Forum: Story Recommendations

JeremyDCP - Island fever

already tried and came up with no results, but if you could find them can you link them please

http://sex-stories-xxx.com/9060_island-fever-4-paradise-chapter-01

Also, try "next door to heaven here on sol

Is that really

-1 male to many females(basically a harem)

?

I haven't read it myself but in the introduction to Living Next Door to Heaven 2 it says "Part VI includes safe sex, multiple-partner sex (both MFM and FMF)."
That MFM tag have always kept me away from reading it since like OP I prefer 1 male to multiple females if it's not a monogamous story rather than swinging or sharing (like the MFM tag suggests, again I haven't read it so I don't know the situation with the MFM here).

There are multiple Harems in the story.
The main Harem is always the MC and multiple girls, I can't remember any mfm in the main harem. That part happens in one of the other harems.
If my memory plays tricks on me and there was mfm in the main harem, then it was a very brief encounter.

There are some girls who switch from one harem to another though, but I don't see why it is such a big deal. harem dudes have dozens of girls, why does it matter when one switches to another.
I can understand it on monogamous stories when someone is turned off by sharing or swinging, but Harems?

There are some girls who switch from one harem to another though, but I don't see why it is such a big deal. harem dudes have dozens of girls, why does it matter when one switches to another.

I can understand it on monogamous stories when someone is turned off by sharing or swinging, but Harems?

Well that entirely depends on the story, I'd say. If a guy has a harem of say 5 girls and you as the reader have one favourite character that you really like, and don't care much for the other 4, you're going to be upset if the character you like leave for someone else, even if he still has 4 other girls.

In some harem stories there's a "core" and some more harem members that aren't as deep and developed, and it sometimes works well when these less interesting characters leave, such as in My Journey.

But generally, I don't see why it should be any difference in attitude about swinging and sharing between harem and monogamy. If you're emotionally attatched to the character it's going to suck when they leave wether the protagonist has other lovers or not.

I mean, when I was 18, one of my closest friends died. I still have other friends, but that doesn't mean that I wasn't devestated or miss him any less because I have dozens of other friends. It might not be fair to compare the death of a close friend to a fictional haremgirl leaving the protagonist, but I think that the principle is the same. Just because you still have others in a similar position as the one who left, it doesn't mean that you don't care about the one leaving.

Because a harem story is not a swinging story. Just because there are multiple people in a relationship does not mean it is supposed to appeal to the same audience.

I have no wish for the girls to be "shared" with other men, that's not why I read harem stories and I would really, REALLY appreciate it if authors could put a warning beforehand so I know not to waste my time.

Also, this does not make me a bigot, or a misogynist, or a hypocrite, because I know for a fact women that are into "reverse" harems get equally angry when the men hitched to the female protagonist sleep around with other women.

It's a question of proper tagging. There is no point in labeling your story a harem if it's basically an excuse to write about an open relationship. The audience for both are not always mutually exclusive, but the vast, vast majority of people into harem stories do not react well if swinging is introduced.

I can understand it on monogamous stories when someone is turned off by sharing or swinging, but Harems?

The same logic applies to harems, the only difference being the number of women involved, and for the same exact reason. Audience wouldn't like it if they went into a story believing it was about a romantic story between a man and a woman only to later have the woman, or the man, or both, sleep around with other people.

The same reason swinging and sharing is a squick in that kind of story also carries over to harem stories. The appeal is an escapist fantasy where a man is romantically involved with multiple women, not a story where said women routinely sleep with other men, because then we're talking about a completely different narrative meant for a completely different audience.

It's a question of proper tagging.

I'll agree, it's about truth in advertising.

But the problem is, the current tags don't really support distinguishing MF+ harems from "reverse" FM+ harems. Once you are into group sex, there isn't really any way to specify a particular gender mix in the tags.

Personally MM is a turn off for me, but I will tolerate limited MM if the story is otherwise interesting enough. However, MFM where there isn't any active MM action doesn't bother me at all.

I tend to avoid FM+ harem stories, not because MFM sex bothers me but because harem stories tend to be inherently a little D/S and I'm not into female dominant stories.

Once you are into group sex, there isn't really any way to specify a particular gender mix in the tags.

Yeah, that is a pretty big problem because there is no way to tell what exactly the author meant with the 'harem' tag. Many authors seem to use it as a stand in for polyamorous and open relationships, which shouldn't be the case, because the general idea of a (modern) harem, as established and popularized in Japan by Tenchi Muyo and Love Hina, is one man being the romantic target of multiple girls/women, and the only real question is if he gets together with all of them (the so called Tenchi Solution) or chooses one in the end (how Love Hina ended). At no point is the idea of him sharing the women with someone else ever brought up, nor would the audiences that watch these kinds of shows react well to such a development.

However, MFM where there isn't any active MM action doesn't bother me at all.

I am very much bothered with MFM if it involves the female characters that are already in a relationship with the protagonist. The story then isn't really a harem story anymore, or needs to have the 'swinging' tag attached to it (for lack of a better alternative).

I tend to avoid FM+ harem stories, not because MFM sex bothers me but because harem stories tend to be inherently a little D/S and I'm not into female dominant stories.

I avoid them because they are clearly written for a female audience. Not that I have a problem with that, what bothers me is when people start mixing up tropes and genres that clearly do not belong together. I mean, it's fine if a harem story has side characters that are gay and get together, but I fail to see the point in describing their sex life in graphic detail, nor do I see why an author would throw a spanner in the works by having the women go around sleeping with other guys after they get together with the protagonist (a usual development in Lubrican stories).

...the general idea of a (modern) harem, as established and popularized in Japan by Tenchi Muyo and Love Hina, is one man being the romantic target of multiple girls/women ...

I don't care for anime and never heard of 'Tenchi Muyo and Love Hina'. So 'the general idea of a (modern) harem, as established and popularized in Japan' means nothing to me as well.

For stories posted on SoL I stay with the SoL code definition.

Harem: There is a harem involved in the story. A traditional old fashion harem, is where an old sultan has a collection of women housed in a palace for his own pleasure. Could apply for newer setting stories where a similar situation exists.

Many authors seem to use it as a stand in for polyamorous and open relationships

Which they shouldn't, because there are tags for those.

Group Sex Multiple couples in the same place or a threesome
Polygamy/Polyamory Multiple spouses or partners (multiple men or multiple women)
Swinging Trading Sexual Partners

Though again, there's no way to specify at the tag level if a threesome is MMF or MFF.

And if you prefer the style of the ancient sultan type of harems, it makes even less sense to include other men since the women weren't allowed to as much as to meet other men except for enuchs.

I already quoted the definition of 'Harem' I use for stories posted on SoL. Which, by the way, has nothing to do with personal preference; it's simply the code definition for a story tag on this site. I even used the tag for a story and its sequel I posted here and I can assure you the male protagonist of the story wouldn't even dream of sharing his lovers with any other men. So I don't think we generally disagree.

I guess I misunderstood you since your quote of tippertop was from a segment where he argued against multiple men in harems and I have heard people argue that old sultans harems were just sex toys, so why should it matter if other guys are involved. I should have known better though since I've read Law of the Blood (Great story by the way) and Roban is not a guy that would share.

I have heard people argue that old sultans harems were just sex toys

To a point they were just sex toys, but the sultans were not in the habit of sharing. Their harems were well guarded, and the male guards were eunuchs(castrated) to ensure that they couldn't dip their wicks in the sultan's cookie jar.

I guess I misunderstood you since your quote of tippertop was from a segment where he argued against multiple men in harems ...

I originally quoted the entire paragraph but that was rather confusing the issue than clear anything. Personally, I think the supposed established Japanese characterization of the term 'harem' tippertop presented was rather unconvincing.

...the general idea of a (modern) harem, as established and popularized in Japan by Tenchi Muyo and Love Hina, is one man being the romantic target of multiple girls/women ...

To me that sounds more like open hunting season than a harem.

...the only real question is if he gets together with all of them (the so called Tenchi Solution) or chooses one in the end (how Love Hina ended).

That can't be the question. It only can be a harem if he lives together with multiple women, otherwise, it's not.

That can't be the question. It only can be a harem if he lives together with multiple women, otherwise, it's not.

I'll take a different position here. Living together is neither necessary nor sufficient for a harem. A young man with a single mother and 4 sisters does not have a harem.

My take on the modern harem is that it requires the following.

A long-term stable sexual relationship between one individual of one gender and multiple (more than 2) individuals of the opposite gender. Personally, I don't consider a triad to be a harem. Romantic, but asexual relationships don't make a harem.

The many are all aware of each other and that they are all in a relationship with the one, otherwise it's just cheating.

One way monogamy: the many are all exclusive to the one in terms of the opposite gender of the many.

Bisexual relations between the many are acceptable but they can't go outside the harem. Occasional cheating by harem members doesn't void the harem as long as it's punished.

A dominance/submission aspect (even if it's subtle and down played) with the one as the dominant. I don't think a stable relationship of equals in a group larger than a triad is plausible.

Occasional sharing of harem members doesn't void the existence of the harem as long as it's limited and strictly under the control of the harem "owner". But to be clear, this adds swinging aspect on top of a harem not something inherent to the harem. At least some readers looking for harem stories will object to this, so it needs to be done carefully and should be tagged for both harem and sharing.

A young man with a single mother and 4 sisters does not have a harem.

Color me surprised!

Color me surprised!

Well, my comment was in response to someone trying to define a harem as one man living with many women with no need for either sexual or romantic relationships between the man and the women.

A long-term stable sexual relationship between one individual of one gender and multiple (more than 2) individuals of the opposite gender. Personally, I don't consider a triad to be a harem. Romantic, but asexual relationships don't make a harem.

Does that mean a bisexual has to choose one gender or can't have a harem?

Bisexual relations between the many are acceptable but they can't go outside the harem. Occasional cheating by harem members doesn't void the harem as long as it's punished.

Of course now it would become complicated in case you'd allow harem members of all genders.

Does that mean a bisexual has to choose one gender or can't have a harem?

Yes. They could have a Heinlein style M+/F+ group marriage, but it wouldn't be a harem.

Of course now it would become complicated in case you'd allow a harem members of all genders.

I wouldn't consider that to be a harem.

Yes.

Your 'yes' is as resolute as it's arbitrary.

Your 'yes' is as resolute as it's arbitrary.

This is true. Go back and read the update.

Your 'yes' is as resolute as it's arbitrary.

I am commenting again, to point out that ultimately all definitions of all words are arbitrary. There is never anything empirical to tie some particular set of sounds or symbols to some particular meaning.

Of course now it would become complicated in case you'd allow harem members of all genders.

I wouldn't consider this a harem, and even if the author did label it as such, he or she should still warn the audience that this is where the story is headed because most people do not associate 'harem' with "group marriage of multiple men and women". Pulling such a stunt is just asking for trouble down the line.

A long-term stable sexual relationship between one individual of one gender and multiple (more than 2) individuals of the opposite gender.

Why wouldn't it be a harem if all harem members only have sexual relationships to the harem 'owner', even if the harem members are of different genders? That you'd allow sexual relationships in an only women harem stands in your way, which is a personal bias rather than a logical necessity.

That you'd allow sexual relationships in an only women harem stands in your way, which is a personal bias rather than a logical necessity.

No, I'd allow it in an only male harem as well.

Your argument doesn't have any logical necessity either. In your view, what distinguishes a Heinlein style M+/F+ group marriage from a harem?

In your view, what distinguishes a Heinlein style M+/F+ group marriage from a harem?

Intention. If the sole or at least predominant intention of the harem members' activities is to pleasure its owner than it's a harem. If the main intention is to find pleasure for themselves, it's not a harem but a relationship of equals.

Intention. If the sole or at least predominant intention of the harem members' activities is to pleasure its owner than it's a harem. If the main intention is to find pleasure for themselves, it's not a harem but a relationship of equals.

I can't accept that distinction, as I do not believe that a stable relationship of equals is possible in any group larger than a triad. Trying to make all decisions by committee is necessarily dysfunctional. The larger the committee gets the less well it works.

But we're not discussing a real life scenario, not that such a situation could even work IRL without extreme social pressure and coercion, we are talking about fiction.

Fiction only really has to obey its own internal logic and rules, so if the author says that multiple women can be in love with the same man without jealously getting in the way, and that the same man can love all of them equally, and that they are all part of such a relationship willingly, what exactly is the issue?

Especially if the author does the necessary legwork to make the premise seem believable to the audience.

Fiction only really has to obey its own internal logic and rules

Those internal rules still need some degree of plausibility and consistency.

so if the author says that multiple women can be in love with the same man without jealously getting in the way, and that the same man can love all of them equally, and that they are all part of such a relationship willingly, what exactly is the issue?

The issue is that all of that is not by itself sufficient to create a relationship of equals as I understand that term.

A relationship of equals requires that they all have an equal say in all decision making. That just isn't plausible in a group.

ETA: For me, this is something that is sufficiently implausible to break the suspension of disbelief.

A relationship of equals requires that they all have an equal say in all decision making. That just isn't plausible in a group

Sure it is. While I agree that harems are hardly ever equal, with the guy taking an alpha role, I don't see any reason why they couldn't have an equal say in things. Just because it's a relationship of say 5, I don't see why they wouldn't have the power in making decisions as if they were 2. It's not like the power of decisions have a finite number like 100 and you can't split it equally if they are 5.

It's not like the power of decisions have a finite number like 100 and you can't split it equally if they are 5.

Committees always make poor decisions or they go into analysis paralysis. It doesn't matter if the context is business or personal relationships. Committees can be used to make recommendations, but ultimately you need a decision maker.

Even in just a couple, a true relationship of equals is hard to make work, not so hard that it's impossible, but it's not easy.

I can't accept that distinction, as I do not believe that a stable relationship of equals is possible in any group larger than a triad.

I just stated a harem is the opposite of a relationship of equals. So what exactly can't you accept as a distinction?

But that's not what the majority of people think when the term 'harem' is mentioned.

1. To the "unenlightened": What the Sultan and Chinese emperor had going.

2. To the weeb: An anime or manga that is part of the harem genre. Usually features a passive MC and lots of blueballing on the part of the audience. Alternatively, stories where the protagonist actually manages to score more than one girl by some miracle.

3. To the erotica readers: A man or woman that is in a relationship with more than two members of the opposite gender.

Heinlein himself did not call his group marriages harems, so I fail to see why you consistently push the idea that group marriages should be labeled as harems. If you were to do a search on Amazon for books relating to harem you'd find that the number of those that do feature multiple men and women in the same relationship are a miniscule rarity. Same goes pretty much everywhere.

Heinlein himself did not call his group marriages harems, so I fail to see why you consistently push the idea that group marriages should be labeled as harems.

I never pushed anything like that at all.

Personally, I think the supposed established Japanese characterization of the term 'harem' tippertop presented was rather unconvincing.

I'd be very curious to dig around old usenet archives to see when the term 'harem' first started being used to denote stories of a man being romantically involved with multiple women, but most of those posts have been lost IIRC. I'm asking because the Tenchi Muyo manga was first published in 1992, the anime aired in Japan in 1995, and in America in 1997, so the term should have started to be used in such a fashion in the English speaking sphere around that time as well.

To me that sounds more like open hunting season than a harem.

The majority of the plot usually involves the women fighting over the protagonist and him getting caught in the crossfire. It's mostly played for laughs, though there are titles that deal with the issue seriously and show the inherent tragedy of such a state of affairs.

That can't be the question. It only can be a harem if he lives together with multiple women, otherwise, it's not.

Yes and no. Tenchi Muyo was the first story to introduce the concept of the male protagonist cohabiting with multiple women that were romantically interested in him, and Love Hina, and the rest of the newly minted harem genre followed along.

A more modern interpretation of the genre uses 'harem' to denote that the story features a gender imbalance among the cast, usually with far more female characters than male ones (to the point that sometimes the protagonist is the only male around) but does necessarily imply that the women are in love with the male lead, though this is a much rarer occurrence.

One thing that is universally prevalent in the genre though is that there is no "harem poaching", at least not until the protagonist has made his choice. In fact, authors that have tried to broach the subject have been met with rather heated hostility by audiences.

That's why I object to the use of the 'harem' tag when there is sharing of partners going on. Neither historically, nor in the context of internet use, does 'harem' denote stories where the women sleep around with other men. And like others have said, there is really no need to use the 'harem' tag in such an event because there are already other tags that can be used for such a purpose.

Neither historically, nor in the context of internet use, does 'harem' denote stories where the women sleep around with other men.

I'll agree with this with the caveat that it's not implausible either historically or in the modern erotica context that a harem owner might occasionally loan out one of the harem members temporarily to serve some specific end (such as rewarding a subordinate).

On the other hand if the putative harem owner is sharing just to share, that's not a harem.

I think we can all agree that properly tagging stories is important, as well as knowing what kind of audience you are bound to attract based on the premise and summary and to put warnings accordingly.

I'm not really saying that harem stories shouldn't feature aspects of swinging and sharing, just that they need to be properly labeled because they are a big squick factor for a vast number of readers.

A good example is a series of books on Amazon called Purgatory Wars. The author failed to mention that past Book 2 the nature of the relationship between the protagonist and his girlfriends shifts towards swinging, leading to a lot of upset readers that left poor ratings, thus negatively affecting sales. The whole debacle could have been avoided with a simple warning of his intentions.

I agree but some people seem to think that they were sex slaves like in BDSM where all kinds of swinging, trading and sharing occur, which is far from the truth.

There is a lot of BDSM play (and stories) out there that don't involve either swinging or sharing. People who think sex slaves equates to sharing and/or swinging are just delusional.