Ethics and Erotica

[SimonDoom]

I'm enough of an Epicurean, or libertine, or aesthete, or whatever you want to call it, to say: Giving pleasure is ethical. It's good. It's desirable. It's socially responsible to give other people pleasure (unless it's an inherently destructive, short-term sort of pleasure, with longer-term harm, like taking methamphetamine).

There's a tendency to discount the "good" of sexual and erotic pleasure. I don't think we should. When we talk about "socially responsible" erotica, one of the social goods to take into account is the pleasure given. The pleasure, the good, of erotica, in this sense, is obvious, indisputable, and widespread. We know it's there because of 1) the pleasure that we can all personally attest to, and 2) the pleasure our readers tell us about. The harm is more amorphous and more speculative.

So when people suggest by their comments, "Sure, it's fun, but is it responsible?" I don't think they've quite got the calculus right. You can't completely separate the two.

 

[Bramblethorn]

I'm enough of an Epicurean, or libertine, or aesthete, or whatever you want to call it, to say: Giving pleasure is ethical. It's good. It's desirable. It's socially responsible to give other people pleasure (unless it's an inherently destructive, short-term sort of pleasure, with longer-term harm, like taking methamphetamine).

There's a tendency to discount the "good" of sexual and erotic pleasure. I don't think we should. When we talk about "socially responsible" erotica, one of the social goods to take into account is the pleasure given. The pleasure, the good, of erotica, in this sense, is obvious, indisputable, and widespread. We know it's there because of 1) the pleasure that we can all personally attest to, and 2) the pleasure our readers tell us about. The harm is more amorphous and more speculative.

So when people suggest by their comments, "Sure, it's fun, but is it responsible?" I don't think they've quite got the calculus right. You can't completely separate the two.

Asking that question isn't an assertion that "fun" has no bearing on "responsible". It's just an assertion that "fun" is not the only thing that has a bearing on "responsible".

Most people think alcohol is fun, but that doesn't stop us having a lot of conversations about what responsible drinking looks like, even in areas where the question can't satisfactorily be answered by empirical measurements of things like blood alcohol content vs. reaction times vs. stopping distances.

 

[ElectricBlue]

Which is a false conclusion, 1) that we have no control or 2) that a lot of people are saying don't publish certain kinds of fantasies?

I'm saying you jumped to a false conclusion, number 2.

When someone says, "I don't find that erotic, so I don't write it," that's not the same as saying, "I don't find that erotic, don't write it."

Sentence structure is important .

 

[TarnishedPenny]

I think, perhaps, there is a Door #3: I find that upsetting, so don’t write it.

 

[Omenainen]

I believe that fiction can influence people's lives, and I don't think erotica is somehow an exception to this. Representation matters. Good representation is important for minorities, and while bad representation is not necessarily as damaging as good representation is affirming, it means strengthening the existing power structures. It is not a neutral act.

By requiring erotica to take into account social issues, you deny many people a venue for expressing their erotic lives. What follows is a post made by a half Asian woman on Lush Stories because it wasn't politically correct regarding Asians. It just happened to be what satisfied her erotically. It's not odd that what satisfies us erotically may often be totally counter to what we stand for in the real world.

Okay. Now, what I also said was this. It was the very next sentence after the part you quoted. Did you not read it, not understand it, or were just too eager to jump to answering?

My stance is that while no subject is such that it should never be addressed, it matters how one addresses it.

Let me apply my imaginary scale of judging stories for racist name calling and degradation for your benefit.

So, your kink is to use racist slurs while fucking. Fair enough. If you write
1. A couple who you show interacting with each other in a normal, respectful way, and then bring up all the nasty words for their sex scene: yes, good, you do you
2. Write a story where someone hires a prositute in the whole purpose of degrading and calling them racist names based on their ethnicity: hmm, okay, could work
3. Writing a story where someone goes around calling everyone with racist terms in every interaction, out loud or in their thoughts: I’ll give you a side eye and go, what are you doing?
4. Write a story where everyone is casually racist, implying these people are actually more deserving than other people just because of their ethnicity: I'd be disgusted and probably wouldn't read any more of yours. Now this kind could also be the author taking a stance against this kind of behavior, for example if there was some consequence for the racism. Maybe “letting racist pigs get their comeuppance” is someone’s kink, what do I know. Anyway, it needs a skillful hand to pull it off.
5. Implying in an off-hand way that actually this ethnicity should rule over all the rest in a story otherwise handling something else entirely: I’d say, go back to Middle Ages, you’re not welcome in this century.

I’ll also quote this part from my original post:

If one's kink includes objectifying somebody else, I think they should really sit down and think through on how to serve their kink so that it doesn't hurt the real people they are objectifying in their stories. Fantasy settings are one useful way to go about this, but even with fantasy settings, it needs consideration.

 

[AG31]

Okay. Now, what I also said was this. It was the very next sentence after the part you quoted. Did you not read it, not understand it, or were just too eager to jump to answering?

I saw it. I just thought it was irrelevant to my point. Being "respectful," may just not work for a given person's fantasy world. Did you read the essay I copied from LushStories? By the half Asian woman??

 

[SimonDoom]

Asking that question isn't an assertion that "fun" has no bearing on "responsible". It's just an assertion that "fun" is not the only thing that has a bearing on "responsible".

Most people think alcohol is fun, but that doesn't stop us having a lot of conversations about what responsible drinking looks like, even in areas where the question can't satisfactorily be answered by empirical measurements of things like blood alcohol content vs. reaction times vs. stopping distances.

A big difference, though, is that we have mountains of data concerning blood alcohol levels and the risk of physical injury or death. Even if we don't have a breathalyzer handy, we know to a high degree of probability that if we drink 5 beers in a relatively brief time at a bar and then get behind the wheel of a car we are substantially increasing the risk to ourselves and to others. We have no such data and no way to make such calculations when we publish stories.

It's an interesting comparison, because, objectively speaking, I think a much stronger ethical case can be made against drinking in public than against publishing erotic stories with even the most extreme content, but most people probably don't see it that way because of the peculiar way that people view sexual matters differently from the way they view other activities.

 

[Omenainen]

I saw it. I just thought it was irrelevant to my point. Being "respectful," may just not work for a given person's fantasy world. Did you read the essay I copied from LushStories? By the half Asian woman??

I did. I thought it was super weird and pretty distasteful of you to post private emails concerning the policies of some other site.

 

[HordHolm]

A big difference, though, is that we have mountains of data concerning blood alcohol levels and the risk of physical injury or death. Even if we don't have a breathalyzer handy, we know to a high degree of probability that if we drink 5 beers in a relatively brief time at a bar and then get behind the wheel of a car we are substantially increasing the risk to ourselves and to others. We have no such data and no way to make such calculations when we publish stories.

It's an interesting comparison, because, objectively speaking, I think a much stronger ethical case can be made against drinking in public than against publishing erotic stories with even the most extreme content, but most people probably don't see it that way because of the peculiar way that people view sexual matters differently from the way they view other activities.

Indeed, and it doesn't only concern stories, as we well know (video games, gansta rap, the current UK government fixation on drill, cartoons, D&D, the list goes on). There is basically zero evidence that imbibing any of these things has a demonstrably negative effect.

Of course, there are two major factors that separate these examples from, particularly, alcohol. Firstly, alcohol has an element of being 'time-honoured.' It is seen as a cultural norm (though with caveats). Secondly, young people tend to be the ones engaging in the kind of cultural activities that make people scream, "won't anybody think of the children!"

Sexual matters fall a little outside these simple divisions, being something less associated exclusively with the young, but the flip side to that is millenia of cultural conditioning towards 'sex bad' ideas. Alcohol has been accepted across most of the world for reasons of religion, an unwillingness to challenge accepted behaviour, and probably, a male consumer focus. Sex, OTOH, for most people involves women who, as most cultural structures fervently presented as essential until recently, must be sexually controlled or 'protected from' or excluded except for the purposes of producing a new generation to an identifiable father.

 

[ChloeTzang]

The only one I've found, after 15 years on this site, is 0007 Asian Neon and its sequels. It's set in a futuristic Asian metropolis. All the characters are Asian. I especially liked the auntie.

It's one of the reasons I started writing my own. I'll leave the "well-written" to you to decide, but Snowed In with a Predator was meant to be a story about being 2nd generation Chinese-American.

LOL. There are one or two of us around, altho a lot of "Asian" stories are written by white guys. Go figure. Anyone, here's a couple more. .I haven't found that many myself either, there's probably more I haven't picked up on, and I would have had no idea about either of you writing here if you hadn't posted on this thread.

Zoe Leong
HardLeo (we've written a couple of stories together)
SweetTastness (Vanessa)
YanLi (she's Australian-Chinese)
pearllily1967 (she only ever wrote one story)

Some people get off on being fetishised for their own race, and write stories expressing that. But most of the racial fetish stories on this site aren't that. They're white people writing stereotypes of other races. "Black bulls" who are brutal sex machines, Asian waifu girlfriends who find Asian men unsatisfying and get wet at the sight of a big strong white guy, stuff where the characterisation is about as deep as a carpark puddle.

Now that comment, I totally agree with, on both counts. The bulk of the IR stories on Lit are rather stereotypical, which is not really unexpected given that 99% of the writers of these stories are white males enjoying their preferences, and why not. Whatever floats your boat. There are the exceptions of course and I guess I fall more into the first category a lot of the time, altho I write very much from a 3rd generation mixed-race, American-Chinese perspective myself, which is a little different again from someone who

I've actually been rather surprised by the offline reader response from quite a few Asian female readers from all over - Japan, Chinese from all over, Korean and even Thai. It's been really interesting and I've had some quite fascinating offline conversations about this. Also a few Asian male readers too. Lit certainly reaches across boundaries alright.

You could also try Chloe Tzang.

LOL. This is a possibility.

(For contrast, here's the sort of thing I imagine when people tell me a story involves raceplay: Social Studies. At least the author there was kind enough to include a content warning so I could decide not to read it.)

LOL. Now THAT is a white guy fetish IR story, but it's a classic of its kind for all that. One of these days, I'd like to reach out to the author and get his okay to write that from the girl's perspective, That's be actually fun to try.

 

[SimonDoom]

One of the interesting issues I didn't anticipate when I started this thread is the vastly different ways people interpret "morality" and "ethics." I've generally thought of a moral code or ethical code as a code of behavior that one would want everyone to follow, like "Don't lie," even if one doesn't necessarily want the law to prevent people from doing that. Others obviously see it as more personal, i.e., "This is what I feel morally compelled to do or not do, but I'm not prepared to insist that others do that."

I assumed my way of looking at it because I DO see many threads where some authors criticizing other authors for publishing content they believe is objectionable. That's a case of someone exercising ethical judgment in the way I look at it--there are certain codes of behavior that we all should follow.

 

[AG31]

I did. I thought it was super weird and pretty distasteful of you to post private emails concerning the policies of some other site.

The essay was, of course, published publicly. The e-mail (unidentified) was simply identifying the context.

 

[AG31]

I did. I thought it was super weird and pretty distasteful of you to post private emails concerning the policies of some other site.

Does "weird" apply to the essay, or to the fact that I included an e-mail for context?

If the former, why?

If the latter, what did you think of the essay?

 

[ChloeTzang]

One of the interesting issues I didn't anticipate when I started this thread is the vastly different ways people interpret "morality" and "ethics." I've generally thought of a moral code or ethical code as a code of behavior that one would want everyone to follow, like "Don't lie," even if one doesn't necessarily want the law to prevent people from doing that. Others obviously see it as more personal, i.e., "This is what I feel morally compelled to do or not do, but I'm not prepared to insist that others do that."

I assumed my way of looking at it because I DO see many threads where some authors criticizing other authors for publishing content they believe is objectionable. That's a case of someone exercising ethical judgment in the way I look at it--there are certain codes of behavior that we all should follow.

For a site like Literotica, personally I think the interpretation of ethics and morality is a personal thing. I know there are people here who find some of my stories, particularly the Unity Mitford ones, objectionable or offensive. I can understand that. There's more than a few stories on Lit where I don't agree with the dubious morality, or immorality as the case may be, but that's based on MY perspective, and I have no objections to anyone else writing whatever they want. I wouldn't write those types of stories myself, but then, one of the joys of Literotica is the sheer variety of perspectives. Something for everyone. I'd never myself critizcize anyone for creating content I think is objectionable. I just wouldn't bother reading it, or I'd drop if after I started and discovered that.

For me, ethics and morality are far more of a personal thing than a broad brush that applies to everything. I might even have to go back and look at your original post, Simon. LOL.

 

[vagrantx]

You could also try Chloe Tzang.
LOL. This is a possibility.

I did at their recommendation, but unfortunately for me you don't seem to write any WLW stories. I did try your Nockatunga story, but even the aliens had faux penises! I was holding out hope for at least a tongue to pop into action at some point.

Not critizing! Only stating my own preferences. You paint pictures with your words, but the subjects are not in my taste. If you ever write something for gay women I'll throw myself at it!

 

[AG31]

I just wouldn't bother reading it, or I'd drop if after I started and discovered that.

Here, here!!! or Hear, hear!!!!

I wish someone would tell me which it is. This is the third time in the last few days I've implicitly invited comment.

 

[vagrantx]

I wish someone would tell me which it is. This is the third time in the last few days I've implicitly invited comment.

“Hear, hear” is a shortened version of “hear ye, hear ye,” which goes back to British Parliament in the 1600s, if not earlier. The expression was — and is — used to draw attention to what someone is saying. It implies agreement with the speaker or, in modern times, the writer.

I've got your back

 

[ChloeTzang]

Here, here!!! or Hear, hear!!!!

I wish someone would tell me which it is. This is the third time in the last few days I've implicitly invited comment.

Hear, hear is often confused with here, here. The reason is largely because they're homophones, and easy to confuse when spoken aloud but rarely written down. As confused phrases go, here, here has taken root and is very commonly seen, but the correct usage is "hear, hear", as in, listen up, dudes!

 

[HordHolm]

One of the interesting issues I didn't anticipate when I started this thread is the vastly different ways people interpret "morality" and "ethics." I've generally thought of a moral code or ethical code as a code of behavior that one would want everyone to follow, like "Don't lie," even if one doesn't necessarily want the law to prevent people from doing that. Others obviously see it as more personal, i.e., "This is what I feel morally compelled to do or not do, but I'm not prepared to insist that others do that."

I assumed my way of looking at it because I DO see many threads where some authors criticizing other authors for publishing content they believe is objectionable. That's a case of someone exercising ethical judgment in the way I look at it--there are certain codes of behavior that we all should follow.

I am totally unsurprised. 'Broad Church' doesn't begin to cover the number of potentially differing views here, given the number of authors on the site. Even if only a fraction of authors look in at the AH, and even fewer engage with this thread, it's still potentially dozens of people who have nothing in common beyond a desire to write erotica, or talk about writing erotica, or jump into funny/dramatic threads, or read the comments of people doing any/all of the above. The idea that we probably share similar views is comforting, but probably wrong.

 

[Omenainen]

Does "weird" apply to the essay, or to the fact that I included an e-mail for context?

If the former, why?

If the latter, what did you think of the essay?

I have near zero interest in what Lush Stories publishes because I don’t publish there and I don’t read there. I have no idea why you’re so insistent in shoving it in my face.

Are you using the term “essay” here for some kind of a forum post over at Lush Stories? Weird use of a word there.

 

[AG31]

Hear, hear is often confused with here, here. The reason is largely because they're homophones, and easy to confuse when spoken aloud but rarely written down. As confused phrases go, here, here has taken root and is very commonly seen, but the correct usage is "hear, hear", as in, listen up, dudes!

THANK YOU!!!!

 

[ElectricBlue]

Indeed, and it doesn't only concern stories, as we well know (video games, gansta rap, the current UK government fixation on drill, cartoons, D&D, the list goes on). There is basically zero evidence that imbibing any of these things has a demonstrably negative effect.

Every time these discussions come up, I think of Charles Manson playing The Beatles' White Album, and thinking the song Helter Skelter was a call for an all out race war.

That completely nut job belief did not turn out well for the Tate, La Bianca victims, nor the dozen or so other murders that have been attributed to the Manson Family.

So there's some very visible evidence right there. Crazy people exist, and go to unexpected places. Sure, Paul, John, George and Ringo aren't responsible for Manson's insanity, but their song was a trigger for the deeds (not the only trigger, obviously, but the most visible one).

 

[lovecraft68]

Never ceases to amaze me how the same discussion can be had here a dozen times(and this has been done before) and still get this much response, which tends to be the same people saying the same things they did in other threads.

No fictional content should be held responsible for real life actions. When they are accused of it, its just witch hunters looking for censorship. I can remember my first encounter with this back in the early 80's when Dungeons and Dragons was blamed for mental illness and suicide etc...and of course Heavy Metal has been making satanists out of kids for decades.

Its the devil's lettuce, I tell you!

People doing stupid, insane, and criminal things do so because there's stupid, nuts and criminals.

 

[ElectricBlue]

One of the interesting issues I didn't anticipate when I started this thread is the vastly different ways people interpret "morality" and "ethics." I've generally thought of a moral code or ethical code as a code of behavior that one would want everyone to follow, like "Don't lie," even if one doesn't necessarily want the law to prevent people from doing that. Others obviously see it as more personal, i.e., "This is what I feel morally compelled to do or not do, but I'm not prepared to insist that others do that."

I assumed my way of looking at it because I DO see many threads where some authors criticizing other authors for publishing content they believe is objectionable. That's a case of someone exercising ethical judgment in the way I look at it--there are certain codes of behavior that we all should follow.

Which is why I suggested above that some kind of a summary of views (by author count, not name) would be interesting. It was clear to me from the start that many of us have the notion of personal, individual ethics, which you've acknowledged takes you by surprise.

Your acknowledgment also explains why some conversations run at cross-purposes, if there's an assumption been made as to meaning, which turns out not to be aligned.

 

[SimonDoom]

Every time these discussions come up, I think of Charles Manson playing The Beatles' White Album, and thinking the song Helter Smelter was a call for an all out race war.

That completely nut job belief did not turn out well for the Tate, La Bianca victims, nor the dozen or so other murders that have been attributed to the Manson Family.

So there's some very visible evidence right there. Crazy people exist, and go to unexpected places. Sure, Paul, John, George and Ringo aren't responsible for Manson's insanity, but their song was a trigger for the deeds (not the only trigger, obviously, but the most visible one).

This is true. Just as it's true that John Hinkley watched the movie Taxi Driver, became obsessed with Jodie Foster, and tried to assassinate Ronald Reagan.

But none of these facts have any ethical significance unless there's an element of reasonable foreseeability. We can say with confidence, either after the fact or in the abstract, that some people will be influenced by some artistic works to do bad things, but unless we have some semblance of an empirically sound basis to foresee harm from particular works, we know nothing of any ethical significance from which we can act rationally.

So I can agree with you regarding the extremely broad and vague proposition that artistic works affect people, sometimes badly, and still reply that this has no significance at all for the ethical decisions we choose to make, unless you take a maximalist "avoid all risk of harm at all cost" point of view, which almost nobody actually takes, and which I doubt very much you take.

I'm confident that you don't believe that the Beatles were in any way irresponsible to publish the song Helter Skelter. How in the world do we tell, then, what is responsible and not responsible to publish, when it comes to erotic stories published at a peculiar platform like Literotica? I submit it's 99.999% throwing darts in the dark. Which is to say, not enough to provide a rational person with a basis for acting ethically.

The person who advances an ethical principle has the burden of persuading that the principle, if generally applied, will reasonably target the harm that one wishes to minimize, and that it will not be too overinclusive (i.e., punishing actions that won't cause harm) or underinclusive (i.e., insufficiently targeting the actions that cause harm).