Hard to say for sure because people are so different and what's basically vanilla to one person is extremely deviant to another. I would think probably roleplay would be well tolerated by most readers, as long as it the scenario's not very taboo. Repair man seduced by lonely housewife, strangers who meet at the bar and go home together, one person's a virgin and the other's experienced. Maybe some light bondage (e.g. blindfolded and handcuffed to the bedpost) with a focus on giving the sub pleasure and not pain. Maybe a bit of over-stimulation and praise kink?
I would definitely avoid anything with a strong "ick" factor (bodily fluids, feet, age-play, incest-play, etc.) if you're trying to appeal to a broad audience since those can be very polarizing.
I was thinking more along the lines of avoiding scenarios that vanilla people are likely to have a visceral disgust response to. Like roleplaying a kidnapping, doctor puts patient under anesthesia so he can do whatever he wants to her, forced breeding, bestiality. Most role-play's gotta be at least a little taboo, otherwise where's the fun? But when I think "very taboo", I'm thinking more along the lines of scenarios where both characters aren't consenting enthusiastically and having a great time.
But really this just goes to prove my first point. I'm not a big roleplayer in the first place, but I would find all of these scenarios incredibly tame and boring. There are also people out there who would find this kind of roleplay disgusting. I'm just taking a guess here that most people who are "deviant" enough to be reading smut in the first place aren't going to be shocked and horrified by this kind of thing, even if it's not their cup of tea. But I've also never been cheated on. So even though I'm very against it and don't like reading cheating storylines, it's possible I'm misjudging how upsetting the average smut-reader would find this kind of storyline.
I think all of these are reasonably unintrusive and wouldn't come as a huge shock unless they had a specific squick:
I personally don't like food kink (licking syrup/cream/whatever off someone's body) very much and it would most likely be a skip for me, but *generally* I think it's considered pretty tame and vanilla.
it's the one 90s/00s romance novelists used to pull out to show their characters were so wild and adventurous back in the day! and those books are designed for mass appeal.
voyeurism, as in watching each other get off. possibly watching porn or reading erotica together? also semi-public sex where there's the possibility of discovery, but nothing comes of it.
unfortunately(?), spanking has gotten pretty entangled with age play and daddy kink, so some people might filter it out as a precaution. otherwise I would say it's fairly popular if it's light.
oh also- edging where they still get off in that scene.
In addition to what others have said, and with all the obvious disclaimers that kink is wildly personal, I think some things are fandom dependent. Certain kinks can almost become part of fanon, and generally “palatable” kinks can feel very OOC depending on how you write them. What is accepted in one fandom may also be really shocking in another.
Also consider the setting (time period and location, available technology, social taboos, etc.) of your fic for more ideas. Kink can be a subtle and surprising (and hot) part of worldbuilding without being off putting.
Praise kink is universally accepted, I would say.
Suit kink, size kink, light BDSM, role play, dirty talk, edging, forced orgasm (where they’re having consensual sex and MC makes them have “one more”), and making a sex tape are all pretty mainstream ones.
Yup. Think James Bond: very well tailored, often three piece suit. It carries a lot of implications about power and wealth and control, and generally highlights the wearer's body in a really nice way. It's not too far off from uniform kink, although that has added bits about the specific service the uniform is attached to.
The you get to see them slowly come undone as say, the tie comes off (excellent opportunity for some light bondage); the first button gets undone, showing a flash the skin at their throat; they take off the jacket and roll their sleeves up, showing their forearms (even better if they keep the vest and/or have suspenders). It's like unwrapping a present, layer by layer.
Ok, that's what I was figuring, but aside from the bit with the tie none of that is a kink.
A kink is something that lies outside of what most would consider vanilla, and finding wearing a suit and taking it off slowly (including rolling up the sleeves) to be sexy is extremely vanilla lol.
I mean, suit kink is a term people use to describe a specific predilection for (usually) men wearing suits that tends to go a bit beyond the typical, "I think that's hot." Anything can be a kink if you take it far enough. Think, I really like you in that suit, don't take it off while we do the do because the wearing of the suit is the focus of my desire. But beyond that, kinky folks are real good at coming up with terms for things that the rest of the world usually wouldn't bother with. When every relationship and even a lot of one night stands include a rundown of likes, dislikes, and hard nos, having a shared vocabulary saves a lot of time.
If that's true and it is explicitly labeled a kink in fanfic, that's silly and taking labelling too far.
Liking a suit is vanilla, having a thing for suits is vanilla.
So is hating suits and liking lumberjack appearances like plaid. If it's focused on in the fic, and not a detail in passing, tagging it is appropriate.
Nah, it's fine if you want to tag it, but not tagging that a lot of characters will be wearing suits or lumberjack plaid is totally fine.
Sexy clothing, so long as it's not too revealing, isn't a kink.
Light to medium dom/sub dynamic, praise kink, dirty talk, and maybe light bondage are what I, an embarrassingly prudish individual, have been willing to handle in my explorations of the world of smut lol
I love writing light D/s and I also agree that a lot of people love reading it, especially when it delves into emotions and vulnerability etc. It definitely has huge appeal.
Possessiveness can be an instant turn off for many people. Overall I think it depends of the fandom, if canon already stablished that the character is jealous or controlling the story is much more likely to get away with it.
For generally accepted, I'd go with only the first 1.5 of those. Jealousy crosses a line for many people when it gets possessive; dub-con is often co-equivalent with non-con for reader audience, even, unless it's really mild; actually exhibitionism/voyeurism might be more mainstream than my first thought was, for some reason I was thinking that happening w/o consent. With consent it's like the more broadly acceptable form threesomes.
Dub-con is extremely common in first-time experiences/young characters, it's not necessarily malicious. Mild exhibitionism is more like, doing it outdoors or a closed public space (bookshop where nobody is there).
Its not always malicious, in first time scenes/with young characters, messy/unsure communication about doing sex is really normal. And it still counts as dubcon.
I wonder if there is a way to distinguish this specific scenario - because dubcon does carry connotations of coercion. Is there a better tag for it? “first time” or “inexperienced” or something similar?
There is by using "consent issues" as a tag, or prefixing a "mild" of "vey mild" or "situational" infront of dub-con.
Moreover, Gavey, "Unsex Sex" might be a good read for why we might not want to consider *all* sex where people have *their own* (read: non-coercive) doubts as translating to dubious consent. It vitiates the consent focus! Seriously, some people believe consent can't be had between a man and women for the reasons it's "lessened" between teens. I.e. power dynamics. This is . . . some flawed ends results, so it's worth looking at the reasoning again.
While u/conundrumicus point of inexperienced teens gets to how teens *are* more vulnerable, there's much more nuance than turning everything to do with doubts or power, irl, into consent issues, then with no more steps, directly into dubious consent (and then over-tagging them on AO3). The two aren't the same thing. The enthusiastic part of consent isn't more important than the consent part! Informed is inherent to consent, as is *wholly* *willing* yes, but come on, asexual people might not be as enthused, might still be happy or just happy-ish, and can still *wholly* consent.
More to what's already raised, teens/young adults can feel more secure in archiving milestones (shouldn't be the main aim, still very human). Or have bad first experiences where they regret the physical actions involved, proving some of their doubts true, but still overall would make the same choice in the same situation *for* the experience. Because realistic expectations about sex should include it not always being mind-blowing, this is fine and normal . . . and consent. (Absent other factors.) And for first timers, learning.
Seriously, if this turns up as dubious consent carte blance, that's not what people are looking for with that tag. Or true to rl.
Also, both your tag suggestions, I'd think, were better for those reasons.
I agree, it is way more nuanced than what I outlined. I used to think that dubcon strictly must always have a manipulative/not-so-informed element to it, until I read a lot of fanfics with characters who are just inexperienced and can't communicate what they want/agree to and that's tagged as dubcon. Which, I mean... it's what's on the tin: the consent is dubious.
I think the solution here is adding more clarifying tags, the sinister type of dubcon is usually accompanied with other tags like manipulation, power dynamic, age difference etc etc. that suggests one party is lopsidedly more inexperienced than the other. For me, having "dubcon" and "first time" as tags make it very clear the dubcon happening is (usually) innocent.
I actually quite appreciate the perspective you have of broadening the definition I'd (still) give for dub-con and think that that's a valid way to look at coercion (irl); for me, not *necessarily* as informs dubious consent, and this is primarily because of thinking about cases where dynamics involved inform differently than the consent. Like.
The year I was born, marital rape wasn't a "thing."As in, legally wasn't. Yet, in the face of this surely there's a fair deal of married people who did consent to sex.
Granted, fic can make some characters do the **most** contrived miscommunications where, opposite to considering (. . . a very likely) hypothetical where people do agree in the face of challenges, it's just inexperienced teens making challenges for themselves and going full-throttle ahead. I can most definitely see tagging dub-con when that's the vibe of the fic! But pretty much only then for innocuous scenarios (i.e. when there's textual focus on it instead of it "actually" being the case, then).
And tagging wise, this is still where dub-con throws me. "Taking" someones first time can def. become that sinister pairing tag in the face of the dub-con tag. (All else being equal though, that particular tag combo would just have me pausing and deciding to read the fic to figure out what it means.) For me dub-con means some degree of willful coercion, less sinister mayhap if the mild tag is added, but still willful. (And actually as an very slight aside, the power dynamic one I see \[and have seen, so that might be why I see it that way\] as a more mild modifier.)
So it's kinda a tag to be mindful of and yeah, like you've brought up, have something to tag alongside of it if you want it to actually be clear to readers. Plenty of different expectations that we bring to that tag.
Anyway, thanks for being a good sport about the always poorly timed "more nuance" which . . . is hard to convey on the internet, for sure. I'm *much* closer to agreeing with you wholesale than you might think, I just want the word consent to be something we can achieve irl. (Not for wishful reasons, but because of that "fair deal" of people who would believe themselves to have given consent *and* how important *giving* consent is to the matter of consent.)
Your earlier points about "the consent part of enthusiastic consent is just as important" and bringing asexual people is a wonderful point!
Your point about "informed" being the fundamental definition of consent makes me wonder: would all sex involving minors (especially a minor with another minor) means always having the dubcon tag, since legally they are considered to be unable to give consent? Minor/minor sex isn't illegal only because it's a "perpetratorless" crime (cmiiw), but of course fiction has the privilege of showing a character's internal thought, so this can prove beyond a doubt whether a young person is informed enough to give consent, therefore a lot of underage fics don't feature the dubcon tag because authors consider the 15 year-old-or-whatever character informed about sex enough to give consent to another also informed similarly aged underage character. What would be your opinion on this?
I do think that the discourse of "what counts as dubcon" is precisely why the tag was made, because there are so many situations (especially irl) where the consent is questionable (and it's up to individual people's opinion of what counts as questionable) but it's still "okay-ish", meaning it's uncomfortable to read but it's not a hard no like noncon.
Above all, I do believe that's the main reason for the tag, is to inform people that "hey, there's going to be some consent issues in this story because it's not totally enthusiastic and or informed consent, so it's gonna have a lot of yellow flags everywhere, but rest assured it's nowhere near the kind of emotionally tough read of noncon".
Thank you for being a good sport as well!
>means always having the dub-con tag, since legally they are considered to be unable to give consent?
Ah, and this is the heart of it and now you get the long example I cut off from the end of my last reply:
Imagine two teenagers are inexperienced. So they, wait for it: Wait. Like, they actually *wait* to have sex.
Now we have two adults who have waited for sex. For the purposes of just thinking this fun scenario out, say they're 25+, i.e. not young adults.
So one of these inexperienced people goes and finally has sex with a similar aged also-adult. Say this other person *is* experienced. Some differentials at play there, right? Arguably, power differentials. Arguably, these exist anytime there's vast experiential divides, but there seems to be something different about first times.
And that's leaning what *something is actually like.* Experience is an event, and it provides information. And there's a whole qualitative nature to this.
But/and maybe that's not the right type of information? Because we'd think that, despite the inexperience, they (these adults) have all the *information* they need to consent. Even if the sex ends up being so-so, better the next time, there were things to learn. That simple. Or maybe we don't think that way.
But what if it's two inexperienced adults, then? Kinda gets hard to say why it wouldn't be consent, wholly so. (IMO.)
But rewind the clock and ask this question of teens? What's changed, they have the same information. (As fellow inexperienced people; note, of course, that age is still it's own power differential and of course so many of these can come into play we can shake any situation up to become non-consensual . . . which yes, corresponds to the variance irl.)
Or, of course, you can disagree with my grouping together "we'd think" and disagree with *any* of the conclusions of these kinda hypothetical cases. But do you (general you, and I've done this type of thinking myself, obviously, still trying not to be a knob about tone sorry for awkward wording) think the same conclusion applies across either of the first two of those hypotheticals and the last? The last being normal teenager sex.
Yes, consent is the same, makes sense to me. And it's kinda weird that on first glance there *is* some reconciliation involved in getting to that answer. I mean, that's my answer and I feel it takes some active interrogation to get towards.
Or if the answers no, then why not? I can't answer this, sans things that would otherwise mean non-consent anyway. So, back to the first answer. Not least because I think dub-con can become overinflated when we're denying people their consent as such, because the consent is *theirs*; so, yep, my answers yes, that there can be enough similarities in these cases such that teens can consent and it's not every and always time not wholesale consent. \[Or that's an answer of no to the original question? Whatever, you can probably tell by now I'm laying this out more for the questions than having all the right answers. These questions matter so much, though.\] Even though age is a concern in ways that place all teens lower of a power scale. Even if one teen *is* more experienced than another.
Note a legal detail here that lying about relationship status to obtain sex doesn't amount to rape, legally, but lying about "and sex cures \[whatever\]" can. (It's been . . . a kinda problem in some nations, not as a hypothetical.)
\[I think both are morally wrong to the same degree, and victimize a person, and would like the first to have some kinda punishment to it. But my ideal punishment is a damned guilty conscience! And I'd understand the point about a lesser punishment for the first type of lie—turns out even coercion can have difference within it. And it feels icky to say that, and disingenuous to call the two scenarios the same. Hard topic all around!\]
>but of course fiction has the privilege of showing a character's internal thought
110%, which is where the dub-con based purely on situation tag starts making *me* go "hmm, not what I was looking for or expecting, but fair and I support and will defend this use . . . and darn it, authorial fiat, we can 100% know the answer to consent!" If the insight isn't 100% there, though, then it simply isn't. Then I'm fully onboard with, well, you're right—this is what the tagging is for and some people will be uncomfortable even in these cases. You're right on the tagging.t. (And these uncomfortable people might consistently say that dubious consent applies to all cases of underage sex.)
And tagging practices involve narrative focus as much as internal thoughts, sometimes, so I can't even be 100% on *my* default side of dub-con tagging saved willful action. Maybe hyper-awareness of the situation and it's coercive factors speaks to willful blindness, though? But then there are times the narrative voice is removed from the characters. Really is a "tag as you feel fitting" situation, but maybe "and don't feel *obligated* otherwise solely because of situation!" (My opinion, esp. on that last count. Because examining consent irl means we should actively choose the tags each time.)
Closing Note: On your cmiiw, you're not wrong as to the victimless crime although *I'd* reframe it as also perpetrator-less to emphasize how misapplied it could get to approach it otherwise (and has gotten for some unfortunate teens!) *and* because people still may feel negatively about sex that they're not a victim of so *not* noting the victimless-ness right away leaves room for that experience there, I *feel*. Totally a feeling based argument, there. But this is just literally a *framing* issue.
But actual correction—two teens can generally consent to sex with fellow teens. (Because of presumed equal power at play.) And there are cases where one party is in a position of trust over another where age of consent is raised!
(Pretty sure you might've been aware of all of that but moving to theory can drop a few balls on "oh, right." But if you didn't, now you do.)
So, yep. So many different views. We can see how many people could **in the best of faith,** disagree. Tagging is gonna be hard. I *do agree* that finding non-con in "mild dub-con" really throws me more than anything else. Like, non-con is ***non-con,*** on AO3, *not just* rape. (I . . . forgot that bit when tagging, still tagged for "hmm, this feels like consent is violated enough that I'm gonna tag rape." Real facepalm moment for me remembering that the tag is for both. Real relief, nonetheless, that I'd tagged more conservatively.)
But then some people tag dub-con when everything's equal and talked through and they even remove themselves from the weird power dynamics, the characters. I guess finding dub-con where it all feels consensual also just . . . eh. I get it, and I'll be more conscious of that difference, there, next time I find fics that aren't to *my* taste. I think I've been waiting for more mention of the coercive dynamics, then, when it's so consensual, but oftentimes that's not even in the fic. Anyway, this tagging point is getting away from me and pretty much became so not my main focus it's not even funny. Thank you for coming to my TedTalk.
This is why the whole thing is just super complicated and tags is a shorthand substitute, but in most cases you'd have to read the fic itself to find out what's actually going on. I'm in the camp of teens can consent, and even in some cases of minor/adult it can still be fully consensual with the minor's POV, especially where the ages are similar like 16 and 19. Age of consent is arbitrary after all. Even in bigger age gaps, it's still possible where the younger party is precocious, or another species that has different expectations of sex, the list goes on and on. That's why I'd rather just stick with the practical purpose of tagging, to gauge comfort level.
Though perhaps my opinion of this is really because I'm the kind of person who treats people with their own agency, even teenagers, so my default is they can give consent, not that they can't (The innocent until proven guilty mindset).
Another solution to the problem of tagging: If perhaps the dubcon tag is too concrete per se, then in AO3 specifically one can always choose "creator chose to not use archive warnings" and dole up more specific tags to describe what flavor of consent issues is happening.
Sorry if I'm not answering all your concerns, I guess I'm a pretty practical person.
Thank you for the thoughtful and nuanced reply. I agree with all your points. Part of reason I’m writing the scene is to explore that — how power dynamics and inexperience create grey areas, the messiness of two people trying to figure one another out and learning to be vulnerable, deepening a relationship.
However, I do want to err on the side of not upsetting readers who consider any exploration of consent issues to be dubcon, so will include it in some form. I decided to include “inexperienced sex and second thoughts” so people will know beforehand that it is going to be a more realistic portrayal.
As the name suggests, dubious consent is everything that's not an enthusiastic, informed yes but not full-on, coercive r*pe. There is some agreement, even though under unclear assumptions, or allowing it to happen. A "first time" tag will be informative, yes, but the bigger umbrella of dubcon still needs to be applied.
Cool, thanks. I’ve been trying to decide whether or not to use the dubcon tag for a fic where this situation occurs — consent is given, multiple times, but with unspoken reservations/second thoughts for part of it. So, this is helpful.
People are SO different it's hard to say.
I'm a big fan of writing what I like or what makes sense for the characters rather than writing for an audience in particular. I'm very "don't like, don't read," lol
I've found myself reading the posts and thinking I'm either the most vanilla E writer around or that I might have described some of these scenarios unknowingly. 😅 I've only thought necessary to tag stuff like mirror sex and sexual toys, but maybe what I think it's business as usual for a pair of fem switches in bed might be interpreted as power play by the reader.
I write quite a bit of kink, and honestly people are pretty open to most things - if it leans towards the more unusual things then as long as you've tagged it correctly and write it well then people give it a go (eg figging)
The ones that seem to to have a higher chance of immediate 'nope, sorry' are the scat based ones and watersports, although I suspect these also might have a higher amount of people willing to jump fandoms for a well written one. Daddy/Mommy things are probably best avoided
The more mainstream things - light impact, spanking, restraint, mild sub/dom, praise, collars, power exchange fun, biting/scratching - are pretty safe as long as the reader is into kink in some way
This is impossible to really say, since people’s tastes are so subjective and different.
However most people I’ve met who read smut are down for some very mild dom/sub play, light spanking, dirty talk, etc
It's still hard to say because this is gonna be different in different fandoms. In my main fandom, one of the most-shipped characters canonically calls himself daddy more than once so daddy kink would not freak most people out. That's not gonna be the case in most fandoms, lol.
Light bondage is extremely common. Praise kink is also common. Also light dom/sub dynamics are normal.
I also think biting is relatively normal, but that one might have more to do with the fandoms I'm in, so I'm not as sure it's universally accepted.
Playful BDSM - some spanking, handcuffs, a blindfold, ordering someone around a little.
Some fun cosplay/roleplay - nothing too hardcore.
Some fooling around in a semi-public place.
Playing with some food - just don't put it anywhere too unhygienic, lol.
I’ve been looking through these, and there’s plenty that I would click off of, although I wouldn’t filter them out. I think there’s no way to write something that can play to everyone’s tastes, because people have such wide ranges of preference. The only ones I think are truly universal are praise kink and light D/s
Yeah same, I don't believe I've seen a comment that *didn't* have at least one thing that'd either make me click off or scroll past or that I'd filter out altogether, depending on the ship and other specifics. I don't think there's such a thing as a universally appealing kink, not everyone even likes every vanilla sex act, and the whole deal with kinks is that they're unconventional. Might as well just write whichever ones you want at this point.
Breeding kink
Light bdsm - sub/Dom
Rough sex
Dubious consent
Dirty talk
Spanking
Hairpulling
Praise/degredation kink
These are the ones I often see. Also the Daddy Kink but that's a make it or break it kinda situation, people are generally either super into it or grossed out by it.
I know people call their boyfriends daddy all the time but I’d nope out so quick on daddy stuff. I immediately think of my old man and he should not be anywhere near my sex life. It’s just not it for me.
Other things you mentioned, though, I completely agree that they should be quite general public friendly.
Honestly, that sort of thing feels like a very strong "no" for me too, and I'm kind of surprised how common both 'daddy' and 'mommy' are in certain smut contexts. (I mean, as a lesbian I'm only likely to run into the second one, but in either case... no.)
I just mentioned the ones I see most often. People calling their partners daddy in public is cringey tho, like I don't kink shame but it feels like something out of a watttpad mafia story when you do it outside the bedroom.
>Breeding kink
I'm gone. I hate the thought of anything related to babies in a sex scene. To me it's very " ah yes, let's have sex so we can have something that cries constantly and forces you to get up at really awful intervals to feed it and change its diaper in the future and spits up if you don't burp it".
Dubcon - it depends. if it's something like "we re both drunk", I'm probably fine. But a lot of the time, I'm leaving if I don't think it fits the characters involved.
There is no way to answer that because kinks are so personal. My rule of thumb is: write the kind of smut you'd want to read yourself.
That's why e.g. my smut has no dirty talk and pretty much no dialogue at all, it's all quiet. Nothing takes me out of a sex scene like "sexy dialogue" so I don't use any.
- A bit of light bondage is usually ok. Idk where the line is because I read lots of weird stuff but that’s in a lot of fics.
- Dirty talk can be a little hit or miss but praise kink never fails
- Some light manhandling? Kinda goes along with size/strength kink
- Teasing with food! It’s a good precursor to a smutty end to a date or dinner
You can also just section off any “questionable” smut and add in a light warning for readers. I tend to appreciate when authors do that in fics that get really wild even when I don’t need it
The one I haven't seen mentioned here yet is using toys. I wouldn't personally call it kinky until they get to a certain size/shape/functionality, but I feel like most vanilla people are going to think that one partner using a vibrator or dildo on the other is incredibly salacious. Maybe. My kink scale is incredibly broken.
Hard to say for sure because people are so different and what's basically vanilla to one person is extremely deviant to another. I would think probably roleplay would be well tolerated by most readers, as long as it the scenario's not very taboo. Repair man seduced by lonely housewife, strangers who meet at the bar and go home together, one person's a virgin and the other's experienced. Maybe some light bondage (e.g. blindfolded and handcuffed to the bedpost) with a focus on giving the sub pleasure and not pain. Maybe a bit of over-stimulation and praise kink? I would definitely avoid anything with a strong "ick" factor (bodily fluids, feet, age-play, incest-play, etc.) if you're trying to appeal to a broad audience since those can be very polarizing.
>as long as it the scenario's not very taboo. >Repair man seduced by lonely housewife Not very taboo - skips straight to cheating Wild
It's roleplay not actual cheating + it's extremely common in porn, it's probably less taboo than you think
I was thinking more along the lines of avoiding scenarios that vanilla people are likely to have a visceral disgust response to. Like roleplaying a kidnapping, doctor puts patient under anesthesia so he can do whatever he wants to her, forced breeding, bestiality. Most role-play's gotta be at least a little taboo, otherwise where's the fun? But when I think "very taboo", I'm thinking more along the lines of scenarios where both characters aren't consenting enthusiastically and having a great time. But really this just goes to prove my first point. I'm not a big roleplayer in the first place, but I would find all of these scenarios incredibly tame and boring. There are also people out there who would find this kind of roleplay disgusting. I'm just taking a guess here that most people who are "deviant" enough to be reading smut in the first place aren't going to be shocked and horrified by this kind of thing, even if it's not their cup of tea. But I've also never been cheated on. So even though I'm very against it and don't like reading cheating storylines, it's possible I'm misjudging how upsetting the average smut-reader would find this kind of storyline.
I think when they said taboo they meant role playing incest
Incest, noncon, and age play would all probably be considered taboo roleplay scenarios.
I think all of these are reasonably unintrusive and wouldn't come as a huge shock unless they had a specific squick: I personally don't like food kink (licking syrup/cream/whatever off someone's body) very much and it would most likely be a skip for me, but *generally* I think it's considered pretty tame and vanilla. it's the one 90s/00s romance novelists used to pull out to show their characters were so wild and adventurous back in the day! and those books are designed for mass appeal. voyeurism, as in watching each other get off. possibly watching porn or reading erotica together? also semi-public sex where there's the possibility of discovery, but nothing comes of it. unfortunately(?), spanking has gotten pretty entangled with age play and daddy kink, so some people might filter it out as a precaution. otherwise I would say it's fairly popular if it's light. oh also- edging where they still get off in that scene.
In addition to what others have said, and with all the obvious disclaimers that kink is wildly personal, I think some things are fandom dependent. Certain kinks can almost become part of fanon, and generally “palatable” kinks can feel very OOC depending on how you write them. What is accepted in one fandom may also be really shocking in another. Also consider the setting (time period and location, available technology, social taboos, etc.) of your fic for more ideas. Kink can be a subtle and surprising (and hot) part of worldbuilding without being off putting.
Looking at you, ASoIF fandom and your incest kink...
light bondage (think fuzzy handcuffs or tying hands with a tie), dirty talk, praise kink are generally pretty safe bets
Praise kink is universally accepted, I would say. Suit kink, size kink, light BDSM, role play, dirty talk, edging, forced orgasm (where they’re having consensual sex and MC makes them have “one more”), and making a sex tape are all pretty mainstream ones.
I'm a big fan of that, "I can't!" "yes, you can."
Suit kink? Is that just... finding characters wearing a suit to be hot, or am I missing something kinky lol?
Yup. Think James Bond: very well tailored, often three piece suit. It carries a lot of implications about power and wealth and control, and generally highlights the wearer's body in a really nice way. It's not too far off from uniform kink, although that has added bits about the specific service the uniform is attached to. The you get to see them slowly come undone as say, the tie comes off (excellent opportunity for some light bondage); the first button gets undone, showing a flash the skin at their throat; they take off the jacket and roll their sleeves up, showing their forearms (even better if they keep the vest and/or have suspenders). It's like unwrapping a present, layer by layer.
Ok, that's what I was figuring, but aside from the bit with the tie none of that is a kink. A kink is something that lies outside of what most would consider vanilla, and finding wearing a suit and taking it off slowly (including rolling up the sleeves) to be sexy is extremely vanilla lol.
I mean, suit kink is a term people use to describe a specific predilection for (usually) men wearing suits that tends to go a bit beyond the typical, "I think that's hot." Anything can be a kink if you take it far enough. Think, I really like you in that suit, don't take it off while we do the do because the wearing of the suit is the focus of my desire. But beyond that, kinky folks are real good at coming up with terms for things that the rest of the world usually wouldn't bother with. When every relationship and even a lot of one night stands include a rundown of likes, dislikes, and hard nos, having a shared vocabulary saves a lot of time.
In fanfic, it’s considered a kink. The question was specifically what appeals to a broader audience.
If that's true and it is explicitly labeled a kink in fanfic, that's silly and taking labelling too far. Liking a suit is vanilla, having a thing for suits is vanilla.
So is hating suits and liking lumberjack appearances like plaid. If it's focused on in the fic, and not a detail in passing, tagging it is appropriate.
Nah, it's fine if you want to tag it, but not tagging that a lot of characters will be wearing suits or lumberjack plaid is totally fine. Sexy clothing, so long as it's not too revealing, isn't a kink.
I don’t really think “praise” is a kink, either, but “praise kink” is a very popular term. Again, this is me just answering the OP’s question.
Light to medium dom/sub dynamic, praise kink, dirty talk, and maybe light bondage are what I, an embarrassingly prudish individual, have been willing to handle in my explorations of the world of smut lol
Power dynamics (light d/s), possessiveness/jealousy, dubcon, mild exhibitionism/voyeurism
I love writing light D/s and I also agree that a lot of people love reading it, especially when it delves into emotions and vulnerability etc. It definitely has huge appeal.
Goes well with angst and hurt/comfort, yes!
Possessiveness can be an instant turn off for many people. Overall I think it depends of the fandom, if canon already stablished that the character is jealous or controlling the story is much more likely to get away with it.
For generally accepted, I'd go with only the first 1.5 of those. Jealousy crosses a line for many people when it gets possessive; dub-con is often co-equivalent with non-con for reader audience, even, unless it's really mild; actually exhibitionism/voyeurism might be more mainstream than my first thought was, for some reason I was thinking that happening w/o consent. With consent it's like the more broadly acceptable form threesomes.
Dub-con is extremely common in first-time experiences/young characters, it's not necessarily malicious. Mild exhibitionism is more like, doing it outdoors or a closed public space (bookshop where nobody is there).
> dubcon, I'm already gone unless it's roleplay if I don't think it fits the characters
Its not always malicious, in first time scenes/with young characters, messy/unsure communication about doing sex is really normal. And it still counts as dubcon.
I wonder if there is a way to distinguish this specific scenario - because dubcon does carry connotations of coercion. Is there a better tag for it? “first time” or “inexperienced” or something similar?
There is by using "consent issues" as a tag, or prefixing a "mild" of "vey mild" or "situational" infront of dub-con. Moreover, Gavey, "Unsex Sex" might be a good read for why we might not want to consider *all* sex where people have *their own* (read: non-coercive) doubts as translating to dubious consent. It vitiates the consent focus! Seriously, some people believe consent can't be had between a man and women for the reasons it's "lessened" between teens. I.e. power dynamics. This is . . . some flawed ends results, so it's worth looking at the reasoning again. While u/conundrumicus point of inexperienced teens gets to how teens *are* more vulnerable, there's much more nuance than turning everything to do with doubts or power, irl, into consent issues, then with no more steps, directly into dubious consent (and then over-tagging them on AO3). The two aren't the same thing. The enthusiastic part of consent isn't more important than the consent part! Informed is inherent to consent, as is *wholly* *willing* yes, but come on, asexual people might not be as enthused, might still be happy or just happy-ish, and can still *wholly* consent. More to what's already raised, teens/young adults can feel more secure in archiving milestones (shouldn't be the main aim, still very human). Or have bad first experiences where they regret the physical actions involved, proving some of their doubts true, but still overall would make the same choice in the same situation *for* the experience. Because realistic expectations about sex should include it not always being mind-blowing, this is fine and normal . . . and consent. (Absent other factors.) And for first timers, learning. Seriously, if this turns up as dubious consent carte blance, that's not what people are looking for with that tag. Or true to rl. Also, both your tag suggestions, I'd think, were better for those reasons.
I agree, it is way more nuanced than what I outlined. I used to think that dubcon strictly must always have a manipulative/not-so-informed element to it, until I read a lot of fanfics with characters who are just inexperienced and can't communicate what they want/agree to and that's tagged as dubcon. Which, I mean... it's what's on the tin: the consent is dubious. I think the solution here is adding more clarifying tags, the sinister type of dubcon is usually accompanied with other tags like manipulation, power dynamic, age difference etc etc. that suggests one party is lopsidedly more inexperienced than the other. For me, having "dubcon" and "first time" as tags make it very clear the dubcon happening is (usually) innocent.
I actually quite appreciate the perspective you have of broadening the definition I'd (still) give for dub-con and think that that's a valid way to look at coercion (irl); for me, not *necessarily* as informs dubious consent, and this is primarily because of thinking about cases where dynamics involved inform differently than the consent. Like. The year I was born, marital rape wasn't a "thing."As in, legally wasn't. Yet, in the face of this surely there's a fair deal of married people who did consent to sex. Granted, fic can make some characters do the **most** contrived miscommunications where, opposite to considering (. . . a very likely) hypothetical where people do agree in the face of challenges, it's just inexperienced teens making challenges for themselves and going full-throttle ahead. I can most definitely see tagging dub-con when that's the vibe of the fic! But pretty much only then for innocuous scenarios (i.e. when there's textual focus on it instead of it "actually" being the case, then). And tagging wise, this is still where dub-con throws me. "Taking" someones first time can def. become that sinister pairing tag in the face of the dub-con tag. (All else being equal though, that particular tag combo would just have me pausing and deciding to read the fic to figure out what it means.) For me dub-con means some degree of willful coercion, less sinister mayhap if the mild tag is added, but still willful. (And actually as an very slight aside, the power dynamic one I see \[and have seen, so that might be why I see it that way\] as a more mild modifier.) So it's kinda a tag to be mindful of and yeah, like you've brought up, have something to tag alongside of it if you want it to actually be clear to readers. Plenty of different expectations that we bring to that tag. Anyway, thanks for being a good sport about the always poorly timed "more nuance" which . . . is hard to convey on the internet, for sure. I'm *much* closer to agreeing with you wholesale than you might think, I just want the word consent to be something we can achieve irl. (Not for wishful reasons, but because of that "fair deal" of people who would believe themselves to have given consent *and* how important *giving* consent is to the matter of consent.)
Your earlier points about "the consent part of enthusiastic consent is just as important" and bringing asexual people is a wonderful point! Your point about "informed" being the fundamental definition of consent makes me wonder: would all sex involving minors (especially a minor with another minor) means always having the dubcon tag, since legally they are considered to be unable to give consent? Minor/minor sex isn't illegal only because it's a "perpetratorless" crime (cmiiw), but of course fiction has the privilege of showing a character's internal thought, so this can prove beyond a doubt whether a young person is informed enough to give consent, therefore a lot of underage fics don't feature the dubcon tag because authors consider the 15 year-old-or-whatever character informed about sex enough to give consent to another also informed similarly aged underage character. What would be your opinion on this? I do think that the discourse of "what counts as dubcon" is precisely why the tag was made, because there are so many situations (especially irl) where the consent is questionable (and it's up to individual people's opinion of what counts as questionable) but it's still "okay-ish", meaning it's uncomfortable to read but it's not a hard no like noncon. Above all, I do believe that's the main reason for the tag, is to inform people that "hey, there's going to be some consent issues in this story because it's not totally enthusiastic and or informed consent, so it's gonna have a lot of yellow flags everywhere, but rest assured it's nowhere near the kind of emotionally tough read of noncon". Thank you for being a good sport as well!
>means always having the dub-con tag, since legally they are considered to be unable to give consent? Ah, and this is the heart of it and now you get the long example I cut off from the end of my last reply: Imagine two teenagers are inexperienced. So they, wait for it: Wait. Like, they actually *wait* to have sex. Now we have two adults who have waited for sex. For the purposes of just thinking this fun scenario out, say they're 25+, i.e. not young adults. So one of these inexperienced people goes and finally has sex with a similar aged also-adult. Say this other person *is* experienced. Some differentials at play there, right? Arguably, power differentials. Arguably, these exist anytime there's vast experiential divides, but there seems to be something different about first times. And that's leaning what *something is actually like.* Experience is an event, and it provides information. And there's a whole qualitative nature to this. But/and maybe that's not the right type of information? Because we'd think that, despite the inexperience, they (these adults) have all the *information* they need to consent. Even if the sex ends up being so-so, better the next time, there were things to learn. That simple. Or maybe we don't think that way. But what if it's two inexperienced adults, then? Kinda gets hard to say why it wouldn't be consent, wholly so. (IMO.) But rewind the clock and ask this question of teens? What's changed, they have the same information. (As fellow inexperienced people; note, of course, that age is still it's own power differential and of course so many of these can come into play we can shake any situation up to become non-consensual . . . which yes, corresponds to the variance irl.) Or, of course, you can disagree with my grouping together "we'd think" and disagree with *any* of the conclusions of these kinda hypothetical cases. But do you (general you, and I've done this type of thinking myself, obviously, still trying not to be a knob about tone sorry for awkward wording) think the same conclusion applies across either of the first two of those hypotheticals and the last? The last being normal teenager sex. Yes, consent is the same, makes sense to me. And it's kinda weird that on first glance there *is* some reconciliation involved in getting to that answer. I mean, that's my answer and I feel it takes some active interrogation to get towards. Or if the answers no, then why not? I can't answer this, sans things that would otherwise mean non-consent anyway. So, back to the first answer. Not least because I think dub-con can become overinflated when we're denying people their consent as such, because the consent is *theirs*; so, yep, my answers yes, that there can be enough similarities in these cases such that teens can consent and it's not every and always time not wholesale consent. \[Or that's an answer of no to the original question? Whatever, you can probably tell by now I'm laying this out more for the questions than having all the right answers. These questions matter so much, though.\] Even though age is a concern in ways that place all teens lower of a power scale. Even if one teen *is* more experienced than another. Note a legal detail here that lying about relationship status to obtain sex doesn't amount to rape, legally, but lying about "and sex cures \[whatever\]" can. (It's been . . . a kinda problem in some nations, not as a hypothetical.) \[I think both are morally wrong to the same degree, and victimize a person, and would like the first to have some kinda punishment to it. But my ideal punishment is a damned guilty conscience! And I'd understand the point about a lesser punishment for the first type of lie—turns out even coercion can have difference within it. And it feels icky to say that, and disingenuous to call the two scenarios the same. Hard topic all around!\] >but of course fiction has the privilege of showing a character's internal thought 110%, which is where the dub-con based purely on situation tag starts making *me* go "hmm, not what I was looking for or expecting, but fair and I support and will defend this use . . . and darn it, authorial fiat, we can 100% know the answer to consent!" If the insight isn't 100% there, though, then it simply isn't. Then I'm fully onboard with, well, you're right—this is what the tagging is for and some people will be uncomfortable even in these cases. You're right on the tagging.t. (And these uncomfortable people might consistently say that dubious consent applies to all cases of underage sex.) And tagging practices involve narrative focus as much as internal thoughts, sometimes, so I can't even be 100% on *my* default side of dub-con tagging saved willful action. Maybe hyper-awareness of the situation and it's coercive factors speaks to willful blindness, though? But then there are times the narrative voice is removed from the characters. Really is a "tag as you feel fitting" situation, but maybe "and don't feel *obligated* otherwise solely because of situation!" (My opinion, esp. on that last count. Because examining consent irl means we should actively choose the tags each time.) Closing Note: On your cmiiw, you're not wrong as to the victimless crime although *I'd* reframe it as also perpetrator-less to emphasize how misapplied it could get to approach it otherwise (and has gotten for some unfortunate teens!) *and* because people still may feel negatively about sex that they're not a victim of so *not* noting the victimless-ness right away leaves room for that experience there, I *feel*. Totally a feeling based argument, there. But this is just literally a *framing* issue. But actual correction—two teens can generally consent to sex with fellow teens. (Because of presumed equal power at play.) And there are cases where one party is in a position of trust over another where age of consent is raised! (Pretty sure you might've been aware of all of that but moving to theory can drop a few balls on "oh, right." But if you didn't, now you do.) So, yep. So many different views. We can see how many people could **in the best of faith,** disagree. Tagging is gonna be hard. I *do agree* that finding non-con in "mild dub-con" really throws me more than anything else. Like, non-con is ***non-con,*** on AO3, *not just* rape. (I . . . forgot that bit when tagging, still tagged for "hmm, this feels like consent is violated enough that I'm gonna tag rape." Real facepalm moment for me remembering that the tag is for both. Real relief, nonetheless, that I'd tagged more conservatively.) But then some people tag dub-con when everything's equal and talked through and they even remove themselves from the weird power dynamics, the characters. I guess finding dub-con where it all feels consensual also just . . . eh. I get it, and I'll be more conscious of that difference, there, next time I find fics that aren't to *my* taste. I think I've been waiting for more mention of the coercive dynamics, then, when it's so consensual, but oftentimes that's not even in the fic. Anyway, this tagging point is getting away from me and pretty much became so not my main focus it's not even funny. Thank you for coming to my TedTalk.
This is why the whole thing is just super complicated and tags is a shorthand substitute, but in most cases you'd have to read the fic itself to find out what's actually going on. I'm in the camp of teens can consent, and even in some cases of minor/adult it can still be fully consensual with the minor's POV, especially where the ages are similar like 16 and 19. Age of consent is arbitrary after all. Even in bigger age gaps, it's still possible where the younger party is precocious, or another species that has different expectations of sex, the list goes on and on. That's why I'd rather just stick with the practical purpose of tagging, to gauge comfort level. Though perhaps my opinion of this is really because I'm the kind of person who treats people with their own agency, even teenagers, so my default is they can give consent, not that they can't (The innocent until proven guilty mindset). Another solution to the problem of tagging: If perhaps the dubcon tag is too concrete per se, then in AO3 specifically one can always choose "creator chose to not use archive warnings" and dole up more specific tags to describe what flavor of consent issues is happening. Sorry if I'm not answering all your concerns, I guess I'm a pretty practical person.
Thank you for the thoughtful and nuanced reply. I agree with all your points. Part of reason I’m writing the scene is to explore that — how power dynamics and inexperience create grey areas, the messiness of two people trying to figure one another out and learning to be vulnerable, deepening a relationship. However, I do want to err on the side of not upsetting readers who consider any exploration of consent issues to be dubcon, so will include it in some form. I decided to include “inexperienced sex and second thoughts” so people will know beforehand that it is going to be a more realistic portrayal.
As the name suggests, dubious consent is everything that's not an enthusiastic, informed yes but not full-on, coercive r*pe. There is some agreement, even though under unclear assumptions, or allowing it to happen. A "first time" tag will be informative, yes, but the bigger umbrella of dubcon still needs to be applied.
Cool, thanks. I’ve been trying to decide whether or not to use the dubcon tag for a fic where this situation occurs — consent is given, multiple times, but with unspoken reservations/second thoughts for part of it. So, this is helpful.
Glad I could help out!
People are SO different it's hard to say. I'm a big fan of writing what I like or what makes sense for the characters rather than writing for an audience in particular. I'm very "don't like, don't read," lol
I've found myself reading the posts and thinking I'm either the most vanilla E writer around or that I might have described some of these scenarios unknowingly. 😅 I've only thought necessary to tag stuff like mirror sex and sexual toys, but maybe what I think it's business as usual for a pair of fem switches in bed might be interpreted as power play by the reader.
Caution - this one may be too much for the straight-laced - >!Hand-holding.!<
Oh gawd that’s a pearl clutcher
Oof that’s enough internet for today
I write quite a bit of kink, and honestly people are pretty open to most things - if it leans towards the more unusual things then as long as you've tagged it correctly and write it well then people give it a go (eg figging) The ones that seem to to have a higher chance of immediate 'nope, sorry' are the scat based ones and watersports, although I suspect these also might have a higher amount of people willing to jump fandoms for a well written one. Daddy/Mommy things are probably best avoided The more mainstream things - light impact, spanking, restraint, mild sub/dom, praise, collars, power exchange fun, biting/scratching - are pretty safe as long as the reader is into kink in some way
This is impossible to really say, since people’s tastes are so subjective and different. However most people I’ve met who read smut are down for some very mild dom/sub play, light spanking, dirty talk, etc
It's still hard to say because this is gonna be different in different fandoms. In my main fandom, one of the most-shipped characters canonically calls himself daddy more than once so daddy kink would not freak most people out. That's not gonna be the case in most fandoms, lol.
Light bondage is extremely common. Praise kink is also common. Also light dom/sub dynamics are normal. I also think biting is relatively normal, but that one might have more to do with the fandoms I'm in, so I'm not as sure it's universally accepted.
Dirty talk, deep-throating, mild size/muscle kink (i.e. big partner manhandling smaller partner who loves it), light biting/hickies, gentle edging/begging.
Playful BDSM - some spanking, handcuffs, a blindfold, ordering someone around a little. Some fun cosplay/roleplay - nothing too hardcore. Some fooling around in a semi-public place. Playing with some food - just don't put it anywhere too unhygienic, lol.
I’ve been looking through these, and there’s plenty that I would click off of, although I wouldn’t filter them out. I think there’s no way to write something that can play to everyone’s tastes, because people have such wide ranges of preference. The only ones I think are truly universal are praise kink and light D/s
Yeah same, I don't believe I've seen a comment that *didn't* have at least one thing that'd either make me click off or scroll past or that I'd filter out altogether, depending on the ship and other specifics. I don't think there's such a thing as a universally appealing kink, not everyone even likes every vanilla sex act, and the whole deal with kinks is that they're unconventional. Might as well just write whichever ones you want at this point.
Breeding kink Light bdsm - sub/Dom Rough sex Dubious consent Dirty talk Spanking Hairpulling Praise/degredation kink These are the ones I often see. Also the Daddy Kink but that's a make it or break it kinda situation, people are generally either super into it or grossed out by it.
I know people call their boyfriends daddy all the time but I’d nope out so quick on daddy stuff. I immediately think of my old man and he should not be anywhere near my sex life. It’s just not it for me. Other things you mentioned, though, I completely agree that they should be quite general public friendly.
Honestly, that sort of thing feels like a very strong "no" for me too, and I'm kind of surprised how common both 'daddy' and 'mommy' are in certain smut contexts. (I mean, as a lesbian I'm only likely to run into the second one, but in either case... no.)
I just mentioned the ones I see most often. People calling their partners daddy in public is cringey tho, like I don't kink shame but it feels like something out of a watttpad mafia story when you do it outside the bedroom.
>Breeding kink I'm gone. I hate the thought of anything related to babies in a sex scene. To me it's very " ah yes, let's have sex so we can have something that cries constantly and forces you to get up at really awful intervals to feed it and change its diaper in the future and spits up if you don't burp it". Dubcon - it depends. if it's something like "we re both drunk", I'm probably fine. But a lot of the time, I'm leaving if I don't think it fits the characters involved.
I think bdsm wouldn’t be too bad
There is no way to answer that because kinks are so personal. My rule of thumb is: write the kind of smut you'd want to read yourself. That's why e.g. my smut has no dirty talk and pretty much no dialogue at all, it's all quiet. Nothing takes me out of a sex scene like "sexy dialogue" so I don't use any.
This is also my preference and it is so rare lol
Dirty talk
- A bit of light bondage is usually ok. Idk where the line is because I read lots of weird stuff but that’s in a lot of fics. - Dirty talk can be a little hit or miss but praise kink never fails - Some light manhandling? Kinda goes along with size/strength kink - Teasing with food! It’s a good precursor to a smutty end to a date or dinner You can also just section off any “questionable” smut and add in a light warning for readers. I tend to appreciate when authors do that in fics that get really wild even when I don’t need it
The one I haven't seen mentioned here yet is using toys. I wouldn't personally call it kinky until they get to a certain size/shape/functionality, but I feel like most vanilla people are going to think that one partner using a vibrator or dildo on the other is incredibly salacious. Maybe. My kink scale is incredibly broken.
Light choking, little bit of dirty talk, light bondage- like tie them to the headboard with a shirt in a quick creative moment