[ SECRET POST #4650 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #4650 ⌋

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

01.



__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.











Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 36 secrets from Secret Submission Post #666.
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

[(Anonymous)]

ugh yeah, and i feel like it would need an additional warning even on top of that? because usually dubcon is stuff where attraction/desire exists but the circumstances aren't fully consensual, like sex pollen/intoxication, coercion, stuff like that where it's "character does want to have sex but probably not under these conditions." if it's "character doesn't actually want to have sex at all" then i feel like that comes way closer to noncon than dubcon.

[(Anonymous)]

DA - I don't think a dubcon tag or a noncon tag are right, because in this kind of situation consent isn't the issue. It's fully consensual. What it really needs is a specific tag that denotes "character doesn't like sex but has it anyway because their partner does." But yeah, it's definitely understandable readers would want to know to expect that before it hit them in the face.

[(Anonymous)]

I guess it would depend on the circumstances. If A really likes B, but doesn't like sex at all, but offers because they think they're supposed to for whatever reason and B likes A and thinks A is offering sex because they want to have sex, I'm not sure it's noncon in the traditionally understood sense of the word, but it's probably dubcon because both parties are not on the same page when it comes to what they're actually consenting to. If A and B really like each other and B coerces A into sex despite knowing that A's reluctant and A accepts because they think they have to for the sake of the relationship, then that's falling more into noncon territory, regardless of A's sexuality.

[(Anonymous)]

I'm the anon above you, and the version of this I've seen the most is: A and B really like each other but A doesn't like sex at all. A says they will have sex with B because they know B likes sex and it's important to them. They have sex. A doesn't enjoy the sex, but they like making B feel good. So that's the version I'm against labeling as dubcon because, well, it's not.

But I agree that the scenarios you describe are dubcon-y/noncon-y.

[(Anonymous)]

AYRT - I agree that the sort of 'well, that was too warm and damp, but I'm enjoying your enjoyment' sex you're describing isn't dub/noncon, and probably isn't worth tagging for.