Though this convo isn't a "story idea", I'll leave it here.

[Hypoxia]

Oh, those wacky Mormons. Too bad she had no sister-wives to help. Now, how would a Scientologist have reacted?

EDIT: In case anyone is wondering, I did *NOT* start this thread. The above was my response to an IRL plot bunny in another thread. Some mod has been playing tricks here. I do not approve.

 

[CyranoJ]

Now, how would a Scientologist have reacted?

I'm sure I don't want to know.

 

[Strangebuddy]

Oh, those wacky Mormons. Too bad she had no sister-wives to help. Now, how would a Scientologist have reacted?

The events would have been the same but the aftermath would have gone like this: She would have contacted the church who would have:

Sued the News for reporting on it,

Sued the cops for looking into the matter,

Sued the person who reported it,

Sued the Children's Division to get her kids back,

Sued all of these parties lawyers,

Sued us for talking about Scientology,

Sued anybody who commented negatively about any of the above suing

...and so on.

 

[MatthewVett]

I'm sure I don't want to know.

My guess would be the lucrative blackmail opportunities...

 

[Sean Renaud]

Wait. . .what new section?

 

[CyranoJ]

I don't think anyone mentioned a new section.

 

[Hypoxia]

I don't think anyone mentioned a new section.

OP's finger slipped, typed 'new' instead of 'news'. Easy.

 

[Sean Renaud]

Happens. I was just curious.

 

[Hypoxia]

Wait. . .what new section?

Everything old is new again. Or everything new is old again. Eventually. Anyway, L&M have promised us new sections Real Soon Now. Or did we mis-hear? Is it new sexes, not sections? Didn't some of the Burgess Shale lifeforms have more than the standard two? What will L&M spring on us?

 

[Sean Renaud]

With any luck it's a Cuckold/Cheating Wives section. They get lumped into Loving Wives and quite often get flamed to hell and back.

 

[Hypoxia]

With any luck it's a Cuckold/Cheating Wives section. They get lumped into Loving Wives and quite often get flamed to hell and back.

Segregating the cucks, yes. That might cool the fire in nasty readers' hearts a little. It's been suggested before, right? [sigh...]

 

[Sean Renaud]

Segregating the cucks, yes. That might cool the fire in nasty readers' hearts a little. It's been suggested before, right? [sigh...]

It's been suggested lots of times and never really gets anywhere. And a fair amount of people have suggested combining Non-Human with Sci-fi /Fantasy because on a site that doesn't allow bestiality a non-human story is inherently Sci-Fi and most Sci-Fi readers aren't going to turn up their nose at a green skinned alien or an elf. They might at a unicorn or something but there's really no rule governing where it goes and in general Laurel tends to trust our judgement unless we try something truly wacky.

 

[emap]

Yes and you wouldn't know wacky if it bit you on the nose.

As far as I know the only new section in the works is bi. I'm assuming that is where the group action that have more than touching the one woman goes.

 

[Sean Renaud]

A bi section? Shit, why don't we just label it "flames go here". While obviously gay and lesbian aren't bi I think 90% of the stories with a bi could fairly be put into one of those sectors and be much, much safer than in a bi-section. But hey maybe I'm wrong.

 

[lovecraft68]

A bi section? Shit, why don't we just label it "flames go here". While obviously gay and lesbian aren't bi I think 90% of the stories with a bi could fairly be put into one of those sectors and be much, much safer than in a bi-section. But hey maybe I'm wrong.

I think the theory would be if BI had its own category it wouldn't get bombed because let's face it, its bi men that get it flamed no one cares about bi women. This is a porn site, isn't every woman bi

Its an extension of you can slip lesbian sex into almost any category and no one cares, but M/M....big no no.

But as I said that is the theory...the reality is it will get bombed by people who hate
"dem queers" cause if a guy likes guys and women...he is still queer...so it will get built in trolls like incest and non con and GM.

But I would like to see it tried, been a long time for a new category in the meantime...

Why the hell does mind control rate a category? Its a perfect part of non con /reluctance it really is on the stance that if being unaware of what you are doing does not constitute non consent then date rape should no longer be a crime...

The category has few stories and I think the authors would get more exposure and votes in NC/R...

Anal....does this really need its own category? Does anyone really complain about anal to the point it should be its own category?

Doesn't matter, the only changes that ever come here seem to be ones no one has asked for...

Although a concerted effort by the authors did get Earth day traded in for April fools this year

 

[Sean Renaud]

See and I think you got the right theory and the wrong answer. People do hate deem queers and every woman is bi. So the logical solution is to keep gay sex in the gay section where ideally only fans wander in and not worry about lesbians.

As for why is Mind Control not in Non-Con is simple. Most people don't think of it as non-con. Non-con for most people requires violence and Mind Control, the issue is primarily not about the sex (if it's even addressed as being wrong) it's about the robbing someone of their will. This is across all media, hell go watch some Buffy or Supernatural. Mind Control has been played for laughs in both scenarios and in general what is portrayed as wrong is again, the lack of will.

I understand where you're coming from, and you're not wrong. At all. It's the same way that (especially in cartoons) a guy hitting a woman, even if she's a super hero and could easily destroy him makes him the ultimate monster. A woman hitting a man with a frying man is funny.

 

[emap]

Honestly for the most part non con is about no no I don't want you in me until he is and then oh my god I am in love with you.

I'm not sure which is odder, the above or the fact that that exact thing is in most hentai. Not to mention most men assume that is how it works.

I am going to mention that I did a lesbian series where there is some sex with a guy, painted as just something that happens and I was 'yelled at' about it. By a guy who said that there is no cock in lesbian.

 

[Sean Renaud]

While I don't think most men thinking that women actually fall in love with their rapists and Japanese culture is. . .odd in some ways to say the very least such is life.

I wouldn't have yelled at you, but I have to concur that dick in a lesbian story strictly speaking sounds like something that doesn't belong for obvious reasons. We have categories so that I can have an idea of what I'm getting into and lets face it the little blurb that we have room to describe our story doesn't give you enough space to give more than the most bare bones explaination in the universe.

 

[lovecraft68]

Honestly for the most part non con is about no no I don't want you in me until he is and then oh my god I am in love with you.

I'm not sure which is odder, the above or the fact that that exact thing is in most hentai. Not to mention most men assume that is how it works.

I am going to mention that I did a lesbian series where there is some sex with a guy, painted as just something that happens and I was 'yelled at' about it. By a guy who said that there is no cock in lesbian.

On your first point...I know this is wasted breath to most here, but some will get what I mean. Lit's "They have to like it" rule is to take the edge off and make the story, not really rape...but what it confirms to a certain type of male(the ones with heavy rape fantasies) is that....see all women really want it, no always means yes.

So that is one part of my frustration with lits game with non con, they are better off going with straight out rape, letting the people who don't like it not read it and the ones who like it can have their kink because at that point its showed for what it is, a sex crime, one that in a fictional setting is some folks idea of hot.

On your last point. I did a Lesbian story "A Woman's Touch" it was about a woman who had been straight and began being curious about women. In the beginning I have her thinking about how she was so horny she went back to an old boyfriend just to get some relief, but was envisioning it being a woman's tongue between her legs, very simple a sentence ir to no real detail and I got a comment "I hate when men write lesbian, they always try to stick straight sex in there"

Overall the story is a 4.77 so I take most didn't care, of course most reading....might be men

 

[lovecraft68]

See and I think you got the right theory and the wrong answer. People do hate deem queers and every woman is bi. So the logical solution is to keep gay sex in the gay section where ideally only fans wander in and not worry about lesbians.

As for why is Mind Control not in Non-Con is simple. Most people don't think of it as non-con. Non-con for most people requires violence and Mind Control, the issue is primarily not about the sex (if it's even addressed as being wrong) it's about the robbing someone of their will. This is across all media, hell go watch some Buffy or Supernatural. Mind Control has been played for laughs in both scenarios and in general what is portrayed as wrong is again, the lack of will.

I understand where you're coming from, and you're not wrong. At all. It's the same way that (especially in cartoons) a guy hitting a woman, even if she's a super hero and could easily destroy him makes him the ultimate monster. A woman hitting a man with a frying man is funny.

This is lits definition for the nc/r section

Fantasies of control

Thing is Mind control has tremendous potential. A lot could be done with this topic and some authors get some good spins on it.

But here mind control is all about the sex(It is an erotica site) and let's face it, by far the number one story line by far in Mind control is

"Guy finds a way to control a frigid raging bitch and he makes her do all kinds of nasty things, gang bangs, trains, humiliation etc....over and over again...that is a lot of what you get there.

And as for consent?

Look, I am not going to judge the kink, its not mine and I leave it at that, but here's fact.

Consent is the only rule in sex period. BDSM has safe sane consensual, but safe and sane vary on the person...my sane? Trust me is many people's crazy, but if I find someone with the same limits or lack of? Its cool

Consent is the only sex crime there is.

Incest? The most common cases are fathers/uncles diddling young boys and girls in the family. The charges? They are not charged with incest

Child abuse, molestation...statuary Rape these kids have been raped, why? Not old enough to give consent...its not that its incest its rape, the charge of incest never enters in, it doesn't have to they are being nailed for everything else.

Beastie? Beastie is a crime because....animals cannot give consent.

Mind control....if a spell, hypnotist or drug or "super power" is being used to make someone perfrom sexual acts they would not normally do....that is rape, there is no consent, like I said date rape...is a crime. If a girl is passed out just from being drunk and someone has sex with her, that is rape...even though she did not protest because she was under an influence.

Reluctance? Black mail, people who love this fantasy delude themselves that its not rape. It is.

If a woman is told if you don't fuck those five guys then I will reveal XYZ and ruin your life.

Those fans say" she could say no" could she? Sure...but....if she is not loving very minute of being with those five guys it is non consent if she is whimpering and scared and humiliated she is being raped.

Point? Own the goddamn kink. All these friggin people trying to make spins and angles and makes themselves feel better about their fantasies....guess what? You have rape fantasies....admit it, its all fiction, short of going out and doing it, its not a crime.

I like incest stories....do I think a guy diddling his daughter is hot? Of course not. I like 18+ consensual(that word again) incest fantasies taboo fun sex. I can own that kink.

People get off on the act, not the explanations

what do I mean? Example you read a story...guy's in his bed, mom comes in his room, takes her robe off, hops on, fucks him silly and....

he wakes up with hard on and his mom sleeping down the hall, he had a dream. He did not really have sex with his mother.

But...what did the reader get off to? The kid fucking his mom of course...none of it ever really happens its a damn story, but the kink was incest, what the second it was a dream it did not count?

Why I bring this up is for non con authors who follow lits (very weakly enforced rule) about it can't be real rape they have devices to get around it

woman is brutally gang raped, you read 4k of 5 guys just tearing her up...and then in the last couple of paragraphs you find out

it was her husband and some friends and it was her birthday present

IT was staged, a woman paid to have some professional sex workers abduct her and rape her(kink.com bound gang bang type set up)

She was dreaming, reading a book you find out they were actors shooting rape porn...anything for the author to say "see, no one was really raped here she enjoyed it...

Okay fine and from the author's POV? he knew from the first word there was no rape, they know they are writing a very rough sex scene that is ultimately consensual.

the reader? Tell me what they got off to? They got off to a woman being raped, period, no excuses. YOu weren't wanking going "Oh, oh, I bet its a hot dream, bet its her hubby!"

No, they are jerking off to "yeah show that bitch, fuck that cunt, hurt her make her scream

That is what they were getting off to pure and simple, bet many don't even read to the end of the authors "reveal"

Again is it a crime to like this stuff? No.

But the fact they lie to themselves is pathetic.

It is what it is and unlike incest(the other "crime" fetish here) the rape here is glorified and far more brutal than what a standard real life rape would be.

That category makes sexual trafficking sexy-BTW where is consent when a woman is drugged, abducted, woken up and gang raped repeatedly then sold into sexual slavery...can you find the consent for me there?

It glorifies sexual violence against women to a degree it makes the NFL look like feminists. Incest here is nothing like real life, rape here is more brutal

we all know that horrible story from India the girl gang raped and beaten to death on the bus(or raped to death basically)

horrific right? we all agree

write that story here and leave out the fact she dies and you have 4.6 and 20 "That's hot comments."

I'm rambling...my point is despite what people think, the non consent category itself is not really the target of any of my derision. For me its the hypocrisy of the site trying to claim they don't allow rape stories here(and the ones they do go back to my point of "see all women want to be raped) and the denial of its readership to admit what turns them on in a fictional story.

 

[Sean Renaud]

Oh, I know what your issue is which is why I generally just throw an affectionate jab at you and move on. And you've never known me to not own my shit. I actually find the beastie rule to be equally stupid. I slap a horn on a horse and it's fine because it's not a horse. Being capable of consenting is at best a loose interpretation. A unicorn doesn't consent anymore than a horse and while I would argue that horses are big powerful animals. Unless you're talking a small dog or cat if an animal wasn't "consenting" in so far as something of that inteligence is capable of such a think you'd know by not being able to pull it off without a lot of equipment. I've seen what happens to people who get kicked by horses. Or hell bitten by horses. And like you my issue ultimately comes down to not really being able to rationalize why if my dogs are green and called Wargs they are magically okay and nobody seems to be entirely clear on where Scooby Doo or Brian of Family Guy fall. And I like hard rules. Not necessarily hard to comply with mind you but I like being able to look at the rules, know what I can and can't get away with. Lit isn't the only site on the internet if I want to write a story about cannibal rapists there are plenty of sites that have no qualms about it.

 

[emap]

Bad doggie, get better medication.

Going to remind you both this website is run by two people. Some of the rules they have are to keep it running, some are there because they don't like letting whatever happen. That is mostly why the non con has the she has to like it rule, not because it's illegal to post a full on rape description online, it's there because one or both said not happening here.

Heck it's not even she has to like it, so long as a beat down rape is not the focus of the story or series it can be in a story here. There are limits on what you can show, but so long as it's not all about beating a woman down and having his way with her you can find it posted.

 

[Sean Renaud]

I know, and I respect their right to set whatever limits they want for whatever reasons they want. It's their house and they set the rules and ultimately if I don't like it I can pound sand.

That doesn't obligate me to like the rules however. Only to play by them in the house. Nor does it mean I can't think that the rules are (or seem from my point of view) to be somewhat or entirely arbitrary and annoying.

 

[emap]

The rules are arbitrary looking because they more or less are, keep in mind that every story is 'read' before being posted. I'm unclear on how exactly this is accomplished by one person, I read fast but yeah so not doing the hundreds a day thingy.

Which means that not all of them are quite registering right away, and then I doubt they are actually all read, skimmed likely is closer. So stories get through that should not even without the basic English standards we all learn in school and never remember.

Annoying is on your end, and I'm fairly sure you find everything annoying.

 

[Sean Renaud]

I don't find you annoying.