Now that i think about it, the only way the term dubious consent can be correctly used is when the person having sex is unsure about how they feel about it and can't clearly communicate their discomfort they feel to the other person (which keeps up the act without asking how their partner currently feels)
still, thats r*pe. i feel like dubcon should only be used in like a situation where the person consents but their consent cant actually be legitimate according to law, like if theyre a prisoner
Perhaps he meaning of "dubious" means in the first place that it's rape, because the "consent" is not clear and when consent is not clear it's not really consent. Dubious IS something morally wrong either way, it's just that it's something that i guess it's used in situations when people don't communicate directly, for example it's not rape in an "obvious" way?(like violence that can easily be discerned by a third person's eyes but still rape nevertheless)I don't know how else it could be used, because at this point the term would be useless. Perhaps the word "consent" in the term is not used to really mean "consent" and it's something that is used the same way the consent in the term "consent through coercion" is used (coercive rape)? Honestly, at this point i am confused, and if we see this logically, it is indeed a useless term. As for the thing you mentioned, what did you mean? Can you give an example with a specific situation?
i would only use dubcon if the person consented under unethical conditions. not really direct coercion but like if they were a horny prisoner, kinda like Hector from Castlevania season 3. He consented enthusiastically, but he was a prisoner being manipulated be Lenore. So irl it would be rape, but me personally since there arent laws there about prisoner safety and whatever, calling it rape distracts from the fact that Hector wanted to do it enthusiastically.
With this example i now understand what you mean. As I've seen though, the term is used to straight up rape in most cases, i highly doubt people use it correctly in such specific situations(like you've also said).
Personally i have no problem with people that read twisted content, as long as they're not hypocrites that try to cover the fact that they contain rape, violence e.t.c or what the story's purpose is by showing violence, which is entertainment (like in this one).
The problem lies with people that try to normalize it and make it something it's not, since they can't handle feeling guilty(your mentions helped me see a clear picture).
If you read something messed up, own it, instead of lying to yourself (or just don't read it at all if you have to rationalize the violence in it to make yourself feel better) .
Also accept the truth about what the consequences of consuming this content are. I believe that if people at least admitted that what they read, is what it is, their perception and in general the bad effects of reading things like this (like desensitization e.t.c), would be less bad since they wouldn't try to "normalize" it.
I'm not saying that the effects would cease to exist, but it would help minimize the desensitization of the individual, since the unconscious lines between reality and fiction would be more "clear" (I'm not talking about the conscious ones, like the knowledge that rape is bad and the morality to not support it).
I hope this makes sense and sorry about the essay haha,
i just find this topic interesting XD
im sticking around for the plot, but it feels really gross reading r*pe that is meant to be smut. its framed in a way that is supposed to be enjoyable to the reader but its really just brutal r*pe. i dont understand how BL authors can keep making this stuff, like do they not feel disgusted? cuz all i feel in those smut scenes is now awful and traumatized that poor guy must be, being assaulted by four men. could have easily writted a character who liked sex, or left out the graphic depictions of r*pe.