Avoiding "clinical" sex scenes

[Djmac1031]

A recent comment on my newest story has got me thinking.

While they claimed to have liked it, their main critique was that my descriptions were "dry and unimaginative," and that some of my sexual terminology "sacrificed heat and sensuality for clinical descriptions more befitting a biology class."

Now in my defense, it was a short story, not a huge amount of character development, and they didn't actually have sex, just masturbated together on a plane.

But instead of getting upset or insulted by their comments. I've decided it's something I can work on to improve. Especially in a new story I'm currently writing, one a lot longer with more build up before finally getting to an upcoming sex scene.

So my question for the group is: what do you consider "clinical" as opposed to "sensual," and how do you go about trying to avoid it?

I'm sure the most common answer will be to make sure to add some emotion and feelings to it. Which I feel I do for most of my stories. But always room for improvement, right?

 

[EmilyMiller]

It’s clinical if they are wearing white coats and have stethoscopes .

Em

 

[madelinemasoch]

I have mixed feelings about this, as certain terms which others may find "sensual" I find disturbing. An example of this is the word "slit." I just find it gross. Nevertheless, I would put it in the category of "sensual" as opposed to "clinical."

Less clinical/anatomical terms like vulva, clitoris, anus, penile gland, basically anything-gland... and more cock, dick, pussy, ass, special places. The heat between her thighs type of shit.

 

[Voboy]

I've grown much less "descriptive" about many of my fuckscenes as I've written more stuff. I don't think they were ever that bad, but it long ago got boring trying to explain every angle of every position. So now I tend to focus on the important bits and stick with those.

For instance: suppose the dude's railing the lady from behind. His hands are on her hips. I might choose to use that one area of contact (his hands) and describe what's happening with those. Sure, he's thrusting, and she's thrusting back, and they're sweaty, et cetera, but the focal point of that scene becomes his hands. His fingers. The marks his nails will make. The bruising, perhaps, if he's gripping too tightly. Those kinds of details, and the way they intensify, can lend a different sort of flavor to what's otherwise merely another doggystyle fuck on a website with seven million doggystyle fucks.

It helps me that I tend to write in FP, which make micro-perceptions of that sort understandable and meaningful. And there are categories in which nuts-and-bolts fuckscenes are not necessary; I take advantage of that, too.

 

[ElectricBlue]

I'm sure the most common answer will be to make sure to add some emotion and feelings to it. Which I feel I do for most of my stories. But always room for improvement, right?

This, obviously, but I try to weave in all the senses, add little grace note details. I generally find it often rains outside, for some reason, during my sex scenes; sounds from outside, that real world ambience. Put the characters within a place, not just their skin.

 

[Euphony]

So my question for the group is: what do you consider "clinical" as opposed to "sensual," and how do you go about trying to avoid it?

"Clinical" seemingly means a focus on anatomical terms, common phrasing, essentially the hallmarks of what is derided as "stroke" fiction.

To which I say

Fuck
Dat
Noise

I am the guiltiest mofo of using 10 words when 3 will clearly do but appreciate the reality that, sometimes, a story is clinical, benefits from or maybe would be lesser were it not.

Length is a typical indicator but tone is my definitive factor. If you felt your tone best fit more graphic, less "literary" word choice, so be it.

*If* you want to move away from that for tonal reasons, the touchstone that works for me is the why of the coupling. Flowery language isn't necessary but you need solid foundations as to why the sex is taking place and to tamp down any and all feelings of sex's "inevitability."

Give it some stakes. Test some character's resolve for it. Reasons is what people usually looking for as the distinguisher.

That said, you can just as easily beat the dead horse in the other direction.

Over wordy stories usually get much more of a pass (I believe) b/c they better mirror what many of us were exposed to as "literature worth studying" in our schooling.

An economy of words that keeps apace in a modest, singular experience descriptive short piece is way more fucking art than many seem willing to give it credit.

 

[Cagivagurl]

A recent comment on my newest story has got me thinking.

While they claimed to have liked it, their main critique was that my descriptions were "dry and unimaginative," and that some of my sexual terminology "sacrificed heat and sensuality for clinical descriptions more befitting a biology class."

Now in my defense, it was a short story, not a huge amount of character development, and they didn't actually have sex, just masturbated together on a plane.

But instead of getting upset or insulted by their comments. I've decided it's something I can work on to improve. Especially in a new story I'm currently writing, one a lot longer with more build up before finally getting to an upcoming sex scene.

So my question for the group is: what do you consider "clinical" as opposed to "sensual," and how do you go about trying to avoid it?

I'm sure the most common answer will be to make sure to add some emotion and feelings to it. Which I feel I do for most of my stories. But always room for improvement, right?

It's your story to tell...
Not every sex scene is full of tender loving emotion...
Sometimes, it's nothing more than a picture, it says what it says....
You will never please everybody...
Writing is like masturbation.... We do it to please ourselves.
If somebody's watching, that's on them....
You do what you do... If they don't like it. They know where the door is...
Cagivagurl

 

[EmilyMiller]

I think I’m often keen to focus on what the character is doing - that involves being precise about what they are doing it to. If that means use of frenulum, then so be it.

Em

 

[ronde]

A recent comment on my newest story has got me thinking.

While they claimed to have liked it, their main critique was that my descriptions were "dry and unimaginative," and that some of my sexual terminology "sacrificed heat and sensuality for clinical descriptions more befitting a biology class."

Now in my defense, it was a short story, not a huge amount of character development, and they didn't actually have sex, just masturbated together on a plane.

But instead of getting upset or insulted by their comments. I've decided it's something I can work on to improve. Especially in a new story I'm currently writing, one a lot longer with more build up before finally getting to an upcoming sex scene.

So my question for the group is: what do you consider "clinical" as opposed to "sensual," and how do you go about trying to avoid it?

I'm sure the most common answer will be to make sure to add some emotion and feelings to it. Which I feel I do for most of my stories. But always room for improvement, right?

Clinical to me is the usage of standard medical terminology such as penis, vagina, intercourse, etc. I don't think it really belongs in erotica except for two instances and those instances depend upon the characters involved in the story.

One is writing for those with a medical fetish because those people may find the medical terminology to be more erotic than a doctor or a nurse telling a woman she has a yeast infection in her pussy or telling a man his cock is dripping because he has the clap.

The other would be in a scene that's not medical per se, but involves a "professional" speaking to someone, maybe like a massage therapist, a chiropractor, or a trainer in a gym.

I suppose there are young adults who've never heard anything other than the medical terms, but I don't think writing them that way would be believable in today's social climate.

 

[EmilyMiller]

Clinical to me is the usage of standard medical terminology such as penis, vagina, intercourse, etc. I don't think it really belongs in erotica except for two instances and those instances depend upon the characters involved in the story.

One is writing for those with a medical fetish because those people may find the medical terminology to be more erotic than a doctor or a nurse telling a woman she has a yeast infection in her pussy or telling a man his cock is dripping because he has the clap.

The other would be in a scene that's not medical per se, but involves a "professional" speaking to someone, maybe like a massage therapist, a chiropractor, or a trainer in a gym.

I suppose there are young adults who've never heard anything other than the medical terms, but I don't think writing them that way would be believable in today's social climate.

I’d rather write vaginal opening than any of slit, gash or snatch. I’m not fond of dick [the word ] so it’s normally cock. I’ve had people complain about me using glans [though not IRL].

TBH - it’s not these words, it’s the words you use round them.

Em

 

[gunhilltrain]

A recent comment on my newest story has got me thinking.

While they claimed to have liked it, their main critique was that my descriptions were "dry and unimaginative," and that some of my sexual terminology "sacrificed heat and sensuality for clinical descriptions more befitting a biology class."

Now in my defense, it was a short story, not a huge amount of character development, and they didn't actually have sex, just masturbated together on a plane.

But instead of getting upset or insulted by their comments. I've decided it's something I can work on to improve. Especially in a new story I'm currently writing, one a lot longer with more build up before finally getting to an upcoming sex scene.

So my question for the group is: what do you consider "clinical" as opposed to "sensual," and how do you go about trying to avoid it?

I'm sure the most common answer will be to make sure to add some emotion and feelings to it. Which I feel I do for most of my stories. But always room for improvement, right?

I know what you mean. In the story I'm writing now, I'm trying to deal with it through a lot of dialogue. It helps that the two main characters have appeared twice before, so I have some idea of how they think.

 

[burgwad]

"Clinical" by way of complaint connotes to me a sex scene whose: (a) overall depiction is rendered in calm, serious, risk-averse prose; (b) narrator is emotionally detached from the action; or (c) participants are too professional, precise, or laser-focused. I guess in all three instances, the issue is emotional detachment.

Emotions are surprising, embarrassing, often cheesy things. Seriously incorporating them into your work means risking sounding like a complete buffoon if you don't stick the landing.

But if you're getting feedback that your work is "too clinical," then it sounds to me like the issue isn't a failure to stick the landing so much as a failure to risk the leap at all. Maybe you feel confident as a writer because you avoid the necessary risks involved in writing emotionally? Or here, forget I said that, and instead ask yourself these similarly condescending but more pointed questions:

1. Can you write sex in a way that feels unhinged to you?
2. Does your narration regularly take note of interesting things different emotions make characters do?
3. Are you comfortable letting your participants fuck talkatively?

 

[Carnevil9]

I think this is a very common problem that all erotica writers have to deal with. Our instinct is to be journalists, but we are better off being poets.

My own way of dealing with it is to focus on what the character is feeling, rather than what they are seeing or doing or having done to them. This involves lots of cheesy similes and metaphors, but that's fine. Readers don't need to know actual factual details. They want to know what the characters are feeling deep down inside. The actual flesh and fluids can be included as an afterthought, but the focus should be on their emotional responses to the sexual activities.

"As Trixie deftly manipulated his cock and balls, Chad felt wave after wave of orgasmic pleasure wash over his being, inflame his soul, and stoke his libido until his every cell cried out in ecstasy, as he launched rope after rope of jizm against the far wall of the room."

 

[Fatdog25]

Having read the story, I didn't have an issue with the terminology. To me, it seemed consistent with the character as you wrote him. I enjoyed it, EV isn't a primary category for me, but it feels like it might grow on me .

 

[LoneMilf]

I also had a quick read of the story. I don't think the issue is being too clinical (the vocabulary isn't), but it didn't seem particularly exciting to me. I suspect this is because the descriptions focus a lot on what the actions are and what they look like, but not what they feel like.

Let me give an example (this is from the story):
"Her hand was soft, warm, as she glided along it with a light, feathery touch. A fingertip found the head, smearing around the drop of precum that oozed from it."

It's a first person story, but it doesn't mention anything about how that touch felt..

 

[Emilymcplugger]

It’s clinical if they are wearing white coats and have stethoscopes .

Em

Oh crap! That shits on my Sci-Fi story (The Process) then.

 

[BobbyLaker]

I’d rather write vaginal opening than any of slit, gash or snatch. I’m not fond of dick [the word ] so it’s normally cock. I’ve had people complain about me using glans [though not IRL].

TBH - it’s not these words, it’s the words you use round them.

Em

Those glans-phobes huh? Far better IMHO than 'bell-end'

In one of my recent stories on here [can't remember which - too early - need more coffee] I scatter 'glans' like confetti.

 

[BobbyLaker]

"As Trixie deftly manipulated his cock and balls, Chad felt wave after wave of orgasmic pleasure wash over his being, inflame his soul, and stoke his libido until his every cell cried out in ecstasy, as he launched rope after rope of jizm against the far wall of the room."

Is that a quote from "Cum on my Glasses"?

 

[Djmac1031]

Wanna thank everyone for the feedback so far.

It's not that I feel ALL my sex scenes are "clinical."

It's certainly the first time I've received that particular critique.

I write all kinds of stories; some deeper and more complicated, others simple little tales.

The story in question was absolutely a short, simple story about two people who meet and masturbate together while on a long flight.

They don't fall in love, and they don't go all the way.

It was also 1st person, male POV.

So yeah I'll fully admit, not a lot of "passion" to the piece. More "Holy shit I can't believe we're doing this."

It's not that I don't think I CAN write a more passionate, sensual story.

I can and, I believe anyway, I have.

Still, I always feel there's room for improvement in my writing.

I'm working on a new story. The major sex scene in question will feature two women; one, experienced, outgoing and aggressive, the other shy, inexperienced, nervous, riddled with guilt and fear due to her religious upbringing but deep down WANTS to explore her sexuality.

I wanna handle it tastefully, of course. But I also want it to be erotic, sensual. Loving even. Not just a "wham bam" progression from A to Z.

I wanna capture the EMOTIONS involved.

I believe I'm up for the challenge; again I think I have managed this before.

The "clinical" comment didn't hurt my feelings, or make me doubt my abilities, so much as simply get me thinking on ways to step up my game a bit.

 

[lovecraft68]

Couple of points to defend a clinical sex scene which I would refer to as 'same old same old'

One, there are only so many positions, descriptions and verbiage to explain how the tab goes into the slot and any other sex act. I would suggest to the reader that they write 50 sex scenes and come back to me again with the complaint.

The other point is language. Again, only so many words, and speaking for myself and some comments on my work and discussions with others, its a huge eyeroll for me when the language gets too flowery and tries too hard to be different. There's a case to be made for using familiar words that don't make someone go "Huh?" in the middle of a scene.

The way to fix this for me is adding some dialogue in the sex, but more importantly, making the story deep enough that the sex is built up through that and when the reader is invested in the characters getting together the sex is all the hotter just for that reason, so I guess there's ways to toss perfume on the pig.

I'm not suggesting copy and paste scenes and not making an effort to try to work in some new expressions in the narrative or among the characters, but an erotic story is a full experience, its not just the down and dirty. Unless you're writing stroke and they really don't care.

 

[SimonDoom]

The first thing is for you to evaluate the truth of the criticism. Just because one reader said it doesn't make it so.

If you decide you want to change things, you might pick a few stories by authors you like, and see how they do it by comparison. My guess is it won't be as different from the way you do it as the reader's comment suggests, but maybe you'll learn something.

In changing things, rather than focus too much on terminology, I'd suggest focusing more on:

1. What the character is feeling and thinking;
2. The dramatic context of the sex and how it furthers the story
3. The dialogue between the characters
4. Bringing all the senses into play

One thing I've learned is you can't please everybody with terms. Think about the terms for "vulva" or "vagina': pussy, cunt, sex, vagina, etc. There are readers who will criticize any one of these choices you make. The important thing is for your story to have a tone and to be consistent with that tone.

 

[Djmac1031]

The first thing is for you to evaluate the truth of the criticism. Just because one reader said it doesn't make it so.

Agreed. And again, I think I can and have written "sensual" stories. And the story in question was really meant to be exactly what it is: a short, kinky little tale.

If you decide you want to change things, you might pick a few stories by authors you like, and see how they do it by comparison. My guess is it won't be as different from the way you do it as the reader's comment suggests, but maybe you'll learn something.

Already started doing so. Although I always look at every story from that perspective; what can I learn from it, good or bad?

In changing things, rather than focus too much on terminology, I'd suggest focusing more on:

1. What the character is feeling and thinking;
2. The dramatic context of the sex and how it furthers the story
3. The dialogue between the characters
4. Bringing all the senses into play

Definitely things I wanna focus on in the one I'm currently writing.

One thing I've learned is you can't please everybody with terms. Think about the terms for "vulva" or "vagina': pussy, cunt, sex, vagina, etc. There are readers who will criticize any one of these choices you make.

Oh for sure. That doesn't bother me. I use the words I like and feel comfortable with and what I think fits best. After that, well...

 

[Candy_Kane54]

It’s clinical if they are wearing white coats and have stethoscopes .

Em

Actually, I find that very sensual ...

 

[EmilyMiller]

Actually, I find that very sensual ...

I used to have a white coat, but a micropipette rather than a stethoscope .

Em

 

[MrPixel]

It’s clinical if they are wearing white coats and have stethoscopes .

Trying my damnedest to figure out a way to work lab smocks into one of my stories. Ah. I think got it. Mmmmm... maybe.