"Taboo" sex stories

[HoopsandEverything]

So, I think I may be told AIBU and am a prude, but would like to know what the general consensus is.

So, if a sex story, which is completely fictional involves a 14/15 year old girl - is that wrong or right?

Just words, no pictures. No lack of consent from the girl in the story.

I don't know if Taboo is the right way to describe it either (this is why the whole conversation started, because I had described it as such).

I don't care what it is in other countries. That doesn't make it right. In some countries it's considered perfectly fine for a 9 year old girl to marry an old man. It's not right just because it isn't illegal there

Chill we're talking about countries like Germany and Sweden here. Hardly some barbaric regimes. 16 is a completely arbitrary age. In the US it is mainly 18- they might think we are sick pedos over here.

OK, I think this thread is a wind-up. No way an adult hasn't heard of Lolita.

I agree shovetheholly.
Even the name has become synonymous with a sexually precocious girl.
It's literally become part of our language.
I am always suspicious of overreactions anyway , 'retching' ? ffs

Attraction to young teenagers is ephebophilia (though a different name makes it no less illegal in most polities or morally incorrect in coercive circumstances). Even Germaine Greer is an ephebophile, or at least published a picture book on the subject.

though a different name makes it no less illegal in most polities

I don't think that is right. In the majority of countries in Europe a 15 year old is able to consent to sex. In a significant number (including Austria, Germany, Italy and Portugal) a 14 year old is above the age of consent.

^I agree shovetheholly.
Even the name has become synonymous with a sexually precocious girl.
It's literally become part of our language.^

There is always some people who won't have heard of things that you think everyone has or ought to have. I remember one of the young men on a series of I'm A Celeb thinking that WW2 started in the 70s, and Jade Goody demonstrating some similar lack of knowledge about Hitler. It happens.

If it's fiction I can't see a problem. What about murder mysteries? And when it comes to underage sex, you do realise that stories about kids of 16 having sex, totally ok in the UK, would be considered paedophile in much of the US?

The whole point of fiction is that it's fictional. Plenty of American thrillers contain downright salacious accounts of sex murders. Somehow I manage not to call the cops.

I've vaguely heard the term 'Lolita' but didn't really understand what it meant or knew anything about the story until I looked it up on the back of this thread. Not everyone has heard about everything.

Oh and I don't need to chill thanks. A teen and an older man is a sensitive subject for me too although I don't have an extreme reaction.

shovetheholly and JAPAB

I tend to blank out everything to do with young children being sexually abused. I looked it up today, I have no recollection of having heard it before. I doubt anyone would have sat me down as a teenager, or young adult, given what I'd been through and told me about Lolita. I am not even sure how it would be pronounced.

Also had no idea that Romeo and Juliet story was based on young teenagers either.

Apologies, that was for Filled not JAPAB

prh47bridge

You're right, that was me being blinkered by my own cultural assumptions. A lot of it about on this thread.

Oh and I don't need to chill thanks. A teen and an older man is a sensitive subject for me too although I don't have an extreme reaction

But it would be OK if she was 16? Anyway, and correct me if I am wrong, the OP has not said anything about the age of the man. What if it was another teenager- ie 2 15 year olds? Or a 16/17 year old. It's different if we are talking about a 50 year old man and a teen, I agree, but I don't think we can call sex with teenagers pedophilia, because it does not fit into the definition of pedophilia. As I have said, I would be uncomfortable if my partner got off on things like this, but I cannot see how this type of fiction should be banned. We can't ban everything we find offensive.

It's a woman (sorry, it's not a man), I think it might actually be two women in fact. I didn't really get into the details because I was having a major fucking meltdown over the fact that I was sitting with a small group of people who thought this was acceptable.

I think that morally, there is a difference between:

a) a storyline involving immoral acts (including sexual abuse, violence, murder, etc) as part of a true reflection of life (which unfortunately involves all those things), and happens to incorporate them into a story.

b) a story particularly and pointedly focusing on something abusive or immoral in a titillating manner for the purposes of furthering a fantasy for sexual or sadistic pleasure.

I don't think there is anything wrong with a), and I think it is a good thing that even the dark aspects of humanity can have a light shone on them, lest many of us just lapse into ignorance/denial.

However, b) is where it gets controversial for me. Most times, I wouldn't advocate the condemning of any activity (however distasteful) as long as someone isn't harmed. But I'd worry about this kind of material 'stoking the fire' in people who do harbour desires to hurt/abuse others.

I'm also not sure about the road it could lead us down. Would computer-generated child pornography be ok? (god, that makes me shudder, but technically victimless). What about child sex robots? (already discussion about this happening).

I guess for me, the crux of it would be whether those things would contribute to a deterioration in human depravity, and therefore increase the likelihood of actual harm happening (I think this is likely), or whether they would function as an outlet and reduce it (I think this less likely, as generally fantasy, particularly sexual fantasy seems to escalate).

prh47
that is interesting, (re 1875, but a long time ago!)

What about Sade? Still widely published and legal to print and own in most countries. Still studied at universities. Still regarded as important literature. Where the word 'sadism' actually comes from. Should we erase his works entirely from history?

People will read Sade for several reasons and I don't doubt there are people who read them for sexual pleasure, but I'd say most read his works for the psychological/philosophical element and they provide interesting debate. It doesn't stop the content being horrific and you can't monitor every reader to ensure their intentions are purely academic.

I don't believe fiction ever has a boundary and I don't believe it should have a legal/illegal boundary imposed. But as with all art it is there for the reader to judge to their own standards and deem moral/immoral and anything else, that's the whole point. If you start trying to draw lines in fiction where would you stop?

Did anybody see this?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Diary_of_a_Teenage_Girl

It was an absolutely excellent, non-seedy look at underage female sexuality and sexual experience.

Mirrors how I felt at that age very well. Fully recommend it - don't but put off by the tween sounding name.

OP, it seems that you lack a broad cultural awareness of either classic fiction or age of consent laws both in the sense of history and geography. In Spain the age of consent is 13, and people can marry at 14. So a story describing what would be underage sex here would be fine in Spain or, presumably, if written in Spanish.

I get the feeling that OP has very violent reactions to anything related to teenagers having sex. That's entirely understandable if you have bad memories or trauma. But it isn't a justification for objecting to perfectly legal fiction. If you can't read about teens having sex then, as several PPs have pointed out, goodbye Romeo and Juliet.

salty Going to watch that tonight.

Prawn I thought I was a pretty avid reader - I honestly had no idea about the ages in R and J - I thought they were like 17 / 18.

I do still think I would not read something between about sex between an adult and a child. So the Lolita thing is definitely out.

Two teenagers having sex - wouldn't be such a reaction. It's the teenager / adult thing that I don't feel comfortable with.

I'd never really thought about the age of consent changing to much. I was aware it was different in other countries, and I was aware it hadn't been the same through history. But, yes, not something I've put much thought into.

Be careful with the film if you are sensitive OP - theres sex between an adult and a 15 year old.

I think Lolita is creepy. Doesn't mean it's not art. A lot of Shakespeare is pretty nasty too. Try Taming of the Shrew, a comedy based on DV and EA.

Please can we stop with the comparisons to Romeo & Juliet, it's not erotica, there's not a huge gap between the ages of the protagonists and, irrelevantly, Juliet would have been played by a boy anyway.

As the age of consent currently stands to choose to have a character who is below it is making a statement of sorts - maybe it's part of the wider story, maybe it's autobigraphical - but if the choice is made for erotic reasons then I think it's questionable.

As views on wrong and right are subjective OP is not being unreasonable to find it wrong - this does not mean she wants to ban R&J or Lolita. It just means that she is uncomfortable with erotica written about a child under the age of consent.

I wouldn't suggest reading lolita under the circumstances, but don't retch over it or get yourself wound up. Nabakov's point was to illustrate how manipulative abusers by writing it from the peadophiles pov. It is very obvious to any critical reader how it is the abuser twisting the wording, tweaking events, to justify his abuse. It's a very well written piece of work, to show how blind we all are to abuse, how easily an abuser pulls the wool over societies eyes. It accomplishes the aim very effectively.

As you don't trust your judgement due to your past (I'm an abuser survivor also btw) why don't you just tell us the book that you are unsure of and we can let you know if it's pervy or not?

I think justifications based on past literature are often red herrings, the intent of lolita often being missed for example, the cultural context of romeo and juliet, and sade while vile in lots of so many ways is really more of a two fingers up at the establishment than anything.

I think Romeo and Juliet being about young teenagers is important. I had a long conversation with one of my DC about it. He felt that their incredibly stupid failure to communicate and overreactions demonstrated how immature they were. Older kids would have planned better, he thought, and not ended up dead.

It's a woman (sorry, it's not a man), I think it might actually be two women in fact. I didn't really get into the details because I was having a major fucking meltdown over the fact that I was sitting with a small group of people who thought this was acceptable

I would try not to let it bother you too much. It might seem wrong to you, but Parliament could pass a law tomorrow, lowering the age of consent to 16. It's an arbitrarily imposed number, it was not introduced based on research or anything like that.

Actually, interestingly, Spain raised its age of consent from 13 to 16 in 2015. It had previously been raised from 12 in 1995. So pre-2015, a 14 yo having sex would not be illegal, but now it is.

In this country, a large number of people engage in sexual activity before the age of 16. Very few are prosecuted- that only tends to be when one of the parties is a lot older.