Extremely Degenerate Smut

[ScrappyPaperDoodler]

I take a somewhat different view. There's good and bad in everything, but I'd say that in general attitudes about sex are a lot better than they used to be, and one of the reasons for that is its commodification. What is commodification? It means that an individual has control over some aspect of their body or sexuality and the terms on which they wish to exchange it with another person. That is, IMO, on balance a good thing. The alternative, or de-commodification, is a central authority telling us how we are to value and exchange our sexuality and criminalizing things when we want to do things differently.

A back massage is a commodity. Nobody thinks twice about that, or thinks that humans are being devalued because they give back massages for money. Why not blow jobs, too?

Women are more comfortable with pornography now than ever before because a) some women enjoy it, and b) women have more control over it than ever before, with communication and photography technology and social media platforms enabling women to deliver content while getting rid of male middle-men.

Very good points. However, wearing my radical university seminar hat (even if only to make the counter-argument) I'd say that the enjoyment, control and economic opportunity presented by the system are not proof that it's less exploitative but rather show that exploitation has become more sophisticated. Perhaps as a means of regaining ground in the battle of the sexes.

All that said, there's no great conspiracy. If someone enjoys and derives financial value from what they do, it's not for us or any other authority to suppress that.

Regarding how sexuality is shifting, I wonder if zooming out and looking at the last 5,000 years as opposed to the last 500 doesn't perhaps reveal that not much has changed in the bigger scheme of things. There are books written a few hundred years ago that wouldn't meet Lit's content standards, and tales of actual hedonism that would (rightfully) get you arrested in today's world. At the same time, we have gotten more open, tolerant, and pleasure-seeking in different ways due to technology and the creation of a middle-class.

 

[mousberry]

What is commodification? It means that an individual has control over some aspect of their body or sexuality and the terms on which they wish to exchange it with another person.

I think you are looking at this too much within the mire of capitalism.

Capitalism assigns every action, service and object a value, and that value can then be exchanged for other such items. Everything begins to be seen within the marketplace economy. Human beings stop being people, rather they are only what they can sell.

And an individual has no control over the market. Pornstars do not have control over their bodies. If your nose is too big, then you need to improve your product by getting a nose job. Same with any kind of plastic surgery. It reduces an individual down to an object.

 

[ScrappyPaperDoodler]

This thread started with whipped cream and vomit.

 

[OddLove]

Very good points. However, wearing my radical university seminar hat (even if only to make the counter-argument) I'd say that the enjoyment, control and economic opportunity presented by the system are not proof that it's less exploitative but rather show that exploitation has become more sophisticated. Perhaps as a means of regaining ground in the battle of the sexes.

Do you think the enjoyment, control, and economic opportunity this current system allows is proof of exploitation beyond the standard economical capitalist exploitation every worker in society experiences? Or do you think it's More exploitative? And if so, in which way would you say it's *more exploitative?

 

[OddLove]

I think you are looking at this too much within the mire of capitalism.

Capitalism assigns every action, service and object a value, and that value can then be exchanged for other such items. Everything begins to be seen within the marketplace economy. Human beings stop being people, rather they are only what they can sell.

And an individual has no control over the market. Pornstars do not have control over their bodies. If your nose is too big, then you need to improve your product by getting a nose job. Same with any kind of plastic surgery. It reduces an individual down to an object.

I agree with you that it's an unfortunate side effect of the superficial word when it comes to selling yourself as a product for sex, but beyond capitalism, it's that way on a societal superficial level too when someone puts themself on the 'market' in terms of dating. The constant pressure most feel to improve there 'hot or not' rating is sad, cruel, unfair, but real.

Anyone remember hot or not by the way? I blame that website for everything wrong with the world today.

 

[SimonDoom]

I think you are looking at this too much within the mire of capitalism.

Capitalism assigns every action, service and object a value, and that value can then be exchanged for other such items. Everything begins to be seen within the marketplace economy. Human beings stop being people, rather they are only what they can sell.

And an individual has no control over the market. Pornstars do not have control over their bodies. If your nose is too big, then you need to improve your product by getting a nose job. Same with any kind of plastic surgery. It reduces an individual down to an object.

I DO look at it through the lens of capitalism, because I think it's the only civilized way to live. The alternative is a centralized coercive authority telling people how things should be valued and forcing them to exchange with one another on the terms approved by the central authority. We've seen how that works.

Capitalism is to economic systems what democracy is to political systems. It's the worst system, except for all the others.

I don't understand the point that "pornstars do not have control over their bodies." What does that mean? Having "control" in a meaningful political/economic sense doesn't mean absolute control, like you are a genie who can wiggle your nose and make life around you adapt to your wishes. Of course we are constrained in many ways by reality. That doesn't mean we lack control, in a meaningful sense. A person who faces all the same life difficulties and constraints that everyone does but has the choice to offer some aspect of their sexuality on terms of their choosing has a choice that someone denied that choice does not have.

 

[mousberry]

I don't understand the point that "pornstars do not have control over their bodies." What does that mean?

Well firstly I made no case for an alternative. I'm just critiquing capitalism, and I think it would be silly to say that it's a perfect system.

And I mean that a pornstar doesn't have control of their own body because the market demands what that body should look like. The body is treated like any other commodity that can be improved and sold to compete with others.

 

[ScrappyPaperDoodler]

Do you think the enjoyment, control, and economic opportunity this current system allows is proof of exploitation beyond the standard economical capitalist exploitation every worker in society experiences? Or do you think it's More exploitative? And if so, in which way would you say it's *more exploitative?

So, here's where I might be going off the rails, but bear with me please...

Women are already not compensated for the domestic labour they've traditionally performed. Self-commodification for the vast majority of content creators is just another form of unpaid labour, with substantially more risks. In most modern democracies, women have better access to divorce as an option. We've built imperfect structures to deal with intimate partner abuse, and social safety nets are generally effective when appropriately targeted.

There are fewer escape routes when you become ensnared in the attention economy.

When you become the commodity instead of simply being a labourer, you can no longer distinguish your self from the product. You cannot withhold labour to compel change. Your existence alone is sufficient to keep the system's gears turning.

What percentage of content creators actually make money? When I was younger, the myth was "there's so much money in porn," but that was never really true. Then it was "wow, these streamers/OF girls/etc. are making millions."

Yes. The tiniest sliver may be, but not most (perhaps not even many). And when you give it a shot and walk away with nothing but the stigma and the memories (sometimes good, sometimes bad), what then?

These platforms also do something else, which is turbo charge consumerism and toxic beauty standards. And these things reinforce one another.

So, yes, I think this is a particularly nasty form of exploitation.

 

[SimonDoom]

And I mean that a pornstar doesn't have control of their own body because the market demands what that body should look like. The body is treated like any other commodity that can be improved and sold to compete with others.

The market is not a monolith. It is the sum of a huge diversity of tastes and desires. That's true whether you're here, or at Walmart, or at Amazon.

Look at OnlyFans. You could look at it as a vehicle by which women commodify their bodies for the "market." That's not wrong. But there's no one perfect OnlyFans type. It appears to be a reasonably efficient market in which an extremely diverse group of creators provides a diversity of content for subscribers. The "market" does not demand one thing, any more than a Sunday morning farmer's market demands that every customer must buy tomatoes.

If you object to the commodification of the human body, then you have to ask, how would you prefer that it be treated? What's the better alternative? Because, as I pointed out earlier, the real-world alternative is to have a central authority tell everybody what things are worth and force people to get on board with that. There's no third alternative. This, I think, is the point that those who object to the market-oriented approach to sex and erotica do not want to face.

 

[ScrappyPaperDoodler]

Because, as I pointed out earlier, the real-world alternative is to have a central authority tell everybody what things are worth and force people to get on board with that. There's no third alternative.

I do think there is a third alternative, which is what we do in most societies: management by a central authority, acting with popular consent, without veering into totalitarianism.

We can be much more aggressive with respect to labour protections for everyone working in the "gig economy," sex work can be regulated according to reality instead of moralism, and tech giants can be slapped around a bit to punish them for their worst excesses.

 

[mousberry]

If you object to the commodification of the human body, then you have to ask, how would you prefer that it be treated? What's the better alternative? Because, as I pointed out earlier, the real-world alternative is to have a central authority tell everybody what things are worth and force people to get on board with that. There's no third alternative. This, I think, is the point that those who object to the market-oriented approach to sex and erotica do not want to face.

I disagree that anyone should have to provide a fix or an alternative when criticising. I don't claim to know what the solution is.

I don't think it matters much that the market has many demands. There is still a value and a price placed on human bodies which objectifies them to be sold. If you're not particularly good looking, sorry but you are worth less as a person now. I think this is really violating and I think it's really wrong. And like the other poster pointed out this type of thinking infects every day life, so people who do not perform in porn videos still have the same demands placed on them.

I'd rather be seen as a person rather than a product.

 

[SimonDoom]

I don't think it matters much that the market has many demands. There is still a value and a price placed on human bodies which objectifies them to be sold. If you're not particularly good looking, sorry but you are worth less as a person now. I think this is really violating and I think it's really wrong. And like the other poster pointed out this type of thinking infects every day life, so people who do not perform in porn videos still have the same demands placed on them.

I don't understand this way of thinking, especially at an erotic story website where we traffic in stories that turn people on.

A good looking person turns other people on more than a person who isn't as good looking. This is not wrong. It is not violating. It is reality. It's no different from the fact that a less intelligent person might offer less value as a software programmer than a more intelligent person. We are not equal, and that's not wrong or bad. It's reality.

We like our movie stars to be good looking. Same with the model industry. We want physicists and doctors to be smart. All of it is commodification. In porn and erotica we desire creators who offer something more attractive. I see nothing wrong with that.

What is the point of criticizing something to which there is no alternative? I don't get that.

 

[mousberry]

A good looking person turns other people on more than a person who isn't as good looking. This is not wrong. It is not violating. It is reality. It's no different from the fact that a less intelligent person might offer less value as a software programmer than a more intelligent person. We are not equal, and that's not wrong or bad. It's reality.

I do agree, but I feel like pornography is an extreme of this type of thinking. What is valuable to the market doesn't exactly correlate with true, real value.

For example, fast food tastes good, it's cheap and it's easy to obtain, so people naturally flock to buy it. It is also terrible for your health, but that doesn't stop the market. The best product doesn't always rise to the top. It's often the most convenient.

I think it becomes very evil is when this type of thinking is applied to human beings and bodies. People have been reduced and made to be most convenient for the market. How a pornstar looks and behaves isn't true to what makes them happy or what is actually valuable. They are act according to the most basic and primal desires in consequence to every other virtue that makes a person loveable.

 

[ScrappyPaperDoodler]

They are act according to the most basic and primal desires in consequence to every other virtue that makes a person loveable.

Our most basic and primal desires are the source of both our virtues and our vices. Without sex and hedonism, we'd be a worse species.

 

[crookedletter]

Without sex ... we'd be a worse species.

For one thing we'd have a really hard time being a species in the first place.

 

[mousberry]

Our most basic and primal desires are the source of both our virtues and our vices. Without sex and hedonism, we'd be a worse species.

Well I think what sets us apart from animals is our ability to override and transcend these base desires.

 

[OddLove]

I honestly can't be bothered to go point for point as things spiral in a million directions.

Here's my axiom.

Individual freedom is almost always MORE valuable and important than Whatever people *think is best for other individuals/societies/cultures/etc.

Sub-axiom.

Individual freedom should only be regulated in places where the risk of no regulation is dangerous and reckless. Examples. Letting individuals buy fully automatic machine guns from Walmart. Letting individuals drive while wasted or high. Letting individuals scam elderly people out of their savings. ETC.

Also, about the vomit thing. I googled it and realized one average size can of cool whip only covers *one pie. Which means two cans of cool whip isn't nearly enough to make the stupid puppy (college student) woozy. So I'm going to have to go back and fix that. But I might also go buy some cans of cool whip and actually check for myself, because I also thought it expanded way more, like one 12oz can would be several gallons once sprayed. And the reason I also assumed that is because around Thanksgiving and Christmas I'll walk by the fridge and spray the same can in my mouth like ten times a day for a month before it goes empty. It really seems like there has to be more. So I'm thinking that Google summary answer I got might be wrong.

I don't know if anyone else has tested this, or maybe knows *math enough to actually math it out, but if so, let me know what you come up with.

EDIT: Fuck I suck at typing.

 

[SimonDoom]

I think it becomes very evil is when this type of thinking is applied to human beings and bodies. People have been reduced and made to be most convenient for the market. How a pornstar looks and behaves isn't true to what makes them happy or what is actually valuable. They are act according to the most basic and primal desires in consequence to every other virtue that makes a person loveable.

By what authority or source of knowledge do you claim to know what makes a pornstar happy or actually valuable? This, I think is the fallacy. You have no grounds for doing so. None. Zero. Who are you to say that if a pornstar has fun making money showing off her tits online that it's somehow bad?

You say "people have been reduced and made to be most convenient for the market." I don't agree. Society, in every form, at every time in history, has treated people this way. The market is not unique in this respect. The uniqueness of the market is that it empowers individuals to decide for themselves what they are worth and to offer themselves, their skills, talents, unique traits, and, yes, bodies, on terms of their choosing as opposed to terms dictated by a central authority. It doesn't result in utopia, but nothing does, so that's not the choice, and it's better than what came before.

Well I think what sets us apart from animals is our ability to override and transcend these base desires.

I don't accept that they are base. I think they are part of what makes us human, and a potential source of great joy. To me, that's what a place like this is all about.

 

[AG31]

This is gonna be degenerate. I suppose that's a trigger warning for people.

So today I was working on a femdom story where this sophisticated lady basically raffles off her 'stupid boy' puppy (young college student) to older men, and as I was writing a scene where an older man made the young submissive get down on his knees and then the man proceeded to spray cool whip into his mouth and demanding he swallow it, over and over until he emptied two cans and the submissive was woozy, then the older man calmly undressed, folded his clothes, and face fucked the submissive mercilessly as all the cool whip came erupted back up and spewing out of the sides of his stuffed squirrel cheeks, and when the stupid puppy was as empty as the cans of cool whip, the man wiped himself clean, got dressed, and left.

And while I was writing this, I stopped and went to the content guidelines just to double check if vomit is allowed. I didn't see anything there discussing it, so I stepped outside of my comfortable and familiar BDSM category, searched for stories featuring such activity, and found many highly rated and popular stories featuring stomach contents... from both directions... and I don't think I'll ever take the southern route myself when writing, but when I discovered it, I had a very strange calmness and connection, what hippies would call oneness if you will.

I imagine I just experience a similar feeling to what lots of readers have here when they first discover that they're neither alone in being 'off' or in being a complete degenerate. It was kind of nice.

A bit off topic, just curious here. Did either person experience more traditional erotic sensations? Swelling in the genitals?

 

[mousberry]

By what authority or source of knowledge do you claim to know what makes a pornstar happy or actually valuable? This, I think is the fallacy. You have no grounds for doing so. None. Zero. Who are you to say that if a pornstar has fun making money showing off her tits online that it's somehow bad?

Most often, the women who enter into sex work do so because they have no other valuable skills, and when desperate times call for money, whether it be poverty or abuse, it's an easy profession to make ends meet. This is an issue when people are defined by what they can produce. If these women were raised in stable households, under secure economic conditions, and were fostered into a system that allowed them to flourish, I would bet my life that the majority would under no circumstances choose to reduce their identities to their sexual organs for pay.

This follows my idea that sex is a base desire— and I mean low and cheap by that. If you're an attractive person, it is incredibly easy to gain attention by appealing to sex. It's immediately visual, ignorant of aesthetics, and entirely narrow in the way it obscures the performer's identity. You see a vagina and a pair of boobs, and the monkey part of your brain is activated and feels good. It's incredibly easy to grab a man's attention like this.

Think of a person you admire and respect. Say one of these women had the opportunity to learn the piano and work hard to compose lovely pieces of music. Would that not be infinitely more attractive than an empty head with boobs? Pornography and consumption culture encourage this attitude to rush towards the most immediate and easy thing instead of working towards cultivating something beautiful. Now, why would these women, if given the conditions and means and ability to create something beautiful, want to appeal to this lower desire? Sure, it's fun, and it feels good, but again, it's cheap.

That's not even getting into how entirely unerotic pornography is.

I don't want to stop people from doing what they like, but I simply believe that porn is exploitative and a symptom of wider issues. It really should be avoided if you can.

Also the defence that people have done this throughout history doesn't work for me. Firstly, the internet itself is such a unique invention that sex work has never been so profitable or accessible. Secondly, people having been raping and murdering for thousands of years, but I'm under no obligation to call this good, just because it is a thing that humans have done.

 

[OddLove]

A bit off topic, just curious here. Did either person experience more traditional erotic sensations? Swelling in the genitals?

If you're talking about horny/aroused feelings, Yes. During the cool whip scene the older guy spraying it is aroused, and the 'stupid puppy' guys older girlfriend is aroused and highly amused cause she likes seeing him get humiliated. But he's just annoyed, not aroused, only doing it because he knows she enjoys it... only time he's aroused in the story is when he gets one on one time with her cause he's a big hopeless simp for her.

 

[SimonDoom]

Most often, the women who enter into sex work do so because they have no other valuable skills, and when desperate times call for money, whether it be poverty or abuse, it's an easy profession to make ends meet. This is an issue when people are defined by what they can produce. If these women were raised in stable households, under secure economic conditions, and were fostered into a system that allowed them to flourish, I would bet my life that the majority would under no circumstances choose to reduce their identities to their sexual organs for pay.

This follows my idea that sex is a base desire— and I mean low and cheap by that. If you're an attractive person, it is incredibly easy to gain attention by appealing to sex. It's immediately visual, ignorant of aesthetics, and entirely narrow in the way it obscures the performer's identity. You see a vagina and a pair of boobs, and the monkey part of your brain is activated and feels good. It's incredibly easy to grab a man's attention like this.

Think of a person you admire and respect. Say one of these women had the opportunity to learn the piano and work hard to compose lovely pieces of music. Would that not be infinitely more attractive than an empty head with boobs? Pornography and consumption culture encourage this attitude to rush towards the most immediate and easy thing instead of working towards cultivating something beautiful. Now, why would these women, if given the conditions and means and ability to create something beautiful, want to appeal to this lower desire? Sure, it's fun, and it feels good, but again, it's cheap.

That's not even getting into how entirely unerotic pornography is.

I don't want to stop people from doing what they like, but I simply believe that porn is exploitative and a symptom of wider issues. It really should be avoided if you can.

Also the defence that people have done this throughout history doesn't work for me. Firstly, the internet itself is such a unique invention that sex work has never been so profitable or accessible. Secondly, people having been raping and murdering for thousands of years, but I'm under no obligation to call this good, just because it is a thing that humans have done.

If you don't like it, that's your right. But it seems to me you are projecting your own personal dislikes onto others.

I think your narrative runs contrary to actual human experience. People DO enjoy sharing sexual content. Not everybody, but many. I think it's something to celebrate, not judge or want to go away.

 

[mousberry]

If you don't like it, that's your right. But it seems to me you are projecting your own personal dislikes onto others.

I think your narrative runs contrary to actual human experience. People DO enjoy sharing sexual content. Not everybody, but many. I think it's something to celebrate, not judge or want to go away.

My argument doesn't discount that people enjoy sharing sexual content. As I said, on its own, it's just a very cheap and objectifying way to interact with others. I think those energies are much better spent making the world more beautiful.

It's fine anyway. I won't stop them.

 

[ScrappyPaperDoodler]

Which means two cans of cool whip isn't nearly enough to make the stupid puppy (college student) woozy.

Why aim for realism? If two cans is somehow hotter (and better on the page) than three cans, rather go with two.

Then again, you could use the volume and the time it takes to deliver said volume as a pacing tool. More might be better if you want to make the reader's heart tighten up as you build up to a breaking/barfing point.

 

[Ianus4]

There’s a different side to this, however: It’s common to see people who assume femdom must be cruel, degrading, and brutal for the guy, and it’s like…why do people think a female-dominant relationship goes hand in hand with male humiliation? Why does the idea of a guy not being in charge need to be associated with misery and pain? Not all femdom is like that, obviously, but there’s a lot of it.

Although I don't follow the category closely, it seems from the comments that committed (and perhaps practicing?) BDSM enthusiasts take it quite seriously that events in the stories should take place with the consent of both parties and the use of safety words.