The Rules on Non-Consent Here are Frankly Ridiculous

[windar]

You may be right. I don't really know. My broader point is that it doesn't matter, because whatever incest "is" out there in the real world has nothing to do with Literotica incest.

And the same is true of non-consent and everything else.

 

[TxRad]

And the same is true of non-consent and everything else.

In the end, nothing any of us says matters one bit. Laurel's house, Laurel's rules. Any argument you have with that, take up with her. We have no input and no influence.

 

[Black_and_White_Writer]

Equally ridiculous is the embrace and utter promotion of incest. In the real world, incest is rape, mostly of adults against children. But that is the favorite flavor here. How? By using the same type of fictional contrivances that justify non-consent.

I agree to a large degree. I’ve written a couple of incest fantasies. Sometimes in real life it can happen in a non destructive way, but always messes with peoples heads. That can make for a good story. In the best incest stories that can be used to give more flavour to the story, but it’s always in a very light way, almost tokenism by dealing (in a limited way) the consequences of those choices.

When done best IMHO by the likes of Lovecraft, and Shadow Rising it is a good way to create a good connection between the characters as there is an underlying relationship already in place.

 

[Black_and_White_Writer]

You've said that before and it makes me laugh. My first foray into incest went very non-con at the end. Also, the popularity of mind control in Incest (and vice versa) suggests that some forms of non-con incest are very welcome indeed.

I had a friend who wrote a good Incest story. It did start out as a rape story, but with the use of restraints I said skew it more as Incest with heavy BDSM elements. It got no problems anywhere he published it – BDSM Library I believe.

 

[Black_and_White_Writer]

Do you really want to get into the business model of the site? How many of those cam girls on the top of the page are truly making a free choice and how many are driven by poverty, drug addiction and the like? Consent is more complex than just signing a contract; the circumstances under which it's signed matter.

And why do some people here feel they owe gratitude to Laurel and Manu? It's a business. I don't begrudge them a living, but I don't owe them thanks any more than I owe it to Bill Gates because I'm using a Windows computer.

Very true, despite what one says about the owners or people running the site, without the contributors the site is nothing.

“Food for thought.”

 

[Handley_Page]

You either allow it or you don't.

Some sites don't allow non-consent-Amazon, for instance. They make that clear and I don't put those stories there (several years ago, they were less clear on that and some were there for a time). Other sites (pay and free) are fine with it and I have many stories there.

But Lit has decided to try to be coy. They say you can have all the non-consent you like as long as the victim decides to enjoy it at the end. To put this inelegantly, this is simply BULLSHIT. More than that, it's frankly offensive. A woman kicking and screaming and fighting her assailant off and then in the end loving it and orgasmic? Come, on!

Publish non-consent stories or not, as you wish. Just be honest about it...

Your protest puts me in mind of a well-known phrase or saying often to be seen in the UK:-
"The management reserves the right to refuse admission"

What Management says, goes.

 

[EvelynEden]

 

[PennameWombat]

Do you really want to get into the business model of the site? How many of those cam girls on the top of the page are truly making a free choice and how many are driven by poverty, drug addiction and the like? Consent is more complex than just signing a contract; the circumstances under which it's signed matter.

And why do some people here feel they owe gratitude to Laurel and Manu? It's a business. I don't begrudge them a living, but I don't owe them thanks any more than I owe it to Bill Gates because I'm using a Windows computer.

That you think my comment was about the business model of the site is… amusing.

I have zero clue what your comment about gratitude is in response to. Not my posting. No one on this thread, least of all me, has said we need to sing paeans to the site’s owners.

Nope, just free will. If you don’t enjoy posting here under the conditions extant, why do it?

 

[PennameWombat]

Very true, despite what one says about the owners or people running the site, without the contributors the site is nothing.

“Food for thought.”

Indeed. This site is utterly dependent on people giving freely of their creative labors. And clearly the concerns of this thread as to the salt mine conditions match the feelings of the majority of contributors.

Or not. Just scrolling through the first few pages of the ‘new stories’ list there was only one author’s name I recognize from ever posting here on AH. I recognized more names from seeing the Literotica twitter account retweet Twitter announcements of new stories by various authors who use Twitter in that way.

If I have a point, I guess it’s that anyone here on AH who thinks they represent a majority, or any significant portion of the people contributing stories, they need a dose of reality.

 

[TarnishedPenny]

First, Lit is a privately-owned site with absolutely no legal requirement to please writers or readers (advertisers are different). Laurel could require everything henceforth to be iambic pentameter. She could ban all stories set in the countryside. She could ban stories using the word 'green'. It is 100% her call and we would be required to comply.

Slight detour - you'll note that there is not an Eleventh Commandment in the Torah or Bible: Thou shalt be pleased and delighted to obey these My other Ten Commandments. The faithful are not expected to jump up and down with happiness, just to follow the rules given them.

It's the same thing with any set of laws. We may find them inconvenient or frustrating, but they still are in force.

And it's Just the same with this site. At present, the owners have policies on underage sexuality, on incest, on bestiality, on non-consensual sex and a few others. We are under no obligation to post stories here or to read them and that makes intense discussions about what 'makes sense' pointless.

Second point. Somebody said on this site some years ago, 'If I want to see old, fat, bald people having second-rate sex, I'll put a mirror by my bed.'

As SimonDoom has correctly noted, this entire site is essentially about fantasies. With some exceptions to suit those with outlying tastes, the people are attractive, not obese, at least modestly charming. There's no need to worry about STDs or pregnancy or periods or ED. We need not look at the reality of (or definition of) incest or non-consensual sex or any of that - so long as it stays between those lines Laurel has laid out, we can publish and somebody will be pleased to read.

WRT what is and isn't incest, the people who enjoy incest stories enjoy them because the very thought is taboo. The relative definitions in this particular state or that particular nation or that other religion are pretty much immaterial. If the writer does a good job of casting hero and heroine in an 'incestuous' (by whatever definition) relationship, that's enough for the reader and that's all that matters.

Peace.

 

[SimonDoom]

And the same is true of non-consent and everything else.

True. And it's not a bad thing.

 

[SimonDoom]

I think it's worth pointing out that nonconsent, like many other categories, is a big and complex category encompassing a wide variety of stories, and the appeal varies greatly depending on the type of story.

Some people get their kicks reading stories about people being hurt. I don't.

But I DO like stories that explore boundaries and get right up to the edge of what's bad and what's good, and sometimes cross over. I enjoy fantasy stories where the characters enjoy extreme behavior, like extreme exhibitionism, incest, bondage, sadomasochism, nonconsent, weird fetishism, sex with aliens, etc., that in the real world most people would not enjoy. I've often asked myself why. I don't have a good answer. I just like them.

For instance, there are two distinct types of nonconsent stories that I've read a number of, and have enjoyed: blackmail stories, and sex slavery stories.

In the real world, of course, the conduct described in these stories would be criminal, and it's extremely unlikely that the female victim would enjoy the conduct. A realistic story about blackmail and sex slavery would be extremely unpleasant, to me.

But in an erotic story the shackles of the real world don't apply. The pleasure of these stories comes precisely from imagining that the female victim enjoys being subjected to sexual play or humiliation of some kind. Is it weird? Sure. It is disturbing? Of course. But it's a fantasy, and it's a fun fantasy, for many. If it's not fun for you, I can't argue with your taste. But you can't argue with mine, either. People enjoy what they enjoy. Some people enjoy "Two Girls One Cup." I don't, but whatever.

Literotica's nonconsent rule makes a lot of sense to me, because it permits the publication of a wide range of stories that I enjoy, while excluding stories I don't. I imagine there are many, many readers who feel exactly like I do. Which means, ipso facto, it's not "Bullshit." A rule that serves the interests of the readers is legitimate, whether it makes any sense to you or not.

Whether or not the rule is consistently applied, I don't know. That's another matter.

 

[NotWise]

Literotica's nonconsent rule makes a lot of sense to me, because it permits the publication of a wide range of stories that I enjoy, while excluding stories I don't. I imagine there are many, many readers who feel exactly like I do. Which means, ipso facto, it's not "Bullshit." A rule that serves the interests of the readers is legitimate, whether it makes any sense to you or not.

Whether or not the rule is consistently applied, I don't know. That's another matter.

To me, the nonconsent rule is an exception that makes the category possible. The site has a long-standing rule against stories of abuse. In your earlier thread, I rephrased that as: No excessive violence, snuff, or abuse of characters.

In that context, Noncon in general would not be allowed on the site. The noncon rule allows stories of abuse if the victim ultimately gets something out of the experience.

Sure go ahead, delete the noncon rule--then noncon stories in general won't be allowed.

 

[SimonDoom]

Issue is what you described is prevalent here because there is no real consistent enforcement

But also, if you don't want rape stories, why have a non con section at all? TBH I don't blame anyone for thinking rape is accepted here. Non con reluctance is one category with two completely different things, one is dubious consent and sleazy the other is rape

No other site that says it won't allow rape has a non consent category Furthermore, if the argument is stories could slip through, how does that explain the word rape in title and tag lines? That slips through

https://search.literotica.com/?query=Rape

That should be telling....but here comes the bootlicks to rapesplain things to us. Within a few posts the men will also be here to tell all the women what rape is and how all women feel about it.

.

Lovecraft, you are a good storyteller, and most of the time you are a valuable contributor to this forum. I value you for that.

But you also act like an angry little insecure child-man with a huge chip on his shoulder with a paranoid delusion that everybody around you wants to knock it off.

I don't care what your personal background and life history are relating to rape and nonconsent issues. I truly do not care. Whatever your life history is, it does not, IN ANY WAY, constrain the right of other people to have, and to read, and to write about, their own personal fantasies, whatever those fantasies are. Given your many statements against kink-shaming, that should be clear to you. Somehow, it's not. I can't help you, and I have no illusion about convincing you.

Your opinion is simplistic and solipsistic, and I don't care whether you are "looking" at me or not. Go ahead. I'm just going to write what I write, and I'm going to be perfectly OK with others writing what they write--including you.

Take a deep breath, Lovecraft. Hoist a beer, drink it, and have a good day.

 

[Bramblethorn]

Do you really want to get into the business model of the site? How many of those cam girls on the top of the page are truly making a free choice and how many are driven by poverty, drug addiction and the like?

What you're complaining about there is just how capitalism works, not just in sex work but in every industry. The people who grow your food, dig your coal, build your electronic goods, empty your trash - how many of them are doing it for the love of work? How many have "truly free choice" and how many are doing it for the same reason as the cam girls: needing money to live?

(There are important differences, though: compared to some of those jobs camming is safe, healthy, well-paid, and flexible.)

If you want to run up the red flag, tear down that entire system, and build something better in its place... well, many have tried and the success record of those attempts is uneven, but I'm willing to read your pamphlet and see if you have a better idea.

But if you think sex work is the only industry where the need for money restricts people's choices, I have some terrible news for you.

 

[Bramblethorn]

To me, the nonconsent rule is an exception that makes the category possible. The site has a long-standing rule against stories of abuse. In your earlier thread, I rephrased that as: No excessive violence, snuff, or abuse of characters.

In that context, Noncon in general would not be allowed on the site. The noncon rule allows stories of abuse if the victim ultimately gets something out of the experience.

Sure go ahead, delete the noncon rule--then noncon stories in general won't be allowed.

In the very early days, Literotica had an "extreme" category. My understanding is that the current NC restrictions - victim should generally get some pleasure out of it, etc. etc. - was more or less where the line between "NC" and "Extreme" was drawn.

Not long after the site was created, they decided they didn't want to host that "extreme" category any more. So we end up with this rule that originally meant "we're not gonna host outright torture porn". But expectations have shifted, and now to a new reader it can come across as "we only host the kind of rape stories that downplay the impact".

I think it was a well-intentioned rule when first introduced, but I'm not convinced it's still the right tool for the job. Intent and consequences aren't always the same.

 

[gordo12]

That should be telling....but here comes the bootlicks to rapesplain things to us. Within a few posts the men will also be here to tell all the women what rape is and how all women feel about it.

G, and S, and E I'm looking at you, don't let me down.

LC: I'm not quite sure why I got dragged into this discussion and why you chose to use those names. Nothing I've ever done or said here would support that.

I don't support rape, but I seem to be able to tell the difference between fantasy written in a story and real life. They are different things!

Needless to say, I'm not appreciative of being called whichever one you were calling me.

 

[ElectricBlue]

Take a deep breath, Lovecraft. Hoist a beer, drink it, and have a good day.

Since I've been called up in despatches (although God only knows why, since I've never engaged in any non-con discussion), I'll reply.

I've had LC on Ignore for two years now, and don't engage with him at all, so he can go on playing his K-Tel's Greatest Hits record all he likes, I really don't care.

And since I never partake in any of these non-con "discussions", he's going to find it hard to find any post where I've ever "mansplained rape" or whatever the fuck he's accusing me of doing.

 

[XerXesXu]

It is disturbing? Of course.

Can you expand on that; in what way do you find your non-consent fantasies disturbing?

 

[gordo12]

Can you expand on that; in what way do you find your non-consent fantasies disturbing?

Poking your nose into other's business is also disturbing. Can you share with us the reason you feel the need to do that?

 

[SimonDoom]

What you're complaining about there is just how capitalism works, not just in sex work but in every industry.

But it's not just capitalism, it's all systems. There's no such thing as a system where you get what you want without having to give something for it. The names and the forms change, but the basic dynamic doesn't.

It's like that old slogan: "Under capitalism, man exploits man. Under communism, it's the other way around."

The salient point is that none of this is peculiar to erotica, or porn, or sex work. There's no such thing as a transaction between two people that is not tinged in some way by an imbalance of power. That's life. But that doesn't make it coercive, or nonconsensual. If that were true, then consent would be impossible, and nobody really believes that.

 

[XerXesXu]

Poking your nose into other's business is also disturbing.]

If it disturbs you the solution is in your own nose - don't do it.

[Can you share with us the reason you feel the need to do that?

Of course. SimonDoom likes to share, at length and often, his views on non-con etc. He appears to resent the views of people who have reservations. This is the first occasion I'm aware of when he's disclosed that he also finds non-con disturbing. I'm wondering if he finds it disturbing in a different way to others.

If you'd want to share, also, I wouldn't feel you were poking your nose in.

 

[gordo12]

If it disturbs you the solution is in your own nose - don't do it.

Funny you can see that when it's other people

 

[SimonDoom]

Of course. SimonDoom likes to share, at length and often, his views on non-con etc. He appears to resent the views of people who have reservations. .

Disagreement and resentment are not the same thing. I can disagree with someone without resenting them. Accusing me of resentment is completely off-base. You have no grounds to say that.

My attitude is one of near-total acceptance of whatever people want to fantasize about. Nobody is hurt by fantasies. I think I'm being realistic about the fact that there is an obvious connection between what is "erotic" and a lot of deep, dark, and disturbing stuff that lies inside us. It continually surprises me how much squeamishness and moral righteousness are on display in this forum. I'm baffled. But I'm not resentful.

As a rule, I do not take disagreement personally. But I do take it personally when someone, like Lovecraft, gets personal and calls me names or accuses me of bad faith. Someone who does that is being a jerk, and I'm going to let him know it. But resentment has nothing to do with it.

 

[TxRad]

Simon, when are you going to learn, you can't argue with stupid people. They don't listen to a thing you say and most couldn't understand if they did listen.

Arguing with idiots is like arguing with a fence. A total waste of breath and time.

Put them on ignore if you can't do it mentally. It is the same bunch every time.