Wow, I must me more of a sensitive nilly than I thought. Because of the lot of scenarios you describe I would file more under non-con than dub-con.
For example, the John/Dean story to me sounds like it should come with a statory rape warning at least. If we accept that 15 is underage and underage people technically can't consent then it's a noncon. And since John presumably knows that Dean is 15 then he would also know that it is statory rape what he is doing. Since fandom doesn't like mean terms (non-con usually sounds nicer than rape for example) I guess rather than statory rape one would label it as underage (personally, for clarities sake I often wish fandom would lable fic where one is over age and one is under statory rape and reserve underage for fic where both are underage; but it's not like fandom is gonna care much for my personal desire for more logical structure in warnings).
I would also file all sex pollen or villain made them do it fics as non con.
Even if neither character is guilty of the non-con a non-con situation still takes place. If there is a loving couple who adore each other and a villain comes and holds a gun on them and forces them to have sex with each other in front of him then it's still a rape. And the villain is the rapist even if he doesn't put his genitals into anyone. If a villain forces one character to rape the other, then both characters have been raped because both were forced into sex. Hence, non-con for both.
A fic where a villain drugs somebody or orders them to have sex with a third person is still a non con for me. The third person assumes that he is having sex with a person with unimpaired judgement but we know better and the villain knows better. It might be dub-con for the third person, but the overall story is still non-con-ish to me.
In real life, there's no such thing as "dubious consent". In real life, either informed consent exists, or it's rape.
I really disagree with this. Heck, I would be close to saying the opposite. In fiction we can much more easily make judgement on characters because we theoretically perfect knowledge of what is going on in their heads. But in real life?
People constantly hook up with people at parties while both of them are drunk. Technically/Legally both have impaired judgement. There might not be one person taking advantage of the other, but if they are impaired then they do not have the ability to consent. Hence non-con technically. Yet many people intentionally use alcohol to lower their inhibitions because otherwise they would be too shy to approach anybody. Partying is a recognized way to meet somebody. Alcohol is usually consumed at dates etc. Already existing couples might go to a party, get drunk and go home and have sex. Technically, impaired judgement. Technically they shouldn't be having sex. Yet obviously nobody is gonna obey that rule just for clarities sake.
Just like boss/employee will always be an affected situation yet that's not gonna stop things like bosses marrying their secretaries, having lots of babies and living happily ever after. Same for students who marry their professors.
no subject
For example, the John/Dean story to me sounds like it should come with a statory rape warning at least. If we accept that 15 is underage and underage people technically can't consent then it's a noncon. And since John presumably knows that Dean is 15 then he would also know that it is statory rape what he is doing. Since fandom doesn't like mean terms (non-con usually sounds nicer than rape for example) I guess rather than statory rape one would label it as underage (personally, for clarities sake I often wish fandom would lable fic where one is over age and one is under statory rape and reserve underage for fic where both are underage; but it's not like fandom is gonna care much for my personal desire for more logical structure in warnings).
I would also file all sex pollen or villain made them do it fics as non con.
Even if neither character is guilty of the non-con a non-con situation still takes place. If there is a loving couple who adore each other and a villain comes and holds a gun on them and forces them to have sex with each other in front of him then it's still a rape. And the villain is the rapist even if he doesn't put his genitals into anyone. If a villain forces one character to rape the other, then both characters have been raped because both were forced into sex. Hence, non-con for both.
A fic where a villain drugs somebody or orders them to have sex with a third person is still a non con for me. The third person assumes that he is having sex with a person with unimpaired judgement but we know better and the villain knows better. It might be dub-con for the third person, but the overall story is still non-con-ish to me.
In real life, there's no such thing as "dubious consent". In real life, either informed consent exists, or it's rape.
I really disagree with this. Heck, I would be close to saying the opposite. In fiction we can much more easily make judgement on characters because we theoretically perfect knowledge of what is going on in their heads. But in real life?
People constantly hook up with people at parties while both of them are drunk. Technically/Legally both have impaired judgement. There might not be one person taking advantage of the other, but if they are impaired then they do not have the ability to consent. Hence non-con technically. Yet many people intentionally use alcohol to lower their inhibitions because otherwise they would be too shy to approach anybody. Partying is a recognized way to meet somebody. Alcohol is usually consumed at dates etc. Already existing couples might go to a party, get drunk and go home and have sex. Technically, impaired judgement. Technically they shouldn't be having sex. Yet obviously nobody is gonna obey that rule just for clarities sake.
Just like boss/employee will always be an affected situation yet that's not gonna stop things like bosses marrying their secretaries, having lots of babies and living happily ever after. Same for students who marry their professors.