The morality of non-consent, in two minutes.

[SimonDoom]

I can agree with that, but on the basis of personal squick, non-con incest or any other kink are the same. One person's kink is another's squick, and in that sense, any two kinks can be fully compared for double standards. The same person who thinks that incest is moralistic but non-con is not, may also think that anal is immoral but asphyxiation and cutting are just fine, or vice-versa or any other combination. We can suppose that whether such comparisons are valid or not wholly depend on whether they align with our own individual morals, but we cannot state unequivocally that any of these comparisons are universally invalid.

I'm always glad to see when you and I agree about something. It makes me feel like we must be right.

Some people obviously have misunderstood what I think is the obvious intent behind that video clip and of my posting it.

The video deconstructs, humorously, the rationalization of nonconsensual sexual activity. If it's nonconsensual, it's nonconsensual. In the real world, it's wrong, period. Dennis is a sociopathic rationalizer.

If you find fantasies about nonconsensual scenarios sexy, it doesn't make you a bad person. It means you are like a lot of people who have transgressive fantasies. It's OK! You don't have to twist yourself into a mental pretzel to convince yourself that the thing you like is not really nonconsent.

What's NOT OK, I think, is trying to get around the fact that you like to fantasize about transgressive things by trying to rationalize, "Well, it's not REALLY nonconsent." Because it IS really nonconsent. That's the point of the video clip.

Nonconsent isn't my favorite kink, but I get its appeal. I think "consensual nonconsent" is much less appealing. It misses the whole point. But to each their own.

 

[mirafrida]

there is no reason why anyone should compare incest and rape, in real life or in erotic stories. Yeah, we can drop the euphemism "non-con". Consensual non-con and reluctance are a different thing so I am not talking about them here.

I just wanted to point out that the argument made in that post that everyone seems to approve of is silly, because morally and ethically, incest and rape aren't the same thing and they never will be. They are both against the law, of course, but law and morals are not the same and never will be. That person was mixing apples and oranges when they compared the morality of incest with the morality of rape. Whether this applies to writing erotic incest or erotic rape is a whole different subject, but they are still not the same, not even close.

Another comparison which is not in any way the same, but still apt in some ways, is adultery. I'm not sure I've ever heard an AH author express this view, but there are clearly many LitE readers who feel it is immoral and hurtful for someone to write a story about infidelity, unless it takes an overt, hardline stance against the offender, and shows them getting some sort of comeuppance for their wrongdoing. As far as I can tell, such feelings often stem from first-hand experiences of infidelity in real life, which caused the people involved intense emotional distress. Stories that treat the subject with less than the vitriol they think it deserves are taken as trivializing the act and belittling their personal pain.

I, on the other hand, do not condone adultery in real life, yet enjoy transgressive stories about infidelity which don't conform to such expectations. Is that immoral of me? Eye of the beholder I guess.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

I'm always glad to see when you and I agree about something. It makes me feel like we must be right.

Well, if you're agreeing with me then you must be right.

 

[Wifetheif]

As someone who practically occupies the N/C category full-time, I scoff at the position that there is no morality to non-consent. The entire sub-genre is BASED on compromising morals. I write realistic tales. Even my SF and fantasy have to follow rules of logic and common sense. We are ALL coerced one way or another just by living our lives! We pay taxes, obey speed limits, avoid certain criminal activity because we are COMPELLED BY SOCIETY! The wife is blackmailed into bedding down with a jerk let's say. How is that any different than a kid obeying a draft notice or following all the rules to obtain their driver's license? They both jump through hoops they both toe the line, they both include things you may not want to do.(Speeding is SO much fun! Who cares if i'm sloshed behind the wheel?) (You mean you expect me to kill somebody?) Unless you live on a deserted island, you are compelled ever single day of your life. Often you are compelled to do something you hate, like work a shitty job with vile people just to get enough money to survive. You may argue that there is a vast difference between a radar gun to nab speeders and the edge of a knife to extort something from a person. I would argue that they differ only in degree of societal opinion. Coercion IS the default setting of humanity!

 

[pink_silk_glove]

As someone who practically occupies the N/C category full-time, I scoff at the position that there is no morality to non-consent. The entire sub-genre is BASED on compromising morals.

Oh there are morality challenges for the characters for sure. I don't think that anyone is arguing against that, although I will be careful not to speak for anyone else.

What I argue myself at least, is that the story itself as presented has no obligation to take a moral based stance or show a moral based judgment on any of its topics, themes or characters. The story has no obligation to show or state that any of its characters have done anything right or wrong. The writer may certainly do so if he pleases, but it is not at all a requirement.

 

[forgotmyantidepressants]

Why does erotica need to be "moral"? Genuinely curious...

 

[lovecraft68]

Later on I thought of something. I know, as I'm sure many do, that we have some women here who have experienced sexual abuse, yet-and I repeat-when this topic comes up they continue to push their views, keep the conversation going because of course they know everything about it, and can't stop going even though most of us at this point know there are people here it could upset. I think that whenever I see someone who isn't new here bring this conversation up yet again.

There's something called empathy. It's a word I know we all know, and many practice, but some can't help themselves.

I believe in free speech regardless of topic and whether or not I agree with said topic, but sometimes just because you can doesn't mean you should.

The "woman's erotica' Thread went exactly as I knew it would, and I have-and will continue-to refrain from calling out the usual people saying the usual thing, as in "well, ladies, I respect you, but let me tell you how you really feel."

 

[TarnishedPenny]

I have deleted the NC/R stories I’ve written, simply because I don’t like the way they made me feel. IRL is horrible.

All that said, my NC/R was specifically written for a couple in which the woman had a rape fantasy. I seriously doubt she was interested in being sexually assaulted IRL.

And there have been some pretty solid studies in which two-thirds of the women responding acknowledged that they had or had had such fantasies at some point. I seriously doubt many of them are interested in the real thing, either.

So, a conundrum. It’s a dreadful thing IRL, yet purely as a fantasy, the majority of women are, or occasionally are, turned on by the fantasy. Does its evil IRL reality mean that writers catering to their fantasies - acknowledged as fantasy - need to be censored?

 

[forgotmyantidepressants]

Later on I thought of something. I know, as I'm sure many do, that we have some women here who have experienced sexual abuse, yet-and I repeat-when this topic comes up they continue to push their views, keep the conversation going because of course they know everything about it, and can't stop going even though most of us at this point know there are people here it could upset. I think that whenever I see someone who isn't new here bring this conversation up yet again.

There's something called empathy. It's a word I know we all know, and many practice, but some can't help themselves.

I believe in free speech regardless of topic and whether or not I agree with said topic, but sometimes just because you can doesn't mean you should.

The "woman's erotica' Thread went exactly as I knew it would, and I have-and will continue-to refrain from calling out the usual people saying the usual thing, as in "well, ladies, I respect you, but let me tell you how you really feel."

White-Knight Misogyny

 

[StillStunned]

The "woman's erotica' Thread went exactly as I knew it would, and I have-and will continue-to refrain from calling out the usual people saying the usual thing, as in "well, ladies, I respect you, but let me tell you how you really feel."

Really? Because I followed that thread from the start, and all I saw was people - men and women - saying that "women's erotica" was a pointlessly exclusive name that didn't describe the writers, the audience or the subject matter.

No-one was dismissive of the idea of "emotional journey" erotica (although plenty of people pointed out that Lit wasn't ever going to add it as a category), and certainly no-one was dismissing anyone's feelings on such stories.

 

[SimonDoom]

So, a conundrum. It’s a dreadful thing IRL, yet purely as a fantasy, the majority of women are, or occasionally are, turned on my the fantasy. Does its evil IRL reality mean that writers catering to their fantasies - acknowledged as fantasy - need to be censored?

I know my answer to that is a decisive "no," and I suspect yours is as well, although you made a perfectly understandable personal decision to remove your own stories that disturbed you. I suspect most authors here agree and oppose censorship, while some might be more open either to censorship or, more likely, self-censorship (i.e., "you can do that if you want to but I think it's wrong and prefer not to").

My personal view is that it is perfectly healthy for people to indulge, to at least some degree, in dark, transgressive fantasies--to have them, to read about them, to write about them.

 

[StillStunned]

My personal view is that it is perfectly healthy for people to indulge, to at least some degree, in dark, transgressive fantasies--to have them, to read about them, to write about them.

I agree. One of the purposes of art (in the broadest sense) is to let people vicariously experience things they won't in real life, so that they can explore their reactions in a safe and controlled manner. People who like horror movies, for instance, probably don't really want to be chased around by chainsaw-wielding psychopaths. They just want the thrill of imagining it.

Part of the "18 and over" rule for accessing sites such as Lit is that as adults we're supposed to be able to separate fantasy from reality. Are there adults who struggle with that? Most certainly. But I don't think that justifies banning entire genres - of books, of movies, of television series, or erotica - that are potentially disturbing.

In the end, it's up to every adult user here to decide what they want to write and what they want to read, and whether they can cope with it in a responsible manner.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

Later on I thought of something. I know, as I'm sure many do, that we have some women here who have experienced sexual abuse, yet-and I repeat-when this topic comes up they continue to push their views, keep the conversation going because of course they know everything about it, and can't stop going even though most of us at this point know there are people here it could upset. I think that whenever I see someone who isn't new here bring this conversation up yet again.

There's something called empathy. It's a word I know we all know, and many practice, but some can't help themselves.

I believe in free speech regardless of topic and whether or not I agree with said topic, but sometimes just because you can doesn't mean you should.

Nothing against empathy, but where else should we talk about this? Not talking about it is one of the worst things that we can do because then it will stay under the radar and we will continue as a whole to misunderstand it. This is an open forum containing every sexual topic under the sun. If someone has a rape trigger (and I have worked in the community and I know that these triggers are real) they should know top avoid threads like this one if they are feeling squeamish about it.

Sure, the point you make is valid, if one is talking with a casual group of friends at a dinner party or around the water cooler at work, but on a sex forum, it's totally appropriate.

 

[OverconfidentSarcasm]

I read where some authors like the OP, who I typically agree with on most topics, justify writing incest stories based on the rationale “Hey it’s okay, it’s only people’s erotic fantasies, nobody really condones incest in real life, right ?”

And then thousands or in some cases millions of Literotica readers read those stories and score them as high or higher than any genre on the site, leading most truly discerning people to question how so many people could gain excitement from a concept they say they find abhorrent in real life. Meanwhile authors in the category bask in popularity while collecting countless followers, favorites, and red-H’s.

And to be honest, I find little fault in that. We are all here providing fantasies for millions of readers seeking erotic escapes while catering to our own self-indulgences and/or desire for small scale notoriety.

But what I take serious issue with is when these same authors turn around and question other genres/story themes they personally take offense to like non-con. Why is it okay to write incest and suggest it’s only for fantasy purposes, but suggest N/C authors are morally wrong for doing the same? It reeks of hypocrisy regardless of one’s position on the topic. Imagine that exact same scene in the video clip if the bad guy had been joking that sex with mom or sister was okay.

Well... I know I'm a day late, but let me try and explain how I always understood this.

Legally, the problem with incest in real life is not the incest. Going by actual sentences and charges filed, it's just an additional factor in an already bad situation. For example, if a parent assaults their child or one of the children takes advantage of their sibling, that's plain rape and sexual abuse, and that's what they're getting charged with. The incest, in that circumstance, only proves to show how much of a predator that person is, if they're able to do that to a family member, of all people. However, if you remove the rape and abuse from the equation, all you're left with in a case of incest are two consenting adults doing things in the privacy of their bedroom.

As far as I can see, that's exactly what the overwhelming majority of authors in the I/T section write about. The only thing you can complain about in a consensual incest relationship are possible birth defects in the hypothetical offspring. And, because of that, I don't see any hypocrisy in I/T authors condemning non-consent stories.

The thing is, we don't run around prohibiting people with down syndrome, or dwarfism, or ALS from having children, despite the probability of passing on those genetic ailments to their children. Why? Because telling people they're not allowed to have kids, based on nothing but the expected genetic viability of their offspring, is, historically, not awesome.

However, we DO run around telling people not to rape, groom, abuse, and assault our peers. Why? Because that one is supposed to be "common sense".

So... yeah. I/T authors have every right to not like NC stories.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

Some people obviously have misunderstood what I think is the obvious intent behind that video clip and of my posting it.

The video deconstructs, humorously, the rationalization of nonconsensual sexual activity. If it's nonconsensual, it's nonconsensual. In the real world, it's wrong, period. Dennis is a sociopathic rationalizer.

Indeed, we are not laughing because we think rape is funny. Hardly. We are laughing AT the absurdity of this narcissist douche as he tries to rationalize his thoroughly coercive intentions. In short, we are ridiculing a potential rapist. But hey, I suppose that perhaps we might be being insensitive towards him. : P

 

[mirafrida]

So... yeah. I/T authors have every right to not like NC stories.

Anyone has a right not to like any story.

Anyone has a right to judge someone who writes an NC story, or an I/T story, or an adultery story, or any story - just as I have a right to judge their judgmentalism.

As someone who writes a lot of NC *fantasies*, I perceive a low but persistent drumbeat here calling for NC authors to be banned from LitE, or avoid discussing their stories on the forum, or otherwise be marginalized, and that does bug me. Honestly, Given that probably 20-25% percent of Americans would say LitE as a whole is immoral and a source of positive harms and should be shut down, I see a hint of hypocrisy in drawing boundaries that exclude me but welcome thee.

But at the end of the day, such criticisms do reflect people exercising their right to judge, so they have their place too. I'm glad there's still room for me and my stories here.

 

[Otto26]

Non-con is a difficult subject matter to tackle in part because of the vague terminology. You'll hear claims that a majority of people confess to having non-con/rape fantasies but, upon closer scrutiny, you'll conclude that they have forced-sex fantasies. Forced-sex, where the victim comes to enjoy the sex, is what Lit really wants to see. Rape, which is less about sex and more about power and torture/brutalization, is over the line.

I have jumped through a lot of hoops to make non-con stories palatable. I've positioned it as an accident of circumstance where the protagonists have to engage in it to survive. Follow on stories dealt, lightly, with the trauma of the event. I've positioned it as taking place in a virtual reality where everyone is a willing participant. I've referred to it in the background to establish the 'badness' of the villain/s. I've never made genuine rape the entertainment of the story. And that mental maneuvering helps me sleep at night.

As for the 'implication', that was a normal part of society for a very long time. The idea that buying a woman dinner obliged her to 'put out', the idea of driving a woman to a remote location and demanding sex unless she wanted to walk home, the idea that a wife couldn't be raped by her husband, these were all very accepted in a lot of societies up until very recently (when acceptance has declined but not disappeared). Talk to women and you'll find that most of them live with the reality that interactions with men can easily shift over to violence.

 

[theMasterBaiter]

Interesting thread. I'm glad it can exist and deeply appreciate hearing the opinions of the women who have commented. No one else really has a say in my mind.

As an ethical sadist (only wanting to hurt those who enjoy being hurt, and how they want it) all my stores are deeply about consent although some have elements of coercion.

The question that burns in my mind regards assumptions about consent. The board wife who wishes her husband would pull her hair or smack her ass but only gets tender loving because he was taught it was wrong to hit a girl. Is that consent or non-consent? "The Lock" series is that taken to absurd levels.

And so for "rape" fantasies. Can the exact actions which are completely and unarguably wrong in one context, be exactly what is desired, missed, and needed in another? That's the story I'm writing now. Or failing to write. As a man, I can't know how to say it correctly, and yet I desperately want to say it, if only to reach an audience who might not otherwise "get it". Any help deeply appreciated.

And I deeply appreciate a community where we can share our points of view.

 

[joy_of_cooking]

the women who have commented. No one else really has a say in my mind.

Why not?

 

[theMasterBaiter]

Why not?

Being female is the only point of view outside my own experience. Men can talk. I won't stop them. I just will listen to my own experience over theirs. I can't do that with women. Or trans. Shrug.

 

[joy_of_cooking]

I think there's more diversity of experience among men than you're recognizing. Do you really think you have nothing to learn from 4 billion people?