How "dark" is an erotic story allowed to be for fun?

[WeShallUnclench]

There are, of course, submission rules on sites like Literotica.

But I kinda want to launch this as a broader, more philosophical question:

How "free" do you guys feel a writer is, within the submission rules, in what they are depicting, and how?

Are you of the opinion, as long as there are proper tags and trigger warnings, it's just a matter of personal interests?

Or do you ever have a feeling along the lines of "that is technically allowed, but it's harmful that this person is writing something like that?"

Do you ever feel authors have a responsibility to talk about problematic subjects respectfully and in a way that won't be misleading for impressionable people in their audience?

To name an extreme example, in noncon scenarios, does the author have an obligation to educate their readers about how consent is a very serious issue, and aim for realistic representation of power imbalance situations?

For a sillier example, consider a story about someone masturbating to the danger of climate change because it's so hot.

In short, do authors have to make sure their stories aren't "culturally harmful", and indeed every story no matter how big or small, whether it has 3 readers or 3 million, should make sure they don' steer society in the "wrong" direction?

 

[StillStunned]

In short, do authors have to make sure their stories aren't "culturally harmful", and indeed every story no matter how big or small, whether it has 3 readers or 3 million, should make sure they don' steer society in the "wrong" direction?

To be blunt, anyone who's going to be influenced by reading an erotic story into unacceptable practices is just as likely to be influenced by something they see on the telly, or a song they hear, or - more likely - the actions and morals of the people around them.

Also, as long as they're reading my stories and playing with themselves, they're not up to other mischief. Just doing my bit to make the world a little safer.

 

[mrs_mackenzie]

If the subject matter of the story is something I don't want to read, I don't read it. Otherwise I don't judge: the site had submission rules that presumably catch anything that isn't allowed.

There's all sorts of awful, traumatic, violent and graphic content on TV so I don't think fiction writing is really going to change much.

 

[ElectricBlue]

Do you ever feel authors have a responsibility to talk about problematic subjects respectfully and in a way that won't be misleading for impressionable people in their audience?

I personally think so - my view is that words have power, so at least think about how you use them. That doesn't imply you need to Nanny-state readers, but equally, I don't buy the notion that it's all only fantasy, and readers know that, so it's okay to indulge yourself with gratuitous content which can, at times, be dodgy as fuck. Some readers are struggling with mental health issues, so it doesn't hurt to be kind.

I've got a notion of "socially responsible erotica", which some folk mock, but when someone says, "Your stories give me a safe haven, where I can escape my shitty world for a while and enjoy my arousal from your stories," that's an affirmation. But then, I don't write extreme content, so the "might be bad words" don't arise.

 

[Bazzle]

There are, of course, submission rules on sites like Literotica.

But I kinda want to launch this as a broader, more philosophical question:

How "free" do you guys feel a writer is, within the submission rules, in what they are depicting, and how?

Are you of the opinion, as long as there are proper tags and trigger warnings, it's just a matter of personal interests?

Or do you ever have a feeling along the lines of "that is technically allowed, but it's harmful that this person is writing something like that?"

Do you ever feel authors have a responsibility to talk about problematic subjects respectfully and in a way that won't be misleading for impressionable people in their audience?

To name an extreme example, in noncon scenarios, does the author have an obligation to educate their readers about how consent is a very serious issue, and aim for realistic representation of power imbalance situations?

For a sillier example, consider a story about someone masturbating to the danger of climate change because it's so hot.

In short, do authors have to make sure their stories aren't "culturally harmful", and indeed every story no matter how big or small, whether it has 3 readers or 3 million, should make sure they don' steer society in the "wrong" direction?

Socially most of my stories are harmful. They are about addiction. I have written several "darkside" stories about death. Because I got asked to. Plus there is some interest.

I dont condone anything my characters do!

B

 

[Cagivagurl]

There are, of course, submission rules on sites like Literotica.

But I kinda want to launch this as a broader, more philosophical question:

How "free" do you guys feel a writer is, within the submission rules, in what they are depicting, and how?

Are you of the opinion, as long as there are proper tags and trigger warnings, it's just a matter of personal interests?

Or do you ever have a feeling along the lines of "that is technically allowed, but it's harmful that this person is writing something like that?"

Do you ever feel authors have a responsibility to talk about problematic subjects respectfully and in a way that won't be misleading for impressionable people in their audience?

To name an extreme example, in noncon scenarios, does the author have an obligation to educate their readers about how consent is a very serious issue, and aim for realistic representation of power imbalance situations?

For a sillier example, consider a story about someone masturbating to the danger of climate change because it's so hot.

In short, do authors have to make sure their stories aren't "culturally harmful", and indeed every story no matter how big or small, whether it has 3 readers or 3 million, should make sure they don' steer society in the "wrong" direction?

IMO... Remember I speak only for myself....
We belong to one huge family on this planet. The human race is one species. I think anybody creating something.
Whether it's visual, audio or written. Creators are bound not only by legal boundaries but by moral boundaries.
Once something is created it becomes part of a planet wide media mash up.
In written words, it is visible to anybody clever enough to open and read it...
For healthy intelligent well educated people that isn't a problem. We can read, ignore, delete. We have the power to rationalise.

Others who read may not have to same mental capacities. Perhaps they live on the edges of humanity, and are heavily influenced by what they read...
I believe, and yes I still speak only for myself. Writers have an obligation to stay within morally acceptable boundaries...
We do have to consider those who may not be able to separate fact from fiction...

Do I feel that what is written might influence somebody, and they might see that as a green light to do exactly that.... Yes, I believe it's possible.

Cagivagurl

 

[StillStunned]

We had this same discussion a few months ago, and someone - maybe me, maybe someone else - pointed out that if writers had such an influence on people surely we'd all be rich and famous by now?

 

[SimonDoom]

How "free" do you guys feel a writer is, within the submission rules, in what they are depicting, and how?

Are you of the opinion, as long as there are proper tags and trigger warnings, it's just a matter of personal interests?

Entirely free. Yes, I think it's just a matter of personal interests. There are some subjects I find distasteful that I wouldn't write about, but I would see my choice as just a matter of personal taste, not moral obligation.

My view is that the Site already bans the three subject areas that are most problematic: violence against children, snuff and torture, and real rape as a subject of erotic enjoyment. I'm not especially concerned about any other subject matters in terms of possible harmful influence on people's behavior in the real world.

Or do you ever have a feeling along the lines of "that is technically allowed, but it's harmful that this person is writing something like that?"

I do ask this question every once in a while, and I've done some reading on the subject, and I simply do not believe there is sufficient evidence to know whether anything we write here might be "harmful," whatever that means. I see no reason to believe that it would be.

Do you ever feel authors have a responsibility to talk about problematic subjects respectfully and in a way that won't be misleading for impressionable people in their audience?

To name an extreme example, in noncon scenarios, does the author have an obligation to educate their readers about how consent is a very serious issue, and aim for realistic representation of power imbalance situations?

No, not at all. This standard is far, far too constraining on art and literature. If one took this standard one must have condemned Jonathan Swift for writing "A Modest Proposal," a short satiric essay that proposed eating babies was an appropriate solution to the problem of overpopulation and poverty. I'm not aware that there was an uptick in baby consumption after the publication of the essay.

I believe this 100%: As an author you are under no obligation whatsoever to ensure that your fictional world is "realistic" in the sense of presenting a problem similarly to the way it exists in the real world. You have the license to suspend the rules of the real world entirely. That said, you might make your story more artistically satisfying if you strive for some element of plausibility in the way your characters behave, or in not going overboard in suspending the laws of science. But this is an artistic choice, not a moral one.

For a sillier example, consider a story about someone masturbating to the danger of climate change because it's so hot.

You answered the question by conceding it's a silly example. What possible "harm" might result from the publication of such a story? A reader deciding climate change is OK after all because it's erotically stimulating? This is the kind of thinking that is so unhinged from reality it's not worth indulging in at all.

In short, do authors have to make sure their stories aren't "culturally harmful", and indeed every story no matter how big or small, whether it has 3 readers or 3 million, should make sure they don' steer society in the "wrong" direction?

Nope, not at all. I don't even know what "culturally harmful" means.

I concede the possibility that a particular work of fiction may have unintended influences on people. Stranger things have happened. John Hinkley shot Reagan because he was influenced by seeing the movie Taxi Driver. Obviously, though, people aren't going to stop making movies that feature assassination attempts, and they haven't done so. It seems silly that we should expect a more stringent standard of "responsibility" in this forum than network television observes. Our stories are fantasy stories offered through a particular medium that makes predictions about "cultural harm" completely speculative. So I'm weighing the pleasure I get from writing my stories and the pleasure my readers get from reading them on the one side against sheer speculative harm on the other, and the weighing seems clear to me in favor of writing and publishing the stories without guilt.

 

[Plathfan]

There are many psychos out there that you can't tame or control. The inability to distinguish between fiction and reality is a hallmark of the insane, and without medication, they may pose a danger to themselves and others.

Millions of ISIS supporters didn’t develop their views from watching Schwarzenegger or Stallone movies—they absorbed cruelty with their mother's milk, growing up in a culture that glorifies death and bloodshed.

You can't be held responsible for what you can’t control. If someone acts inappropriately after reading your story, it’s not your fault—they were already predisposed to it. These people are ticking time bombs, and you shouldn’t curb your creativity just because a few loonies are lurking.

 

[M_K_Babalon]

There are, of course, submission rules on sites like Literotica.

But I kinda want to launch this as a broader, more philosophical question:

How "free" do you guys feel a writer is, within the submission rules, in what they are depicting, and how?

Are you of the opinion, as long as there are proper tags and trigger warnings, it's just a matter of personal interests?

Or do you ever have a feeling along the lines of "that is technically allowed, but it's harmful that this person is writing something like that?"

Do you ever feel authors have a responsibility to talk about problematic subjects respectfully and in a way that won't be misleading for impressionable people in their audience?

To name an extreme example, in noncon scenarios, does the author have an obligation to educate their readers about how consent is a very serious issue, and aim for realistic representation of power imbalance situations?

For a sillier example, consider a story about someone masturbating to the danger of climate change because it's so hot.

In short, do authors have to make sure their stories aren't "culturally harmful", and indeed every story no matter how big or small, whether it has 3 readers or 3 million, should make sure they don' steer society in the "wrong" direction?

Damn near free. Sometimes stuff against the rules may slide by.

I think things should be properly tagged. I don't believe in trigger warnings, any tag I have taken that way is purely coincidential.

Nope.

Nope. Grown folks should know better by now.

No, I'm trying to get my readers off, not be a boner killer.

That's lame and corny, dawg.

I don't care who chose to be offended by what. Trying not too offend somebody is like looking for hen's teeth. It's not my fault if somebody gets offended by something I write. Be mad at yourself for reading it.

 

[Voboy]

How dark is an erotic story allowed to be for fun?

As dark as the writer and the readers want it to be. Fortunately, there's a spectrum of stories out there and the freedom to choose which ones you want to expose yourself to.

I'm not sure I've ever heard of a writer deliberately mis-tagging a dark story with flowers-and-unicorns tags just to fuck with people, and if that happened, I'd expect the story to be reported.

 

[TheLobster]

 

[SimonDoom]

View attachment 2381417

To be fair to the OP, the OP is asking questions rather than advocating a particular position. The questions are fair to ask.

 

[Lifestyle66]

You're as free as you want to be on this site to publish darker stories. They just have their rules which can be worked around to create dark stories.

I did that with two stories I refer to as my "Aftermath..." stories, in which the wife was raped (off story) and it's about the repercussions to her marriage. I wrote "What I Wrote and Why: Aftermath" in Reviews and Essays to explain how I intended the story as a caricature to try influencing the Loving Wives crowd into thinking about their burn-the-bitch fetish.

So, not all stories here have to be strokers or romance. Many of the Loving Wives BTB stories are even far less than erotic and more into violence than many readers like.

It's always a matter of personal interest and what the author wants to write, as long as it's within the site rules.

Stories, books, video games, and movies don't create monsters. The monsters have always been there, around us every day. It's always just a matter of time before a few of them step out into the open and are seen for who they are. It just seems we're seeing more of them today, but that's only due to there being a much larger pool of humans from which to rise.

 

[Kelliezgirl]

In short, do authors have to make sure their stories aren't "culturally harmful", and indeed every story no matter how big or small, whether it has 3 readers or 3 million, should make sure they don' steer society in the "wrong" direction?

Who decides what is "culturally harmful"?

Who decides what is the "wrong direction"?

One could build a solid case that porn is culturally harmful. Ergo should we shut the site down and all go do something else?

 

[WeShallUnclench]

We had this same discussion a few months ago, and someone - maybe me, maybe someone else - pointed out that if writers had such an influence on people surely we'd all be rich and famous by now?

I don't feel many people actually believe in "monkey see, monkey do" to such an extend. Rather, two things:

One, as someone above pointed out, there are vulnerable people. Say, you got a 1000 readers. Is the probability that 1 of them takes away the wrong idea from your story, and is changed for the worse, really that far-fetched?

Two, it adds up. One rando writing noncon doesn't influence anyone maybe, but what about 1000 randos or more? Basically the only way you can be sure you have no negative influence then is if you are confident you are part of a rare species rather than contribuing to a trend.

At least that is the influence argument.

 

[AG31]

I don't think of myself as an author. I think of myself as a recorder of my fantasies. As such, I really have no choice about the content. My stories are all dark, but so far they've all been accepted. I haven't even read the rules. I do know there's a rule about the age of characters. Fortunately all mine are grown up.

 

[SimonDoom]

Basically the only way you can be sure you have no negative influence then is if you are confident you are part of a rare species rather than contribuing to a trend.

At least that is the influence argument.

Nobody, ever, can be sure they are not having a negative influence. You could write and publish a happy Christmas story and somebody who's had horrible Christmas experiences might get triggered and shoot up a post office.

You don't know. Not only that, in the context of this place, you HAVE NO IDEA. None. Zero.

So this is not a standard that a moral person can follow.

Let's say we accept the premise "Authors should be mindful of the possible consequences of their stories" as a serious moral principle. Where does it get us? Without information, it gets us nowhere.

Let's say I have an adult consensual incest story with one million views. Let's say at least one tenth of them actually read the whole thing the whole way through. That's a hundred thousand readers.

Maybe--MAYBE--some tiny, but impossible to calculate, fraction of those people were negatively influenced by my story. They read my adult consensual incest story, got the idea in their head that incest is OK, and abused their own child. Is that realistic to assume? It doesn't sound that realistic to me, but I don't know, you don't know, and none of us knows.

I also don't know whether some people, perhaps a larger number, were positively influenced by my story. Maybe they had an incestuous experience that causes them guilt and my story makes them feel better, or gives them a feeling of catharsis. Maybe my story serves as a kind of steam valve and dissipates the desire to act badly in real life. This seems equally plausible to me, but I don't know, and neither does anyone else.

What I DO know is that I get enjoyment from writing my stories and people get enjoyment from reading them. I know because they tell me.

Plus, I believe, based on a lifetime of reading and observing, that there is value in transgressive, shocking, offensive art, art that strays from moral rules, that doesn't try to adhere to narrow concepts of being "responsible." I think such art makes us a richer, more interesting, more mature civilization. There's value in that, too.

So I conclude that the premise--"I should be mindful of the possible impact of my stories on the world"--doesn't get me anywhere. It provides me nothing useful to decide whether I should or should not publish an erotic story here that has transgressive content.

 

[Lifestyle66]

... Ergo should we shut the site down and all go do something else?

Yes. Shutdown the site ... and with the extra time on our hands, we'll all be forced to go off and find someone for real sex in real life.

 

[Kelliezgirl]

Yes. Shutdown the site ... and with the extra time on our hands, we'll all be forced to go off and find someone for real sex in real life.

Well, when you put it that way, it doesn't seem so bad...

 

[SimonDoom]

Yes. Shutdown the site ... and with the extra time on our hands, we'll all be forced to go off and find someone for real sex in real life.

But do we want the authors of Literotica, randy and unsatisfied, loosed on the world? Maybe the world would be better off if we just stayed in our rooms and kept writing.

This is my point: we just don't know.

 

[Plathfan]

Plus, I believe, based on a lifetime of reading and observing, that there is value in transgressive, shocking, offensive art, art that strays from moral rules, that doesn't try to adhere to narrow concepts of being "responsible." I think such art makes us a richer, more interesting, more mature civilization. There's value in that, too.

Ode to Perversion.

 

[Lifestyle66]

But do we want the authors of Literotica, randy and unsatisfied, loosed on the world? Maybe the world would be better off if we just stayed in our rooms and kept writing.

This is my point: we just don't know.

Just stay in my room, randy, and unsatisfied?

You haven't met the muse for my character "Jan"! Try reading "The Loving Wife - 750 Words".

 

[MillieDynamite]

I've written several stories about serial rapists and or serial killers. I wouldn't think about publishing them here. Maybe a serial killer where you don't go into great detail about the kills or the thrill he has, but then what's the point? Nearly all serial killers have some sexual element in their kills. How do you show that kind of thing here? The only way to do it for sale is to make damn sure it doesn't have any erotic elements, so you don't have to tag it as erotica.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

Nobody, ever, can be sure they are not having a negative influence. You could write and publish a happy Christmas story and somebody who's had horrible Christmas experiences might get triggered and shoot up a post office.

Agree. Everything is a Rorschach test. One cannot control how another interprets their work. Give two people an inkblot, one sees fluffy clouds and sunshine, the other sees dismembered body parts and blood. Art is no different.

I use this example often. All over the English speaking world we know the poem In Flanders Fields. We hear it every November. We see it as a metaphor for the senseless waste of human life that is war and use it as a desperate cry for peace. However, few know that the poet was John MacRae, a Canadian officer during WWI. He was a belligerent racist (quoted in the newspaper calling out the French as cowards) and he wrote the poem with the intention of glorifying the dead to inspire young men to enlist and be willing to die for the king of England. He could not have been more pro-war. The world had other ideas though. He could not control our reaction and could not control the interpretation of his work. Bottom line: an artist cannot be held responsible for the reactions to his work, as he may be able to influence his audience but ultimately has zero control over them.