Post History

Source: https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/48503
License name: CC BY-SA 4.0
License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

Source: https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/48503
License name: CC BY-SA 4.0
License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

> In this day and age should the definition / categorisation of erotica be revised?

No. Erotica is a story intended to titillate, it is **intended** to aid imagination for the purpose of masturbation. Or more generally, for the _primary_ purpose of creating sexual excitement.

If a story contains elements like that, it is probably erotica, even if there is a story line. If the story line is subordinate to creating sexual excitement, it is erotica.

But if sex serves a purpose (marking a transition state for your character) then the sex is an actual turning point, and in a story about real adults is merely realistic. Real people have sex, they masturbate, they engage in kinky stuff. There is nothing wrong with describing it (although some legal restrictions may apply in some jurisdictions; like not depicting child porn, or in some countries not depicting homosexuality).

Like all writing (including battles, torture, etc) it can be overblown, purple, or otherwise badly written, but depicting sex is not the issue.

I certainly don't think erotica needs a redefinition, I also don't find anything wrong with writing it. Sex is definitely a form of entertainment, whether the erotica is used for masturbatory fantasy or role playing or whatever. It can make both men and women feel powerful, loved, accomplished, joyful and the release of sex can, for some time, make them feel happy, content and connected.

Those can be strong story elements in a longer story. Sex can lead to love. Sex can lead to break ups. It is a tool you can use, and describing what was felt can be important, the moment that somebody's character actually changed. Pretending people are mindless in sex and only come to realizations afterward, when their clothes are back on, is unrealistic; leave it to censored TV, where women have sex with their bra on, or _everybody_ has sex under the covers, and after sex (apparently, from the jump cuts used) everybody puts their underwear back on before cuddling. (Honestly I'd rather they just change the camera angle while people get out of bed and get dressed enough to film).

Be realistic. The notion that kids don't see Internet porn and know how it works is ludicrous; the moment they wonder they will find out. Not that Internet porn is realistic, but the mechanics and results are pretty obvious for anybody that wants to find them. I don't know who the outraged think they are protecting by censoring **_books,_** when straight-up real-life video filmed by amateurs of nearly _everything_ can be found in a few minutes.

Original score: 23