>>1258686
We need a case study on the statistical overlap of incest and NTR (i.e. netori and netorare) communities.
Intuitively, I think that there is a statistically significant increase over the control for the overlap between incest and netori communities and decrease over the control between incest and netorare ones.
I would assume that the scenario of
>1) one sibling stealing the other one from their current non-incestuous partner
could be found enticing by a statistically significant number of people, when considered from the PoV of that sibling, and I believe the literature supports this hypothesis.
However the idea of
>2) protagonist's partner is being stolen by their (partner's) sibling
seems to seldom be entertained and the comparative rarity of relevant literature seems to reflect that as well.
A possible mechanism for this discrepancy, if we're to theorize one, is likely effected by the two following points:
<1) Incest is predominantly PoV-presenting and/or self-insert adjacent genre of literature;
Fictional (or biographical) scenarios involving incest disproportionally often put the focus on the subject, rarely merely presenting it as a sort of an external matter, even if the counterexamples of the latter do exist.
Community, surrounding this sort of literature then, would demonstrate a statistically significant increase over the average in terms of the bias for specifically seeking relatability in the content they are consuming.
That, in turn, leads to a disproportional representation of the audience generally considering the presented scenarios from the standpoint of subjective projection, or even direct self-inserting.
<2) Despite Incest and Netorare both being considered deviancies, the social tendencies between the two differ to a considerable degree.
The community overlap we're studying today notwithstanding, a comparative and arguably greater lack of an overlap between the two communities also happens to be a factor.
It could then be argued that for most members of only one of the presented communities, the addition of the content catering to the community they aren't a member of, to the literature they are consuming, is more likely to cause a negative reaction over the positive one.
Analyzing the two above points, two specific scenarios seem to emerge:
The scenario of
>1)
would directly cater to both Incest and netori communities directly:
For the incest community, the scenario represents a power-fantasy catering directly to their needs. Additionally, it directly tackles a very common and popular conflict for the genre - the interaction between the incestuous protagonists and the "normalcy" that surrounds them;
For the netori community, the scenario still directly encapsulates the entirety of the content they were expecting. The inclusion of specifically incest can be considered a cognitive detractor for the experience for some, but most literature would foreshadow this detail sufficiently early for the reader to implicitly consent to it.
Conversely,
>2)
would only cater to incest and netorare communities partially:
For the incest community, the exclusion of the main protagonist out of the actual incestuous relationship conflicts with one of the fundamental expectation the community has for the genre in question;
For the netorare community, while the core of the expected conflict is preserved, the aforementioned cognitive detractor is still present, arguably in a stronger form. For a piece of netorare literature the ultimate reveal of the involvement of incest cannot be as easily and openly foreshadowed as it could be for netori literature, as such it's comparatively more likely to carry a stronger cultural shock, potentially distracting the reader at the culmination of the expected experience, thus effect a negative reaction from them.
Thus, the literature catering to both incest and netori communities can effectively play into the expectations of both, minimizing the friction and arguable enhancing the experience at times.
Meanwhile, the same cannot be said for the literature that attempts to cater to both incest and netorare communities, as the challenges it has to overcome would predominantly limit its audience mostly to existing simultaneous members of both communities, making it unlikely to capture new members on its own.
In conclusion,
literature creates audience, and audience, in its turn, enables further literature to be made.
Friction and conflict between the audience and the literature written for them, would naturally result in a cycle of continuous mutual decrease for both.
Meanwhile, literature capable of naturally catering both to virtual entirety of its target audience while reaching beyond it, is likely to experience the reverse opposite - a continuous mutual growth of both the medium and the audience consuming it.