Harem Stories

[ElectricBlue]

However, lucky for me none of your stories seem interesting or even good to me, like bad B-movies, so you will never have to worry about being a 'mind-reader' and I will never have to waste my time. You enjoy your stories and writing and have a good rest of your day.

How would you ever know what my stories are like, or about? I doubt you've looked at anything more than the categories and the titles, let alone the tags. And I fail to see what your point is, about those writers who don't use ten tags. What's that got to do with anything?

But hey, at least my stories use all my own characters.

 

[AlinaX]

I have often added as many as four tags and become extremely stuck about what more to add.

 

[allenknott3]

How would you ever know what my stories are like, or about? I doubt you've looked at anything more than the categories and the titles, let alone the tags. And I fail to see what your point is, about those writers who don't use ten tags. What's that got to do with anything?

But hey, at least my stories use all my own characters.

First, what do you mean by at least your stories use all of your own characters? Is that supposed to be an insult? It is not a very good one.

Second, the first step in determining if I am going to read a story is the title, categories, and description. The second step is to look at the tags. Did not even get to the second step, looking over your profit, none of your stories interest me. None of their descriptions are interesting to me.

Third, my point is that ten tags IMO seem to be enough since again, almost everyone does not use all ten tags. There are several tags, for one of your stories, "750 WORD PROJECT 2023" that do not even really need or even a tag.

But since there is no middle ground, per what you said, we cannot reach it, so I do not really care about your opinion. I was trying to be nice, but you seem to want to be something else.

 

[Bramblethorn]

Parents, Siblings, and Children are family members. Spouse's siblings, aunt, uncles, nephews, nieces, and cousins are close relatives.

Ah, now. Leaving aside the omission of grandparents/grandchildren, which I'm guessing was accidental, many readers would disagree with you on "spouse's siblings". For instance:

https://www.literotica.com/s/wifes-neglected-sister

"I struggled with categorizing this, it's not "incest" as it's a sister-in-law..."

https://www.literotica.com/s/incest-with-pregnant-sister-in-law/comments

"It's not incest if it's with his sister in law."

https://www.literotica.com/s/early-christmas-present/comments

"Wife's sister.. not his sister. In-laws don't really count as incest, otherwise it's far more widespread than people would believe."
"NOT incest, belongs in "Loving Wives""

https://literotica.com/s/impregnating-my-sister-n-law/comments

"it would be nice it the idiot author understood that a "sister-in-law" does NOT qualify as incest"
"How about this being the the wrong category. Non Consent would be better. They are not blood related."

https://www.literotica.com/s/love-in-unusual-places/comments

Why is this in the incest section? They're not related by blood,

And not everybody would agree with you on cousins:
https://www.literotica.com/s/was-jenny-really-my-sister/comments

"Hell, having sex with even cousins is not incest."

Not to mention this exchange:

https://www.literotica.com/s/my-niece-and-her-roommate/comments

"That was a great first story but it should be posted in group sex as none of the people are related . Calling some one uncle is kinky but unless they are related it's just kink."

"This is just as much incest and step parent and child or step siblings enjoying a sexual relationship. He considered her his niece and that is what the point is quit bitching about a technicality."

"Fair point. I suppose it depends on how precisely you define "incest". And guess it is fair to say that an older parental figure bedding a younger dependent figure is still "taboo" even if it doesn't meet a strict definition of incest..."

"This is the correct section for the story, unless you are a geneticist. The Incest section is full of stepmothers and their stepsons, who are exactly as “related” as mother and son as Leslie is as Mike’s niece. She was raised her entire life to see him as her uncle, so the transgression is just as real."

Many legal definitions would also disagree with yours. For instance, in New South Wales incest is sex with one's "parent, son, daughter, sibling (including a half-brother or half-sister), grandparent or grandchild, being such a family member from birth". So siblings-in-law, aunts, uncles, nieces, nephews and cousins (of any degree) are not considered incest.

Historically speaking the number of distances to be counted as incest vary over time and degrees of consanguinity but they are examples of first and second cousins not being considered incest.

Here's a story about second cousins: https://www.literotica.com/s/my-cousins-persistence/comments

Evidently the author felt second cousins counted as incest; evidently several readers vehemently disagreed.

Like I said, there is not a universally agreed definition of "incest" for I/T.

 

[allenknott3]

Ah, now. Leaving aside the omission of grandparents/grandchildren, which I'm guessing was accidental, many readers would disagree with you on "spouse's siblings". For instance:

https://www.literotica.com/s/wifes-neglected-sister


https://www.literotica.com/s/incest-with-pregnant-sister-in-law/comments


https://www.literotica.com/s/early-christmas-present/comments


https://literotica.com/s/impregnating-my-sister-n-law/comments


https://www.literotica.com/s/love-in-unusual-places/comments


And not everybody would agree with you on cousins:
https://www.literotica.com/s/was-jenny-really-my-sister/comments


Not to mention this exchange:

https://www.literotica.com/s/my-niece-and-her-roommate/comments


Many legal definitions would also disagree with yours. For instance, in New South Wales incest is sex with one's "parent, son, daughter, sibling (including a half-brother or half-sister), grandparent or grandchild, being such a family member from birth". So siblings-in-law, aunts, uncles, nieces, nephews and cousins (of any degree) are not considered incest.



Here's a story about second cousins: https://www.literotica.com/s/my-cousins-persistence/comments

Evidently the author felt second cousins counted as incest; evidently several readers vehemently disagreed.

Like I said, there is not a universally agreed definition of "incest" for I/T.

I talking about Literotica/Erotica. So, sex with your aunt is not incest according to New South Wales, but that is not the case here. So, you are right there is no universally agreed definition of incest. Some do not even consider step-siblings to be incest and some do. If you want to use legal as a requirement, then in some areas, Literoica is illegal. I am saying, again, that Literotica should have clearly definition for tags.

But without getting political here, you are speaking to a larger issue in society where as has lost the ability to agree on terms.

Yeah, I was thinking grandparents/grandchildren. But here is the flaw of your logic, they have to be some type of agreement on terms. So, I would argue the NSW law is more of a liberal view of incest. In North Carolina, where I am from, the law is a person that is grandparent or grandchild; parent or child or stepchild or adopted child; brother or sister of whole or half-blood; uncle aunt, nephew, or niece.

Texas where I currently live: Person known to be ancestor or descendant by blood or adoption; current or former stepchild or stepparent; parent's brother or sister of the whole or half blood; brother or sister of the whole or half blood or by adoption; children of the person's brother or sister of the whole or half blood or by adoption; the son or daughter of the person's aunt or uncle of the whole or half blood or by adoption.

Again, I personally do not consider a spouse's siblings to be incest, but some do, hint why I include. But this is my entire point: the tags should be made clear.

 

[SirAeghann]

After reading through the thread, I'm well aware it's unwise to join the fray, but hopefully it won't be too bad.

I think on the whole, I agree with the OP.

I write a bdsm themed harem series set in the modern day. Now because the story takes place in the modern day and not in the past with a historical harem, and is not a high fantasy with mind control or magic, I used an open polyamorous relationship as a framing device for the harem coming together.

I was warned, repeatedly, by readers that fans of the harem genre get irrevocably enraged to the point of doxxing and death threats when the women in a harem are shared with men who aren't the MC. So I've avoided it. Though their relationship is still open and the peril of one or more of the women sleeping with someone else is sometimes used for drama.

I understand that on literotica tags and category can set reader expectations before a single word is read. Fans of haremlit have certain expectations, just like fans of sci fi, fantasy, romance, etc. We expect an author to fulfill those expectations based on how they market their work. All perfectly reasonable.

I attempt to use tags based on what appears in the chapters for searchability purposes. Like spanking? You'll like my series. Want to avoid depictions of bdsm? You won't like my story. It is what it is.

Where I disagree with OP is that variations of harems, like reverse, lesbian, gay, etc. should use different tags. A reverse harem story is still a harem story, and I think it's fine for them to tag it as such. I would hope they'd use a Fmmm tag as well, but with only so many tags available and other content in the chapter more pressing, I can understand why some might not, especially if there isn't an explicit scene with all of the characters in that particular chapter.

As with most things I think everyone's a little right. When it comes down to it you can only control personal practice.

 

[AlinaX]

I had no idea harem readers could be as toxic as LW readers. Wow.

 

[allenknott3]

After reading through the thread, I'm well aware it's unwise to join the fray, but hopefully it won't be too bad.

I think on the whole, I agree with the OP.

I write a bdsm themed harem series set in the modern day. Now because the story takes place in the modern day and not in the past with a historical harem, and is not a high fantasy with mind control or magic, I used an open polyamorous relationship as a framing device for the harem coming together.

I was warned, repeatedly, by readers that fans of the harem genre get irrevocably enraged to the point of doxxing and death threats when the women in a harem are shared with men who aren't the MC. So I've avoided it. Though their relationship is still open and the peril of one or more of the women sleeping with someone else is sometimes used for drama.

I understand that on literotica tags and category can set reader expectations before a single word is read. Fans of haremlit have certain expectations, just like fans of sci fi, fantasy, romance, etc. We expect an author to fulfill those expectations based on how they market their work. All perfectly reasonable.

I attempt to use tags based on what appears in the chapters for searchability purposes. Like spanking? You'll like my series. Want to avoid depictions of bdsm? You won't like my story. It is what it is.

Where I disagree with OP is that variations of harems, like reverse, lesbian, gay, etc. should use different tags. A reverse harem story is still a harem story, and I think it's fine for them to tag it as such. I would hope they'd use a Fmmm tag as well, but with only so many tags available and other content in the chapter more pressing, I can understand why some might not, especially if there isn't an explicit scene with all of the characters in that particular chapter.

As with most things I think everyone's a little right. When it comes down to it you can only control personal practice.

No one should ever get death threats. If you write a story where the main male character shares his women with other men, then that is fine, it is just not my taste. The reason why I favor variations is like any category there are subcategories.

But using the FMMM tag would be interesting or maybe easier FM+. I do not like or read BDSM theme stories but I respect your rights to write those stories and everyone else to enjoy those stories. It is fiction after all.

I think fans get generally enraged because 1: they are reality few harem stories or series compared to other genres and 2: most individuals I have encountered think of harem as the term is used in anime/porn/hentai, one male with many females and otherwise it seems to be as you said not feeling expectations. Again, using harem variations is good IMO.

I also think porn genres are what most people go back on. So for example, interracial in porn is only white/black, and does not include Asain. So, when someone reads the tag interracial they are thinking it going to be a white person with a black person, not any race. Same as DP, which in theory can be any type of double penetration but most think of it as being Dp by two men/cocks.

 

[allenknott3]

I had no idea harem readers could be as toxic as LW readers. Wow.

First, what are LW readers?

Second, any group of readers can be toxic.

Using an example, I got some pushback for one of my stories on another site because the main character, white enjoyed fucking and ruining black women. It was labeled racism, and I was a racist, but there were thousands of stories where the main black male character did the same thing to white women and nobody said a word.

 

[Bamagan]

I had no idea harem readers could be as toxic as LW readers. Wow.

I expect there's a wedge of overlapping readership. Anyone who believes in a combination of maledom, commoditized sexuality, and monopolizing that sexual commodity for exclusive personal use is likely to enjoy reading about a man surrounded by women (or even just one woman) existing as some class of property (or contractual exclusivity), or vengeance on anyone who disrespects their property rights. I wouldn't be surprised if that kind of reader is also more prone than average to objecting to any stories they don't see as being 'pure' representations of the genre as they understand it.

 

[Bramblethorn]

I talking about Literotica/Erotica. So, sex with your aunt is not incest according to New South Wales, but that is not the case here. So, you are right there is no universally agreed definition of incest. Some do not even consider step-siblings to be incest and some do. If you want to use legal as a requirement, then in some areas, Literoica is illegal. I am saying, again, that Literotica should have clearly definition for tags.

But without getting political here, you are speaking to a larger issue in society where as has lost the ability to agree on terms.

I'm not sure there ever was a time when everybody agreed on what words meant. Living languages just aren't that tidy.

 

[SimonDoom]

Again, I personally do not consider a spouse's siblings to be incest, but some do, hint why I include. But this is my entire point: the tags should be made clear.

No point is served in forcing tags to conform to a site-determined definition if readers themselves cannot agree on the definitions of words, as is obviously the case with respect to such terms as "incest" and "harem."

Your understanding of the terms is your understanding, and it's just as valid as another's, but no MORE valid. Some people see harems differently from the way you do, and some may enjoy a broader range of "harem" stories than you do. I'm like that. My tastes are very broad. I do not have narrow preferences, whether it's about loving wives, incest, or harems. So your system would be bad for me.

This isn't mean to be disrespectful to you, but this is the general problem with many of the complaints voiced about the Site here. When people complain that the Site should do things differently to provide a better experience, what they really mean is "better for me." The Site obviously has no obligation to cater to that.

I think fans get generally enraged

If anybody gets "enraged" because of tag use, they're the one with the problem, not the Site, and not the author who adopted the tags. So the fan is a little confused? Come on. That's not cause for rage and 1-bombing. That person should grow up a bit, take a deep breath, and learn to read the signs a bit more thoroughly to take responsibility for themselves about what stories they choose to click on or read.

 

[allenknott3]

I'm not sure there ever was a time when everybody agreed on what words meant. Living languages just aren't that tidy.

Where I disagree with you is that in the last 40 to 60 years I think it has become worst.

Also, if we cannot agree to definitions of terms then what are we even doing? Then what are even we discussing? What is even the point?

That would mean all tags on Literotica are both right and wrong at the same time. Maybe Literotica should do always with tags altogether?

 

[allenknott3]

No point is served in forcing tags to conform to a site-determined definition if readers themselves cannot agree on the definitions of words, as is obviously the case with respect to such terms as "incest" and "harem."

Your understanding of the terms is your understanding, and it's just as valid as another's, but no MORE valid. Some people see harems differently from the way you do, and some may enjoy a broader range of "harem" stories than you do. I'm like that. My tastes are very broad. I do not have narrow preferences, whether it's about loving wives, incest, or harems. So your system would be bad for me.

This isn't mean to be disrespectful to you, but this is the general problem with many of the complaints voiced about the Site here. When people complain that the Site should do things differently to provide a better experience, what they really mean is "better for me." The Site obviously has no obligation to cater to that.




If anybody gets "enraged" because of tag use, they're the one with the problem, not the Site, and not the author who adopted the tags. So the fan is a little confused? Come on. That's not cause for rage and 1-bombing. That person should grow up a bit, take a deep breath, and learn to read the signs a bit more thoroughly to take responsibility for themselves about what stories they choose to click on or read.

I could not disagree with you more. Then there should be no tags. You are using the same argument, "better for me" that you claim I am using.

If someone gives you a 1-star rating, that tough tits that is the reader's response. The readers can give the story any rating they want, almost any comments, any reviews they want, for any reason they want. Otherwise, then it would only be positive, 5-star comments/reviews being left, which is what some person wants, only to be praised and never criticized.

 

[SimonDoom]

I could not disagree with you more. Then there should be no tags. You are using the same argument, "better for me" that you claim I am using.

I'm not arguing that the current system should be kept because it's good for me; I'm arguing against changing it because there's no reason to believe it will be better for most people. I think most people would prefer a tag system where the tags approximate the same level of definitional breadth that people accept with the words outside the tag system. I don't really know, but nobody does. The one thing we DO know to a certainty is that tastes among Literotica readers vary to a great degree, and the system, whatever it is, should accommodate that breadth of tastes.

When the subject of incest comes up, people keep talking about what the law is in this or that jurisdiction. That's completely irrelevant to this discussion. The only thing that matters is reader tastes, because the entire purpose of tags and categories is to match content with readers. Since readers of erotica interpret "incest" in many different ways, the default position, absent a good reason to do otherwise, should be to permit terms to be used inclusively rather than exclusively, i.e.,. it would be wrong for the Site to remove a story from the incest category because it featured "step" relatives rather than blood relatives.

If someone gives you a 1-star rating, that tough tits that is the reader's response.

The Site gives you perfect freedom to give any score you want for any reason. I support that. But, personally, I think it's childish to 1-bomb a story for reasons other than that you didn't like the content of the story. I think it's silly and entitled to vote down a story because its content doesn't match your expectations based on the tags. That's not the same thing as saying I believe one should only give 5s. I don't believe that, either. I believe one should give a story the score that one honestly believes it deserves based on the quality of its content, whatever that number is.

 

[allenknott3]

I'm not arguing that the current system should be kept because it's good for me; I'm arguing against changing it because there's no reason to believe it will be better for most people. I think most people would prefer a tag system where the tags approximate the same level of definitional breadth that people accept with the words outside the tag system. I don't really know, but nobody does. The one thing we DO know to a certainty is that tastes among Literotica readers vary to a great degree, and the system, whatever it is, should accommodate that breadth of tastes.

When the subject of incest comes up, people keep talking about what the law is in this or that jurisdiction. That's completely irrelevant to this discussion. The only thing that matters is reader tastes, because the entire purpose of tags and categories is to match content with readers. Since readers of erotica interpret "incest" in many different ways, the default position, absent a good reason to do otherwise, should be to permit terms to be used inclusively rather than exclusively, i.e.,. it would be wrong for the Site to remove a story from the incest category because it featured "step" relatives rather than blood relatives.



The Site gives you perfect freedom to give any score you want for any reason. I support that. But, personally, I think it's childish to 1-bomb a story for reasons other than that you didn't like the content of the story. I think it's silly and entitled to vote down a story because its content doesn't match your expectations based on the tags. That's not the same thing as saying I believe one should only give 5s. I don't believe that, either. I believe one should give a story the score that one honestly believes it deserves based on the quality of its content, whatever that number is.

Where I disagree with you is that Literotica, since their site should define the tags, is similar to how some other sites do. Then they should enforce those tags. Some will not like it, but you cannot make everyone happy.

As for the 1-star bomb a story. That is what reviews are, you rate them on whether you like the content of the story or not. Yeah, expectations are part of reviews, the same as with films. So, if someone thinks a story deserves a 1-star because they dislike the content because that did not meet their expectations that is valid (and not childish) because that is based on the individual reader's POV of the quality of its content.

Back to the tags for a moment, the only thing that SHOULD matter is how the site defines those tags. The tags are there for a reason, the same as the category and description. If a harem story suddenly has the main male character engaging in sex with men, that is a story I am going to give a 1-star too, because I do not read stories with male-on-male sex in them i.e. gay sex. So, I avoid that tag. So if the author does not clearly market the story correctly, then my expectations are different, the same as with a film, that is comedy but marketed as an action movie.

Now, if you meant reviews bombing, where the person does not read the story, just mark it down because they do not like the tags or category that is different. I have the experience, of authors removing my negative reviews but leaving up the positive reviews.

what this comes down to is simply: everyone is entitled to like what they like, to write or read what they want. But just make it clear either by correctly tagging the story or putting it in the text before the actual story. For example, I do not read scat stories, but I do not go through rating all of them 1-star because that would be review bombing. But if it is in there and not clearly explained or tagged, then yeah that deserves a bad review.

 

[yowser]

This is a classic indexing problem, and demonstrates the strengths and deficits of different indexing methods.

Lit employs two distinct methods to index stories, presumably with the goal of getting their readers to 'the good stuff' or at least their own 'preferred stuff.'

The categories are what are called 'pre-coordinate indexing' (predetermined) and use a 'controlled vocabulary' ie. set terms with defined attributes. I think most readers understand categories generally (like going into a bookstore and browsing the 'mystery' section), but as we have seen here, there still can be ambiguity over definitions (incest, interracial, etc.) But most readers looking for gay male stories are not going to dive into the 'lesbian' category.

Tags technically are also 'pre-coordinate' (applied before publication) but do not use a controlled vocabulary, they are the keywords that authors have applied for their works, and as has been pointed out, are generally used more for marketing than 'anti-squick' warnings, although some authors do that.

I do not see how Lit could force authors into using tags in a controlled vocabulary way, it would involve far more scrutiny than is currently possible.

Readers looking for their 'good stuff' can use the advanced search functions, which allow for post-coordinate terms (ie. keywords in the text of stories, titles, etc.) It does not have the sophistication of any decent modern web search engine (deliberately not mentioning the Elephant) but for the most part allows readers a reasonably fine-toothed tool for homing in on particular kinks.

I'm pretty much in the loose structure camp, and have no interest as a writer in being limited to strictly defined tags, and I'll tag my output pretty much as I please. I like that freedom to choose tags and suspect most authors do as well. Readers are getting free product, and it seems unreasonable to get overly fussy over the site's indexing.

 

[Bramblethorn]

Where I disagree with you is that in the last 40 to 60 years I think it has become worst.

I suspect what's more likely here is that the "shrinking of the world" caused by communications technology has made such differences in understanding. 40 years ago nothing like this site existed, and none of us would've had any way to know if some fans of incest fiction defined the term differently to others.

Also, if we cannot agree to definitions of terms then what are we even doing? Then what are even we discussing? What is even the point?

That's excessively black-and-white thinking. A large part of social development is learning how to interact productively with people who might not agree with one on everything.

At any given time, on any given topic, there's a good chance people do agree enough to have a productive conversation. If Jane and Bob disagree on whether "sister-in-law" is incest, but Jane's writing a mother/son story, the difference doesn't matter.

If Jane is writing a sister-in-law story, and Bob doesn't consider that incest, it's up to him whether that thought concludes with "so I'm giving it 1 star", or "but I know some people do, so I'm just going to click out of that story without demanding that the whole world aligns with my definitions".

Bob can definitely do better than clicking on a story titled "Incest With Sister-In-Law" and complaining that SIL isn't "real" incest.

Back to the tags for a moment, the only thing that SHOULD matter is how the site defines those tags.

The site doesn't define those tags, and it would be a disaster if they tried to do so. That would require Laurel to keep on top of all the nuances of terminology across a thousand different kinks, or alternatively a drastic change to the story moderation system with hundreds of mods each specialising in a few areas. (This is how it goes on other story sites that do define tags.)

The tags are there for a reason, the same as the category and description. If a harem story suddenly has the main male character engaging in sex with men, that is a story I am going to give a 1-star too, because I do not read stories with male-on-male sex in them i.e. gay sex. So, I avoid that tag. So if the author does not clearly market the story correctly, then my expectations are different, the same as with a film, that is comedy but marketed as an action movie.

Since you obviously are aware that not everybody understands the word "harem" the same way that you do, have you considered revising your expectations? Seems like that might make your experience less annoying.

Everybody has things they like and dislike in a story, and Literotica lets authors decide which of those to prioritise in tagging. There's no particular reason why readers with an aversion to M/M content deserve to be privileged above those who dislike second-person narration, or present tense, or US spelling conventions, or the use of words like "smiled" as a speech tag, or any of the thousand other things that readers grumble about. It's not a peanut allergy.

In particular, until the day comes when it becomes standard to provide advance warning of hetero content I don't see any obligation for authors to provide advance warning of M/M or F/F.

what this comes down to is simply: everyone is entitled to like what they like, to write or read what they want. But just make it clear either by correctly tagging the story or putting it in the text before the actual story. For example, I do not read scat stories, but I do not go through rating all of them 1-star because that would be review bombing. But if it is in there and not clearly explained or tagged, then yeah that deserves a bad review.

It's not possible to tag/pre-warn for every story element that might conceivably upset some reader out there.

That's not to say tagging/pre-warning is always pointless. I've done so on some of my stories where I felt that some themes were particularly likely to be upsetting to readers. But there is no agreed list on what the things are that we ought to be warning for.

 

[ElectricBlue]

The site doesn't define those tags, and it would be a disaster if they tried to do so. That would require Laurel to keep on top of all the nuances of terminology across a thousand different kinks, or alternatively a drastic change to the story moderation system with hundreds of mods each specialising in a few areas. (This is how it goes on other story sites that do define tags.)

This is the point the OP appears to have missed. The site doesn't define tags, authors do; and the most used tags are a consequence of a twenty plus year site life. That in itself is the most effective filter of all - common usage over time. So in that sense, there is a set of prescribed tags - they're the ones most authors use. If an author doesn't like that set of tags, I'd say they're the outlier, they're not in the centre of the bell curve.

 

[allenknott3]

This is the point the OP appears to have missed. The site doesn't define tags, authors do; and the most used tags are a consequence of a twenty plus year site life. That in itself is the most effective filter of all - common usage over time. So in that sense, there is a set of prescribed tags - they're the ones most authors use. If an author doesn't like that set of tags, I'd say they're the outlier, they're not in the centre of the bell curve.

But that is seemly what you missed. My argument is one: Literotica should define the tags. 2: However, since Literotica does not, then authors should but your response shows that some are not willing to do that because they want 'freedom' to tag their stories however they want.

 

[allenknott3]

I suspect what's more likely here is that the "shrinking of the world" caused by communications technology has made such differences in understanding. 40 years ago nothing like this site existed, and none of us would've had any way to know if some fans of incest fiction defined the term differently to others.



That's excessively black-and-white thinking. A large part of social development is learning how to interact productively with people who might not agree with one on everything.

At any given time, on any given topic, there's a good chance people do agree enough to have a productive conversation. If Jane and Bob disagree on whether "sister-in-law" is incest, but Jane's writing a mother/son story, the difference doesn't matter.

If Jane is writing a sister-in-law story, and Bob doesn't consider that incest, it's up to him whether that thought concludes with "so I'm giving it 1 star", or "but I know some people do, so I'm just going to click out of that story without demanding that the whole world aligns with my definitions".

Bob can definitely do better than clicking on a story titled "Incest With Sister-In-Law" and complaining that SIL isn't "real" incest.



The site doesn't define those tags, and it would be a disaster if they tried to do so. That would require Laurel to keep on top of all the nuances of terminology across a thousand different kinks, or alternatively a drastic change to the story moderation system with hundreds of mods each specialising in a few areas. (This is how it goes on other story sites that do define tags.)



Since you obviously are aware that not everybody understands the word "harem" the same way that you do, have you considered revising your expectations? Seems like that might make your experience less annoying.

Everybody has things they like and dislike in a story, and Literotica lets authors decide which of those to prioritise in tagging. There's no particular reason why readers with an aversion to M/M content deserve to be privileged above those who dislike second-person narration, or present tense, or US spelling conventions, or the use of words like "smiled" as a speech tag, or any of the thousand other things that readers grumble about. It's not a peanut allergy.

In particular, until the day comes when it becomes standard to provide advance warning of hetero content I don't see any obligation for authors to provide advance warning of M/M or F/F.



It's not possible to tag/pre-warn for every story element that might conceivably upset some reader out there.

That's not to say tagging/pre-warning is always pointless. I've done so on some of my stories where I felt that some themes were particularly likely to be upsetting to readers. But there is no agreed list on what the things are that we ought to be warning for.

First, it is not black-and-white. You are confusing views, beliefs, and values with the definition of words. They are not the same thing. The best example I can use to prove the point is a handshake, which is a greeting in Western society, but they bow in Japanese society. But using definitions of terms are not the same thing.

I understand that everyone does not use the word "harem" in the same way, hint my OP, but the is no point in continuing to insult, which you have done at least twice. I have not insulted you once.

Again, the site should determine tags, in my opinion, but that is just my opinion. I am fine with authors providing advance warning of hetero content. No, it would not, it just required Literotica to create a series of tags, and then authors would use those tags. Your arguing is basically you are a misbehavior child who does not want to do it, so you are throwing a temper tantrum.

You are wrong, it is possible to tag/pre-warm, again you just do not want to do it, because you simply do not want to do it.

Again, all Literotica has to do is come up with a set of tags, similar to other websites. It is not rocket science. You are acting like it would be the end of the world, no it would make the experience better.

Regardless, we are seemingly going around in circles and you seem not to notice there are some who agreed with me, I figure obviously since you must have skipped those posts, but there are some who do not. Well, good day to you and enjoy your writing/stories.

 

[ElectricBlue]

But that is seemly what you missed. My argument is one: Literotica should define the tags. 2: However, since Literotica does not, then authors should but your response shows that some are not willing to do that because they want 'freedom' to tag their stories however they want.

Are you aware of the tag pages, sorted by category, showing the most commonly used tags within each category?

Those are the tags most used by writers, with the frequency determined over two decades of usage; and it follows that they're the most common search terms used by readers. If Lit was to "define" the tags best to use, surely they'd point to those lists? Which is exactly what the site has done. Those lists are, in effect, site sanctioned lists.

When I tag my stories, as an example, I don't make up my own tags. I go look at those lists, and pick the most commonly used tags which best suit my story. That maximises my chances of stories being found by interested readers, because I imagine they do the same - narrow down a search using the tags used most often.

I can't see how the site would do it any other way.

You keep saying the site should define tags - okay, tell us how the site might do that. What's your suggested method to "standardise tags"?

 

[Bramblethorn]

You are wrong, it is possible to tag/pre-warm,

Actually, I never said it was impossible to tag/pre-warn. I said it wasn't possible to do so for every story element that might upset some reader, and that there's no standard on which elements should be tagged.

again you just do not want to do it, because you simply do not want to do it.

And right here, as an example of how words have different meanings to different people: I wrote "That's not to say tagging/pre-warning is always pointless. I've done so on some of my stories..." and you've somehow come to the conclusion that this is me "simply not wanting to do it".

In fact, most of my stories do have some kind of content warnings either in an author's note or in a tag. Examples of things I've warned for:

• "COVID-19, dementia, and the death of a spouse" (and a dog), in Romance
• Horror content, in a non-Horror category
• BDSM elements and consensual rough play, in Lesbian Sex
• Humiliation and spanking, in Exh/Voy
• A word that's widely accepted in modern Australian English but could be taken as a major racial slur by British readers.

To illustrate my point, let's take a look at one of yours. Tags on this story are: james bond, harem, huge cock, mfffffff, threesome, incest, male dominance, dove cameron, alexandra daddario, spy action.

In the course of the story, the protagonist rapes three women. (Yes, two of them had just tried to kill him; no, that doesn't make it not-rape. Yes, as he was choking the other one with her swimsuit he interpreted the "look in her eyes" as consent from this woman who he'd never met; no, that doesn't actually make it consent. And no, "male dominance" doesn't cover rape.)

To state the obvious, rape is a major content-warning issue for a lot of people, and you gave readers no warning of it. Granted, Connery-era James Bond isn't known for his respectful treatment of women (...nor for that matter Bond-era Sean Connery...), but those rapes aren't part of the movie on which your story is based.

I'm surprised the story was allowed through at all, TBH; rape is usually off-limits in Celeb/Fanfic. But maybe Laurel missed it.

If you didn't find room among your ten tags to flag the inclusion of multiple rape scenes in a category that doesn't usually include rape, IDK where you get off chiding anybody else for inadequate tagging.

Again, all Literotica has to do is come up with a set of tags, similar to other websites.

Maybe you should ask those "other websites" how much work was involved in doing that.

One of my friends works on the tagging system for another story website; I wasn't exaggerating when I mentioned it as something that needs hundreds of volunteers. Not just for the workload, but for the expertise across thousands of different topics.

You are acting like it would be the end of the world, no it would make the experience better.

I'm sure if somebody else did all the work of ensuring that stories were tagged according to your personal preferences, it'd make the experience better for you personally. But not everybody else's tagging preferences are identical to yours. I suspect there'd be a lot more readers who'd care about having rape stories tagged and warned up-front than there are who get agitated about the precise definition of "harem".

Regardless, we are seemingly going around in circles and you seem not to notice there are some who agreed with me, I figure obviously since you must have skipped those posts, but there are some who do not.

I don't reply to everything posted here, no. That doesn't necessarily indicate either agreement or disagreement, it just means that I don't reply to everything.

 

[HordHolm]

But that is seemly what you missed. My argument is one: Literotica should define the tags. 2: However, since Literotica does not, then authors should but your response shows that some are not willing to do that because they want 'freedom' to tag their stories however they want.

I'm really at a loss as to what you expect might happen as a result of this thread.

It's been pointed out that only the merest fraction of Lit authors frequent this corner of the forums, and of those authors not all (probably not most) have clicked on to this particular thread. So, let's say for argument you have 0.01% of Lit authors as an audience for your argument here. What possible difference can such a small subset of Lit authors make? Even if there was consensus, which there isn't. Well, perhaps if you could change your audience into advocates... however...

You tell us what authors 'should' do, but when presented with counter-arguments you seem to get a little 'agitated' that others here aren't automatically agreeing with your position, whether because they don't agree with your initial proposition, or because they view the obstacles as insurmountable, or because it will be nigh on impossible for 'all Lit authors' to agree on the structure you believe they should agree on. That being the case, where to from here?

I will be blunt - you are not winning people over to your cause. How might you change that? My suggestion would be, if you are truly committed to the issue, to begin the work yourself - start to define the tags the way you think they should be defined, start threads detailing how you are doing it and ask for feedback, be a bit flexible, accommodate the suggestions of others, attempt to convince people rather than dictate, be prepared for a long haul - in short, be a leader on the issue, and perhaps (although I have my doubts) others may follow you and a new consensus may begin to be formed.

 

[allenknott3]

I'm really at a loss as to what you expect might happen as a result of this thread.

You tell us what authors 'should' do, but when presented with counter-arguments you seem to get a little 'agitated' that others here aren't automatically agreeing with your position, whether because they don't agree with your initial proposition, or because they view the obstacles as insurmountable, or because it will be nigh on impossible for 'all Lit authors' to agree on the structure you believe they should agree on. That being the case, where to from here?

I will be blunt - you are not winning people over to your cause. How might you change that? My suggestion would be, if you are truly committed to the issue, to begin the work yourself - start to define the tags the way you think they should be defined, start threads detailing how you are doing it and ask for feedback, be a bit flexible, accommodate the suggestions of others, attempt to convince people rather than dictate, be prepared for a long haul - in short, be a leader on the issue, and perhaps (although I have my doubts) others may follow you and a new consensus may begin to be formed.

My only point in the threat was to see where others stood. I was not surprised by some of the responses, but I was glad at least some of the responses agreed with me, with some offering good points.

I never told anyone what authors "should" do. I was just saying what I think should be done. Having a debate is not being "agitated" and that is a judgment based on the text. So, how are you judging me emotionally through my responses?

I am going to be blunt, I do not care about winning people over to my cause. Why? Because I stand where I think is right/correct on all issues, even if people are screaming that I am wrong. To quote, Alfred Korzybski, "There are two ways to slide easily through life; to believe everything or to doubt everything. Both ways save us from thinking." So it seems others want to slide easily through life or as Albert Einstein is quoted, "There are only two ways to live your life. One is as though nothing is a miracle. The other is as though everything is a miracle." Same basic idea.

Now, even as you said that is only a small percentage of authors on the forum, I posted to see where others stood, to see if anyone agreed with me or even if I was truly alone in my thinking, regarding the topics. But it does not do any good because as one response points out, basically everyone is entitled to define the tags, however they want, which means the tags are meaningless.

I do not have that type of time or commitment. Plus, I would argue that it would not do any good anyway. As many point how, their definitions of terms are different, and they are fine with that. Meaning there is no argument on the issue. That is why I repeatedly said the site should do it, despite realizing that was not going to happen. For example, I did not realize there were only two owners. I thought Literotica had a staff.

Now, I have always tagged my stories correctly, but that is not the issue. The issue is reading stories that are not tagged correctly.

So, let's assume for a moment you are right, I accommodate the suggestions of others, but how far? Because any accommodation to one is going to upset another. So let us use the example of incest, if we include the aunt, as being part of incest, that will upset the people who do not view the aunt as part of incest. As I mentioned earlier, we have lost the ability to agree to terms or in this case tags, so if Literotica does not set the definition of tags, then it is meaningless. This is what I realized that I did not know before, it seems most are fine with the systems, as is because they like the freedom it offers. Fair enough.

I will leave you with my favorite quote of all time, normally attributed to Albert Einstein, "Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe.”