As horrid as that sentence is...:D I do think this has some truth in it, even when we're talking "quality" fic and not the "run-screaming-from-it-warp-young-girls-minds-for-our-future" kind. 'Non-con' is sometimes used to label fics where the act 'appears' to be non-consensual, or one character believes it to be, but the one on the receiving end is really consenting on some level and perhaps letting the other act this way to 'exorcise their demons', etc.. But the graphic playing out of this comes off very much like 'non-con' and thus earns the label for those who would freak out and scream if encountering such without a label, whilst the deepest emotions behind the acts really are essentially consensual.
I realize that reply is a bit of a powder-keg...:D...but I am NOT defending the freakin' insane interpretations of this concept...I'm talking about the quality darkfic about warped and messed up people trying to survive life.
That's pretty much it, I think. It's a shade of meaning about whether it's a said-no/wanted-to-say-no situation or a didn't-say-yes situation. In a court, very similar. In the non-consenting party's mind, possibly very different. Or possibly not different at all.
Plus, I think it also is used in disclaimers because it triggers less emotional response among the squicked/survivors.
I was trying to figure that out myself... Thought maybe 'non-con' was more 'the people involved are in a relationship, but there was not consent' as opposed to 'rape' which might be seen as more stranger-perpetrated.
AFAIK (from my criminal justice class) there is no difference legally, as 'rape' isn't a legal term. There are just a variety of different levels of sexual assault.
Ah... to my mind they mean exactly the same thing. Except "rape" in fics often suggests that the character is *really* not happy about it where as in "non-con" fics the fall-out is going to be a lot more mushy. What with the character suddenly realizing their One Twu Luv.
Or something.
Also, someone explained to me once that non-con and rape differ in such a way that with non-con the character physically enjoys it and orgasms, where rape is all about pain and domination.
Okay, I just freaked myself out with trying to make a case for non-con. It didn't work, but I gotta scrape my brain with bleach.
Also, someone explained to me once that non-con and rape differ in such a way that with non-con the character physically enjoys it and orgasms, where rape is all about pain and domination.
Ugh. There is likely a case to be made for non-con (haven't seen a great one yet, but I remain convinced a good writer could make that case), but that's not it. Orgasm is a physical response, and the body responds to sex, whether or not the brain is a willing participant. If it were a guy saying no, and he got hard and had an orgasm anyway, do you think anyone would assume it was because he "secretly liked it", or just that, duh, penises respond to physical stimulation? It doesn't make it any less rape.
Ugh, ugh, ugh, I hate when bad ficcers try to make Twu Wuv redeem all, and just end up perpetuating really damaging cliches.
Pretty much what everyone else is saying... I think in the fandom, 'non-con' tends to be used to refer to some warped encounter between characters who already have some sort of relationship (friendship or otherwise), often canon characters, and 'rape' is more likely to be used when we're talking Goa'uld torture, masked guy in dark alley, etc..
But in the literal sense? Not a damn difference. I think the terminology has just taken on a subtle meaning as to the circumstances or general tone of the surrounding events.
I think the terminology has just taken on a subtle meaning as to the circumstances or general tone of the surrounding events.
Yeah, I think this is true. But as for the rest, I think the reverse! I think in fandom, there's not a damn difference, they're just trying to make acquaintance rape sound good. But in the literal sense, there can be a big difference - for everyone who assumes or doesn't ask for consent when it's not there, there's a partner who assumes or doesn't ask for consent when it is there. Both are non-consensual, but only one is also rape.
I think a case could be made that all of those aliens-made-us-do-it, we-have-an-alien-virus-that-means-we're-going-to-die-unless-we-have-sex, and other similar stories are non-con without falling into the category of rape because none of the participating parties is forcing the other, but they're both being forced into something they don't want to do. So it's not really consensual, but it's not really rape in the normally understood sense.
Then again, most people who write those types of stories don't bother putting non-con at the top anyway, so when I see non-con, I figure the story deals with rape.
I'll point out here that I'm speaking from experience that's almost entirely centered around Stargate fandom since these things do tend to be different across fandoms (and even across different subsets within fandoms).
And here I got all rambly in your journal and you don't even know me. Er...hello. *g* I followed a link in qwirky's journal to get here.
To get legal, in most states non-consensual sex can mean sexual contact that does not include penetration but which occurs without the consent of one party. In most states, rape is defined as including penile-vaginal, penile-anal, or penile-oral penetration, or penetration of the mouth or anus using any other body member or any object, or any variation of the above where the victim is unable to consent as well as ones where the sex act is coereced or forced. Meaning, if you stick a sucker in a someone's mouth, it's not rape, if you stick a penis in, it is, and if you stick the sucker up their butt, it's rape.
Non-consensual sex could include any form of sexual contact without actual penetration as well as including rape. Lesser criminal offenses that are variations of sexual assault are usually included here. Rape of children is sometimes considered a separate offense, especially in states that haven't changed their legal codes lately. I don't know if any states still have the "spousal exception" (*vomits*) on the books, but I think England still does.
Oftentimes "sexual intercourse" is defined as only penile-vaginal sex. All other forms of penetration are called "deviant sexual activity" in Arkansas and a lot of other states, but not all of them outlaw those actions. There are a lot of deviants out there, including our former president...
Some people seem to think non-consensual sex would include penetration after using a "date rape drug", but in legal terms the inability to give informed consent means that the act was rape, just as it would be rape if the victim was very low-IQ or a stroke victim in a nursing home. (I don't get why people don't see that they're just as bad.)
In fandom, the words seem to be used loosely and relatively interchangably. I think a lot of people don't know what they're talking about when they blather on about the subject.
In fandom, the words seem to be used loosely and relatively interchangably. I think a lot of people don't know what they're talking about when they blather on about the subject.
*chokes*
*dies laughing*
So, so sorry. Really. If my brain was at all functioning right now, I'd contribute coherently to this conversation, but my brain is job-hunting-fried, and can focus on nothing but the inadvertent funny here. Because, really, there is so much of fandom that this sentence could be applied to. Oh, *so* much.
((Will go now and not spam. Bad Hilly, no cookie.))
I've encountered fic where 'non-con' is, in fact, a consensual act, is just part of a BDSM relationship. So one character is tied up and says "no" or whatever, and so it's labeled non-con, but the idea is that they're involved in a relationship where they have ground rules and this is okay.
... That's the idea. I'm yet to see it both labeled that way and properly executed.
Ooh, I've heard of that one, too, and that's a good division. Not really seen it done that way in practice, like you say, but, yeah, I bet that's one of the things the "non-con" label was meant to describe, the "not rape, but very squicky to those with consent issues" situations.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
no subject
*eyeroll*
no subject
no subject
no subject
I realize that reply is a bit of a powder-keg...:D...but I am NOT defending the freakin' insane interpretations of this concept...I'm talking about the quality darkfic about warped and messed up people trying to survive life.
no subject
no subject
Plus, I think it also is used in disclaimers because it triggers less emotional response among the squicked/survivors.
no subject
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(Anonymous) - 2005-05-11 22:23 (UTC) - Expand(no subject)
Hrm...
AFAIK (from my criminal justice class) there is no difference legally, as 'rape' isn't a legal term. There are just a variety of different levels of sexual assault.
Re: Hrm...
Re: Hrm...
Re: Hrm...
Re: Hrm...
Re: Hrm...
Re: Hrm...
Re: Hrm...
Re: Hrm...
no subject
Or something.
Also, someone explained to me once that non-con and rape differ in such a way that with non-con the character physically enjoys it and orgasms, where rape is all about pain and domination.
Okay, I just freaked myself out with trying to make a case for non-con. It didn't work, but I gotta scrape my brain with bleach.
no subject
Ugh. There is likely a case to be made for non-con (haven't seen a great one yet, but I remain convinced a good writer could make that case), but that's not it. Orgasm is a physical response, and the body responds to sex, whether or not the brain is a willing participant. If it were a guy saying no, and he got hard and had an orgasm anyway, do you think anyone would assume it was because he "secretly liked it", or just that, duh, penises respond to physical stimulation? It doesn't make it any less rape.
Ugh, ugh, ugh, I hate when bad ficcers try to make Twu Wuv redeem all, and just end up perpetuating really damaging cliches.
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
no subject
no subject
no subject
1) Rape means they hate it from beginning to end. Non-con can mean that they hated it or had to be coerced into it, but ended up having fun.
2) One or the other (depending on who you ask) is done for tittilation, the other for plot purposes.
3) Not a damn thing. People just think 'I like reading non-con' sounds better than 'I like reading about rape'.
Up to you which one you pick.
no subject
But in the literal sense? Not a damn difference. I think the terminology has just taken on a subtle meaning as to the circumstances or general tone of the surrounding events.
no subject
Yeah, I think this is true. But as for the rest, I think the reverse! I think in fandom, there's not a damn difference, they're just trying to make acquaintance rape sound good. But in the literal sense, there can be a big difference - for everyone who assumes or doesn't ask for consent when it's not there, there's a partner who assumes or doesn't ask for consent when it is there. Both are non-consensual, but only one is also rape.
(no subject)
(no subject)
no subject
And OMG, you got more responses than I would have, anyway.
*pleased*
no subject
I think a case could be made that all of those aliens-made-us-do-it, we-have-an-alien-virus-that-means-we're-going-to-die-unless-we-have-sex, and other similar stories are non-con without falling into the category of rape because none of the participating parties is forcing the other, but they're both being forced into something they don't want to do. So it's not really consensual, but it's not really rape in the normally understood sense.
Then again, most people who write those types of stories don't bother putting non-con at the top anyway, so when I see non-con, I figure the story deals with rape.
I'll point out here that I'm speaking from experience that's almost entirely centered around Stargate fandom since these things do tend to be different across fandoms (and even across different subsets within fandoms).
And here I got all rambly in your journal and you don't even know me. Er...hello. *g* I followed a link in
no subject
omg i am so legal-ish...
Non-consensual sex could include any form of sexual contact without actual penetration as well as including rape. Lesser criminal offenses that are variations of sexual assault are usually included here. Rape of children is sometimes considered a separate offense, especially in states that haven't changed their legal codes lately. I don't know if any states still have the "spousal exception" (*vomits*) on the books, but I think England still does.
Oftentimes "sexual intercourse" is defined as only penile-vaginal sex. All other forms of penetration are called "deviant sexual activity" in Arkansas and a lot of other states, but not all of them outlaw those actions. There are a lot of deviants out there, including our former president...
Some people seem to think non-consensual sex would include penetration after using a "date rape drug", but in legal terms the inability to give informed consent means that the act was rape, just as it would be rape if the victim was very low-IQ or a stroke victim in a nursing home. (I don't get why people don't see that they're just as bad.)
In fandom, the words seem to be used loosely and relatively interchangably. I think a lot of people don't know what they're talking about when they blather on about the subject.
Re: omg i am so legal-ish...
I do not have time right now.
Re: omg i am so legal-ish...
Re: omg i am so legal-ish...
Re: omg i am so legal-ish...
Re: omg i am so legal-ish...
Re: omg i am so legal-ish...
Re: omg i am so legal-ish...
Re: omg i am so legal-ish...
Re: omg i am so legal-ish...
Re: omg i am so legal-ish...
Re: omg i am so legal-ish...
*chokes*
*dies laughing*
So, so sorry. Really. If my brain was at all functioning right now, I'd contribute coherently to this conversation, but my brain is job-hunting-fried, and can focus on nothing but the inadvertent funny here. Because, really, there is so much of fandom that this sentence could be applied to. Oh, *so* much.
((Will go now and not spam. Bad Hilly, no cookie.))
no subject
... That's the idea. I'm yet to see it both labeled that way and properly executed.
no subject
no subject