Do we need separated Men's and Women's sections?

[MarlowBunny]

Do we need separated Men's and Women's sections at Literotica?

I have heard some submissions described as "stroke" stories. I assume those are stories intended to produce maximum arousal with minimum reader investment. I assume such stories are two pages or shorter. I assume such stories are primarily aimed at men and the occasional woman who is already primed. In my opinion, these stories are quickly forgotten even if they achieve their goal so to speak.

In contrast, there are stories like Firebrain's and PennLady's (to pick on just a couple) that linger in the mind and potentially stimulate low boiling arousal for hours or days after reading. These stories are almost always rated "hot" and seem among the most likely to win "Editor's Choice." I assume these stories are primarily aimed at women and the occasional man who is a connoisseur.

Do any of you disagree with my assumptions about "aimed at men" vs. "aimed at women"?

I have noticed that both types of story portray different "unrealities." For example, stroke stories often feature a female character who turns on like a light switch and jumps into a sex act with little or no pursuit by her suitor. In contrast, picking on Firebrain's latest, http://www.literotica.com/s/cider-webs, (which I loved) the story takes place almost entirely in the female protagonist's head. As beautiful as the story is, I think it was as unrealistic as a "stroke" story. The basic assumption in the story is that the male protagonist is able to correctly deduce the un-communicated and taboo smoldering that takes place within the woman's mind. Sadly, few real men are mind readers any more than real women are light switches.

Do we need a "women's" section that indulges the fantasy that men know exactly what women want, never misinterpret signals, and always unselfishly satisfy multiple times. Do we need a "men's" section that indulges the fantasy that no woman can resist a frantic ride and explodes with ecstasy at the first glance from mister awesome? Maybe we should have special tags:

Cum receptacle vs. Psychic superman?

OR

Stroke vs. Smolder?

 

[Darkniciad]

I don't think there's any real need. It doesn't usually take very long at all to determine whether you're reading a stroke piece or something with more development.

Besides, it would be a nightmare to implement. I can hear Manu fainting dead away at the suggestion, and doubt it could be done without taking the site down either on purpose or in essence from the amount of database manipulation necessary slowing everything down to an unmanageable crawl.

 

[bronzeage]

I write stroke stories aimed at women. A few men have written to say they enjoy them as well.

We have enough debate now about categories, it would never end if we split ever one down the middle.

In any case, it is a pointless pursuit. The writer never knows for what the reader searches. We put it out there and hope someone enjoys it. We don't have to know what they do, once they find it.

 

[Stella_Omega]

You ask the wrong question, grasshopper.

The correct one is "Can we possibly talk the owners into making any changes in the story categories at all?"

and the answer to that is a resounding no.

The "loving wives" category is so badly misnamed as to be offensive, and it contains three types of plots that mutually antagonistic, withthe result that it's known as "Troll hollow" by most writers.

There should be a bisexual section.

There should be sub-sections in both the lesbian and gay sections for BDSM, for the same reasons that BDSM is separate from vanilla sex for hets.

Not gonna happen, as far as anyone here can tell.

And now you're asking for a very subjective editorial response... Who decides what's stroke and what's smolder? I can about guarantee that one story gets read first to last, out of every... oh, say, fifty? A hundred even? that get submitted.

 

[Boxlicker101]

I don't think we need any such division. I write mostly stroke, and get more emails from women telling me they get off on my stories than I do from men. Readership of my stories and those of others covers such a wide spectrum that almost everybody can find something they like.

 

[lovecraft68]

I agree with Bronze age as far as the categories are already getting a bit confused and we don;t need to help that along.

In my mind the only valid category question I ask is why the non consent section has not been closed out yet.

My daughter is working on a project in high school about the sex slavery rings that are popping up every where. Groups that drug teenage girls and young women then hook them on drugs and turn them into craigs list prostitutes. All high schools are talking about this to make girls aware of it and the there are special task forces created to deal with it.

As I was looking through her material I realized that what I was reading about was the plot line of a third of the non consent section.

Lit has one hard rule: no underage. They are strict on this because they do not want to risk legal problems. I don't understand why there is an entire category that glorifies kidnapping/slavery and abuse of women.

Of course there is the "she really wanted it" stories and the ones that end with it being a couple who were playing a sex game well in those cases it really wasn't rape now was it? But there are plenty that are just start to finish assault and it's just fine.

Sorry to get off your topic Marlow but saw a category question and am completely disgusted with what I was reading and that the site condones it. Wonder how Lit will feel when the FBI starts reigning these people in and finds 20 Literotica non consent stories bookmarked on their PC's. No where near as heinous as some one writing about a pair of 17 year olds in the first time category but close enough.

 

[LettersFromTatyana]

What does this:

Do we need separated Men's and Women's sections at Literotica?

Have to do with this:

Stroke vs. Smolder?

In addition to what bronzeage and Boxlicker said, I've so far written only in romance (smolder alert), but over half of my comments and emails are from men.

Do tags have to be approved? If not, there's nothing stopping anyone from using what you suggest, though given the subjectivity I don't see that they'd be terribly helpful. I've always appreciated author notes at the top of a story to let me know what I'm in for; boiling a story's flow down to a word can be hard.

 

[bashfullyshameless]

I enjoy "stroke" stories. I also enjoy the "slow burn" stuff. Hell, I have more than once set out to write something short and smutty, only to have everyone else tell me it's the exact opposite.

I really don't think it's based on gender. For me, erotica from a woman's perspective is much, MUCH hotter than from a man's. I really love the mental/emotional process of a female character as the erotic scenes unfold. It doesn't have to be drawn out, but having it there at all creates a huge appeal for me. I wouldn't know, though, whether that's "for men" or "for women."

 

[bronzeage]

What does this:



Have to do with this:



In addition to what bronzeage and Boxlicker said, I've so far written only in romance (smolder alert), but over half of my comments and emails are from men.

Do tags have to be approved? If not, there's nothing stopping anyone from using what you suggest, though given the subjectivity I don't see that they'd be terribly helpful. I've always appreciated author notes at the top of a story to let me know what I'm in for; boiling a story's flow down to a word can be hard.

Tags do not have to be approved, but there is a list of words which cannot be put in the tags window. "Rape" is the only one I know, but there may be others.

 

[PennLady]

I don't think we need men's and women's categories, nor do I think it would be feasible. For one thing, not every woman or man likes the "usual" stuff for their gender.

I write to write. I write b/c I have a story in my head, and I admit, most of them do not exactly center around sex. The couple that do -- Island Encounter and In the Red Parlor, were written for different reasons. IE was sort of a request, and Parlor was more of an exercise for me. I think Island was more of a "hit." Even though Parlor was a stroke story, I actually had comments saying okay, fine but now get back to character and plot.

So I just write and hope people enjoy it.

It is a shame there's such resistance to revamping the categories. "Loving Wives," especially, is mislabeled and misleading.

 

[3113]

Mix & Match arguments

Lit has one hard rule: no underage. They are strict on this because they do not want to risk legal problems. I don't understand why there is an entire category that glorifies kidnapping/slavery and abuse of women....Wonder how Lit will feel when the FBI starts reigning these people in and finds 20 Literotica non consent stories bookmarked on their PC's. No where near as heinous as some one writing about a pair of 17 year olds in the first time category but close enough.

You're mixing and matching your arguments, Dude. How will Lit feel? Relived that none of those stories are underage, because only underage stories might get them shut down and arrested. Now, I agree a sweet, first-time story between 17 year olds is far better than a non-con-near-gang-bang with an 18 year old...but you make it sound like it's Lit's fault that the U.S. has this fucked up view of underage sex. It's not Lit's fault that the U.S. thinks that sex with anyone under age 18 makes one a sex offender. I'm sure Lit would love tender, beautiful stories of 16-year-old consensual sex. But the owners can't risk it.

Meanwhile, stories containing violence against adult women have always been allowed by the U.S. and still are allowed. Which does seem completely fucked up, but there you go.

Nevertheless, that point of yours raises a very different mix-and-match argument. One that was once used against violent comic books back in the 50's. The infamous child shrink, Fredric Wernham, saw juvenile delinquents reading comic books and argued that the comic books turned boys into juvenile delinquents. But non-delequent boys were also reading these comic books. It was, if you like, a chicken-or-egg argument. Did the comic books induce boys to be violent, or did violent boys like to read comic books or did boys in general like violent comic books violent and non-violent alike? The same problem arrises with non-con stories. Do men who read them go on to commit such crimes or do men who commit such crimes read such stuff--or both? And how many non-violent men read this stuff as compared to the violent ones?

And then there's a second difficulty with this argument, which is similar to the "Stroke vs. Smolder"--are all non-con stories created equal? Should a story detailing a slave's story in order to condemn the slave trade be removed simply because it contains that subject matter and could be stimulating for a predator? Do we erase that attempt to enlighten because we fear the predator reading it? If we do, don't we end up in the same boat as the underage? No underage, no matter how true or tender because any underage might be read by a predator and, we presume, cause him to act out?

I'm all for your rant, and I do agree that a lot of the non-con is objectionable trash--but you need to clarify arguments here to make it clear exactly what you want, why and what should be done. Underage stories are dangerous to this site because they might bring legal actions, no matter how tender, so you can't take Lit to task for not allowing them--take the U.S. to task for throwing out the baby with the bathwater. And if Lit or the U.S. starts to go after non-con type stories in the same way as they go after underage, how does either avoid a slippery slope which cuts out the good with the bad?

 

[Darkniciad]

Tags do not have to be approved, but there is a list of words which cannot be put in the tags window. "Rape" is the only one I know, but there may be others.

Anything with the word "baby" is restricted as well. Babysitter, Babymaker, Babydoll, Beanie Baby. Doesn't matter. That four letter string will reject any variation.

 

[Boxlicker101]

Tags do not have to be approved, but there is a list of words which cannot be put in the tags window. "Rape" is the only one I know, but there may be others.

No references to children are allowed. I believe even "babysitter" is prohibited, even though sex with the babysitter or nanny is a staple of porn.

 

[lovecraft68]

You're mixing and matching your arguments, Dude. How will Lit feel? Relived that none of those stories are underage, because only underage stories might get them shut down and arrested. Now, I agree a sweet, first-time story between 17 year olds is far better than a non-con-near-gang-bang with an 18 year old...but you make it sound like it's Lit's fault that the U.S. has this fucked up view of underage sex. It's not Lit's fault that the U.S. thinks that sex with anyone under age 18 makes one a sex offender. I'm sure Lit would love tender, beautiful stories of 16-year-old consensual sex. But the owners can't risk it.

Meanwhile, stories containing violence against adult women have always been allowed by the U.S. and still are allowed. Which does seem completely fucked up, but there you go.

Nevertheless, that point of yours raises a very different mix-and-match argument. One that was once used against violent comic books back in the 50's. The infamous child shrink, Fredric Wernham, saw juvenile delinquents reading comic books and argued that the comic books turned boys into juvenile delinquents. But non-delequent boys were also reading these comic books. It was, if you like, a chicken-or-egg argument. Did the comic books induce boys to be violent, or did violent boys like to read comic books or did boys in general like violent comic books violent and non-violent alike? The same problem arrises with non-con stories. Do men who read them go on to commit such crimes or do men who commit such crimes read such stuff--or both? And how many non-violent men read this stuff as compared to the violent ones?

And then there's a second difficulty with this argument, which is similar to the "Stroke vs. Smolder"--are all non-con stories created equal? Should a story detailing a slave's story in order to condemn the slave trade be removed simply because it contains that subject matter and could be stimulating for a predator? Do we erase that attempt to enlighten because we fear the predator reading it? If we do, don't we end up in the same boat as the underage? No underage, no matter how true or tender because any underage might be read by a predator and, we presume, cause him to act out?

I'm all for your rant, and I do agree that a lot of the non-con is objectionable trash--but you need to clarify arguments here to make it clear exactly what you want, why and what should be done. Underage stories are dangerous to this site because they might bring legal actions, no matter how tender, so you can't take Lit to task for not allowing them--take the U.S. to task for throwing out the baby with the bathwater. And if Lit or the U.S. starts to go after non-con type stories in the same way as they go after underage, how does either avoid a slippery slope which cuts out the good with the bad?

Literotica can if they wanted to go with underage. There are sites out there that do. Those sites have a bad rap and I am sure are always in some form of hot water but the fact that they will do it is a draw to those that want to read it.
It is up to the folks that run lit what they deem acceptable and non acceptable there are ways to turn a "rape" story into a "no animals were really hurt during the filming of... by making it a requisite that the story be turned into a game (boxlicker has written in this manner) or the woman gets into it by the end.
Sexual slavery is not a joke although it seems to be on here.

before you move on to the inevitable "what about hardcore BDSM?" question.
If you know anything of BDSM you know that the submissive no matter how poorly treated is there by their own will. They are masochists and they live to serve it is their choice. Rape is rape.
Perhaps this is a moral rather than legal question I am posing. There are many women on this site who have been sexually assaulted and by the kind of people who find these stories entertaining. I am not disputing lit's write for under age I am not campaigning to write under age stories.
I just think that category needs some better defined regulations.
Every other category on here is fantasy from cross dressing to anal to incest to non human. Incest maybe considered "sick" you will either find it appalling or enjoy it but on lit is is 18+ and consensual non human flirts with bestiality but they are "fantasy" creatures so it gets by now throw force in and what do you have?
If a brother forces his sister it is no longer incest it is rape. If someone in the "anal" category has a cock forced in their ass against their will it is not "anal" it is now rape. Rape is not a fantasy it is a crime and the many women on here who have rape fantasies obviously have not had it happen to them or anyone close to them.
Trust me I know I am wasting my breath, I know all about the "well just don;t read it" crowd and the freedom of speech crowd and of course the plain old I must be a fag and a pussy and a whiner. Years ago these stories although they never turned me on never made me sick either it just was not my thing until my foster sister was raped. Now they make me ill. I don;t read them but the fact there are thousands archived on this site gives me the shivers. like Knowing that you just saw a spider on your bed and now don;t know where it went.
The only thing I can say is this. in Silence of the Lambs Hannibal Lector makes a remark to the Senator about her kidnapped daughter about how will she feel when it's her daughter on the slab. The only way to get anyone here who can only see the black and white legalities of this category to think differently is god forbid it be your wife/ daughter/ mother or anyone close to you that gets assaulted. Then read one of these stories and think about it again.

 

[Jake Marlow]

I concur with everyone else. There's no need for "men's" and "women's" sections. I think if something is in the Romantic section it's usually a slow burn. Perhaps (not that it will happen) letting the author submit a "heat level" rating when they upload a story. A lot of epublishers use this.

 

[lovecraft68]

Tags do not have to be approved, but there is a list of words which cannot be put in the tags window. "Rape" is the only one I know, but there may be others.

So there are stories here about rape but the word cannot be used? That is extremely interesting. I suppose forced or coerced would work.
But very funny the word rape is not allowed when there is a category full of it. Shows the site maybe just a little more paranoid about it then my detractors seem to think.

 

[sr71plt]

I am a male writer with ten "editor's choice" awards (awarded across the board, by the way--straight, gay male, lesbian, nonerotic), so what is this "editor's choice" as being for the female's or any particular type of story assertion?

 

[Verdad]

Literotica can if they wanted to go with underage. There are sites out there that do. Those sites have a bad rap and I am sure are always in some form of hot water but the fact that they will do it is a draw to those that want to read it.
It is up to the folks that run lit what they deem acceptable and non acceptable there are ways to turn a "rape" story into a "no animals were really hurt during the filming of... by making it a requisite that the story be turned into a game (boxlicker has written in this manner) or the woman gets into it by the end.
Sexual slavery is not a joke although it seems to be on here.

before you move on to the inevitable "what about hardcore BDSM?" question.
If you know anything of BDSM you know that the submissive no matter how poorly treated is there by their own will. They are masochists and they live to serve it is their choice. Rape is rape.
Perhaps this is a moral rather than legal question I am posing. There are many women on this site who have been sexually assaulted and by the kind of people who find these stories entertaining. I am not disputing lit's write for under age I am not campaigning to write under age stories.
I just think that category needs some better defined regulations.
Every other category on here is fantasy from cross dressing to anal to incest to non human. Incest maybe considered "sick" you will either find it appalling or enjoy it but on lit is is 18+ and consensual non human flirts with bestiality but they are "fantasy" creatures so it gets by now throw force in and what do you have?
If a brother forces his sister it is no longer incest it is rape. If someone in the "anal" category has a cock forced in their ass against their will it is not "anal" it is now rape. Rape is not a fantasy it is a crime and the many women on here who have rape fantasies obviously have not had it happen to them or anyone close to them.
Trust me I know I am wasting my breath, I know all about the "well just don;t read it" crowd and the freedom of speech crowd and of course the plain old I must be a fag and a pussy and a whiner. Years ago these stories although they never turned me on never made me sick either it just was not my thing until my foster sister was raped. Now they make me ill. I don;t read them but the fact there are thousands archived on this site gives me the shivers. like Knowing that you just saw a spider on your bed and now don;t know where it went.
The only thing I can say is this. in Silence of the Lambs Hannibal Lector makes a remark to the Senator about her kidnapped daughter about how will she feel when it's her daughter on the slab. The only way to get anyone here who can only see the black and white legalities of this category to think differently is god forbid it be your wife/ daughter/ mother or anyone close to you that gets assaulted. Then read one of these stories and think about it again.

There's a good reason pornography was defined by the words “I know it when I see it.”

The same could be said about the vile, nasty, disgusting kind. Legalistic definitions like yours, which rely on something clear-cut like whether there's consent are of no help and lead to the usual absurdities of censorship.

As a woman, I'm not at all offended by many non-consent stories. That doesn’t make me some kind of rarity, either. ‘Rape’, or if you prefer, ravishment, fantasies are just about the most garden variety of female fantasies. Stories that cater to such fantasies don’t bother me. Many are actually written by women.

Doesn’t mean there’s a lack of stories in the same category that are hateful, misogynistic, and give me the willies, though. But there’s many or more of them in other categories, too, and certainly in BDSM.

There’s no rulebook for isolating ugliness—though I will admit that in the case of underage, I don’t mind applying one based on the odds.

 

[Darkniciad]

You know, Lovecraft, I hate to be a dick about it, but this is really getting old. You drag out this obsession and rant about it in walls of text with only the vaguest connection to the topic you're posting in -- constantly.

Nobody's going to change your mind, and you're not going to persuade anybody else, either. It is what it is. If someone actually brings up underage sex or non-con, that's one thing, but for the lovea Pete, please stop converting every other topic into a soapbox with next to/no provocation or relevance.

Like I said -- sorry, but it's getting on my nerves, and I doubt I'm alone in that.

 

[lovecraft68]

You know, Lovecraft, I hate to be a dick about it, but this is really getting old. You drag out this obsession and rant about it in walls of text with only the vaguest connection to the topic you're posting in -- constantly.

Nobody's going to change your mind, and you're not going to persuade anybody else, either. It is what it is. If someone actually brings up underage sex or non-con, that's one thing, but for the lovea Pete, please stop converting every other topic into a soapbox with next to/no provocation or relevance.

Like I said -- sorry, but it's getting on my nerves, and I doubt I'm alone in that.

Say what you want this little nugget shows I am not entirely barking up the wrong tree.

Originally Posted by bronzeage View Post
Tags do not have to be approved, but there is a list of words which cannot be put in the tags window. "Rape" is the only one I know, but there may be others.

wonder why this is?

 

[sr71plt]

You know, Lovecraft, I hate to be a dick about it, but this is really getting old. You drag out this obsession and rant about it in walls of text with only the vaguest connection to the topic you're posting in -- constantly.

Nobody's going to change your mind, and you're not going to persuade anybody else, either. It is what it is. If someone actually brings up underage sex or non-con, that's one thing, but for the lovea Pete, please stop converting every other topic into a soapbox with next to/no provocation or relevance.

Like I said -- sorry, but it's getting on my nerves, and I doubt I'm alone in that.

No you're not alone. I was thinking of posting something, but then I decided "why bother" as Lovecraft takes us here three times a week and foams at the mouth about it no matter how many times he's told it's old.

On top of that, screaming about rape/nonconsent stories when the author is combining incest and BDSM for his own stories is pretty mealy mouthed. No, I don't see incest or BDSM as being as bad as rape/nonconsent, but when put together as incest/BDSM, I see it as close enough to depraved to think the incest/BDSM author should just keep his mouth shut on the subject of what is acceptable and what isn't.

 

[lovecraft68]

No you're not alone. I was thinking of posting something, but then I decided "why bother" as Lovecraft takes us here three times a week and foams at the mouth about it no matter how many times he's told it's old.

On top of that, screaming about rape/nonconsent stories when the author is combining incest and BDSM for his own stories is pretty mealy mouthed. No, I don't see incest or BDSM as being as bad as rape/nonconsent, but when put together as incest/BDSM, I see it as close enough to depraved to think the incest/BDSM author should just keep his mouth shut on the subject of what is acceptable and what isn't.

There is one difference in my "bdsm/incest" and 18+-of course- mix from the other category.

Consensual

 

[Kitty_Schrödinger]

Do we need separated Men's and Women's sections at Literotica?

I have heard some submissions described as "stroke" stories. I assume those are stories intended to produce maximum arousal with minimum reader investment. I assume such stories are two pages or shorter. I assume such stories are primarily aimed at men and the occasional woman who is already primed. In my opinion, these stories are quickly forgotten even if they achieve their goal so to speak.

In contrast, there are stories like Firebrain's and PennLady's (to pick on just a couple) that linger in the mind and potentially stimulate low boiling arousal for hours or days after reading. These stories are almost always rated "hot" and seem among the most likely to win "Editor's Choice." I assume these stories are primarily aimed at women and the occasional man who is a connoisseur.

Do any of you disagree with my assumptions about "aimed at men" vs. "aimed at women"?

I have noticed that both types of story portray different "unrealities." For example, stroke stories often feature a female character who turns on like a light switch and jumps into a sex act with little or no pursuit by her suitor. In contrast, picking on Firebrain's latest, http://www.literotica.com/s/cider-webs, (which I loved) the story takes place almost entirely in the female protagonist's head. As beautiful as the story is, I think it was as unrealistic as a "stroke" story. The basic assumption in the story is that the male protagonist is able to correctly deduce the un-communicated and taboo smoldering that takes place within the woman's mind. Sadly, few real men are mind readers any more than real women are light switches.

Do we need a "women's" section that indulges the fantasy that men know exactly what women want, never misinterpret signals, and always unselfishly satisfy multiple times. Do we need a "men's" section that indulges the fantasy that no woman can resist a frantic ride and explodes with ecstasy at the first glance from mister awesome? Maybe we should have special tags:

Cum receptacle vs. Psychic superman?

OR

Stroke vs. Smolder?

How about making the use of the tags. Why complicate things more?

 

[Guest]

*deleted*

 

[sr71plt]

Women stroke.

I think it's often a choice between stroke and yawn.