Making no apologies for Potterotica


1 Like

Avada Cadavra!!! (sound of mike dropping)


Forward slash! Not backslash! </pedantic asshattery>


Good catch!

(She’s could have been slyly witty, by concluding “I will not be slashed into pieces any more!”)

so that started out quite funny.

then shit got real.

Thinking pretty seriously about having my 16 year old son watch that as a catalyst for a conversation about porn, erotica and the objectification of women.


Win on the poetry, but girlfriend needs to lose the canned North American poetry slam accent. It obtunds the emotion and meaning of her words by verging them toward Blah blaahh bla blaaaahhh. Not all poetry slammin’ poets in North America fall prey to this, but I’ve heard it live on both coasts and in too many recordings. I hope Brenna finds a spoken voice to match the playful and critical power of her written one.


I always wondered why spoken word poets (if that’s the right term) all have the same cadence.

Maybe she didn’t want to say ‘slash’ wrt fanfic?

1 Like

Backslash, it’s a Microsoft thing.

1 Like

Thanks for that!

1 Like

So, I don’t dispute what she says about porn. Personally, I’m pretty selective about it: it has to be clear that all parties are consenting, has to not just be nasty bangin’ away, has to bear some resemblance to people actually having sex and enjoying it. I’d say about 90% of it is pretty gross and 99% of it is unrealistic–including the amateur stuff.

Having said that…

OK, I tried the URL she spouts off and I get a 404. Not a surprise; she probably spouted it off on the fly. Probably. Nevertheless I did a Google search for “ harry potter nc-17” ( redirects to and got this story.

And apparently, Lavender and other students are writing erotica about Ron, which creeps him out because he has no feelings for her, leaving him feeling violated. Thankfully, though, Luna has rules in her fanfic! They are:


- If the couple becomes real they’re no longer ‘taboo’ and therefore not fit for our ‘fiction’ any longer.

-No rape or non-con of any type in the stories.

-All stories must be rated M aka Nc-17

-All S&M stories must be clearly labeled as such to avoid upset. (Thank you Romilda!)

-All slash stories, whether m/m or f/f must be labeled.

-No incest stories! (In exception of the HAWT threesomes involving the Weasley twins.)

-No one under 15 mentioned in sexual situations. (This includes snog sessions Lavender.)

Well, good! No incest other than the Weasleys (because that’s HAWT), and there won’t be any erotica in this story about kids under 15.



I get that the age of consent is 15 in some places, but it’s 16 in England. It’s 17 where I live (Illinois). Anyone remember the shitfest when Glee did their Sadie Hawkins episode? Puck had sex with a 16-year-old girl who enthusiastically pursued him, wouldn’t take “no” for an answer, and he finally consented despite not knowing that he was in a state where she was already at the age of consent? Nah, he asked her if would get him in trouble, she said yes, and he consented anyway. This of course means she was raped.

Chapter two of that story starts with some erotica fantasizing about Malfoy having sex with Ginny. I did the math; her character would have been 15 or 16 at the time.

But nah, they’re not at all the same.

In fact, just doing a general Google search brings up a lot of fantasies about non-consensual sex and, well, there’s some really terribly-written slash about Harry and Snape…you know…because there’s nothing at all creepy about a teen having sex with one of his teachers.

So yeah…if I see an image or video of a 24-year-old in pigtails performing a sexual act, that’s worse than fantasizing about 15-year-olds having sex? Or more to the point, nothing wrong with fantasizing about Bonnie Wright, at 15 years old, with her skirt hiked up, or a 15-year-old Katie Leung getting herself off with a broomstick?

I buy half of it. The other, not so much.

Her point about the flashing “just turned 18!” banner would have gone down a lot easier if she didn’t preface that by openly fantasizing about having sex with prepubescent schoolchildren. I’m sure Humbert Humbert also uses the “well-rounded character” defense, too.

She’s a hypocritical kink-shamer. You can dress that up in feminist slam poetry all you want, that’s the base of it. Her porn is good, yours is not.


the way i reckon the inconsistency is that these people take mass media as a sort of gospel which should obey their ideals about society and whatnot, whereas fanfic is their opportunity to profane. some of this then slowly makes its way into the canon.

as such, it’s nothing new. plenty of this in the Old Testament. what is odd and slightly depressing is the reverence for such crap as Harry Potter, but whatever.

i think her point was that “normal” porn is just as fantastical as hers. normal sex with “barely” legal adults is not generally considered kinky, anyway; where’s the kink-shaming?


“They are part of the bigger story. They exist beyond 8 minutes in ‘Titty Titty Gang Bang.’ That their kegels are not the strongest thing about them […] don’t you give me raw meat and tell me it is nourishment.”

With an added head bob for emphasis on how little she thinks of “Titty Titty Gang Bang.”

She’s making her point very clear, here. She thinks that masturbating to erotic literature about fictional schoolchildren is more respectable than masturbating to videos with consenting, role-playing adults.

She tries to throw gender politics, societal pressures and sexual assault on top of it. But that’s the ultimate point of what she said.

Her kink is nourishment. Yours is raw meat.



Yeah; I think she may be hung up on the fact that hers is imagined while watching “Titty Titty Gang Bang” is watching real people actually having sex, and that in many pornos, there’s little in the way of realistic sex, and hell, very little respect for the female actors from the male actors, if at all. Personally, I blame the fact that so many uptight, conservative folks unwind with porn…but maybe I’m wrong here. I don’t know if this is a reference to a real porno, but I found several that had that title. The first one I found featured…er…a woman in the position of power…as a doctor…giving rectal exams to men? Well, different strokes, I suppose.

Me, I’m a tiny bit more squicked out by the Harry Potter fiction, because I can’t help but think that people’s imaginations are going to be fueled not just by the fanfic, but also by the mental image of the actors from the movies. The first fanfic I found when I searched for “ harry potter nc17” gave me a story set during Harry’s sixth year, and the first explicit description of people having sex is Draco and Ginny. My first thought is that someone out there, if they’re turned on by this, they’re going to have a mental image of Tom Felton, age 16, in sexual relations with Bonnie Wright, age 15.

Let’s pause to think about that for a moment.

And some of the slash I found…the Snape/Harry one I found earlier, the headshot of the author was of a woman, probably in her mid-30s. Can’t help but think of some of Robert Pattinson’s stories about the creepy middle-aged women…

1 Like

I totally agree. I like everything about this clip, but man was it hard to watch because of that cliched rhythm. It was almost like a parody.

I feel somewhat vindicated now in only fantasizing about the movie-version of Moaning Myrtle, who was played by an adult very close to my own age and never came across to me as literally adolescent on-screen.

Now I need to track down some of that fanfic. :smiley:

I see your point, the “admission” to potterotica is a dare, its meant to show that she knows what she’s talking about when she talks about porn, its also a gambit to paint admitted potter porn as erotica and claim its better than porn as if the distinction was worth discussing. In the end, sex sells.

There’s a point there, I’m not even going to go there and attempt to critique the validity of the point, its hers to make. But its definitely a nonsequitir to preach to the choir a valid case weakly and then claim she’s taking back anything.

I’m not taking sides here, just that I don’t see this convincing anybody that’s not already convinced, the line she uses to join the dots here are so thin that you kinda have to be on her side in the first place to recognize them.

A few weeks ago I had a small exchange with a buddy who posted a picture on FB “explaining” how certain vegetebales have more protein than meat, the numbers were unrealistic, spinach had like 20 times more protein than meat. I pointed out that this is not true and that its simple to verify after which he attempted to change the conversation and say that it doesn’t matter because its healthier anyway to not eat meat.
You can be a level 7 vegan and still agree (hopefully) that truth is truth and if you believe something on good evidence, there’s no reason to present bad evidence to other people to convince them for their own good.
To be clear, I don’t mean to say that what Twohy is pointing out does not have merit, in the end I’m just not a fan of speaking the truth with bad arguments.

Edit: For spelling and clarity.

Oh my god, not an “added head bob”! That’s just unacceptable.

Yeah, but seriously, I get your point although personally I have no problem with either one, and feel that her intent was more celebratory than shaming.

There were a few eye-roll inducing moments, and the “raw meat” bit really threw me. Tartare and sashimi are nourishment, and quite delicious ones.