Unless you have talking toilets in your stories, that would probably not happen in a bathroom scene.…
Hmm....Talking Toilets....I may have to add that into one of my books.... it strikes me as very Hitchhiker's Guide the Galaxy
I think the problem here is not the existence of sex in a story line (though a lot of arguments tend to boil down to "yes sex" or "no sex"). The real issue is the level of description and purpose of the text. Having sex occur in your story does not make you a bad writer. It is the level of detail that is the problem with most of these scenes. However, whenever I argue about the graphic nature or level of detail of sex scenes in fiction (or even movies), people get all defensive and start saying ridiculous things like "sex is a normal part of life" or "it is there for characterization". That is fine. That is why we have the two (or more) people together, that however, does not license the author to do whatever he/she pleases in that scene.
Most of the sex scenes I've seen have been very superfluous to the plot. Like the author was pounding his brain for an excuse (no matter how small) to put a lurid anatomy lesson into the text, rather than writing a scene that was efficient, to the point, and an effect vessel for the movement of plot.
I have never read one where I said to myself afterward "Wow, that REALLY sheds a lot of new light on the character in a completely different way than I would have ever understood otherwise." Never.
Even Martin's scenes weren't so much realistic or gritty as they were lurid and burdensome to the plot. They slowed the plot to a crawl to show the minute details and movements of a scene where only a hair's breadth of character was revealed. Those scenes last MUCH longer than any of the other 'defining character moments' where people have to make tough decisions that will affect the course of history. Which is why I am s skeptical of the purpose of such scenes when I come across them in books.
It is not the prude in me that is speaking as much as the critical reader. I was taught to think about what I read and make judgments. If it is there for titillation, fun, etc. it is in the wrong genre. If it is there to convey plot and character, it will be efficient in its description and short. Most of what I've seen are the first sort. If there is plot/character it is thrown in as an afterthought. The scenes are stretched out to epic proportions and the level of anatomic detail tend to range from the ridiculous to the truly disgusting.
People may disagree. However, I don't think the disagreements are based on story mechanics.
Brevity is the soul of wit, and indeed, it is ideal for the unfolding of story elements as well.
If a scene runs too long for its purpose, cut it.
If something doesn't move the plot along, cut it.
Writing isn't about living every moment and experience of life verbatim. It is distilling it down to something potent and transcendent.
So, Martin, by trying to be so realistic, has forfeited reality and lost the purpose of the scene.