Fandom definitions: non-con and dub-con

[ratherastory]

Hola, flist

Comments

[de_nugis]

I'm not sure I could lay out quasi-legal definitions, but some scenarios that often get labeled dubcon

[ratherastory]

Okay, I can see that. I was having a lot of trouble imagining scenarios in my head where a "no" of any kind could be interpreted as a "yes," but my imagination was clearly lacking in that regard.

[de_nugis]

At least to me, if one of the parties involved in sex says no to the other, it's noncon, no further debate. My scenarios are all situations where both say yes but for one or both the yes is modified by circumstance. I think labeling a rape in which the victim gets pleasure out of the sex or ends up 'falling in love' with the rapist as dubcon rather than noncon is appalling. And I'd certainly label the Sam/Gen scenario (which I, too, firmly believe is an interesting hypothetical example rather than canon) as noncon. In that case, I guess the distinction from my second and third example is that Sam would know that the consent was not consent. If you had a situation where Sam thought he was having sex with Ruby, and Gen thought she was having sex with Jared, and they BOTH consented under false beliefs, that I would call dubcon

[ratherastory]

If one of the parties involved in sex says no to the other, it's noncon, no further debate.

That's my take on it too. I was trying to figure out where people in fandom consider things to be a "grey area" as it were.

The idea of someone "enjoying" rape or falling in love with the rapist appalls me to such an extent, I can't even begin to discuss it rationally. Just no. No no no. No. And furthermore, no.

[4thejourney]

There are real life cases where a rape victim "falls in love" with the abuser but it isn't really love- I'd call it Stolkhome(sp?) or something and it's defo still noncon in my book. And just because a body responds to physical stimulus and "enjoys" it doesn't make it consensual either.

[katwoman76]

It's called Stockholm Syndrome.
But that's not love, that's survival instinct so to speak.
Sadly in fandom it often is written as epic love.

[4thejourney]

Yes, I agree with you entirely, but maybe I wasn't very clear in my comment what I meant, sorry :-p It REALLY bothers me when they do the "rape can turn into true love" thing :-(

[katwoman76]

Nono, you were clear. IMHO we are thinking the same thing.
I always want to scream at my laptop "that's NOT love, that's someone with Stockholm Syndrome. Don't try to claim it's an epic romantic love story!!!",

[4thejourney]

Yes, exactly. In fact, when I finally came across a few fics that actually portrayed it as such (Sam bring coerced, tortured, brainwashed, whatever to the point where he began saying yes or thought it was love) I was glad. Not "haha this is such a happy fic" glad but glad to see it shown for what it really was, not as "if I hurt you enough you really will fall madly in love with me." :-(

[katwoman76]

I think labeling a rape in which the victim gets pleasure out of the sex or ends up 'falling in love' with the rapist as dubcon rather than noncon is appalling.
Sadly I see that way too often. And it bugs the hell out of me.
Not the fact, that a fictional story includes non-con elements, but that the author didn't realize that there was no doubt about the non-existence of consent.

[shinysylver]

Ah yes, sex pollen. That is a classic example. They agree to the sex cause they have to so there is no consent issues between each other but they were indeed given no real choice.

That scenario is common in Harry Potter what with all the potions. A love potion would be noncon because there was no consent with the person dosed but a mutual accidental lust potion would be dubcon.

It really is kind of a vague and hard to define thing. And an author can't go wrong with over warning.

[zolac_no_miko]

Oooh, you make some really excellent points! Sex pollen's a good one that hadn't occurred to me, dub-con that isn't rapey in any way, just unfortunate.

[maraceles]

I'm going off of what I've seen in SPN fandom (including its kink memes), HP fandom, and SV fandoms, but I think that dubcon and noncon are definitions of narrative kinks, of differing storyline types, more than anything else. That is, I think that both dubcon and noncon mean rape. Full stop. The terms dubcon and noncon are used to warn the reader about what KIND of rape goes on in the story

[ratherastory]

I definitely like the idea that it's a way of defining fandom tropes/the "kind" of rape to give the reader an notion of what they're getting into. That makes a whole lot more sense to me than the idea that dub-con is somehow "not really rape."

Excellent point, and thank you!

[de_nugis]

Hmm, no, I think that any scenario in which one participant is a conscious, perpetrating agent reads as something very different to me than the scenarios I mentioned, all of which explicitly involve situations where neither party was overriding or disregarding a known or suspected lack of consent in the other party. So if Sam coerces of manipulates consort Dean into sex, regardless of whether Dean "really wants it," I'd call that noncon. In the situation where Dean explicitly consents to sex with Sam, and Sam has no reason to believe that Dean isn't doing so in the same way that Sam is, but Dean in his heart of hearts is only taking this step in their relationship because it's season 1 and he hopes it will make Sam stay, or it's s3 and he's guilty about the deal, I'd label that dubcon. But the instant that Sam could reasonably be expected to be aware that that is what is going on, I'd switch the label to noncon. And for drunk sex? If the sober party has reason to expect that consent would be withheld if the person were sober, like if

[de_nugis]

Put more simply, I'm only listing scenarios in which I could still like both characters in the morning.