Making a case for the use of the term "pure erotica."

[AG31]

Edit 11/22/23: Thanks to several contributers here, I see that "simple" is better than "pure." So obvious!! How could I have wrestled with this for so long??? Anyway, I'm now making a case for "simple erotica."
*****************

Erotica can be thought of as having two types. There's stroke erotica and what, for want of a better term, one thread calls non-stroke erotica, stories that pay significant attention to plot and/or character. You can peruse that thread and others here in the forum to see that many writers regard stroke erotica as being of lesser worth. One thread asks us to fess up to writing it.

I don't think it is of lesser worth as a type of erotica. I think both can be done well or poorly. But "stroke" is irretrievably burdened, for many, with connotations of slap dash writing and juvenile naughtiness.

I would like to propose "pure erotica" as a replacement for "stroke erotica." Anyway, that's the term I'm going to use. It would aply to stories focussed entirely on arousal, without connotations of disrespect for the type.

Do yu agree with the idea? Do you agree enough to use the term when discussions warrant it?

Here is a list of stories I call pure erotica that, I think, are also examples of high quality writing. These authors needn't "fess up." They should be proud.

Unless otherwise noted, they are all BDSM, because that's what I read. But the principle can apply to any cateogry. I'm listing them in the order in which I encountered them over the last few years, when I've been reading online erotica. I'm using this order just because it's a fun exercise for me.

If you know of any other stories that are similar to the ones below, please let me know!

Twelve Maxbridge Street
Note: The last section is not an example of pure erotica.
Barn Dance @visioneer
Vignette 1, Vignette 2 @vkseverin
The Ring - Chap 1-6 @konstant
The Pleasure of Being Spanked @Milarepa
Enslaving Eli Billierosie
Note: This isn't on Literotica, but it's such an outstanding example of what I'm talking about, together with being a novella, that I had to include it.
Stairway to Heaven Not BDSM
Naked for Me @_vision_
Licorice Centered Milk Chocolate @KeithD Not BDSM
Adam Meets Madelyn @electricblue66 Not BDSM
Jesse and Adam @electricblue66, @JasonClearwater Not BDSM
Note: EB tossed a small monkey wrench into my neat definition of "pure erotica", i.e., "stories that attend to arousal without paying much attention to plot or character." Because his notion of eroticism is inextricably tied up with intimacy, it's hard not to end up depicting vivid characters. After standing on my head, coming up with definitions that would accomodate his stories, I'm just leaving him as the exception that proves the rule.
Emerson Learns a Lesson @RainyDayPen

@Rob_Royale, @djrip, @SimonDoom, @Comshaw

 

[AchtungNight]

I don’t think I’ve ever written a pure stroke story without considering plot in any context. But I guess my Star Trek and Isla Fisher stories come pretty close. The Sisters Next Door as well.

 

[AG31]

I don’t think I’ve ever written a pure stroke story without considering plot in any context. But I guess my Star Trek and Isla Fisher stories come pretty close. The Sisters Next Door as well.

Yeah, but what do you think of using the term "pure erotica" instead of "stroke story???" I'm taking note of your three references. If they're not too long I'll read and comment.

 

[AchtungNight]

Yeah, but what do you think of using the term "pure erotica" instead of "stroke story???" I'm taking note of your three references. If they're not too long I'll read and comment.

They’re my shortest works here. Thx in advance.

As for your term, well, people are always going to insult the things they wish to shame. Call security officers their proper names, rent-a-cops, or cop wannabes, they’re still the same thing. You gotta accept different words and not just what sounds nice.

Personally I’m a fan of plot buildup over lack thereof. But my memory is good enough that I skip over it when rereading for a quick stroke fix.

 

[alohadave]

Yeah, but what do you think of using the term "pure erotica" instead of "stroke story???" I'm taking note of your three references. If they're not too long I'll read and comment.

It's a distinction without a difference. Changing the name doesn't change the nature of the stories and what they are used for.

It's another step on the euphemism treadmill.

 

[AG31]

It's a distinction without a difference. Changing the name doesn't change the nature of the stories and what they are used for.

It's another step on the euphemism treadmill.

Well, as I tried to explain in the OP, one carries negative connotations and the other doesn't. My purpose is to separate stories that are only about arousal from the idea that they are bad and to call them otherwise is a euphemism.

 

[Bramblethorn]

Erotica can be thought of as having two types. There's stroke erotica and what, for want of a better term, one thread calls non-stroke erotica, stories that pay significant attention to plot and/or character. You can peruse that thread and others here in the forum to see that many writers regard stroke erotica as being of lesser worth. One thread asks us to fess up to writing it.

I don't think it is of lesser worth as a type of erotica. I think both can be done well or poorly. But "stroke" is irretrievably burdened, for many, with connotations of slap dash writing and juvenile naughtiness.

I would like to propose "pure erotica" as a replacement for "stroke erotica." Anyway, that's the term I'm going to use. It would aply to stories focussed entirely on arousal, without connotations of disrespect for the type.

Do yu agree with the idea? Do you agree enough to use the term when discussions warrant it?

I'm not convinced by the premise that "stroke" stories are more "pure" erotica than that where plot/character plays a significant role. For me, plot/character are a significant part of the erotic interest.

An alternative to "stroke" that I often hear elsewhere is "PWP", which can be taken as either "Porn Without Plot" or "Plot? What Plot?"

 

[Bramblethorn]

Well, as I tried to explain in the OP, one carries negative connotations and the other doesn't.

Yet.

Is there a reason to think people who attach negative connotations to "stroke" wouldn't attach those same connotations to stroke-by-another-name?

 

[Comshaw]

Well, as I tried to explain in the OP, one carries negative connotations and the other doesn't. My purpose is to separate stories that are only about arousal from the idea that they are bad and to call them otherwise is a euphemism.

It's all in the interpretation. A rose by any other name still smells as sweet and has as many thorns. A thing is what it is no matter the tag put on it.

Comshaw

 

[AG31]

It's all in the interpretation. A rose by any other name still smells as sweet and has as many thorns. A thing is what it is no matter the tag put on it.

Comshaw

Some names have bad connotations ("stroke") and some names don't ("pure"). That does make a difference. I want a term that doesn't commit me to implying something that is not worth as much as something else.

 

[AG31]

Yet.

Is there a reason to think people who attach negative connotations to "stroke" wouldn't attach those same connotations to stroke-by-another-name?

Well, it allows me to talk about the type of erotica without subscribing to the idea that it is less worthy than the other type.

 

[AchtungNight]

You called my story “Sisters Next Door” an example of “insert tab a into slot b”. I don’t mean to disrespect you, but that is what many of us mean by stroke stories or “pwp”. It seems even you would dis these stories a bit. At least you get the concept, I’ll give you that.

And my point is call Military Intelligence a compliment or an oxymoron, it’s still the same thing. Beauty in the eye of the Beholder, often one of the most depraved creatures in a fantasy realm.

 

[ElectricBlue]

Note: EB tossed a small monkey wrench into my neat definition of "pure erotica", i.e., "stories that attend to arousal without paying much attention to plot or character." Because his notion of eroticism is inextricably tied up with intimacy, it's hard not to end up depicting vivid characters. After standing on my head, coming up with definitions that would accomodate his stories, I'm just leaving him as the exception that proves the rule.

Just doing my job .

In my mind, this is yet another spin on the "erotica" versus "pornography" debate, "stroke" (whatever that is - I've not seen a consistent definition, and @SimonDoom in another thread spotted three) versus "character driven story telling" (or whatever it is that non-stroke is).

I don't know that badges serve any real purpose. They look pretty on a shirt lapel, sure, and let other people know what your allegiances are, but ultimately, it's what's in the body of a story that matters. If you read enough of a writer's stories, you end up with a pretty good idea of their world view, and if they label it, that's fine. It might be a fine wine or a cheap beer, but you don't really need a label to know which is which.

And it pleases me that I can't be put in a neat little box. Who wants to be like all the rest?

 

[Bramblethorn]

Well, it allows me to talk about the type of erotica without subscribing to the idea that it is less worthy than the other type.

AFAICT, people who consider "stroke" stories inferior mostly feel that way because they believe stories without much plot/character are inferior to those with those things. Unless you can change that attitude, those people are going to keep on considering those stories inferior under any name, and in a few years' time we'll be looking for a new term to avoid the negative connotations of "pure erotica". This is the euphemism treadmill that @alohadave was referring to: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euphemism#Lifespan

 

[M_K_Babalon]

I don’t think I’ve ever written a pure stroke story without considering plot in any context. But I guess my Star Trek and Isla Fisher stories come pretty close. The Sisters Next Door as well.

My... well the other me's current incest story is probably borderline between stroke and nonstroke. Almost every single chapter has sex in it. Stroke with a plot.

 

[M_K_Babalon]

Well, it allows me to talk about the type of erotica without subscribing to the idea that it is less worthy than the other type.

It's not less worthy. The connotslations are more about how they're written and by who, like when they're simply no different than pornos where the plot is just an excuse to fuck. There's people that like that, too, and don't care. It's like the stigma that fan fiction is garbage- not all of it is. I just don't see pure erotica catching on, people are gonna know what it is and most people consider all of this stuff to be smut regardless-- which is probably a more profane term, than stroke story.

Much like when worked at Steak N Shake and called myself a grill technician; it won't fool nobody.

 

[AG31]

AFAICT, people who consider "stroke" stories inferior mostly feel that way because they believe stories without much plot/character are inferior to those with those things. Unless you can change that attitude, those people are going to keep on considering those stories inferior under any name, and in a few years' time we'll be looking for a new term to avoid the negative connotations of "pure erotica". This is the euphemism treadmill that @alohadave was referring to: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euphemism#Lifespan

I'm hoping I might change a few minds by offering them a list of quite well written pure erotica.

 

[AG31]

I just don't see pure erotica catching on, people are gonna know what it is and most people consider all of this stuff to be smut regardless-- which is probably a more profane term, than stroke story.

They may know what it is. And it may not change their opinion that it is a less worthy type. But it allows me to declare my opinion that I don't think it's less worthy as a type. Just like with all erotica, some is good and some is bad. I don't want to be forced to use a loaded term.

 

[ronde]

The usual definition of "erotica" is literature or art intended to arouse sexual desire, and as such, both "stroke stories" and stories where the majority of the story is centered on the plot and the sex is either secondary or of equal importance. I think what you're trying to define is the undefinable, that being what is commonly called "porn". The reason it isn't possible to define porn is that if you ask a hundred people they'll all give you a different answer.

I think the writing of either can be equivalent as far as style and technical details. It's only the content that makes the difference. No matter what you call it, some will deem it to be "art" and some will deem it to be "porn". In my opinion, calling it "pure erotica" will only upset the many who do like a plot in their stories, and the "pure" tag will probably drive away the readers who just want a quick trip into manual ecstasy.

 

[Rob_Royale]

Any time you try to label something or change a label, it's an uphill battle. And to call anything "pure" is to call everything else "impure". Now based on your previous thread asking whether smut was a synonym for erotica, it's clear that labels are important to you. But they aren't to everyone.

I think calling a story, a stroke story is merely stating a fact. Like calling John Wick an action film. I don't see a negative connotation. Stroke stories are designed to titillate and get the reader's heart rate up. A worthy goal. I started mine yesterday. Any reader that comments poorly about it should check their common sense. Exactly what were they expecting in 5500 words?

 

[AG31]

Isn't writing them a declaration that you don't think they are lesser?

There's nothing wrong with strokers or the term. No reason to differentiate unless there's some sense of shame around the term for you.

When someone says "fess up," they're saying it's a lesser type of erotica.

It's just a label, neither good nor bad. The only value it carries is the value you place upon it.

Labels are public. I can place a positive value on "stroke story," but no one out there in the world will know it.

I wouldn't be ashamed of writing strokers and calling them what they are. I've repeatedly said I write porn or smut. Sometimes I refer to it as erotica. It's all the same thing to different degrees: stories written with the hopes of someone getting sexual gratification from it.

I'm not ashamed. It's practically all I write. But it's clear that a bunch of people are. They shouldn't be. Let's use a different label.

I have a few personal strokers in my backlog, I should clean them up and post them. No overall plot. Just graphic sex from start to finish. Most of mine begin with a firm grip on the throat and end with hair being pulled and bodies tightly connected.

Yes, please do. I'll read them.

 

[AG31]

Any time you try to label something or change a label, it's an uphill battle. And to call anything "pure" is to call everything else "impure". Now based on your previous thread asking whether smut was a synonym for erotica, it's clear that labels are important to you. But they aren't to everyone.

I think calling a story, a stroke story is merely stating a fact. Like calling John Wick an action film. I don't see a negative connotation. Stroke stories are designed to titillate and get the reader's heart rate up.

Why would anyone else post a story in LitEROTICA? I'm not saying everyone should write stories that attend only to arousal, but surely every story here can be expected to arouse someone, right?

A worthy goal. I started mine yesterday. Any reader that comments poorly about it should check their common sense. Exactly what were they expecting in 5500 words?

Well, I know I can't get rid of "stroke story," but if I make enough nuisance of myself, maybe people will know what I'm talking about when I use the term.

Anyway, there are pure erotica stories of 5500 words (or thereabout) that are pure gems of exquisit writing. That's what you should expect.

 

[M_K_Babalon]

1. I generally take that phrasing as gentle rubbing/joking. As in "Who here prefers nachos over tacos? Come on, fess up!"

2. What does it matter how others see something you enjoy? I like the George Lucas Howard the Duck movie. The vast majority of people loathe it. I am in the minority that values it as comedic fluffy entertainment. The public's loathing of it does nothing to diminish my love of it, but I also don't feel I need to defend it. I happily call it a "guilty pleasure." Though, that's not because I feel guilty liking it. That's just the generally accepted/known title for liking unpopular media.

3. It's not the label that makes people see it as lesser, though. It's the style they aren't fond of. A new label won't change that.

People like Howard enough that he's shown up in Marvel comics and was at least in the first GotG movie. I've never seen the movie to have an actual opinion on him or the movie.

 

[SimonDoom]

I don't agree with this, both because I think it's pointless to get hung up on labels for things and because I don't believe there is a meaningful difference between stroke/pure erotica and other types of erotica. Putting a label on something doesn't change what it is.

I think it's more meaningful to skip over the labeling process and just talk about the elements of a story in a meaningful way, and compare stories that way. It adds nothing to say "We're going to put this story here in the 'stroke' or 'pure' box and that story there in the 'non-stroke' or 'non-pure' box. It's a diversion from what matters.

Doesn't every author who writes a sex scene in an erotic author enjoy the idea that the reader might masturbate and achieve orgasm to the story? If so, you're a stroke author! You're no different from anyone else who embraces the term "stroke" except in ways that have nothing to do with that word. If you write a 3 page story and the last 2 pages are a stroky sex scene, then how is it different from an 8 page story with the last 2 pages as a stroke scene, except the reader may have to wait longer to stroke (or not, if, in my opinion, the buildup is handled right, and is worth stroking to on its own).

I feel exactly the same way about the word "pure" as I do about stroke.

 

[AG31]

I don't agree with this, both because I think it's pointless to get hung up on labels for things and because I don't believe there is a meaningful difference between stroke/pure erotica and other types of erotica. Putting a label on something doesn't change what it is.

I think it's more meaningful to skip over the labeling process and just talk about the elements of a story in a meaningful way, and compare stories that way. It adds nothing to say "We're going to put this story here in the 'stroke' or 'pure' box and that story there in the 'non-stroke' or 'non-pure' box. It's a diversion from what matters.

Doesn't every author who writes a sex scene in an erotic author enjoy the idea that the reader might masturbate and achieve orgasm to the story? If so, you're a stroke author! You're no different from anyone else who embraces the term "stroke" except in ways that have nothing to do with that word. If you write a 3 page story and the last 2 pages are a stroky sex scene, then how is it different from an 8 page story with the last 2 pages as a stroke scene, except the reader may have to wait longer to stroke (or not, if, in my opinion, the buildup is handled right, and is worth stroking to on its own).

I feel exactly the same way about the word "pure" as I do about stroke.

It never crosses my mind that a reader might masturbate. But I write stories that don't attend to character and plot. I think they're well written, and my feedback confirms this.