Home « Forum « Author Hangout

Forum: Author Hangout

Much Sex vs Some Sex

merlyn2748

So, I have a story, which is already hindered by the fact that there is a gender transformation, even through for plot reasons the swap is not beaten into the readers head at all times. The story is currently set as Much Sex since sex is component of the plot(due to magic), but I don't think it is going to be part of every chapter I write, nor is it the only thing that is going to happen in the story. Obviously, I am not writing a stroke story. But, my concern is that as the story progresses the story will fall more into the Some Sex category than the Much Sex. I also feel that too often Much Sex is selected when it should be Stroke Story. I know my TG tag is probably already stopping people from trying the story, even though I am trying to avoid the "squick-y-ness" of it as much as possible. Do you think having it marked as Much Sex could be driving even more potential readers away?

Switch Blayde

@merlyn2748

It's a subjective call. If it were the other way around, where there was some sex in the beginning and then it turned to much sex, Then it would be "much sex" with a story code of "slow."

But the other way around? *shrugs*

Replies:   Joe Long
robberhands
Updated:

@merlyn2748


Do you think having it marked as Much Sex could be driving even more potential readers away?


Or draw in readers expecting much sex. Just tag it the way you think is adequate and don't speculate what would be the best advertisement for your story. You know, 'Honesty is the best policy' and all that jazz.

Crumbly Writer

@merlyn2748

I'd go with "some sex", as that helps set expectations. If they aren't expected a bunch, they're more likely to appreciate it when it occurs. If it gets to be too much, they can always bail, though hopefully they won't blame you since they knew the nature of the story going in and expected there to be ... some sex. 'D

Unfortunately, though, there are no 'hard and fast rules' for these designations.

Ross at Play

Recent statistics showed that Much Sex is the largest category on the site. That wouldn't bother me.
I suggest you focus more on using your story description to entice readers by showing your story has a worthwhile plot.

Joe Long

@Switch Blayde

But the other way around? *shrugs*


Much sex in the beginning and then little at the end? Marriage.

awnlee jawking

@merlyn2748

If there is a good proportion of chapters with no sex, my preference would be for a code of 'some sex' rather than 'much sex'. But this isn't a democracy, use the code you feel more comfortable with.

I also feel that too often Much Sex is selected when it should be Stroke Story.


The SOL definitions imply 'much sex' and 'stroke story' are successive values on a quantity scale, but to me the difference is on the story focus. I think it would be possible to write a very good 'stroke story' which actually contains less sex than a 'much sex' story, by incorporating very long build-ups and protracted foreplay for every coupling.

Compare taking two hours to masturbate to a single completion against masturbating twice for five minutes each time within the same two hour period

(No kittens were killed by God while researching this post.)

AJ

robberhands

@merlyn2748

I also expect more raunchy and descriptive sex scenes from a story tagged 'much sex', and more of the vanilla kind by a story tagged 'some sex'. Of course that could simply be my wishful thinking.

Joe Long

@awnlee jawking

(No kittens were killed by God while researching this post.)


They may have developed blisters (without adequate lubrication)

Dominions Son

@awnlee jawking

I think it would be possible to write a very good 'stroke story' which actually contains less sex than a 'much sex' story, by incorporating very long build-ups and protracted foreplay for every coupling.


That protracted foreplay is sex.

Replies:   awnlee jawking
Switch Blayde

@awnlee jawking

The SOL definitions imply 'much sex' and 'stroke story' are successive values on a quantity scale, but to me the difference is on the story focus.


Which is a mistake Lazeez made. The original "stroke" was a story with no plot. It might be a single scene. To me that makes more sense.

Replies:   Crumbly Writer
awnlee jawking

@Dominions Son

I envisaged a scene which indicated that sex was inevitable but no sexual contact occurred until, say, halfway through. There could be plenty of verbal and physical cues that wouldn't normally be described as sex yet set the mood and expectation.

Eek, have I just described a 'stroke' story that only a woman could write?

AJ

Replies:   Dominions Son
Dominions Son

@awnlee jawking

There could be plenty of verbal and physical cues


Ever hear of phone sex? If the point of the verbal and physical cues is sexual arousal/pleasure, it's sex.

Replies:   robberhands
robberhands

@Dominions Son

If the point of the verbal and physical cues is sexual arousal/pleasure, it's sex.

As much as I thought Clinton's definition of sex was self-serving and artificially constricting, yours is indefinable extensive.

Dominions Son

@robberhands

indefinable extensive.


Extensive? Yes. Indefinably? No.

If the intent is sexual arousal or sexual pleasure, it's sex. Yes, that's extensive, but it's really quite simple.

Replies:   robberhands  robberhands
robberhands

@Dominions Son

If the intent is sexual arousal or sexual pleasure, it's sex. Yes, that's extensive, but it's really quite simple.

Is it still that simple if the intent is one sided, or would that mean a form of public masturbation?

Replies:   Dominions Son
Dominions Son

@robberhands

Is it still that simple if the intent is one sided, or would that mean a form of public masturbation?


Yes, it's still that simple. Masturbation is sex, self sex, but still sex.

robberhands

@Dominions Son

If the intent is sexual arousal or sexual pleasure, it's sex. Yes, that's extensive, but it's really quite simple.

What about the typical form of flirtation between two relative strangers. Their intent isn't to have sex, but trying to find out if they want to have sex with each other. Is that consequently foreplay, or already sex because superficially it's indistinguishable from the flirting of two people who already decided to have sex.

Replies:   Dominions Son
Dominions Son

@robberhands

What about the typical form of flirtation between two relative strangers. Their intent isn't to have sex, but trying to find out if they want to have sex with each other.


Whether actual intercourse is intended or not doesn't matter.

What matters is the intent of the flirtation itself. Is the intent of the flirtation itself sexual arousal/pleasure/gratification of either oneself, or the other party?

If yes, the flirtation itself is a form of sex.

It is possible to engage in flirtation without such intent, which would not be sex.

robberhands

@Dominions Son

Ok, I get it. It's a very extensive definition of sex but consequent. I just can't see such a wide definition as useful. Should a story where the sexual content is limited to the verbal flirting of two peolple tagged "sex"? I don't believe that the expectations of the readers would concur with your definition.

Replies:   Dominions Son  REP
awnlee jawking

@Dominions Son

What matters is the intent of the flirtation itself. Is the intent of the flirtation itself sexual arousal/pleasure/gratification of either oneself, or the other party?


In this case, I'd say that what matters is whether the flirtation is for the sexual arousal of the reader.

AJ

Replies:   Dominions Son
Dominions Son

@robberhands

Should a story where the sexual content is limited to the verbal flirting of two peolple tagged "sex"?


Possibly. It would depend on a number of factors, mainly around the nature of the flirting.

It's ultimately a matter of judgement for the author where the cut off is, but if the flirting gets raunchy/lewd enough, tagging the story as minimal sex rather than no-sex should be considered.

Dominions Son

@awnlee jawking

In this case, I'd say that what matters is whether the flirtation is for the sexual arousal of the reader.


For determining the stories sex level tag, that's definitely correct.

Ross at Play
Updated:

To AJ & robberhands,

DS has floated off to the Twilight Zone, again, and you know he's going to keep on repeating exactly same things until you give up.
I suggest you are better off simply not responding any more to this one.

Replies:   robberhands
robberhands
Updated:

@Ross at Play


I suggest you are better off simply not responding any more to this one.


Why? This is a polite and friendly held discussion. I've no trouble accepting his opinion, even though I don't think it's very useful. A definition should be as exact as possible, an extensive definition defies that purpose.

Replies:   Ross at Play
REP

@robberhands

Should a story where the sexual content is limited to the verbal flirting of two peolple tagged "sex"?


If you are talking in general, then flirting could very well be considered foreplay, which is generally considered the initial steps that lead to intercourse. In general the terms sex and intercourse are synonymous.

However, if you are talking about the way sex is defined on SOL's website, then flirting is not sex. I'm not sure if sex is specifically defined on the website, but the sex codes are all oriented to intercourse being required for sex to have occurred. I also recall statements made saying that on the site sex means intercourse.

robberhands

@REP

...but the sex codes are all oriented to intercourse being required for sex to have occurred.

Well, many codes listed under 'Sexual activities' are outside of sexual intercourse. However, I'd never tag flirting as 'sex'. I'm too afraid of the ire of my readers I'd receive in response.

Dominions Son

@REP

In general the terms sex and intercourse are synonymous.


Intercourse refers specifically to vaginal penetration by a penis.

I take it therefore that you agree with Bill Clinton that oral sex is not sex.

REP

@Dominions Son

I did say 'in general'. When you get into the specifics, sex includes activities in addition to intercourse. However, that doesn't stop people from using the two terms interchangeably.

awnlee jawking

@Dominions Son

Intercourse refers specifically to vaginal penetration by a penis.


I've seen the expression 'anal intercourse' used but not 'oral intercourse'.

Personally, my inclination is to disagree with Bill Clinton, then read whatever he said and still disagree ;)

AJ

Ernest Bywater

@Dominions Son

Intercourse refers specifically to vaginal penetration by a penis.


That's only true if you use the phrase sexual intercourse, because social intercourse is talking due to intercourse meaning interaction or something similar.

Replies:   Dominions Son
Ross at Play

@robberhands

Why? This is a polite and friendly held discussion.

It's up to you.
Over time I expect you'll find here that some types of 'polite and friendly held discussions' tend to become wearisome.

Replies:   robberhands
Ross at Play

Ah, 'intercourse'. There's a word that has changed meaning of time.
A few hundred years ago people could have described what DS and robberhands have been doing on this thread as "engaging in some vigorous intercourse".
[Smiley face not used because I mean that literally.]

Replies:   Crumbly Writer
Dominions Son

@Ernest Bywater

That's only true if you use the phrase sexual intercourse


Sexual intercourse is implied when you are saying sex=intercourse.

Replies:   Ernest Bywater
robberhands

@Ross at Play

Over time I expect you'll find here that some types of 'polite and friendly held discussions' tend to become wearisome.

Or I might be more polite and friedlier than you are and don't become weary that easily.

Ross at Play

@robberhands

I do not doubt that. I am inclined to think that remaining polite in the face of intentional provocation is an ineffective and unwise policy.

Replies:   robberhands
Ernest Bywater

@Dominions Son

Sexual intercourse is implied when you are saying sex=intercourse.


maybe, but not everyone sees that as a direct implication unless you use the full term.

robberhands

@Ross at Play

I am inclined to think that remaining polite in the face of intentional provocation is an ineffective and unwise policy.

Well, I can't shoot anyone sitting behind my screen. Caps and bold lettering don't feel satisfying to me either, so I stay polite.

Replies:   awnlee jawking
awnlee jawking

@robberhands

Well, I can't shoot anyone sitting behind my screen. Caps and bold lettering don't feel satisfying to me either, so I stay polite.


Okay, you can shoot someone with a cap gun (can you still buy them?) but I've never heard of shooting someone with a bold-lettering gun :)

AJ

Crumbly Writer

@Switch Blayde

Which is a mistake Lazeez made. The original "stroke" was a story with no plot. It might be a single scene. To me that makes more sense.

Still, despite how much sex there is, there's a bid difference between "some sex" and "stroke". What's more, many stroke stories have a plot (typically a couple running through a continual parade of new partners), but there aren't many extended stories without any plot at all. They may not be fine literary examples, but let's not dismiss them entirely.

Replies:   Switch Blayde
Crumbly Writer

@robberhands

As much as I thought Clinton's definition of sex was self-serving and artificially constricting, yours is indefinable extensive.

Sex is not limited to sexual penetration, nor is it limited to only that. You can have an active sex story where the couple never has penetration (say, for instance, is one partner has AIDS and the other is allergic to latex, or one has a stroke but both remember their intimacy fondly and want to continue it).

Many stories feature young people who aren't yet ready to go 'all the way', yet still have fun playing around together.

Replies:   robberhands
Crumbly Writer

@REP

I'm not sure if sex is specifically defined on the website, but the sex codes are all oriented to intercourse being required for sex to have occurred.

Does that mean that stories about lesbians aren't allowed unless they employ toys? Boy, if it does, I'll start peddling my stories to a LOT more family friendly sites!

Ross has a point, you continually seek explicit definitions, even when it doesn't apply to the circumstance, and you continue to badger everyone else until we either consent or abandon the thread altogether. That's not 'seeking insight', that's bullying in order to force everyone to quit arguing their points.

You clearly understand the distinction we're making. If you don't agree with it, that's fine, but quit forcing the issue. We don't define sex as Intercourse only! If you do, then that's fine (you and Bill should get along great), but don't badger us simply because we don't believe in strict, exclusionary definitions.

Replies:   REP
Crumbly Writer

@Ross at Play

[Smiley face not used because I mean that literally.]

Translation: You're fuckin' screwing with me, and you know it!

Replies:   Ross at Play
Switch Blayde

@Crumbly Writer

What's more, many stroke stories have a plot


The original definition of "stroke" was no plot (and maybe no character development, not sure of the latter).

When you don't have a plot (or much of a plot) and no character development, you don't have the no sex scenes. All you have is sex, sex, sex. That's stroke. The "stroker" doesn't want the breaks in the sex to interfere with his "progress."

robberhands

@Crumbly Writer

Sex is not limited to sexual penetration, nor is it limited to only that.

Thanks a lot for that insightful comment. This time you really opened my eyes to a brand new world of wonders. I wait with bated breath for the next time you pick one of my statements, rip it out of context and drown it in your wisdom.

richardshagrin

@Switch Blayde

There is at least one "stroke story" on SOL that talks about crew racing in special boats called shells, and the coxswain (maybe that should be cockswain) sets the pace by yelling stroke, stroke, stroke. I think the story was set at a private high school in New England.

Replies:   awnlee jawking
Joe Long

@Dominions Son

I take it therefore that you agree with Bill Clinton that oral sex is not sex.


Sex is more than intercourse. I'd say any stimulating contact with a person's genitals.

Hell, the hotel desk clerk and I flirted up a storm earlier, but it certainly wasn't sex (even if I left with a smile on my face.)

Ross at Play

@Crumbly Writer

Me:
[Smiley face not used because I mean that literally.]

You:
Translation: You're fuckin' screwing with me, and you know it!

YES, but this time it's my literal meaning that's intended to screw with your head, not some figurative or metaphorical implication. :-)

awnlee jawking

@richardshagrin

Stroking the man in a boat - that's female masturbation ;)

AJ

awnlee jawking

@robberhands

I'm a fervent admirer of DS's style of logical reasoning: it's served me very well in my chosen field. But, knowing that most of the posters here are arty types rather than practitioners of science, maths and logic, I try to tone it down.

FWIW, on this particular topic, I agree more with robberhands than DS. I think that what constitutes sex is a grey scale rather than an absolute, and often depends on context.

AJ

Ross at Play

@awnlee jawking

most of the posters here are arty types rather than practitioners of science, maths and logic

What? As far as I know those who work/worked in IT include me, CW, EB, DS, and REP. Combined, we probably make well over half of all posts here, and first three make almost all of the ridiculously long ones!

Replies:   Joe Long  Switch Blayde
robberhands

@awnlee jawking

I'm a fervent admirer of DS's style of logical reasoning: it's served me very well in my chosen field.

As I already said before, I can't fault DS' consequent reasoning. I just find his conclusion useless. It's an extremely excessive definition of 'sex'. A definition's purpose is to differentiate, if it's too exessive, that purpose is shot.

robberhands

@awnlee jawking

By the way, the fathers of logic are the philosophers. The thinker not the mechanics, the 'practitioners of science, maths and logic'. Descartes' "cogito ergo sum" is the prime example of flawless logic. It almost excuses his faulty life choice of becoming a philosopher as well as a mathematician.

Replies:   awnlee jawking
Ernest Bywater

@awnlee jawking

But, knowing that most of the posters here are arty types rather than practitioners of science, maths and logic, I try to tone it down.


As a person who started life in the banking industry and ended up with a number of accounting related qualifications over the years, then moved through logistics and on into IT with 2 IT diplomas and several other IT certificates, I'm not sure I qualify as an arty type.

Replies:   robberhands
robberhands

@Ernest Bywater

I'm not sure I qualify as an arty type.

Well, I studied a "Geisteswissenschaft". There is no accurate translation into an English term. Maybe that could elevate me into an arty type. Sadly I doubt that my particular subject of study would count as such.

Joe Long

@Ross at Play

What? As far as I know those who work/worked in IT include me, CW, EB, DS, and REP.


You forgot me

Replies:   REP
awnlee jawking

@robberhands

I'm a fan of the Socratic Method, questioning any and every assumption. A very unpopular technique here :(

AJ

Replies:   Ross at Play
Ross at Play
Updated:

@awnlee jawking

I'm a fan of the Socratic Method ... A very unpopular technique here :(

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socrates#Trial_and_death

Replies:   awnlee jawking
awnlee jawking

@Ross at Play

I'd like to grow Hemlock in my poison garden but can't find a suitable source. Ironically, it's almost certainly growing wild quite near to me, only I'm not sure of the identification :(

Perhaps I should settle for Elderflower to piss off the French with home-made Elderflower Champagne. Perhaps we'll be allowed to call it by its proper name post-Brexit.

AJ

Replies:   Ross at Play
REP

@Crumbly Writer

You clearly understand the distinction we're making. If you don't agree with it, that's fine, but quit forcing the issue. We don't define sex as Intercourse only! If you do, then that's fine (you and Bill should get along great), but don't badger us simply because we don't believe in strict, exclusionary definitions.


You are out in left field CW. I have already fielded this accusation, but perhaps you haven't gotten to my reply. But since you left the post rather than delete it as inappropriate, I will reply.

The post you replied to was in response to Robberhand's post:

Should a story where the sexual content is limited to the verbal flirting of two peolple tagged "sex"?


My response was based on the definition of SEX that is inherent in the ability of an Author to select details codes for their story. Code a story as containing SEX and the full set of codes are available to you for selection. Code the story as "No Sex" and the codes related to sexual intercourse are no longer available. Thus flirting does not meet SOL's definition of SEX.

As to my belief of what constitutes SEX, your accusation is an extension of DS's post:

I take it therefore that you agree with Bill Clinton that oral sex is not sex


My response to his post was:

I did say 'in general'. When you get into the specifics, sex includes activities in addition to intercourse. However, that doesn't stop people from using the two terms interchangeably.

Replies:   Crumbly Writer
REP

@Joe Long

You forgot me


You can have my place in Ross's list.

I wrote technical manuals describing the operation and maintenance of computer-controlled electronic systems used for intelligence gathering applications and I developed and presented training courses that were used to train our military customers' representatives in how to operate and repair their new systems. I also managed the group that supported the contractual, mil-spec technical writing/training effort.

At the time of the DOT.com collapse, my company was broken up and my workload dropped to zero. Since I was the manager of the technical writing/training department they wanted to keep me. At the time, we were a 50-person satellite operation with no IT department. So they put me to work helping to support our computer network with the assistance of one of our system design engineers. While I gained a great deal of knowledge during my 3-month sojourn in the field of IT support, I do not consider myself as an IT worker. I barely knew what I was doing at the start and was certainly not a qualified IT worker at the end of the effort I supported.

Replies:   Ross at Play  Joe Long
Switch Blayde

@Ross at Play

those who work/worked in IT include me, CW, EB, DS, and REP.


And me. However, I remember how hard it was moving from technical to management because the "right" answer (to a technician) wasn't always the "right" answer for the company.

In management, you learn there isn't always a black and white answer. It often depends on other factors.

Ross at Play

@awnlee jawking

I'd like to grow Hemlock in my garden

You'll have to find me first. :-)

Replies:   awnlee jawking
Ross at Play

@REP

I do not consider myself as an IT worker.

Got that. Technical writing for IT is quite different from working in IT.

awnlee jawking

@Ross at Play

If you ever accidentally swallow some Hemlock, just read a few paragraphs of one of my stories.

(In joke - only Ross will understand this.)

AJ

Replies:   Ross at Play
Ross at Play

@awnlee jawking

Ross will understand this

Ditto your home-made elderflower champagne too, no doubt.

Crumbly Writer

@Switch Blayde

When you don't have a plot (or much of a plot) and no character development, you don't have the no sex scenes. All you have is sex, sex, sex. That's stroke. The "stroker" doesn't want the breaks in the sex to interfere with his "progress."

I guess I always had a different perception, as I always preferred the 'slow build' as it led to more intense happy endings. Thus I'd look for sex stories with mild character development that would develop a scene jump into the sex, then just to the next situation, which would decrease the urge to 'blow my was', allowing me to continue building my 'enthusiasm' for hours (kind of a literary version of 'tantric sex'). 'D

I guess I was conflating "much sex" with "stroke".

Crumbly Writer

@robberhands

Thanks a lot for that insightful comment. This time you really opened my eyes to a brand new world of wonders. I wait with bated breath for the next time you pick one of my statements, rip it out of context and drown it in your wisdom.

It was also considerably late, after everyone else had already made the exact same point.

Crumbly Writer

@REP

My response was based on the definition of SEX that is inherent in the ability of an Author to select details codes for their story. Code a story as containing SEX and the full set of codes are available to you for selection. Code the story as "No Sex" and the codes related to sexual intercourse are no longer available. Thus flirting does not meet SOL's definition of SEX.

There's a huge distinction between SOL's definition of sex and the legal definition of it. You can easily be charged with 'lewd sexual action' without ever having 'smashed your genitals together'. Although the general discussion was about story differentiations were about story codes, your assertion was generic (you likened it to Bill Clinton's defense, who never wrote anything on SOL).

Replies:   robberhands  REP
robberhands
Updated:

@Crumbly Writer


(you likened it to Bill Clinton's defense, who never wrote anything on SOL).


Who knows? He could use a pen name.

Ross at Play

@robberhands

You to someone else ...
Thanks a lot for that insightful comment. This time you really opened my eyes to a brand new world of wonders. I wait with bated breath for the next time you pick one of my statements, rip it out of context and drown it in your wisdom.

Thank you. You've restored my faith in the universality that members of our species are ill-tempered. :-)

Replies:   robberhands
robberhands

@Ross at Play

Thank you. You've restored my faith in the universality that members of our species are ill-tempered. :-)

Actually I'm very well tempered. I guess meanwhile CW does it on purpose, and I wouldn't want to disappoint him either. So I try formulating my responses to our mutual satisfaction.

Replies:   Ross at Play
Ross at Play

@robberhands

So I try formulating my responses to our mutual satisfaction.

All we need now to make both our days is for someone to explain we should have expressed the ideas behind our sentences with fewer and shorter words. :-)

REP

@Crumbly Writer

Although the general discussion was about story differentiations were about story codes, your assertion was generic (you likened it to Bill Clinton's defense, who never wrote anything on SOL).


CW, you need to get your facts straight. Go back and read the series of posts that got you to this point. Do that and you will find:

1. I never mentioned Bill Clinton, that was DS.

2. Robberhands asked if a story should be tagged 'sex' when the only sexual content was flirting. My response to that question is what you are addressing, and I told him the term 'sex' is not specifically defined on the website to my knowledge. However, sexual intercourse appears to be required because tagging a story as 'No Sex' removes the detailed codes related to sexual intercourse so the Author can not select them when posting a 'No Sex' story.

Get your facts straight before you dump on others.

or as Robberhands said:

I wait with bated breath for the next time you pick one of my statements, rip it out of context and drown it in your wisdom.

Replies:   Dominions Son
Ross at Play

If hope no readers come here and discover on a site for sex stories authors do not know (they can't all be right) the meaning of the word 'sex'. :-)

Replies:   awnlee jawking
Dominions Son

@REP

You and CW are both wrong, the first reference in this thread to Bill Clinton was by Robberhands.

Replies:   REP
awnlee jawking

@Ross at Play

I know this one - it's Latin for six! :)

AJ

REP

@Dominions Son

You and CW are both wrong,


Sorry about that DS. I missed or forgot about Robberhands' comment.

My main point is CW totally missed the boat on my post. I also noticed in other threads that his reply to a post sometimes addresses something other than what the poster said. Have you noticed it?

Replies:   Dominions Son
Dominions Son

@REP

Have you noticed it?


Yes.

Replies:   REP
Joe Long

@REP

I think I was a data scientist before they invented the term. I work with databases - geospatial in the office, sports at home. The day job is managing the creation of airfield airspace analyses for the FAA (cataloging the objects that may be obstacles to aircraft in flight)

Replies:   Dominions Son
Dominions Son

@Joe Long

I think I was a data scientist before they invented the term. I work with databases - geospatial in the office


Interesting, small world, the IT work I do is application development/maintenance for geospatial database systems.

Ernest Bywater

jplong meet Dominions Son, may your work efforts not meet in mid-flight. That could be messy.

REP

@Dominions Son

Thanks. It's nice to know I wasn't misinterpreting what I read.

Back to Top