Forum: Author Hangout

Readers who feel the way you have described should only read stories tagged No Sex.

Worse, in my case they kept criticizing me because my story "made no sense" whenever they'd skip over the sex scenes. If that happens, go back and reread the sections you skipped over!

Authors who feel that way should use the "Stroke Story" tag.

Amen. There's good stroke and crappy stroke, too.

I just skimmed a story where the plot was (a) initiate the virgin, and (b) would Mom join them. Both fun things, but the sex got in the way. Really.

Easily 2/3 of the story was a waste, and it's sad to see an opportunity for good stroke wasted.

bb

Don't misunderstand. I'm not suggesting that sex scenes never get in the way. However, if you think that sex scenes are never part of the plot and always get in the way, why are you reading anything but no-sex stories?

That was my point. I asked, didn't you read the story labels and the story description, or realize you're on a site with sexual stories. However, it never seems to deter their insistence that ALL stories should be devoid of sex. It's not that they object to the sex, but for them, the sex scenes just aren't worth reading and their preference is for all stories to avoid it.

Authors who feel that way should use the "Stroke Story" tag.

That's ridiculous. What you're saying is if there's sex there's no plot.

But from my POV, too many stories start out as a plot-driven tale, but almost immediately become literally drenched in long, repetitive, unrealistic and over-blown sex scenes.

You know what? It gets boring as hell. More is most certainly NOT better.

I agree with that. When I originally wrote "The Preacher's Wife" (on ASSTR) it was 5 chapters. People begged for more so I wrote another 5 chapters. The problem is the story ended after the 1st 5 so the rest was what you said.

So when I posted it on SOL, I went back to the original ending (it ended up as 6 chapters due to revisions). Now it's the story it was supposed to be, a story about the sexual liberation of a woman.

My original comment was based on your assertion that all stories with sex are stroke stories.

You know what? It gets boring as hell. More is most certainly NOT better. In some cases, over 300 chapters of that shite is a massive overdose of senseless, no-point bedroom (kitchen, lounge, garage, attic, patio, car, mall, 7-11 store, changing room, Starbucks restroom, etc) boffing.

You've got a good point. There's a major difference between the judicious use of erotica and out-and-out repetitive porn (repeating the same scene over and over with ever changing partners). However, there is a happy medium, and that medium is not skipping over every sex scene you encounter. I'd ask that you at least review the first couple sex scenes first, to determine whether there's anything worthwhile (plot wise). If not, then the author has a set style and you have my blessings to bypass the repetitive shit.

This is a pointless argument, so I'll drop it. But to affirm my original point, several long-running serials contain so much gratuitous, repetitive harem-style sexual content that really has little purpose other than ego-buffing and recreational boffing for the main character (which has little or nothing to do with advancing the ancillary plot such as wealth building or crime fighting or prepping to "decimate" the invading space aliens) that it truly qualifies as a stroke story.

Remove the gratuitous sex scenes, and the story is far less than one-third its posted length.

People weren't responding to that issue, but rather to the idea that repeated sex scenes mean 'no story'. You were talking about specific instances (specific offensive stories which struck you as being poorly written), but instead addressed them as being 'bad stories' due to the sexual content.

Not only is there straight out porn (stories with little value beyond a sexual charge), but there's also 'gun porn' (stories which cater to veterans, which don't appeal to anyone who's never broken down a large arsenal of guns), 'car porn' (who any readers who don't frequent car shows just to go home and jerk off) or any other variant.

If you go on and on about minor issues which don't advance the story, then you (the author) should be called on it, as it'll impact your readers, your scores and your fan base.

What that means, to the author, is that it's time to start revising and editing in order to cut the fat--removing the unnecessary story elements which make the story impenetrable to those outside of your little group.

In short, if the story doesn't advance the plot, it needs to be jettisoned. If it takes you too long to get to the point, you need to strip out the minor subplots until you get to the bare bones of the story.

Unfortunately, telling the difference between what's essential, and what's not, is often the mark of a master storyteller, which are few and far between.

@Not_a_ID

But that isn't relevant. The position staked was essentially that a story that progresses ANY plot elements while in the process of having sex should be coded as "stroke." Full stop, no further consideration of other content is required.

That position is very flawed.

Very well stated. Thank you for boiling down my overblown explanation. (Otherwise known as 'word porn').

It's not impossible for sex scenes to be part of the actual plot content.

True, and it need not be a stroke or much sex story either.

Boring like beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

No, boring in like *yawn* not keeping my interest.

True, but my point is that what you find boring may in fact be very interesting to someone else.

Thus boring depends at least as much on you as on the author.

A classic example of this are the book fans who want constant explosions and gunfights, and who rates Hemmingway as a yawn because it's too slow.

There's poor writing, but very often there are readers who are either just impatient for something more like what they witness on TV, or who are simply looking for something else entirely. (After all, who the hell wants Downtown Abbey when what you're looking for is The A-Team?)

That's hardly the fault of the author, or an indication of the quality of writing.

True, but my point is that what you find boring may in fact be very interesting to someone else.

Thus boring depends at least as much on you as on the author.

Then that would be true for a sex scene too

I think I'm in agreement with what you're saying. It seems like even focusing on whether sex advances the plot misses some important considerations. A story where sex advances the plot through personal growth of the characters--facing vulnerability, gaining comfort being more open, the sort of exploration of growth through BDSM that I think is a hallmark of one class of good scene design--doesn't particularly seem to be in the stroke direction no matter how central sex is to the plot advancement.

I personally wouldn't expect that of a "much sex" flag when I know there is a "Stroke" flag too.

One complication is when you have a squick/teaser like 'incest' or 'BDSM' for a story listed as either Minimal or No Sex (similar to reading a 'No Sex' gay romance).

Many will reject about the 'sexual content', despite their being none, while other will complain about the lack of promised/expected sex.

But, now that we've beat this particular horse to death, how about we get back to discussing HOW to write sex scenes?

I personally wouldn't expect that of a "much sex" flag when I know there is a "Stroke" flag too.

SOL changed their definitions. The difference in the past was stroke didn't have a plot. Now there's no mention of plot or lack of it.

But "much sex" is now defined as plenty of sex. I remember asking in my Yahoo group if one of my multi-chapter stories was "much sex" or "some sex." The majority of those who took the poll said "some sex." But every or almost every chapter had sex in it. To me that's plenty of sex therefore "much sex." I changed it to "some" but later changed it back to "much."

Sorry, but most people understand "No Sex" to be just that, no sex. You can have romance, but no explicit sex. Off-screen is fine, but references to it are questionable: you might be able to, but you need to be careful.

Generally, "New Sex" describes stories where sex simply isn't a part of the story, not one where you slip it in where it isn't expected.

Also, when you describe "Stroke" as being more than 66.6% sex, that includes the entire story/plot rather than references per chapter. You can have sex in every chapter while also focusing on a decent plot line and advancing the characters in a meaningful way.

Based on the SOL Tiers outlined, if I had to give an arbitrary number "Stroke" would probably be more than 2/3rds of the story content directly relates to sex.

That's the new definition. I didn't even know the definition changed. The old definition of "stroke" was no plot, hence the name — you're not reading a story, just sex scenes to, um, stroke yourself.

That's the new definition. I didn't even know the definition changed. The old definition of "stroke" was no plot, hence the name — you're not reading a story, just sex scenes to, um, stroke yourself.

While I understand that was the old definition, I agree with the change, as there were several terrific stroke stories/series which would follow a string of characters as they chases one person after another, all the while building the story and developing the character. Dismissing an entire genre as "meaningless" is a bit of an overstatement. Even if it's not your cup of tea doesn't imply it can't be used to develop a terrific story.

I agree with the change, as there were several terrific stroke stories/series which would follow a string of characters as they chases one person after another, all the while building the story and developing the character.

That would have been "much sex" not stroke. Maybe it had to do with the TPA scoring where "P" was plot. It would be unjust to give a stroke story a "P" score when the author says there is no plot.

I don't agree with the change. Even though SOL has "no sex" stories it's still pretty much a sex story site. There should be a category for a story that is basically sex without plot — a stroke story.

EDITED go correct "no sex" stories. What happened? I originally didn't have the quotation marks so it read: Even though SOL has no sex stories...

Of course SOL has sex stories.

* I will concede that writing a stroke story with a coherent plot is difficult. However, I reject the notion that it is impossible.

It's not quite on point since each "story" is very short, often no more than a scene or two, but Mark Aster's "My Friends the Allens" stories are delightful, each one nicely polished and very hot. Some are even funny. Overall, they form a story arc.

Highly recommended.

bb

I will concede that writing a stroke story with a coherent plot is difficult. However, I reject the notion that it is impossible.

The key to any story, even stroke stories, is character development. That's why most of them end up involving the marriage (group marriage many times) of the main characters. Those developments are known as a "plot line". The two aren't incompatible, but any time you focus on a single topic, the story tends to become unbalanced, so it's becomes more difficult to carry off.

where the plot is focused on sex.

That defines the erotica genre. That's why with erotica you cannot remove the sex and still have a story. It would be like removing the romance in a romance genre story.

Stories about rowing, competitive crew racing,from twos up to eight plus cox in a boat with someone calling "stroke, stroke, stroke" so the rowing is coordinated would be stroke stories. I remember at least one, about a high school student who went out for crew.

Or a story about a mechanical engineer, whose entire job is to get those little engines to stroke, stroke, stroke. After a while, it can get a bit boring.

That crankshaft has to turn somehow.

Wasn't that the gimmick in that stupid "Snowpiercer" movie—little kids in the bilge pedaling away?

bb

A bilge is part of a ship.

And this was a train with a bilge. What's so hard to understand about that?

I mean, after accepting that it's a train powered by little kids pedaling away, getting to "bilge" isn't really a very big step.

It was a crappy movie, BTW, although Tilda Swinton did her usual outstanding job.

bb

Since a train as a matter of definition has neither a keel nor a water line, it can not have a bilge.

Heh. Where logic and art meet, the former must yield to the latter.

To paraphrase Galileo, "Eppure è un bilge."

I rest my case.

bb

So far she hasn't said anything we don't already know or haven't already been told, but she says it very well and I think the thing is worth its $2.99 price.

Eh. You know, writers that do really good, vivid sex scenes are few and far between. I'm not one of them. But I get the job done, and that's good enough.

You obviously haven't watched Excel Saga then. Of course, neither have I. Although I did love the panel response I heard when someone asked about a sequel. "Yeah, about that, we've already asked the creator/producer for a sequel. He looked at us in terror and asked if he could do anything but that."

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

I wonder if that was before or after Puni Puni Poemy, which is generally considered to be a follow-up to Excel Saga, though not really a direct sequel.

I suppose if one were to examine the plot progress of Excel Saga, there isn't terribly much of it given all the spoof comedy going on. Except the spoof comedy is rather the point. Towards the end there is a plot-heavy "serious" episode, under the justification that at that point, that was the only thing they HADN'T done.