The "couples" in the code list all imply -- or state -- that one person in an arrangement is having sex with another outside the arrangement.
Couldn't we have one that covers something like half the sex that occurs between two people on a given night?
Sure, it's less common on the page than it is in the bed. Some of us, though, write about W(edded) L(ust).
The "couples" in the code list all imply -- or state -- that one person in an arrangement is having sex with another outside the arrangement.
"Couples" is a group heading. I believe that's meant by that group of codes.
There are problems with some of the definitions, though:
Cheating - One party is cheating on their spouse
It doesn't have to be a spouse. It could be a bf/gf, fiance, etc.
Wife Watching- Man enjoys watching his wife getting fucked
Should be "having sex" or something like that. What if he watches her give a blowjob. And in today's world of same sex marriage, what if a woman enjoys watching her wife have sex?
Should be "having sex" or something like that. What if he watches her give a blowjob. And in today's world of same sex marriage, what if a woman enjoys watching her wife have sex?
I'm open for better definitions of the tags.
I'm open for better definitions of the tags.
Cheating - One party is cheating on their spouse
Just change "spouse" to "partner." You use "partner" a few lines down under "Sharing."
Wife Watching - Man enjoys watching his wife getting fucked
As I said, simply change "getting fucked" to "having sex." I wouldn't worry about same-sex married people.
The "couples" in the code list all imply -- or state -- that one person in an arrangement is having sex with another outside the arrangement.
"Couples" is a group heading. I believe that's meant by that group of codes.
Yeah. What I was saying is that sometimes when one person in a couple is having sex, that person is having sex with the other person in the couple. More often in life than on the page, but I'm not the only one wh writes that.
sometimes when one person in a couple is having sex, that person is having sex with the other person in the couple
Wouldn't that simply be Ma/Fa (or whatever the couple was)?
I thought the "Couples" group was exceptions to the norm. But I never understood the need for the story code "consensual." If you don't have the "non-consent" code, it's consensual by default.
If you don't have the "non-consent" code, it's consensual by default.
It's possible that in a single scene that there is both consensual and non-consensual sex. One scene that comes to mind, the MC is in a threesome involving two male and one female characters. The MC consented on having sex with the female, and the female consented on having sex with both guys. The non-consensual part occurred when the second guy started having sex with the first one at which time the first guy left.
It's possible that in a single scene that there is both consensual and non-consensual sex.
True, but what if a boy has sex with his girlfriend and sex with his mother? You'd have "incest" but not "no incest."
True, but what if a boy has sex with his girlfriend and sex with his mother? You'd have "incest" but not "no incest."
If you had a story about ostriches having sex with squids, would you also use a 'NoF'/'No(human)M'?
I ask, because a future story of mine features humans getting intimate with certain alien who don't fit into the standard M/F dynamic (not that I'd EVER code it that way).
But I agree with Switch, many of the story codes on SOL, which are ALL primarily sex based, now seem quaint and outdated. As fewer stories are exclusively sex based, having exclusive sex based coding seems limiting. While it was once necessary having 'g' and 'b' codes, it's now immaterial as those stories are now longer allowed (although still floating around in the system).