My general sense of somethingorother continues unabated. Why is it that I have to clean the stove again when I did it just the other day? Sauce stains. Bah. I will stop eating sauce
( Read more... )
I use non-con and issues of consent as warning labels. I've never written a flat-out rape story, so I've never needed to think how to label it. I'd probably label non-con and then add a violence warning, if appropriate.
But labelling is so vague -- on one end, there are the people who will be disappointed if something labelled non-con doesn't match up to what they're looking for ('Drunk! That doesn't mean he wasn't consenting! Pah!') and then there will be people who complain if the label is missing ('But he's drunk! Really drunk! Of course he can't consent!')
It's like, how would you label an incest-themed story if the two related characters barely appear in a scene together on the page, and one is completely unaware of the other's feelings, but the whole story focuses on the sexual obsession of the second character for the first? Would that merit an incest, an unconsumated incest, or a general whoa, that's way creepy, dude, or what?
Labelling is hard. That's why I didn't used to do it. :-)
having answered 'yes' I am in the drastic minority, so!
I would use "issues of consent" to cover grey areas, but to me "rape" doesn't require physical force, and "non-con" is a pretty black and white statement. --I find, actually, that I sometimes read "rape" where the author intended "issues of consent," because I'm so sensitive to that, not needing it be an *attack.* You know?
terribly interesting questions! Hopefully there will be more comments soon. i <3 discussion.
and I feel I should clarify that I do read and enjoy rape stories, and entertain (wine! juggling! theater!) rape fantasies, and I am all come to terms with this. I think a *lot* of the "non-con" usage is people trying to sidestep the fact that they like reading about (fictional) rape. (Not all! Maybe not even the majority! But a lot.) Which is understandable. It's a terribly loaded concept--that's why it's hot. (To those of us who find it so, that is.)
I just wish we had terminology to specify "I want to read about resisted-seduction, or slave scenarios, or etc. etc." because, since we don't, people start redefining "rape" which makes me all itchy and wanting to yell about how rape is rape--but, you know, we want to read what hits our kinks! I can't blame anyone for that. And we just need more words.
I just wish we had terminology to specify "I want to read about resisted-seduction, or slave scenarios, or etc. etc." because, since we don't, people start redefining "rape" which makes me all itchy and wanting to yell about how rape is rape--but, you know, we want to read what hits our kinks! I can't blame anyone for that.
Smart! Smartsmartsmart! That's exactly how I feel about it too, but I hadn't put been able to put it into words yet.
I think a *lot* of the "non-con" usage is people trying to sidestep the fact that they like reading about (fictional) rape.
This certainly seems to be what's behind one of the two big rape story arguments in fandom ("This was a rape story!" "No, it wasn't!"), with people saying that how can everyone keep praising this story when it's an evil rape story, and what's this noncon nonsense anyway, and so on.
Personally, I just want a way to tell the brutal with extra blood from the psychological manipulation, since psycological manipulation interests me but the more brutal versions, not so much. So far, I find the noncon umbrella term (with rape a subset, as suggested elsewhere in the comments) works for me, but obviously there is the problem of there not being universal agreement. *g*
(Also, I find my rape fantasies like it when you read poetry to them.)
I use noncon for strong seduction and situations where there is no consent to give. If the seducee really meant that "no" sie is delivering, sie wouldn't be willingly sitting, half-dressed, on the seducer's lap, kissing back while having hir nipples tweaked and genitals fondled. If sie meant it, sie would have fought hir placement, and be biting instead of kissing.
Chattel slavery also comes under noncon and not rape. Property has no legal consent to give, regardless of how the two-legged livestock feels about the situation.
Rape implies at least some equality and ability to consent. It also requires resistance and negative after-effects.
There's also "Coerced consent:" go with it or worse happens. Sleep with me or i have you executed. Sleep with me or i blow up the whole world. There are options, they just aren't good ones.
But that's my position. I consider Cute when you babble to be noncon. It's a strong seduction that involves pleasure for both parties.
As nopseud said, I think there's definitely a difference between flat-out rape and issues of consent. I've only ever come close to writing rape in a story that was set in ancient Rome and had the whole master/slave thing going on, and it was very uncomfortable for me to write. Whereas issues of consent? That's an entirely different topic, largely because it is a much greyer area in RL as well as in fic. For example, I'm thinking just about everybody has had an experience when they really weren't in the mood, but went along with sex to make their partner happy or stop their partner from bitching, or something... then of course, as nopseud says, you get into the areas of substances that would diminish your ability to make choices or give clear consent, and it all gets terribly complicated, not to mention that when you get into the kinkier arena, "yes" can mean "no" and "no" can mean "yes" ...
Ha! I was all set to answer 'no' to the first question, because I don't distinguish between rape/noncon, but then you went and changed your phrasing, and I realised that I see 'rapefic' as a specific subgenre (something with torn clothes, and a specific type of attack, sorta, it's not that well defined in my mind).
I think I use noncon as the umbrella term, and rape as something slightly narrower. Though I would certainly use rape for non-physical force coercion scenarios too, no doubt about that.
Comments 14
I use non-con and issues of consent as warning labels. I've never written a flat-out rape story, so I've never needed to think how to label it. I'd probably label non-con and then add a violence warning, if appropriate.
But labelling is so vague -- on one end, there are the people who will be disappointed if something labelled non-con doesn't match up to what they're looking for ('Drunk! That doesn't mean he wasn't consenting! Pah!') and then there will be people who complain if the label is missing ('But he's drunk! Really drunk! Of course he can't consent!')
It's like, how would you label an incest-themed story if the two related characters barely appear in a scene together on the page, and one is completely unaware of the other's feelings, but the whole story focuses on the sexual obsession of the second character for the first? Would that merit an incest, an unconsumated incest, or a general whoa, that's way creepy, dude, or what?
Labelling is hard. That's why I didn't used to do it. :-)
Reply
I would use "issues of consent" to cover grey areas, but to me "rape" doesn't require physical force, and "non-con" is a pretty black and white statement. --I find, actually, that I sometimes read "rape" where the author intended "issues of consent," because I'm so sensitive to that, not needing it be an *attack.* You know?
terribly interesting questions! Hopefully there will be more comments soon. i <3 discussion.
Reply
I just wish we had terminology to specify "I want to read about resisted-seduction, or slave scenarios, or etc. etc." because, since we don't, people start redefining "rape" which makes me all itchy and wanting to yell about how rape is rape--but, you know, we want to read what hits our kinks! I can't blame anyone for that. And we just need more words.
Reply
Smart! Smartsmartsmart! That's exactly how I feel about it too, but I hadn't put been able to put it into words yet.
Reply
This certainly seems to be what's behind one of the two big rape story arguments in fandom ("This was a rape story!" "No, it wasn't!"), with people saying that how can everyone keep praising this story when it's an evil rape story, and what's this noncon nonsense anyway, and so on.
Personally, I just want a way to tell the brutal with extra blood from the psychological manipulation, since psycological manipulation interests me but the more brutal versions, not so much. So far, I find the noncon umbrella term (with rape a subset, as suggested elsewhere in the comments) works for me, but obviously there is the problem of there not being universal agreement. *g*
(Also, I find my rape fantasies like it when you read poetry to them.)
Reply
Chattel slavery also comes under noncon and not rape. Property has no legal consent to give, regardless of how the two-legged livestock feels about the situation.
Rape implies at least some equality and ability to consent. It also requires resistance and negative after-effects.
There's also "Coerced consent:" go with it or worse happens. Sleep with me or i have you executed. Sleep with me or i blow up the whole world. There are options, they just aren't good ones.
But that's my position.
I consider Cute when you babble to be noncon. It's a strong seduction that involves pleasure for both parties.
What says the Wind? is noncon and not rape, despite the header ( ... )
Reply
Reply
I think I use noncon as the umbrella term, and rape as something slightly narrower. Though I would certainly use rape for non-physical force coercion scenarios too, no doubt about that.
Reply
Hmm. Yes. I could go with that. 'All rape is non-con, but not all non-con is rape'.
Reply
Leave a comment