[ SECRET POST #3209 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #3209 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04. [WARNING for incest]



__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.













Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 054 secrets from Secret Submission Post #459.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[case]

A warning for what? (If incest, why 4 and not 6?)

[(Anonymous)]

AYRT

Incest, yes. As for why not #6, I didn't read that one because I don't know the fandom... so yeah, I don't think I can say whether or not it might need a warning. I do think #4 should have one, though.

[(Anonymous)]

NA Because qualitatively there's a BIG difference between sibling incest and parent/child incest. Sibling incest can be fully consensual, and most often is fully consensual the way people ship it. Parent/child incest is almost never consensual (I only say "almost never" and not "never ever" because I suppose it's possible for a parent to have consensual sex with their child if that child is a fully independent grown up - though even there I'm not totally sure).

[case]

Huh? I wasn't asking about what made them different, I was asking why the original anon had an issue with the Batman secret but not the one that literally spells out "incest" in text (turns out it's because anon didn't read the latter one).

[(Anonymous)]

I was asking why the original anon had an issue with the Batman secret but not the one that literally spells out "incest" in text

Yes, and that's what I was explaining. I don't think the other anon's primary problem was with the fact that it was incest. I think their primary problem was with the fact that it was parent/child rape incest. That...seems pretty obvious just from reading their comment.

They didn't say "please put an incest warning on #4, since most Robins are related to Batman." They said:

Could you please put a warning on #4, since most Robins are Batman's sons.

[case]

OP (of the secret) specified "daddy!kink" so I wasn't automatically assuming it was "rape incest kink" (secret itself mentions nothing of underage, etc) since the two aren't exactly the same, kink wise!

I have no actual issue with putting a warning on it though.

[(Anonymous)]

Thank you. I think original anon and I would both appreciate it. :)

[(Anonymous)]

I would chime in here to say

"Parent/child incest is almost never consensual (I only say "almost never" and not "never ever" because I suppose it's possible for a parent to have consensual sex with their child if that child is a fully independent grown up - though even there I'm not totally sure)."

holds true in real life, but not for fiction. Consensual parent/child especially adopted parent/adopted child is a kink I've seen a lot in fiction, with many instances of the adopted child being the reader stand-in and therefore being attracted to the adopted parent. Burt/Kurt in Glee is a thing. Sheriff Stilinski/Stiles is a thing. Most of it is treated as consensual.

[(Anonymous)]

Okay but that stuff still needs a warning.

Like, to use one of your examples, if I was reading a Burt/Kurt fic that hadn't been tagged as such and had nothing in the summary to indicate what it was, I'd be pissed off once I realized it was incest.

[(Anonymous)]

I don't disagree. I was pointing out that fiction and reality are very different for that particular kink, and keeping that distinction there is important.

[(Anonymous)]

holds true in real life, but not for fiction.

Personally that distinction doesn't hold much weight for me. Never has. It's the same with master/slave stories and they-said-no-but-they-wanted-it stories. If a person is a slave they can't consent. If a person says no, it's rape to fuck them anyway. The fact that we can be inside the character's head and know that they actually do want it doesn't change that for me. Parent/child is just the most extreme example of this.

[(Anonymous)]

If you're AYRT and the distinction between fiction and reality doesn't hold weight for you I don't think there's anything I can say to that, honestly, besides people are not characters and characters are not people. But if I am reading you correctly, that won't matter to you either, so it's moot.

[(Anonymous)]

Yeah, the things we eroticize hold weight, and the things we normalize hold weight. And those things do have a proven effect on the way people view reality. But it's moot. Sure, yeah. Sure. Moot.

[(Anonymous)]

But a large part of the draw of incest kink in fiction is that it's taboo. Ergo, no-one is trying to normalize it, because then it would no longer be taboo and thus lose it's draw.

[(Anonymous)]

"Sibling incest can be fully consensual"

how drunk and delusional can you be?

today f!s have been twisted loophole... what the hell, Case?

[(Anonymous)]

I think you are very confused about what consent means vs what it doesn't. The only thing I can surmise is that you're confusing "consensual" with "normal and healthy." That is literally the only way your comment has any sort of basis in logical reality. You might want to work on that. Having a clear understanding of how consent works is important.