Thoughts on "dub-con" as a fanfic kink

[briarwood]

This is a response to thefrogg's post about consent issues in fanfic and to theladyscribe's response in which she describes one of her own fics as possibly "dub-con" (Dubious consent).

This is a touchy subject. Here's where I have to insert my standard feminist disclaimer: I am not discussing real life. I'm discussing fanfic, and specifically sexual-fantasy fanfic. In real life, there's no such thing as "dubious consent". In real life, either informed consent exists, or it's rape. Please don't think I can't make that distinction between fiction, fantasy and reality.

In fanfic, we're not dealing with the real world. In putting warnings on fanfic, we must acknowledge real-world issues, because (hello!) our readers are real people. If we don't acknowledge that real-world issues affect them, then the warning is pointless. So I see thefrogg's point, that a story where consent is less than explicit might be triggering for some readers.

The second part of this issue is the ages-old argument about the reasons for warnings/info and suchlike. Without reiterating the arguments here, the result is, broadly speaking, two camps of "warn-ers". One camp who warn "responsibly" i.e. who conscientiously include warnings for everything contained within a fic, and another camp who regard warnings as optional and might fail to warn if, for example, the "warning" might also be a spoiler.

For the reader, particularly the reader who wishes to avoid certain kinds of fic, this presents a dilemma. I want to be able to say of theladyscribe's story "since there was no warning for non-con or dub-con, clearly the sex was intended to be consensal." To me, this is self-evident. In the story, Jess wakes up to find Dean touching her; they go on to have sex. In canon Dean can be a misogynist pig, but I don't see him as a man who goes where he's not wanted; so it wouldn't occur to me to think of the scenario as non-consensual. Dean wouldn't have done it if he didn't have reason to believe she would consent.

Unfortunately, every fanfic author who fails to warn for a rape scene in a fic makes a liar out of me on that presumption.

This is a pain in the ass. Because for me, dub-con is my second biggest fanfic kink. *points to standard feminist disclaimer above* And one of my biggest pet peeves is fics labelled "Dub-con" when they're really, really not.

There's an obvious conflict here betwen "dub-con" as a warning of potentially triggering material, and "dub-con" as a kink. If all it takes to make a story dub-con is the absence of a "yes", then my kink is doomed to frustration. I think there's an argument for presuming consent in fanfic, because we presume an awful lot of things in fanfic. Characterisation is based not solely on the story text, but on what the fanfic author expects the reader to know about the characters. When I wrote Ceremony of Innocence which ends with Sam leaving Dean and getting on a plane, I expected the reader to be aware that Dean's afraid of flying, that Sam knows Dean's afraid of flying and therefore Sam's choice of transport should mean something more than just it's the quickest way to get to California. Similarly, if I write - or read - a PWP, I presume the sex is consensual unless something (including the warnings on the fic) suggests otherwise. That's assuming the characters involved aren't canonically disposed to rape...but if they were I don't think I'd be reading about them.

Actual dub-con (and here I'm talking about dub-con-as-kink) is very hard to write. It's not something written "by mistake". All too often, fics labelled as "dub-con" are not "dubuious" at all: it's a label for consensual sex with some BDSM elements or for rape fic in which the victim experiences orgasm. These are not dub-con.

True dub-con rides the razor's edge of consent. It's the scenario in which consent is given, but not freely. It's the scenario in which the person wants it, really wants it, but is contrained to say no for social or political or emotional reasons. It's the fuck-or-die scenario which forces a couple not ready for it into a sexual relationship. It's the "sex-pollen" scenario where they don't realise there's an outside force acting on them.

I'm going to give examples from my own fic, not to show off my stories, but because only on my own fic can I speak with authority about the intent behind the words. Whether the intent carries through to the final result is for others to judge. For the sake of clarity, both of these are Supernatural fics featuring incest.

My own Restrain, Release (Sam/Dean) is not dub-con, because although Sam took advantage of Dean being drugged/drunk and Dean didn't specifically consent to sex on that night, the boys had discussed it beforehand and Dean's consent is implied because he has a safeword and chooses not to use it.

Dean shivered, and this time not because of the cold. Sam's casual tone unnerved him a little, as did the fact that he'd apparently slept through being stripped, bound and gagged. That just wasn't possible.

"Good boy," Sam said softly, in the same tone he would have used talking to a dog. "Now, listen carefully, Dean. There are three rules. One: you will obey every order I give you, at once, no arguments. That shouldn't be too difficult; I know how you love to take orders."

Fuck you! Dean thought, but he made no sound. He could almost remember... They went to a club last night, one of those places with live music and... But the memory danced out of reach.

"Two," Sam went on relentlessly. "You may not talk without permission. Three: you may not come without permission." Sam blew gently on Dean's chest, across his nipples; to Dean Sam's breath felt hotter than it should have. "Do you understand the rules, Dean? Make noise for yes."

Dean grunted past the cloth in his mouth.

"Good boy," Sam said again. Dean half-expected him to pat his head. "Do you remember your safe-word?"

For a moment, Dean had no idea what he meant, because he couldn't remember them planning anything like this. Then the memory came back to him, a conversation they'd had weeks before. Dean had told Sam that fancy safe-words were dumb and you should just say stop.

My story In Vino Veritas (John/Dean) is dub-con because although Dean gives consent, actively participates in the sex and has an orgasm, he has very conflicted feelings about sex with John and (although this is not specified in the story) he's fifteen years old; legally and morally too young to consent.

John's hand gripped Dean's forearm, preventing him from leaving. "Dean, wait. I ain't so drunk as that."

"Bullshit. You can't even stand."

John's grip on his arm tightened. Dean met his hooded eyes, trying to understand. John looked like he wanted to say something, but no words came.

But Dean understood. His father needed him.

Dean swallowed past the tightness in his throat, and nodded slowly. "It's okay, Dad." He withdrew his arm from John's grip and stripped off his t-shirt. He stood and unzipped his pants. Please god don't let Sammy wake up... Dean removed his underpants and socks, leaving everything in a heap on the floor. He straightened and stood, naked, before his father.

John gazed at him for a moment, long enough for Dean to squirm under the scrutiny. Without speaking, John pushed back the blanket. Dean, shivering in the cold, lay down beside him.

(For some readers the age issue and father/son power dynamic will shift the above story from dub-con to non-con; that's fine. Everyone's mileage differs a little and I have no problem with someone disagreeing with me on this. That's kind of the point. True dub-con should seem like non-con to some readers.)

For me, a dub-con scenario has two essential elements. First that the dominant partner in the sex has no reason, within the scene itself, to think the sex is non-consensual. In my John/Dean example, you can argue that John should have no reason to presume consent from Dean (and you'd be right!) But within the scene itself, Dean voluntarily gets into bed with John.

Similarly in "sex pollen" and "fuck-or-die" scenarios, the participants generally do consent to the sex within the actual scene. Whether that consent can be considered genuine depends on the wider context: did a relationship exist between them prior to the incident? Would these two people ever have slept together if some outside force hadn't interfered? If there was a pre-existing attraction, were there other things keeping them apart and what's the likelihood that they would have overcome those things on their own?

The second essential element in dub-con is this: if you were hypothetically able to ask the non-dominant partner (or both of them for a sex-pollen story where both were equally affected), after the event, whether or not there was consent he or she would answer either "yes" or "I don't know". That "yes" may be self-deception, but he or she must believe it.

There's another dub-con scenario, one which I've almost never seen in fanfic: the scenario where one partner genuinely has no idea that the other isn't freely consenting to the sex. Most slave!fic could take that line, as a slave, by definition is not free to refuse a master, but I've rarely seen a fic that handles it well. Admittedly, I've read a lot less of that genre in the past few years, but the general line in slave!fic seems to be either a) they're in love, so the consent issues inherent in the master/slave relationship are ignored, or b) it's rape or non-con, or presumed consensual in the same way prostitution is "consensual".

I would really love to see a slave!fic in which a loving master is genuinely shocked when his slave, given the capacity to consent, turns around and says "no, I'm leaving". But I guess that wouldn't suit the slashy need for a happy ending.

Comments

[elf]

There's an obvious conflict here betwen "dub-con" as a warning of potentially triggering material, and "dub-con" as a kink.

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

I have various kinks. Dub-con is solidly among them. Some of my kinks, are serious triggers for other people. I am annoyed that there's no common labeling differences between "if you're triggered by X, maybe avoid this story" variety, and "if you like X, this story is for you."

[morgan32.livejournal.com]

I am annoyed that there's no common labeling differences between "if you're triggered by X, maybe avoid this story" variety, and "if you like X, this story is for you."

I think in many cases, there's no real distinction to make. If a fic contains blood-play or watersports or character death in the warnings, that warning serves to attract anyone who wants to read those things. There's no conflict, because it means the same thing to both sides.

Somehow, though, when the subject is consent and sex, we (and by "we" I mean fandom) get confused. Even "non-con" can be a confusing label, because there's a big difference between a non-con scene that's written to be erotic and a non-con scene that's intended to be awful and shocking. And the label/warning doesn't tell you much about how graphic it will be, either. And that confusion seems to become even more difficult to navigate when you get to dub-con.

[mab-browne.livejournal.com]

Interesting bit of meta. I've wrestled with my interest in non-con/dub-con for a while, and interestingly, the more I've been exposed to it, the less it's become a kink. I think that might be the hooboy! slash phenomenon coming into play. At first, you're just excited to know that something exists and that other people do this thing. Then the first flush of joy and novelty wears off, and you start noticing just how bad so much of what you're reading is. And it's a lot harder to find 'good' dub-con than it is to find 'good' slash.

[morgan32.livejournal.com]

And it's a lot harder to find 'good' dub-con than it is to find 'good' slash.

I second that!

I have a major non-con kink which I really struggle with; it's the one aspect of my own sexuality I find difficult to accept. But though I avoid non-con for that reason, I can satisfy that kink with well written dub-con. You're right; it's hard to find.

[thefrogg.livejournal.com]

Hi! Thanks for contributing to what is turning out to be a very interesting topic (or in my mind, entire web of topics).

I keep trying to point out that the point of my entire essay was story construction, but I think I'm just going to give in and drift with the topic discussion.

I think it's not just an argument over dub-con as a possible trigger point vs. dub-con as a kink - it's the interpretation of the whole warnings system. Are warnings listing contents that might be triggers? Or are they possible kinks? Personally, I use them as triggers. Perhaps we need to start adding (kink) or (possible trigger) after things. Or having separate kinks and warnings lines. I don't know. My headings get complicated enough as it is.

[morgan32.livejournal.com]

I keep trying to point out that the point of my entire essay was story construction

If I interpreted you correctly, you were essentially asking people to be aware of what they're writing which seems totally reasonable to me. I didn't even have an issue with anything you said until I saw the other essay; the combo kinda pushed a button for me because that dub-con label is a real pet peeve for me. It really is a kink of mine and when the label is (as I see it) misused it's sorta like someone's promising candy but serving beans.

I think it's not just an argument over dub-con as a possible trigger point vs. dub-con as a kink - it's the interpretation of the whole warnings system. Are warnings listing contents that might be triggers? Or are they possible kinks?

The trouble is they are both. It's easier with rape/non-con because fandom broadly agrees on what that means (poor writing and occasional lack of thought aside). So whether the reader is looking to read or to avoid rape fic, the warning or label serves the same purpose. Most of the other things we warn about are similar: whether trigger or kink they mean the same thing.

What your essay did for me is highlight something I hadn't really processed before - that this isn't true for dub-con as a warning. That maybe the reason so many fics are incorrectly (to me) labelled dub-con is because the term as a trigger warning has a very different threshold for consent than when it describes a kink. And I don't really have a solution to that conflict. I don't think there is a solution, because the former is based on reality (there's no such thing as dubious consent in RL) and the latter on a fantasy that is, for some of us, super-hot.

[rockeandroll.livejournal.com]

When I first started reading metafandom I fell on my head a lot when there were debates about warnings. My background in fandom was low-porn, high-plot, and my experiences with warnings were not with these kinds of 'trigger' issues so much as "If I'd known this pairing was going to be in the background of your fic I wouldn't have read it!" or "You labelled this Naruto/Sasuke when it's really Sasuke/Naruto!" (Good old Naruto fandom.)

I realised that often when I was arguing with people about warnings, we were doing it in such an abstract way that we didn't realise we were talking about different things. What I was talking about were more often than not 'labels' - markers like pairing or genre to tell the prospective reader what the story is about. (I've written some fics that I didn't want to put pairing labels on, which is where I started having conflict with people who advocated warnings for everything.)

When discussions got a bit more explicit I started to get a better picture. When people started talking about 'triggers' I realised that as attached as people can be to OTPs, reading Sasuke/Naruto when you thought you were getting Naruto/Sasuke isn't likely to be a traumatic experience.

Basically what I'm getting at is that I think there needs to be a distinction between 'warnings', which alert the reader to potentially disturbing or upsetting content, and 'labels', which hint at what the story is about. Or to put it even more simply, labels are there to attract readers and warnings are there to, in a sense, turn them away.

[morgan32.livejournal.com]

I realised that as attached as people can be to OTPs, reading Sasuke/Naruto when you thought you were getting Naruto/Sasuke isn't likely to be a traumatic experience.

Oh, I don't know. When I was in Stargate SG-1 fandom there were plenty of fans who claimed to be seriously traumatised by any hint of het romance in a fic...

Or to put it even more simply, labels are there to attract readers and warnings are there to, in a sense, turn them away.

Yes, that sums it up pretty well. I have issues with "warning" for everything myself; generally if there's something I don't want to give away I make the warning as vague as I can and add a note that the reader can always ask me about specific triggers.

The thing is, for most things, whether you call it a warning or a label, it serves the same purpose. For some reason piss-play is quite popular in Supernatural slash fics; but I can take the label as a warning to hit the back button just as well as someone else might take it as an enticement to read.

But what happens when the warning/label means different things to different people? In the Dean/Jess story I linked to above, is that really enough to be triggering for someone? If so, if it should have a warning on it, that warning can't serve the dual purpose of attracting a reader, like me, who enjoys dub-con...because to me that story is fully consensual.

I doubt we'll ever get a real consensus in fandom on the subject of warnings. This is just me realising the issue is more complex than I'd realised before.

[kennahijja.livejournal.com]

I'm not sure that 'dub-con' is really that easily containable with the examples you give above. Obviously, again, we're talking fiction only here.

I'm very fond of the entire variety of fic that deals with consent issues, from mild to noncon/rapefic. And the warning/advertising categories that float around are pretty diverse, and unfortunately very vague too - you have ambiguous consent, dub-con, coercion, non-con, rape... all, I would argue, potentially overlapping but not necessarily describing the same thing. People are interpreting these differently, and will therefore use them with different meanings, which doesn't help either.

My personal favourite are blackmail-type fics, which I would usually label as dub-con (because it's a more common fandom term), although coercion would be more precise. Though others would put it firmly under non-con. I don't think it's possible to come up with (or standardise) an interpretation that will be acceptable for everybody, because subjective interpretations will always differ.

Outside the sexual content, for example, I throw a fit (and boycott the fic) if a header spoils me for character death, and won't warn for it either apart from vague 'darkfic/disturbing content'. A lot of people, on the other hand, really want to be warned for this, and making everybody happy just doesn't seem to be possible.

[arby-m.livejournal.com]

One compromise I've heard about is to put a vague warning (or no warning, depending on the author's feelings on how spoilery it is) in the standard header, but then provide a more explicit warning - even if it gives away the plot - in either a footnote or another place entirely, and link to it from the header. So the people for whom it's more important to not be triggered can read the detailed warning, but the people who are more concerned with being spoiled than being triggered don't have to read it.

I'm sort of torn myself, because sometimes warnings are definitely spoilery, but on the other hand, it's horrible to be triggered by fic when you have no idea what to expect. I think that the "double-labeling/warning" idea above at least allows me to make that choice for myself, instead of forcing me to skip the fic entirely to be on the safe side.

(here from metafandom)

[valentinite.livejournal.com]

I'd add another category: the category where the non-POV character has reason to think there isn't consent, but the reader knows there is. (Generally the non-POV character is dominant, but not always, or it doesn't even have to be a sort of sex where that matters.)

The simplest form of this is just lots of alcohol, and one person thinks they're taking advantage of the other's intoxication. But since the drunk character is the POV character, we really know that they're all for it, and would be sober, too.

I've seen authors manage to pull this off from both sides at once -- i.e. they *both* think they're taking advantage of their drunk friend (whom they've been secretly lusting after). And while I realize it's a silly storyline, it's also, honestly, a bulletproof story-kink of mine.

It doesn't have to be alcohol -- sex pollen, spells gone awry (hello, HP fandom), etc.

Re: (here from metafandom)

[erinptah]

I've seen authors manage to pull this off from both sides at once -- i.e. they *both* think they're taking advantage of their drunk friend (whom they've been secretly lusting after).

. . . I have got to find me some of that. That sounds awesome.

[esorlehcar.livejournal.com]

Sam took advantage of Dean being drugged/drunk and Dean didn't specifically consent to sex on that night, the boys had discussed it beforehand and Dean's consent is implied because he has a safeword and chooses not to use it.

A lot of what you say in this post is very interesting, but I find your explanation that that story is fully consensual somewhat unsettling. Even if Sam didn't purposefully drug Dean, he "took advantage" of him being non-consensually drugged by equally non-consensually stripping him, trussing him up, and gagging him while he was unconscious from drugs he had not agreed to take.

Yes, AFTER all these non-consensual things had been done to Dean, he did not use his safeword when he was no longer unconscious (given that he's still drugged enough at that point that he can't remember anything that happened, I'm not sure how valid that consent is, but that's a point for another day), but unless they had specifically discussed, and Dean had specifically agreed to, Sam doing all those things to Dean when he was drugged and unable to say no (and when he had not consented to being drugged), Sam had no consent, implied or otherwise, and the fact that Dean eventually enjoyed despite the advantage that had been taken of him doesn't change that fact.

[morgan32.livejournal.com]

Even if Sam didn't purposefully drug Dean, he "took advantage" of him being non-consensually drugged by equally non-consensually stripping him, trussing him up, and gagging him while he was unconscious from drugs he had not agreed to take.

Yes, true, and it's not a problem that your lines as a reader are in a different place from mine.

This is why I say there are reasons to presume consent exists in fanfic unless it's otherwise indicated. I haven't spelled out in the story how in-depth the lovers' discussion of BDSM groundrules and what they could do to each other might have been, because it's a PWP and the story doesn't need that level of detail. But I think it's reasonable for the reader to assume Sam wouldn't have done such a thing were he not sure Dean would be okay with it. (Dean knowingly sampled the drug; he just doesn't remember that part.) And I only quoted a small extract above; in the story itself it's entirely from Dean's POV and I think it's pretty clear he's a consenting participant.

That said, you're right: the initial set up in the story is without consent. But nothing sexual happens before that consent is given. (Yes, you can argue that what Sam has done with Dean unconscious is sexual. In RL it would be; but I do believe fiction porn has different standards.)

[theladyscribe]

Oh yay, more discussion!

I like what you say here, and I think you're right that there's an issue because of the terminology. I was warning for dub-con as a possible trigger, rather than a kink (though I have since changed the warning from "dub-con" to "possible trigger"). To my mind, the two are quite different: warning for dub-con as a possible trigger implies that the sex is not necessarily the focus of the story, whereas warning (advertising?) for dub-con as a kink would mean that the sex is the point.

Falling back on my own fic as an example, as I've mentioned in my own post, I wrote the story without considering the implications of consent, partially because I know my version of Jess, but also because, like you, I strongly believe that Dean doesn't go places he's not wanted. And besides, the sex is not the point. The emotional implications of the story is what I want to focus on, and the sex is kind of a means to that end. It was only after the fact that I realized there was a possible implication of dubious consent.

... Um, I'm not entirely sure that all makes sense. It's late here, and I need to sleep.

[erinptah]

There's another dub-con scenario, one which I've almost never seen in fanfic: the scenario where one partner genuinely has no idea that the other isn't freely consenting to the sex.

One of my favorite characters is incredibly susceptible to this (and I've alluded to it in his past a few times in fic, as have a couple of other writers, though I can't think of any extended treatments).

He has this very fundamentalist conception of sex and power and gender roles, which leads to his belief that women and/or subordinates shouldn't be allowed to say no to him, sexually or otherwise. (This has led to harassment lawsuits in canon.) Turn that around and put him with a man he looks up to, however, and he thinks he isn't allowed to turn anything down.

...and, man, I wish there were more fic going into that, because I do like to watch him cry. (Your fiction-is-not-reality disclaimer is in full force here, mind you.)

I would really love to see a slave!fic in which a loving master is genuinely shocked when his slave, given the capacity to consent, turns around and says "no, I'm leaving".

I think I heard a song like that once.

But I guess that wouldn't suit the slashy need for a happy ending.

I can see that. Hm. Maybe if the slave were then paired up with someone else? (I've never written slave!fic anyway, though, so I'm a little out of my depth here.)

Very interesting thoughts; thanks for typing them up!

[jessara40k.livejournal.com]

One of my favorite characters is incredibly susceptible to this (and I've alluded to it in his past a few times in fic, as have a couple of other writers, though I can't think of any extended treatments).

He has this very fundamentalist conception of sex and power and gender roles, which leads to his belief that women and/or subordinates shouldn't be allowed to say no to him, sexually or otherwise. (This has led to harassment lawsuits in canon.) Turn that around and put him with a man he looks up to, however, and he thinks he isn't allowed to turn anything down.

Which character is this, and can you reccommend any fics that include that premise, if you don't mind?

[nike-victory.livejournal.com]

Oh, I hear you. One of my favorite dub-con fics isn't labeled as such at all. It's a surprisingly dark story about high school and roles and the characters are so very confused about what they're doing that all they can really agree on is that it's fucked up. And one of the boys is only in this rather twisted sexual relationship because he doesn't really see any other choice and goes along with it, especially in the beginning. I can definitely see it being a trigger for some just as it's a kink for me and each time I think to rec it, I end up debating over whether to inform the person I'm reccing it to about the rather dubious consent because the author doesn't warn for it herself.

[kyuuketsukirui.livejournal.com]

Is that by any chance wax_jism's Void?

[ifyouweremine.livejournal.com]

(Here via metafandom)

I tend to use my warnings to serve the duel function of both warning and enticing. Like, if I warn for non-con I know that's a squick for some people (who'll avoid it) but it's a kink for others (who'll read it).

Your examples of what you consider dub-con and what you don't are pretty interesting; personally, I would consider both examples dub-con (the second one for the reasons you mentioned and the first one because I don't think drugged/drunk Dean was capable of giving consent and Sam took advantage of that).

This kind of reminded me of this idea I heard once that drunken sex is never truly consensual sex because a drunk person can't really give consent, but I don't necessarily agree with that--like, I think if in your example Sam and Dean were both drunk and decided to have sex I would see that as consensual, but in your example it seemed more like Sam was taking advantage of Dean's drunkenness so he could have sex with him, which I definitely think is dub-con.

Anyway, that's all I really had to say on the matter, I guess I'll take my thinking cap off now. ^___~ (Oh, also? If you want SPN non-con or dub-con recs I can totally hook you up. I'm just saying.)

[miriam-heddy.livejournal.com]

This kind of reminded me of this idea I heard once that drunken sex is never truly consensual sex because a drunk person can't really give consent, but I don't necessarily agree with that...

It's not simply an idea. In a number of places, it's the law that consent cannot be gotten from someone who's drunk. And the reasoning behind that is not that hard to understand. After all, we recognize that driving while drunk is dangerous because one's reflexes and cognitive abilities are impaired. Sex while drunk is likewise problematic.

But of course we're talking about the difference between laws in RL and conventions in fanfic here, and this discussion of dub-con begins with the acknowledgment that fiction is fantasy and thus doesn't have to fall within the rules and laws of RL even if we recognize the rules and laws in RL are there for a very good reason.

[jacquez.livejournal.com]

(via metafandom)

There's another dub-con scenario, one which I've almost never seen in fanfic: the scenario where one partner genuinely has no idea that the other isn't freely consenting to the sex.

I can personally only think of one story I've read that fits this definition (in Sentinel fandom). (I might've read others but they're not coming to mind.) I'm not surprised -- it's partially rare because it's difficult to pull off, I think, but also I think it's rare because (although many people can torment characters six ways from Sunday), that particularly weird kind of mindfuckery is queasily unpleasant and reminds people uncomfortably of things they might have done to others that maybe the others weren't so keen on.

Not, like, rape or anything -- but it's this kind of queasymaking Extreme Sports version of Like That Time I Made My Sister Watch Aliens With Me.

[velvet-mace.livejournal.com]

I write a lot of fic in the dub-con/non-con/rape/violent rape contiuum, and I write with a variety of genres from humor (which drives some readers nuts because rape is never supposed to be funny) to full on sickening horror (which is too much for other readers to stomach). So I've given some thoughts about the subject.

The first thing that occurrs to me is that people tend to treat rape like an on-off switch. You are or you aren't. And if you are, you must be traumatized to the some set degree, and if you aren't you have no right to be upset -- but it seems to me that it just isn't that easy, because there are two dynamics going on: The intentions of the rapist, and the emotional state of the victim before/during and after the act.

For example: You can have a "sweet" guy sweep a girl off her feet, make her feel loved an appreciated, ending with a night of sex that she fully and enthusiastically agrees to, only for her to discover later that the guy only had sex with her on a dare or as a joke so he could brag about it to his pals, or for some other low-life reason. Does she feel violated? Holy heck yes. Was it rape? Er... that's not so clear.

Another example: An 9 year old plays "doctor" with a 13 year old friend who has recently got ahold of a porno mag. The 9 year old doesn't really know what she's consenting to and finds it rather uncomfortable. The 13 year old probably should have known better but wasn't being malicious. They go on to play other games after curiosity is satisfied. Later when they grow up and realize what they've done. The no longer 13 year old feels hideously guilty, the no longer 9 year old shrugs it off as kids screwing around, in this case literally. Dubious con? rape?

Neither of these is the same as someone being dragged onto a beach and gang raped with bottles.

On the fanfic end of things you have as much latitude and more especially if you consider if the motivation for the fic is to titilate, surprise, horrify, sadden or set up for hurt comfort.

I guess this is a long way of saying sometimes the context matters more than the actual acts.

[velvet-mace.livejournal.com]

btw, here from metafandom . Hi!

Also, that last line should be: sometimes the context matters more than the actual consent.

[wychwood]

(here via metafandom)

There's another dub-con scenario, one which I've almost never seen in fanfic: the scenario where one partner genuinely has no idea that the other isn't freely consenting to the sex.

I've actually seen this done a couple of times in SGA fandom - neery's Foolproof and Incapable of Error is the best example I can think of. It's quite rare, though, I agree.

[thelana.livejournal.com]

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.

[morgan32.livejournal.com]

For example, the John/Dean story to me sounds like it should come with a statory rape warning at least.

Well, that's a legal standard and would vary a lot from place to place. Besides, if you're gonna get into the legalities it's also incest.

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.

Again, you seem to be talking in legal standards. In real life it can't be easy to get a rape conviction based on a two-strangers-drunk-at-a-party scenario, but that doesn't make it any less morally and ethically rape if the sex was in fact non-consensual. It doesn't make the trauma experienced by the victim any less.

There's a big difference between a person who goes out and gets wasted with the intention of getting laid, and a person who drinks too much and is taken advantage of as a result. True, the sexual partner in each scenario may not be aware of the difference, or may be just as impaired, but the act is still non-consensual and in real life should be treated as rape. Maybe not to the extent of getting someone arrested - in reality that always depends on what can be proven.

degrees of non-con

[thelana.livejournal.com]

To me in fic it's usually less a question of non-con vs. not non-con. It seems to me that it usually is more a question of the degree of non-con that people are willing to cope with. In real life there is no distinction between rape and non-con. Non-con is rape. End of story.

But in fiction I often get the impression that non-con vs. rape might reflect the degree of violence used. With rape meaning straight out violent mean spirited rape with a straight forward unwilling and in pain victim. And non-con covering less violent versions too like under the influence of drugs, coercion, fondling and seducing somebody who is tied up and imprisoned.

All of these might be rape/non-con, but it can still a difference to the reader. They might be willing to read a non-con situation, but not if it is brutal and violent or not when a character they like is portrayed as manipulative, brutal or villaineous. (personally? I would like an additional "dark" label for any fic that has normally good character behaving evil)

I would collectively file sex pollens, sex or die or slave fic into the non-con corner. But precisely because they already are one can see it as redundant to label it non-con in addition to their already existing label. if it says slave fix or sex pollen fic it already gives the reader an idea what to expect and they can decide whether this degree of impaired judgement is something they are comfortable with.

Take slave fic. If it was labeled slave fic and otherwise suggested that it's gonna contain sex (and sex before the slave is freed), my guess would be that it contains only happy fluffy sex that the slave enjoys. The fact that the slave enjoys it doesn't change that it's a non-con situation because even though he wants to give consent he can't. Just like a 3 or 8 or 13 year old can't give consent. If a slave fic was labeled non-con in addition to slave fic I would assume that sex takes place where it is obvious that the slave isn't really comfortable with it but that it's not really violent. And if it was labeled slavefic and rape I would assume that there is straight forward rape with violence and injuries and what not.

Drunk!fic is the same to me. I don't mind drunk!fic. I emotionally don't consider it very non-con-y. The drunk!fic label suggest to me that it's likely gonna be a light hearted fic with alcohol and sex in it. If I was the kind of person who has issues with alcohol during sex I might want to steer clear of it, but other than that write away. I have to admit that I find it more bothersome if one person is clearly sober while the other is clearly drunk. And whether the person who is drunk is lucid enough to be the aggressor and believable as the aggressor. And whether or not the non-drunk person was counting on the other's drunkenness or just stumbled into it by accident. (which actually brings me to an interesting canon example, but this is getting too long for one reply)

I'm actually stumped about what would constitute a real dub-con. Maybe a fic where the POV character doesn't know and the reader isn't sure either. When it's intentionally left open.

And there is sort of the bodice ripper example or the moral no stories, which is a category I rather like. I have always had a soft spot for hero/villain pairings. Where I can buy a situation where the hero is attracted to the villain and wants to have sex with him but can't bring himself to yes because it would shatter their whole moral foundation. And trhe villain is all "I know you want me, I know you can't say it, therefore I'm taking you without you saying yes, taking the responsibility away from you". In real life now that is a dub-con that would never fly and be straight up non-con. Because only bad things has come out of men running around they think they know that women mean yes when they say no. Or that they know that a woman wants better than she herself or contrary to what she is saying. But in fic? What is it? Non-con? Probably. But it's one that if well written always leaves me stumped.

But yes, generally I tend to fall fast on the side of non-con. Either impaired judgement (either through outside force or though substances) takes place or it doesn't.

Real Canon examples (last post I swear)

[thelana.livejournal.com]

I used to be a member of a board dedicated soaps and every once in a while there was a situation that got fans arguing like crazy about issues of consent.

Situation 1 (DOOL, Sami, EJ &Lucas): She is in a car accident. Her boyfriend is trapped under the roof of the car and potentially dying. Another motorist drives by, holds a gun to her. She begs him to help her or else her boyfriend will die. He tells her she has to have sex with her or else he'll let the boyfriend die. She has sex with him.

Personally, that strikes me as straight forward rape. It's as much rape as the raider who comes into a town, shoots a child in the head and tells the mother if she doesn't have sex with him he'll kill her other children too. The legal definition of rape explicitly covers rape that happens while threatening somebody (for example with a weapon) or threatening others (the "I'll kill X if you don't sleep with me). But there was still discussion because... (IMO, probably because the actor is hot) I guess one could make cases for forced sex and non-con, I don't know?

Situation 2 (GH, Rick&Liz): They are married. He is lying to her, but she doesn't know that. So from her perspective they are happily married, love each other and have sex regularly. He slips her birthcontrol pills. She has a bad reaction to them. They have sex and I think she passes out after the fact? Something like that. Anyway, huge discussion, was it rape? Was it "just" icky? Was it not rape because they are married and she would have slept with him definitely if she hadn't had that reaction? Is it rape because she didn't consent to being slipped something she didn't know about (though he thought it would be harmless)? Is it normal like any married couple who go somewhere, she gets tipsy and when they come they have sex? And it is never brought up again on the show.

Situation 3 (B&B, Brooke &Ridge &Nick): They are a couple, happy together and all. Maybe quarrelling a bit about her ex, but nothing out of the ordinary to them. She drinks cough sirup. Has a bad reaction to it. He comes home. Isn't aware of it. They have sex. It's never addressed again. Is it rape? Is it "just" icky? Particularly since it's in connection with another storyline that is going on at the same time. About a year earlier Ridge and Brooke got married. An accident happened. He is presumed dead. She has a total freak out/break down. Her ex whom she dumped to be with Ridge holds her through it. They have sex. Two days later Ridge turns up not dead and she reunites with him, not potentially pregnant with her ex's kid. She never calls it rape, but Ridge many months later accuses the ex of taking advantage of Brooke when whe was in emotional distress and not truly herself.

Situation 4 (German soap, Roman &Deniz): They used to be a couple. Then D left R for a girl. Roman pursues him for a while and D rejects him. Then he begins sending mixed messages. He kisses Roman and then insists he loves his girlfriend. A bunch of times. Then D gets high and R and D have sex. Is it icky? Is it normal? Is it kinda exploitative? R sat there when D took the pills and knows that he is high. He knows from a previous event that being high lowers D's inhibitions. He tags along to a party that is at another location and there they have sex. He is also deeply convinced that D is gay and is just denying is sexuality. There are no additional pointers from the writing. No dundundun music to show that what is happening is bad. No sad romantic music to show that it is angsty and tragic. Is it sort of explotative because D was high and R wasn't? Is it just normal non-exciting behavior because so what, people have parties, people get high, people have sex there. Is it understandable because R really loves D and wants him back? Is it actually laudable because he is helping D to no longer deny his sexuality? Is it wrong because we know there is a good chance if R asked D for sex/a relationship at this point while D is sober D would likely turn him down?

I'd atually like it if somebody made a long detailed poll giving potential examples from fics and then let people vote what they would label it, rape, non-con, dub-con, nothing at all, something else... Maybe it would lead to some really interesting results.

[yourlibrarian]

I don't know that I have anything to contribute to this, except that I find it incredibly amusing that I am at this moment listening to a media show discussing how valid George Carlin's 7 Words still are, what constitutes appropriate warnings for parents, and where people's offense lines lie. Their general conclusion is that there's no way to draw straight lines because everyone's situation is different.

[jessara40k.livejournal.com]

I would really love to see a slave!fic in which a loving master is genuinely shocked when his slave, given the capacity to consent, turns around and says "no, I'm leaving". But I guess that wouldn't suit the slashy need for a happy ending.

SGA faqndom, and while Rodney's reaction when John leaves isn't explicit (and I suspect he expected this response) and you don't see just how much he loves John until the very end of the story, it's the closest to your description I've seen - and it certainly isn't a happy ending. Although lavvyan does intend to write a sequel it stands alone IMO.

Dearest (http://www.wraithbait.com/viewstory.php?sid=13260)

[duskpeterson.livejournal.com]

In case you're interested, I posted about your slavefic comment in this post (http://community.livejournal.com/orig_slavefic/44346.html) at orig_slavefic.

Hmm....

[(Anonymous)]

So. I was googling dub-con to acquire a strict definition, and this is what I found. This is a couple years late but here's my two cents...

In general, I agree with the OP's opinion on what falls under each category. I also believe that dub-con also applies in the opposite direction; In your example of the John/Dean fic, I would say that John's drunken state makes it potentially impossible for him to consent to the act. Dean's part would be entire consensual (though not legally, as pointed out repeatedly). The combination makes a solid "dub-con" warning/advertisement, for me.

Then again, as is the point of fanfic, I would also probably gloss over the dubious consensual nature and call it good word porn. A bit disturbing for some, but good nonetheless.

I don't have a dreamwidth account (not that I wouldn't love one) but if you want to comment on my comment or say anything else, you can email me at starinafay @ gmail.com.

^^

~Kei

[(Anonymous)]

Again with the being years late for this discussion!

As someone who's really only just discovered fanfics (courtesy of Cherik), I've been a little surprised to discover my love of dubcon, as this wasn't an aspect of my sexuality I was aware of before. But non-con leaves me absolutely cold. And, as already stated, 'dubcon' is a pretty vague category - there are scenarios I would happily acknowledge should be warned as dubcon (e.g. character agrees, but doesn't actually want it, or is doing it for some other reason such as blackmail or whatever), but that don't appeal to me. Personally I only like situations where the character says no, but on some level means yes. Which sounds awful... I'm holding onto the 'It's okay because it's fiction' lifeboat pretty firmly here.