Vaginal Details

[dr_mabeuse]

Like a lot of authors, i tend to get descriptive when it gets down to just what a male character is doing to a female character's genitals during a sex scene. He plays with her labia, rubs her clit, etc. etc.

It occurs to me suddenly that this is pretty much the written equivalent of the video 'meat shot', where just the organs are shown going at it. I've always found meat shots to be, if not a turn-off, then boring at best.

Is that the way you women react to these vaginal details in an erotic story? Does describing exactly what part of the female genitals is being stimulated and how have any erotic value to women? Of is this just too dehumanized to have any sensual appeal? Just how close do you want to be?

---dr.M.

 

[MathGirl]

no.

far.

MG

Ps. Welcome back, Dr M

 

[Madame Manga]

It depends in what spirit it's being described.

If it's just leering over the labia, then yeah, it's a meat shot and not very interesting. I wouldn't say it was a positive turnoff--I'm a pretty anatomical gal myself, and attention to the clitoris is, like, important. Establishing that a male character has some clue about the female anatomy is a lot better than magical no-hands thrusting-only multiple orgasms.

The real problem with an account of sex that's *all* about the organs between the legs is that it doesn't distinguish itself from a few million similar stories. All cats are grey in the dark. Convincingly include the organ between the ears and I'll read anything, including descriptions of scat consumption. ;-)

MM

 

[MathGirl]

I'll read anything, including descriptions of scat consumption.

When something like that appears here, that's when I'm moving on. Why would anyone want to read about eating a kitty? Ugh
MG
Ps. You made a typo.

 

[Guest]

Convincingly include the organ between the ears and I'll read anything, including descriptions of scat consumption. ;-) MM

Well said. Welcome back, Doc.

A fan, Perdita

 

[Madame Manga]

When something like that appears here, that's when I'm moving on. Why would anyone want to read about eating a kitty? Ugh
MG
Ps. You made a typo.

*snicker*

I think it was a thread in How To a few days ago. Eye-opening, to say the least.

MM

 

[openthighs_sarah]

Convincingly include the organ between the ears and I'll read anything, including descriptions of scat consumption.

*adds MM to notification list for new story*

 

[wildsweetone]

Is that the way you women react to these vaginal details in an erotic story? Does describing exactly what part of the female genitals is being stimulated and how have any erotic value to women? Of is this just too dehumanized to have any sensual appeal? Just how close do you want to be?

---dr.M.

I feel that you're not asking us what you should be writing... more that you want to know what we (women) prefer to read, right?

Well, if you get serious answers, you're likely to get a myriad with no specific indication of a way ahead winner.

Women as readers tend to depend on their mood as to what they pick up to read and depending on their mood, depends on how they react to whatever they read.

There is no stereotyping women readers except to say that we are a varied bunch. What turns one reader on is not guaranteed to turn another on. At least, I don't believe so.

However, if you're clever with your descriptions you can cover a wider audience and thereby cover a wider mood swing.

Being particularly specific in details, and being particularly obtuse in details are opposite ends of the bell curve. Somewhere in the middle is where you'll find the majority of us.

My suggestion is that you write whatever way you feel comfortable writing and your readers will read whatever they wish to read.

Unless of course, you are writing for your audience and not yourself...

In which case, have you tried the General Board with these questions?

[/wso-waffle]

 

[dr_mabeuse]

No, no. It's just that I found myself reading some story involving oral sex, and the author had the girl licking a little here, and then sucking there, and then swirling her tongue around this part, then that part, and I thought to myself, this is more than I want to know. The whole erotic mood went out the window as we were treated to a lesson in advanced blow job kinetics.

So then I started wondering about what I write. I tend to get anatomical during sex scenes mainly because I want the scenes to last and, well, you have to talk about something. You can't just say "George ate Laura for a long time and did a very good job of it." of "Laura looked out the window as George continued his frenzied cunnilingus."

For my part, I've always been less interested in the details of organ-in-organ sex and more interested in what the characters are feeling and showing: the macro-pornographic vs. the micro-pornographic, and I'm getting more and more macro all the time. Pretty soon I'm going to be writing about men "dashing their virility against her gates of passion unfulfilled" or just doing a cowardly fade to ellipsis when the action starts...

---dr.M.

 

[openthighs_sarah]

You can't just say "George ate Laura for a long time and did a very good job of it." of "Laura looked out the window as George continued his frenzied cunnilingus."

You could say George looked out the window at Laura, who continued her frenzied cunnilingus.

That kind of makes a nice opening sentence, I think.

Oh, and I like the word spasm as it applies to the female orgasm. It's just such a great fucking word, and also a great fucking word.

Glad I could help!

 

[Guest]

spasming thighs

You could say George looked out the window at Laura, who continued her frenzied cunnilingus.

That would be great entry for Ogg's 'dark and stormy night' contest thread.

I too love spasm(s), especially mine. Perdita

 

[Svenskaflicka]

I find detailed descriptions a tad boring at times. I think one has to focus more on how a person feels than about what makes him/her feel that way.

 

[snooper]

... You can't just say "George ate Laura for a long time and did a very good job of it." of "Laura looked out the window as George continued his frenzied cunnilingus." ...

Well, as I often say, yes and no.

The "left hand on the mouse" brigade will demand (by the injudicious use of "1" votes and anonymous feedback) that you do write stories better suited to medical textbooks.

However, in a real story which just happens to be erotic, you can say either of these, and the second one really evokes the opposite of the first. Having said that the wording is a little crude. Perhaps "George ate Laura for a long time and she thought it an exquisite performance."

 

[Svenskaflicka]

Personally, I would go more for the "Laura was in for a surprise. George turned out to be quite a master at cunnilingus. He licked, nibbled, and sucked on her clit and her labias with such expertise, such understanding for what would make her squirm and moan, that Laura suspected he must have been a lesbian woman in an earlier life."

 

[Guest]

". . .suspected he must have been a lesbian woman in an earlier life."

Flicka, you make me think *I* was a lesbian man-bitch in a former life!

 

[Svenskaflicka]

Flicka, you make me think *I* was a lesbian man-bitch in a former life!

...because...?

 

[Guest]

man-bitch problem

...because...?

Silly you, because you make me laugh and get horny at the same time and as I only go for men (like Snape/AR) I had the same thought (in reverse) as your fictional lady with the labs and her puss-licking fictional man. Get it?

Nevermind...

 

[Guest]

Mea culpa, Dr. M.

Doc, forgive all this pussy-footing on your thread. Flicka and I can't help ourselves when we engage in intellectual intercourse.

But then, I know you will forgive me anything.

smooches (of the non-cute variety),
Perdita

 

[Svenskaflicka]

Re: man-bitch problem

Silly you, because you make me laugh and get horny at the same time and as I only go for men (like Snape/AR) I had the same thought (in reverse) as your fictional lady with the labs and her puss-licking fictional man. Get it?

Nevermind...

I'm using the Blonde Loop Hole here...

 

[Octavian]

Getting back to the thread...well amost

A woman goes to the doctor's complaining about occasional pains in her chest. He asks her to undress and gives her a thorough examination.
She looks at him anxiously, "Well?"
He looks over his glasses at her. "You've got acute angina."
"I know," she replies, "and my tits aren't bad either, but what about the pain in my chest?"

Octavian

“Encase your majestic tree of manhood in the sublimely soft wondrous wet hallowed depths of my body,” she implored.

“Oh,” he replied, “You mean you wanna fuck!”

 

[Guest]

Re: Getting back to the thread...well amost

Originally posted by Octavian
“Encase your majestic tree of manhood in the sublimely soft wondrous wet hallowed depths of my body,” she implored.

Good first sentence for the contest.

But, I would be shocked to have my angina called cute. Cute is bad, cute is so uncool. You can't have cute fucks. Yewey!

 

[wildsweetone]

Re: Getting back to the thread...well amost

A woman goes to the doctor's complaining about occasional pains in her chest. He asks her to undress and gives her a thorough examination.
She looks at him anxiously, "Well?"
He looks over his glasses at her. "You've got acute angina."
"I know," she replies, "and my tits aren't bad either, but what about the pain in my chest?"

Octavian

“Encase your majestic tree of manhood in the sublimely soft wondrous wet hallowed depths of my body,” she implored.

“Oh,” he replied, “You mean you wanna fuck!”

see, now i know i'm sick. i had to read that twice before i got it. *sigh* *giggling* opps *coughing*

okay where were we...

dr.M over describing is a bit like over prescribing i guess. don't give away so much that there's an overdose of information happening. leave enough up to the imagination of the reader so that they become included in the story.

an author doesn't need to describe all the mechanics of a sex scene in physical movement terms. using all the senses can help fill out scenes for word counts. and using the senses can also drag the reader by the scruff of the neck into the scene.

 

[dr_mabeuse]

Personally, I would go more for the "Laura was in for a surprise. George turned out to be quite a master at cunnilingus. He licked, nibbled, and sucked on her clit and her labias with such expertise, such understanding for what would make her squirm and moan, that Laura suspected he must have been a lesbian woman in an earlier life."

You're kidding, right SF? That's not really suipposed to be arousing is it?

I would say:

He dragged his tongue slowly up her moist slit, wetting the few parts of her pussy that weren't already glistening with her own excitement. He stopped with just the very tip of his tongue at the apex of her sex and savored her taste, the thickness of her hot secretions in his mouth, the taste of raw sex. He looked up at her for a moment and their eyes met. He saw the eagerness burning in her eyes, and that set him off. He suddenly drove his face against her cunt, using his nose like a plow to open her up as he tried to reach as far into her as he could and she arched her back and gasped in surprise and pleasure.


---dr.M.

 

[Guest]

yech

the thickness of her hot secretions in his mouth, ---dr.M.

i was with you until the secretions got thick...

regarding your question:

when you get VERY specific you run the risk of the character "doing" things that are annoying to the reader. personally, nose-diving into my vagina would get a gentle nudge if not a biff to the forehead.

you also are taking the chance that you are going to hit "the button" for some readers.

i have found that lots of male writers project onto their female characters enjoyment of things that aren't necessarily "all that" for me or the friends i have asked.

tactile detail is great. using all the senses helps break it up.

b

 

[masterhypnotist]

I never use the detailed descriptions described. Most of my fans are women and they certainly don't complain. MH