![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Question # 4572
So. Was poking at fic sites, and it occurs to to ask:
What's the difference between 'rape' and 'non-consensual sex'?
What's the difference between 'rape' and 'non-consensual sex'?
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
12 letters and an SAT prep course?
'Non-con' is when he loves her really.
*eyeroll*
*eyeroll*
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.
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.
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.
Plus, I think it also is used in disclaimers because it triggers less emotional response among the squicked/survivors.
Well, hey, you just pointed out a case that's clearly non-consensual, but also pretty clearly not rape to most people. :)
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.
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.
You're allowed to Dirty Sanchez or Donkey Punch (or combine the two for the Juan Valdez) in rape...not in non-consensual.
There's a few answers to that question...
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.
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.
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.
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.
Most rape isn't stranger-perpetrated, though. That's a total myth about rape and murder; most are perpetrated by people you know, often people you know intimately. You can rape a spouse or girlfriend or a date; that's how most rapes occur. And I absolutely can't go along with a definition that implies it's not possible to rape someone you know well.
The difference, I think, is just what the words on their surface mean - "non-consensual" means no consent given, not why no consent was given or whether it would be given or what the non-consenting person really thought of it all. Rape is unwanted by the non-consenting partner. It's like... looking at two different ends of the transaction, I guess. All rape is non-consensual, but not all non-consensual sex is rape. Like![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
woodface implied, it's non-con if your partner wakes you up with oral sex, since you didn't consent to it.
The difference, I think, is just what the words on their surface mean - "non-consensual" means no consent given, not why no consent was given or whether it would be given or what the non-consenting person really thought of it all. Rape is unwanted by the non-consenting partner. It's like... looking at two different ends of the transaction, I guess. All rape is non-consensual, but not all non-consensual sex is rape. Like
woodface implied, it's non-con if your partner wakes you up with oral sex, since you didn't consent to it.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.
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.
Most rape isn't stranger-perpetrated, though. That's a total myth about rape and murder; most are perpetrated by people you know, often people you know intimately. You can rape a spouse or girlfriend or a date; that's how most rapes occur. And I absolutely can't go along with a definition that implies it's not possible to rape someone you know well.
Well, I know that, and you obviously know that, but to the public at large 'rape' still conjures images of someone being dragged into a back ally by some pervert. Which was my point. I'm talking about this in the context of fanfic, obviously.
Well, that, and I happen to know that Lyss was asking this because it was two separate categories on an archive, which is what I was drawing my conclusions from.
Well, I know that, and you obviously know that, but to the public at large 'rape' still conjures images of someone being dragged into a back ally by some pervert. Which was my point. I'm talking about this in the context of fanfic, obviously.
Well, that, and I happen to know that Lyss was asking this because it was two separate categories on an archive, which is what I was drawing my conclusions from.
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.
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.
*clings for does not know and hence had you ask*
And OMG, you got more responses than I would have, anyway.
*pleased*
And OMG, you got more responses than I would have, anyway.
*pleased*
Usually nothing.
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 inqwirky's journal to get here.
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.I think in fandom, there's not a damn difference, they're just trying to make acquaintance rape sound good.
I'm sure is some cases that's quite true. I'm sure every author that uses that label has their interpretation of it.
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.
Also true. Life just isn't black and white, as much as we'd like it to be on serious topics like this (especially when the Really Wrong version is Extremely obvious). And that's similar to what I was saying (way at the top:)) about certain types of stories in the fandom.:)
I'm sure is some cases that's quite true. I'm sure every author that uses that label has their interpretation of it.
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.
Also true. Life just isn't black and white, as much as we'd like it to be on serious topics like this (especially when the Really Wrong version is Extremely obvious). And that's similar to what I was saying (way at the top:)) about certain types of stories in the fandom.:)
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.
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.
The one concession I might make to the Stupid People is that most definitions of rape carry an implication of violence which is abstracted out of "non-consensual" - that makes no implication of violence or the lack thereof. So it may be divided down lines of the accompanying violence. But I think it's a fairly stupid division, if so - it just means they're misguided morons, rather than utter morons. Non-con can be violent, and rape can be non-violent. For all practical purposes (well, fanfic divisions, anyway), it's the same thing. (Okay, the one case where it might not be might be in cases where the perpetrator wasn't in control of his actions, like the real-life case of the guy who, genuinely, had sex with someone in his sleep without knowing it, or with a perpetrator who's some bizarre alien who doesn't have the mental capacity to grasp the concept. But that's not how ficcers use it. They use it to mean Rape They Don't Think Is Bad.)
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.
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.
Page 1 of 3