What are your biggest turn offs? In reading, writing or real life.

[JaneRamsey]

My top three all across the board are:

1. Incest (pretend or otherwise)
2. Reluctance/non consent (pretend or otherwise)
3. Ball gags (Only them though, not other types of gags.)

Bring any of these up and it's like a big'ol thermonuclear mood killer for me.

 

[Nezhul]

In reading, the gold medal definitely goes to unnatural behavior of the characters. It blows my suspension of disbelief right off.

In both reading, writing and real life - definitely anything to do with scat, bile.

In real life exclusively, I would be turned off by non-consent, hard pain or suffering, any body damage, blood.

 

[seela]

Reading: Constant misspelling and bad grammar. And I mean constant. I'm fine with slip-ups, but if the writer shows no care or effort, I move on. I don't like bratty and tedious characters. Also reading smut in English has been a turn off, because I've just had a hard time engaging that part of myself in that language, I suppose. It's changed, though.

Writing: I don't really write a lot, but constant misspelling and bad grammar is probably a good answer here as well, although it's mostly an issue if I write in a foreign language. I'd find it difficult to motivate myself to write about a submissive male character, so maybe that?

Real life: I don't really like cutesy and coy, and "ooh, you've been a bad girl" makes me roll my eyes. Then again, those can be spun in a way that gets me seriously hot, but that takes a partner that understands humiliation and such.

 

[sangerin]

In all of the above: unkind behavior and bad grammar!

 

[Jada59]

I dislike incest, ball gags (why?), stuff with aliens, costumes, golden showers, scat, giants and other not of this world stuff. I also don't like creepy and dirty looking dungeons.

 

[ericrodman101]

Steps

Incest doesn't work for me, although step relations is OK. Anyone have a problem with steps?

 

[Jada59]

Incest doesn't work for me, although step relations is OK. Anyone have a problem with steps?

I never really thought about it until now. I guess that would be okay.

 

[formertroll]

Reading: geometry or anatomy that doesn't make sense. Unless your character is an Olympic gymnast you need to write them with reasonable flexibility

Irl: when a gal didn't honor the safe word

 

[twister947]

Self-destructive behaviour. It has an effect on me that is hard to explain, immediate and profound.

 

[Nezhul]

Incest doesn't work for me, although step relations is OK. Anyone have a problem with steps?

I don't. I actually don't have problems with true incest either, as long as its consensual. I feel that if two people are both adults - they can decide whom with and how they want to have sex. And it's their business, and no one else's.
It's frowned upon because of many opportunities to exploit and covertly coerce your family members, and I understand that. It also feels icky for many, but then again, so is BDSM.

 

[JaneRamsey]

I dislike ball gags (why?),

I saw the movie Jawbreaker as a kid....

 

[PrettyLilPussy]

I saw the movie Jawbreaker as a kid....

Yep, that did it for me too...

 

[jerryb1966]

My top three all across the board are:

1. Incest (pretend or otherwise)
2. Reluctance/non consent (pretend or otherwise)
3. Ball gags (Only them though, not other types of gags.)

Bring any of these up and it's like a big'ol thermonuclear mood killer for me.

Puke, pee/poo, or blood

 

[JaneRamsey]

I don't. I actually don't have problems with true incest either, as long as its consensual. I feel that if two people are both adults - they can decide whom with and how they want to have sex. And it's their business, and no one else's.
It's frowned upon because of many opportunities to exploit and covertly coerce your family members, and I understand that. It also feels icky for many, but then again, so is BDSM.

The main reason it's frowned upon I'm pretty sure (outside of the coersion aspect) is that two family members producing a baby is almost a guarantee to produce fucked up children (mental and physical birth defects, mental retardation etc.) At that point it goes beyond just what two consenting adults are doing alone in a bedroom.

 

[curious_slut]

I could go on and on but I don't want to write an essay tonight.

1. Ignorance
2. Refusing to use spell check
3. Race play

My top three all across the board are:

1. Incest (pretend or otherwise)
2. Reluctance/non consent (pretend or otherwise)
3. Ball gags (Only them though, not other types of gags.)

Bring any of these up and it's like a big'ol thermonuclear mood killer for me.

 

[SissySalina]

Being nailed to a cross is a pretty big turn off.
Being hanged is also a turn off.

 

[Bramblethorn]

The main reason it's frowned upon I'm pretty sure (outside of the coersion aspect) is that two family members producing a baby is almost a guarantee to produce fucked up children (mental and physical birth defects, mental retardation etc.) At that point it goes beyond just what two consenting adults are doing alone in a bedroom.

Incest does increase the risk of genetic disease, but the risks are somewhat overstated. This answer by a genetics professor says:

"Couples who are related by blood have a higher chance of having children with genetic diseases or birth defects. It is estimated that couples who are siblings (1st degree relatives) have about a 7-12% risk above the population risk, which is estimated to be about 3-4% of newborns."

A lot of the widely-reported cases of brother-sister incest do involve children with some form of congenital illness, but I suspect there's a lot of involvement there from other factors like fetal alcohol syndrome, under-age mothers, and inadequate prenatal care. People who are banging their own siblings tend to have other issues in their lives.

 

[SimonDoom]

Confining my answer to what turns me off in reading erotica: not much. I'm pretty open-minded. Scat turns me off, but I find pee stories erotic.

I find that if the story is well-written, I can usually get myself into the author's kink even if it's not one I share.

This isn't always the case, but often I find it less erotic when the erotic subject is presented in a negative way, accompanied by intense pain, humiliation, revenge, or punishment. I prefer stories where sex or eroticism is presented in a positive way.

The response to incest here intrigues me. I enjoy incest stories, so long as the incest is presented in a positive and consensual way.

I'm completely unconcerned about whether certain types of erotica track or resemble the real world. This is a fantasy world, and my view is people should be able to indulge their fantasies, whatever they are.

 

[PrisonerOfDoubt]

Turn offs when reading:
1. When an author hyperactively reveals each character's internal monologue and when most transition points in the plot are followed by excessive revelations of self doubt. I find that sort of mental clutter distracting. I prefer to guess at the motivations of characters at least a little bit. It feels truer to life.
Example:
"What did Mr. Darcy mean when he said loved me against his better judgement? He doesn't really love me. He doesn't even think I am pretty. I wish I was pretty! He just thinks I'm low class trash good for a dirty fuck in the woodshed out back behind Pemberly whenever his nasty old Aunt grabs him by the nuts. Even though I am crazy bitch and definitely ought to be spanked raw with his crop and fucked right out of these cumbersome petticoats, I think I will just wax glumly for some months and then go down on Mr. Collins while he recites Fordyce's sermons as an act of self sabotage..."

2. Orgasms that occur too quickly to be realistic in writing. It makes me giggle unsexily and wonder if I skipped a section. A little foreplay, please.

'When the tip of Miss Lucas's dainty tongue found Miss Bennet's desperately throbbing clitoris, waves of pleasure rolled over her wildly flailing body and as she screamed out in her ecstasy,"YesYES a thousand times, yes!!"'

3. Gaps in knowledge or timeline--I'm not sure which it is. Sometimes things move too quickly in erotica. They met. They had a converstation. They fucked? How many hours ago did they meet? This is confusing.

 

[Farawyn]

My top three all across the board are:

1. Incest (pretend or otherwise)
2. Reluctance/non consent (pretend or otherwise)
3. Ball gags (Only them though, not other types of gags.)

Bring any of these up and it's like a big'ol thermonuclear mood killer for me.

Nezhul.

 

[Nezhul]

The main reason it's frowned upon I'm pretty sure (outside of the coersion aspect) is that two family members producing a baby is almost a guarantee to produce fucked up children (mental and physical birth defects, mental retardation etc.) At that point it goes beyond just what two consenting adults are doing alone in a bedroom.

Thaat's true. But then again, for hundreds of years monarchy married close relatives A LOT. I don't think people in the past really knew about things like genetic consequences of close-blood relationships. I believe that it was frowned upon for different reasons long before they noticed how babies were off more often.

As for present day, sex could easily happen without having children. Or, if I was ever caught up in a mad romance with my sister and wanted to really marry her and spend my life with her - we could adopt, or have a surrogate mother/forther for our children. I don't have problems with that, and I think many people who go as far as incestuous marriage would probably chose that to risking the health of the child.

It is estimated that couples who are siblings (1st degree relatives) have about a 7-12% risk above the population risk, which is estimated to be about 3-4% of newborns."

well 7-12% ABOVE the population rate still means 10-16% doesn't it? And for me, that's A LOT. I'd never do that if I could reduce the odds of complications to 3-4% instead by having a child from another man's sperm.

A lot of the widely-reported cases of brother-sister incest do involve children with some form of congenital illness

Also, the real reason is that press aren't really interested with stories with no drama. If siblings had a baby and it was totally fine - there's no drama to be had there. No one bothers to report it. But if they had a baby and it was sick - then the press and the readers can gloat and criticize the incestuous relationship. SO you simply don't end up hearing about hundreds of happy cases - instead hear only about particularly bad ones, that screws with common person's perception of truth a lot. That's the universal danger of press - it doesn't have to give you facts or statistics, but it gives you stories.

That said though, I do believe that most of incest still has rapey or coercive exploitative nature. Rarely it's a true consensual choice of two adults. So these things I'm talking about are purely speculative in nature.
We humans are actually chemically wired to ignore the pheromones of people we grow in close contact with - that's why so few of us lust after their mothers or sisters, brothers and dads. Our brain is wired to look outside our close circle. Even unrelated step-siblings who grow together since early childhood often develop this basic pritection from incest. That's what nature gave us.

That's all digression though, I won't sidetrack the thread with this topic anymore

 

[JaneRamsey]

That's all digression though, I won't sidetrack the thread with this topic anymore

I'm okay with side tracking... Especially when it relates to science!

 

[Bramblethorn]

well 7-12% ABOVE the population rate still means 10-16% doesn't it?

I think that's correct. The way it's written, it's not absolutely clear whether they mean "3-4% + 7-12%" (taking that as an additive percentage) or "3-4% + 7-12% of 3-4%", but I think the former is what was intended.

And for me, that's A LOT. I'd never do that if I could reduce the odds of complications to 3-4% instead by having a child from another man's sperm.

It's certainly a significant risk, and a lot of people would not accept those odds. I'm not sure I would.

But many people do take similar levels of risk, for non-incest-related reasons - the family has a history of genetic disease, they know there's a significant chance that their kids will be affected, they decide to have kids anyway - and that kind of decision doesn't attract the same sort of stigma that's directed at incest.

Also, the real reason is that press aren't really interested with stories with no drama. If siblings had a baby and it was totally fine - there's no drama to be had there.

Yep, good point.

We humans are actually chemically wired to ignore the pheromones of people we grow in close contact with - that's why so few of us lust after their mothers or sisters, brothers and dads. Our brain is wired to look outside our close circle. Even unrelated step-siblings who grow together since early childhood often develop this basic pritection from incest. That's what nature gave us.

There's some research to that effect, yeah, although it's been challenged by other researchers. Searching on "Westermarck effect" will find more info for anybody who's curious.

 

[Bramblethorn]

Getting back to the OP, three major turn-offs for me:

IRL: jerks. If I don't like somebody I'm not going to be attracted to them.

Fiction: stories that introduce characters by their measurements. Stories with no tension to them - if I know exactly how the story's going to end, I probably don't need to read it.

 

[Nezhul]

Ann was a 5'1" lean blonde with blue eyes and 38DD breasts....