non-consent' stories. They too often depend on implausible devices(e.g., 'her body betrayed her, and she groaned uncontrollably') in order to be 'erotic.' In general, I find them intellectually dishonest.

 

[CreamyLady]

I think that we need a new term for "rape fantasy."

A telling point about the degrees of rape, and the difference in generations:

When I was very young, and working in downtown Los Angeles, the LAPD had a program in which they would go to corporations and give talks on women's safety. The first talks I attended emphasized one thing: fight. There was no talk of passivity, or cooperation in order to save oneself harm. You know why?

Because at the first moment of implied consent -- implied, mind you; stopping struggling or screaming -- any possibility of conviction went out the window. What got a conviction in a rape case was a dead body or a very damaged one. As one police officer said, "The more bruises the better, and cuts are good, too."

It was a nasty thing then to go through reporting a rape. I had to report an attempted rape, and I was grilled -- BY THE COPS -- as to my sexual habits and mode of dress, right after fighting the son of a bitch off. I only reported it after thinking that the next woman might not be so lucky.

Well, they never caught the little so and so, and I never had to go through a trial. I was very lucky; other women were picked apart on the stand, forced to relive, again and again and again, the violence, pain, loss of self. No one gave a tinker's damn about them, really, because -- in law -- the victim is merely the occasion or evidence of a crime. It isn't the victim seeking justice, after all. It is the State, an impersonal entity, seeking to restore order.

The victim is merely unfortunate collateral damage.

I realize there are degrees of coercion. What bothers me, though, is the sense that I'm getting that one level is more okay than the others, that no physical bruises or cutting is better than a violent rape, because the woman is not physically harmed. This is bullshit, and I'd love to see the degree business sent to the boneyard. All rape is about power, and anger, and frankly should be treated as one and the same.

As for the victims nonreporting, I don't think it's fuzziness on their part about what is actually a rape. I think it is the whole sense of loss of self. A person who is raped ceases to be a whole person; she is a victim, a collection of evidence, a witness. Every aspect of her life is open to scrutiny. She has no privacy, no dignity, few caring people and no time to get over the worst of the damage.

I really understand women wanting to just get away and lick their wounds. Everyone says, "Get counseling." How many of us are willing to open up and go through horrendous emotional pain, again and again, to get OVER it? Don't most of us try and hide it, just so we can function?

Intellectual dishonesty is the least of it. Nonconsent stories, to me, represent the worst side of the Beauty and the Beast fable; the bestial man tamed by the love of a gentle girl. What we forget is that, in the original, the Beast was originally a man of culture and breeding, and Beauty didn't fall in love with his bestial nature. She loved the gentleman within. More often than not, we are presented with a physical beast and no glimpse of any kind of gentle soul.

I'm getting off my soapbox now.

 

[nitengale]

Well, they never caught the little so and so, and I never had to go through a trial. I was very lucky; other women were picked apart on the stand, forced to relive, again and again and again, the violence, pain, loss of self. No one gave a tinker's damn about them, really, because -- in law -- the victim is merely the occasion or evidence of a crime. It isn't the victim seeking justice, after all. It is the State, an impersonal entity, seeking to restore order.

I think in some places this is true, the victum is merely used to collect the evidence and with any hope the bastard is caught. HOWEVER, there are places in which the victum is well looked after, with ongoing couseling initiated immediately upon her reporting the incident. EXCELLENT programs!! The programs, unfortunatley, in some places are used as politcal pawns and do have that horrid monetary problem attached to them. I was lucky enough to watch the one of these programs go from the inital development phases into a program that has VAST community and state support!

I realize there are degrees of coercion. What bothers me, though, is the sense that I'm getting that one level is more okay than the others, that no physical bruises or cutting is better than a violent rape, because the woman is not physically harmed. This is bullshit, and I'd love to see the degree business sent to the boneyard. All rape is about power, and anger, and frankly should be treated as one and the same.

I absolutely agree 100% and how unfortunate is it that women are led to believe if they are raped by their husband or an aquaintance, this is LESS of a RAPE. Not to mention if they have not had the shit kicked out of them then it isn't really a rape. THESE beliefs are real!

As for the victims nonreporting, I don't think it's fuzziness on their part about what is actually a rape. I think it is the whole sense of loss of self. A person who is raped ceases to be a whole person; she is a victim, a collection of evidence, a witness. Every aspect of her life is open to scrutiny. She has no privacy, no dignity, few caring people and no time to get over the worst of the damage.

I really understand women wanting to just get away and lick their wounds. Everyone says, "Get counseling." How many of us are willing to open up and go through horrendous emotional pain, again and again, to get OVER it? Don't most of us try and hide it, just so we can function?

Again, I do not dispute these feelings, which is why getting the benefit of a good program OUT in the community is so well worth the effort!

The exams are horrid, and the interrogations are not pleasant, but given the crime, there is not a whole lot in the ways to sugar coat it. There is a reality to it that sucks, but measures are in place to at least make it less horrid.

Our program offers so much, and I am not tooting my own horn, but my point is to show that there are places that do care MORE about the victum, than just looking at her as maybe an additional piece in solving some horrid puzzle. Yes, there are still women out there that will not report this event no matter how good a program is, I can only that we reach a good percentage of them...and in time.

 

[CreamyLady]

I know there are good programs out there. In my case, I had very effective, if rough, group therapy from the women living in my apartment building. The manager rented only to cops and young single women (!), and one of the cops was on duty when my report when in. He knew I wouldn't get much sympathy from his coworkers, and he called Betty, the apartment manager.

When I got home -- and I got to WALK home, because I wasn't "hurt" -- every woman in the complex was in Betty's apartment. I was hauled in, given a stiff scotch (I was shaking at that point) and a cigarette. I'd quit smoking two years earlier, but Betty told me to smoke, and I did. It DID calm me a little.

Then I had to talk. They all listened, and then I listened, and we talked and cried and talked and cried for hours. At the end, two of them took me back to my apartment, hugged me, and I was actually able to sleep.

These women and I had not been friends before, and we weren't really friends afterward, but they saved me from a breakdown or worse. I dealt with the worst of the lingering crap during therapy, but I still get frightened when I see a guy who even remotely resembles that creep, and it's been 27 years.

Seriously, we should take better care of each other. Instead of a few good programs, there should be many good programs, and support, and care. We should not just shrug things off.

Ack. I'm spending the afternoon on my soapbox!!!

 

[nitengale]

CreamyLady...I agree

 

[Whispersecret]

I respectfully suggest that you may be biased, CL, by your experience. You too, Nitengale, by your job.

I maintain that a fantasy involving being taken by "force" can be wholly separate from the very real, very horrible issue of rape in the real world.

For example, if I see a couple fucking in a public place, like an elevator, I will most likely be repulsed and indignant. It is inappropriate and rude behavior that has no place in polite society.

However, that doesn't mean that I don't also enjoy reading or writing stories in which the characters engage in sex in a public place.

Thank you, Mickie. What a unique thing to have inspired someone.

 

[Whispersecret]

NC...

I personally don't generally care for 'non-consent' stories. They too often depend on implausible devices(e.g., 'her body betrayed her, and she groaned uncontrollably') in order to be 'erotic.' In general, I find them intellectually dishonest.

Heh heh. Since I wrote a non-consent story, I'm intensely interested in hearing you elaborate on this point. I don't honestly feel that I depended on any devices. Perhaps it is just the fact that you used the word "device," that bothers me. That word hints that I employed a sort of trick to make my story erotic, instead of just writing well.

What I did was write a story that turned ME on. Without knowing it, I capitalized on the fact that most of the people who enjoy reading non-consent like the fact that the "victim" is forced to enjoy themselves in spite of the situation. Therefore, I used words like "helpless," "control," "commanded," stuff like that because that's the nature of the genre. Just as you use softer words and ideas for a romance story.

Do you label ALL non-consent stories as "intellectually dishonest," or just the ones who rely on "devices?" Please explain how what you described is a device rather than being genuinely erotic. And please don't think I'm angry at all; I am just calmly rising to the defense of my writing, because I thought I did a rather good job and I'm interested in hearing why you think I might not have.

 

[Laurel]

I'll admit it - I have non-consent fantasies. Good-looking stranger chases me, catches me, ties me to the bed post, pleasures me in a number of ways while I'm helpless to protest (poor me! lol).

Have I been assaulted? No. Would I WANT to be assaulted? Of course not. Am I a sick puppy? That's subjective... I think if we all search our consciousness, we'll find a desire or two that are less than politically correct. It's not healthy (nor legally wise) for a doctor to seduce his patient on the table, but that won't stop me from imagining such a scene (my doctor is a hottie!). Flashing a truck driver, then seducing him at a rest stop is far from the safest activity, yet it's the fantasy of many women. Would most of them actually go through with it? Probably not, but that that doesn't make the fantasy any less exciting - more so, I'm sure, than the actual act would be.

Rape is wrong. Any time you force anything on another person, it's wrong. If a man ever attacked me, he'd better be a fast runner else I'll be hanging his nuts from my rearview mirror. I'm an independent-minded, fairly intelligent chick, but that doesn't stop me from fantasising about being 'taken'. Serious Question for the day: is it appropriate to judge the roleplay or fantasies of an otherwise mentally healthy person? Discuss.

 

[CreamyLady]

I'm willing to agree that my experience has probably skewed my view of things, and that others may have an entirely different perspective. It doesn't lessen my feeling that, fantasy aside, presenting forced sex as a pleasurable activity is dishonest.

I believe that anyone who entertains such fantasies in real life has some measure of control over the outcome, and more power to them. Fantasize away. However, the stories I really object to do NOT present a nonconsent fantasy; they present a situation where force is employed, and the "victim" ends up enjoying the experience, against her will. That, to me, is dishonest.

If we can agree to disagree again, I'd appreciate it. I don't want to start a war. I just don't see the entertainment value in such tales, and probably never will.

Gad. It has finally happened -- I'm an aging feminist with a flagging sense of humor. Why, oh WHY did I ever join NOW?

 

[Laurel]

LOL! *smooch* If there's a war, I don't want to be on opposite sides as you CL. I understand your view. My sister has a very hard time with the fact that anyone would entertain incest fantasies - her personal experience biases her in that way. There are many quirks & kinks that I will never understand, one of which is people who are aroused by another's pain. So true rape is not exciting to me, but loss of control fantasies are. Not sure if that makes any sense at all.

 

[Ulyssa]

It's okay, CreamyLady

When we reach down and put our mental tendrils into the muck that's down there waiting for us, we often scoop up the little girls, the idealistic teens, and the confident young women whom we just knew could change the world.

Like Madonna some of us take the street shit and bury it or turn it into a tough broad exterior. Others fall apart and hide inside themselves or their homes until reality is safely pushed away.

I think the rest of us fall somewhere in between. But somehow we still have to wake up in the morning and go off to work--and we all know that in spite of what the men think, we're the ones that make the "world go round."

Is there a point here? Probably not. I just want to say how much I admire everyone's honesty on this thread.

 

[nitengale]

I respectfully suggest that you may be biased, CL, by your experience. You too, Nitengale, by your job.

Actually, I have yet to express my opinion regarding rape fantasies. I went off on another tangent. I am not the least biased as I can separate reality from fantasy very easily. But the nice thing about fantasies is the person doing the fantasizing has all the control, which goes without saying. So while I have the job of taking care of true victums, I myself have been a victum many times in my own fantasies. My captor never uses harsh degrading words, nor does he use leather restraints, only the finest silk!! Does my job hamper this? Nope, not yet, thank God.


Laurel's question: "Is it appropriate to judge the roleplay or fantasies of an otherwise mentally healthy person?" Absolutely not. To each his own. Fantasizing is a healthy outlet. Just as I would not judge what you read here, or assume because you read all non consent stuff you are into something not healthy.

 

[peterpan]

Here is the typical sort of quandry I come across.
You are a young guy walking down a dark street. An old woman walks in front of you at a slower rate. She looks over her shoulder at you as you get closer and closer, obviously worried. What do you do. What do you do.

A) maintain you precice pace. slowly, inexorably eating the distance between you, watching her attempt to go a little faster and faster, finally ducking into a pathway she hopes is you will think is the entrance to her house but ironically half the time is yours.

B) slow your pace to precisely match hers, convincing her beyond a shadow of a doubt that you are following her.

C) Make a mad dash to pass her and get it over with.

or D) My favorite. Lie down.

 

[nitengale]

Hmmm...

Why not just smile, say hello, and move past her?

peterpan, you are definately an interesting person

 

[peterpan]

Serious Question for the day: is it appropriate to judge the roleplay or fantasies of an otherwise mentally healthy person? Discuss.

Yes, absolutely. Well I guess it depends what you mean by 'Judge'. Atleast I find psychoanalising my own fantacies very revealing. Some people's stories really give me the creeps.

You could argue that how people behave in their fantacies each night is far more telling than how they behave each day.

 

[peterpan]

Re: Hmmm...

Why not just smile, say hello, and move past her?

Ah. I see I forgot to mention the iron dental work

Passing in these circumstances could take a couple of minutes, especially if she speeds up. I guess I could say one hello every ten seconds...

Not joking, if possible I cross the road and once or twice have stopped to tie my shoelace.

oooh! oooh! Ive got another one! What if you are walking up to the dairy to by some milk and the paper and you pass an accident where a grader has tipped over and squashed a pram flat, and the young mother is screaming and screaming. Then she sees you and starts laughing. And she can't stop laughng and won't let go of you and everyone who has gathered around starts laughing and slapping you on the back, cos' you are that presenter off candid camera. But this is your day off.

Hmmm. A bit late here. A thought to sleep on, I think.

 

[Whispersecret]

I'm willing to agree that my experience has probably skewed my view of things, and that others may have an entirely different perspective. It doesn't lessen my feeling that, fantasy aside, presenting forced sex as a pleasurable activity is dishonest.

I believe that anyone who entertains such fantasies in real life has some measure of control over the outcome, and more power to them. Fantasize away. However, the stories I really object to do NOT present a nonconsent fantasy; they present a situation where force is employed, and the "victim" ends up enjoying the experience, against her will. That, to me, is dishonest.

If we can agree to disagree again, I'd appreciate it. I don't want to start a war. I just don't see the entertainment value in such tales, and probably never will.

Gad. It has finally happened -- I'm an aging feminist with a flagging sense of humor. Why, oh WHY did I ever join NOW?

Egad. There's that word again. Dishonest.

CL, I respect your view. I respect you. I agree we're going to disagree. No confrontation here. <winks> However, I'd really like to say something else here in regard to being dishonest.

Is it dishonest to portray a man enjoying sex with his 18 year-old daughter, when we know for a fact that most men would abhor the idea in real life? I don't think so. It's unrealistic, yes. Highly.

So by the same token, is it then dishonest to portray a woman enjoying sex with someone who has her in his complete control? Again, I don't think so.

All types of fiction have different degrees of reality. John Grisham books are very realistic. There's very little in his novels that is difficult to believe. However, if you take my favorite genre, romance or even historical romance, as a reader, you need a greater capacity for "suspending disbelief."

I'd venture to say that erotic fiction is the genre that demands THE GREATEST amount of reader reality abandonment. (Hey, I think I just coined a new phrase!) When you read a majority of erotic stories, you just have to say to yourself "Well, it COULD happen. There's a one in a million chance, but it COULD happen."

Thoughts on this?

 

[bluntforcemama]

Nonconsent

I am greatly turned on my nonconsent, but that does not mean that I want to be raped. In my mind, there is a difference. Rape, outright, is a horrible act of control and violation that should be punishable by death. I know that's extreme, but I think that taking something so personal from someone else should be the biggest crime next to taking someone's life.

The fantasies that I have or write about do entail nonconsent, but not to the degree that makes it sickening. It's more like the unrealistic Stockholm Syndrome. The victim falls for the predator, and they live happily ever after. I know that's tame, but I think I pulled it off. If you want to see what I mean:

http://www.literotica.com/stories/showstory.php?id=3412

http://www.literotica.com/stories/showstory.php?id=8093


Now mind you, these stories suck in parts.

 

[Ulyssa]

Kitchenette

Great! How am I supposed to concentrate with that waving in my face? I lost ten minutes just staring at the perfect hypnotic motion for me.

Myst, you are a prime tormentor of aging, mature women!

 

[NCmVoyeur]

Re: NC...

What I did was write a story that turned ME on. Without knowing it, I capitalized on the fact that most of the people who enjoy reading non-consent like the fact that the "victim" is forced to enjoy themselves in spite of the situation. * * *
Do you label ALL non-consent stories as "intellectually dishonest," or just the ones who rely on "devices?"

Two observations to start. First, I'm not speaking of your stories specifically (I haven't read them yet; though, my plan is to systematically go through the posts on my "What's your best story?" thread and read what people put down, so I'll get to "Hostile Takeover" in time.)

Second, perhaps the term 'device'is the problem and I should have picked a better term.

By 'device,' I means 'plot device,' or 'premise,' or 'fiction,' or 'illusion'--namely, that any woman (in reality) can ever be 'made' to enjoy sex against her will, let alone customarily.

To make a comparison, many people have threesome fantasies (I do), and many stories are written about threesomes. My sense is that, in reality, some threesome are fantastic experiences for the participants, some are a mix of awkward and good, and some turn out badly (sadly, I cannot speak from experience. ). The stories I read, likewise reflect great experiences (mostly), though some still capture the nervousness/awkwardness that the 'real' experience may often entail. In other words, I think the fantasy/story tracks reality, to a good degree.

By contrast, I've yet to hear rape victim claim "gosh, I was scared for my life and the guy was brutal, but ya' know, once he got inside me it started to feel really good, and I ended up with the most intense orgasms. I really got into it." Yet, seemingly MOST 'nonconsent' stories proceed under the fiction that the woman orgasms (in spite of herself) and eventually comes to enjoy the sexual experience. That's what I mean by dishonest. (The flip side of the coin--what I call the 'rape fantasy as oxymoron' theory--is that, while women may enjoy the fantasy, the fantasy proceeds under such an element of mental control that it is pure fiction to call it 'non-consent.' 'Dishonest' in a slightly different respect; it pretends to be what it's not.)

Your post in reply to CreamyLady asks 'how is this different from the fantasy men may have about their daughters?' The difference (a big one, IMO) is that a number of men in the 'real world' do in fact have sexual relations with their daughters and, given that they risk marriage, jailtime, and destroying their offspring mentally, I assume they do in fact enjoy it or get some satisfaction on some level. Others may enjoy the idea, but have enough concern about 'incest taboos' or the above risks to avoid ever entertaining the idea for real. In the same way, I have the fantasy of indulging in sexual acts of sundry form with sundry women, but thoughts of HIV and divorce keep me from entertaining the idea seriously as real-world proposition.

(In a similar vein, I view the 'incest' category here as largely 'pedophilia in disguise.' The category seems to have a disproportionate number of 18-year old female characters; many of whom curiously seem 'younger' than their chronological age would suggest.)

The suspension of reality that a woman can be forced against her will to enjoy sex seems categorically different than the suspension of reality that I can have promiscuous sex without running the risk of HIV. I just don't think it ever happens in the way the stories suggest. That's what I mean by dishonest.

Does that help explain my viewpoint?