Don't forget it's fiction

AMEN!!!!

Katie B

Unfortunately, they do. I gave up visiting SIN (SpankingInterNet) after a group of very censorious members drove away several good writers because they objected to 'that kind of story'. There was no question of these members thinking the stories were accounts of real life events. They fully acknowledged they were fiction; they just didn't think fiction of that kind should be allowed on the site. What really pissed me off was that the moderators did nothing to prevent this kind of bullying, and in some cases even abetted it.

I quite often come across stories in the Library of a kind that I don't like. No problem - I just stop reading them, and in future avoid that particular author's work. But I certainly wouldn't demand that they be censored. I'm very grateful to Februs and his fellow librarians for continuing to resist the demands of the fascists.

Tangential to the topic, it's interesting how literary studies have changed over the years. When I studied the pre-university A level course in Eng Lit recently (in Raptor's terms, anyway) it was fine to write about and analyse characters and their motives and psychology as if they were real. But now, just 35 years later, since the advent of more modern notions of texts as 'constructs', students are penalised unless they constantly make it clear that, say, "Flopsy presents the character of Muriel as being porcophiliac" - to discuss Muriel as if she were real is a serious gaffe now. It does, though, place the focus more directly on the craft of the writer.
And I didn't make that up, by the way.
But, even more, or maybe less, pertinently, isn't the distinction between reality and fiction over-rated? Thought is as creative in reality as it is in creating fictions, which may be why some readers do get uncomfortable at the less consensual kinds of stories.
TEM

While I'm with you on your opinions about censorship, I disagree with this comparison. In murder mysteries (and most mainstream violent fiction) its the bad guys who are committing the evil acts. The reader is meant to be disgusted by the villain's crimes and route for the hero who seeks to end them. In spanking erotica, we WANT the innocent captive to get spanked by the despicable kidnapper. Some stories on this site involve people being raped (and not the fun, roleplay kind of rape), enslaved, and brutalized by omnipotent tormentors who get away scott free, or even are written in such a way that the reader is meant to enjoy the proceedings from the rapist's perspective. That's where it differs.

Personally, I understand that most of the people who write these stories know that this kind of thing is wrong, and would never do such things in real life even if they could get away with it (and just as often as not, the writer is fantasizing about being the victim). Its just an unconventional sexual fantasy. I have fantasies that - while nowhere near as extreme as the above - would probably be disturbing to a vanilla person. If someone writes to tastes more extreme than my own, I just don't read their material, and take it for granted that they know the difference between fantasy and reality.

Long story short: a fantasy is a fantasy, and is harmless regardless of how much you might personally dislike it.

Ahhhh well, that's true of some spanking-oriented stories, but OTOH in plenty of others of them the spanker is bringing a disobedient, troublemaking, scheming, dishonest and/or mischievous spankee to well-deserved 'justice' and 'retribution' with his/her paddle, hairbrush, strap, cane, etc.

My point was a bit more generic, i.e. that simply writing about an occurrence--whether it's a murder or an unjustified spanking or a teenager skipping school and being punished for doing so--doesn't necessarily equate to advocacy of the behavior involved, regardless of the perspective employed in the literary work... --C.K.

First I want to make it clear that I understand the intent of Februs' post and agree with it even without benefit of having read the offending comments. That said, however, this thread has opened up a broader and fairly varied topic.....one I'd like to join in on.

Having read all of the prior posts I would like to point out that nothing is as black-and-white as we would like. It is true that a author can exclusively write murder mysteries without being guilty of endorsing murder, but what about an author who almost always includes a sex scene that contains ......oh, for the silly extreme of making a point........toe-sucking? If I read that author and always found a toe-sucking scene, I would be led to think that that author might well have a foot fetish of his own. I couldn't prove it, but I might bet money on being right.

Therefore, a reader of a story that contains a theme they find odd, sick, or downright offensive would not be wrong to associate the author with what they wrote. Remember the old "tabula rasa". We start with an empty page. What ends up there is no accident.

As far as fiction being harmless? Well, I think history tells a much different story. Books have incited violence, changed history, caused wars. Heck .....just look at all the trouble the Bible has caused! But this does not mean writers should censor what they write either. Like I said at the beginning, this is not a black-and-white issue. A writer should write what they wish without fear of censorship.........but they must also realize that once they put a story out there in the public domain, they can't disassociate themselves from having created it and the criticism it provokes merely by waving a "It's just fiction!" flag.

Of course, but I have a feeling that those aren't the ones that have people up in arms.


Ah, I suppose I'm expected to be offended by this. Don't worry, someone else will be sooner or later, and then you can have your fun.

That may be true however if the vast majority of readers of any one story make negative comments as to the content of the story, even assuming every commenter knows it is fiction, what does that do to the author, and in this library is that what we want to do?

In one sense constant and steady critical remarks of a authors fantasy fiction is a attack on the author whether we admit it or not. It is a form of censorship in the worse way because those who attack in a negative manner can say, "well I never said that author should stop writing", but the effect is the same.

We know some writers have a tougher hide then others but please do not tell me authors should not take comments personally. We all take comments personally, otherwise no one would give one hoot if anyone commented. Februs asked we all remember its fiction, maybe my view of that comment is wrong but to me the intent was reminding us not to be so critical of others writing because we happen to disagree with the story details. If all my stories came under attack for the contents of the story I certainly would feel not welcome on this site, and would soon stop writing, and I believe I am not alone in my thinking.

Dear Canadianspankee,

I thought I was quite clear that for the sake of this site and Februs' post, that I was in agreement. My post was to address the issue that the post brought up for us all to peck at. If someone writes something offensive, why shouldn't it be criticized? We shouldn't censor writers but we should censor critics?


Why would I 'expect' anything, least of all offense at the truth? Hasn't the Bible prompted war? Or at least been used to condone it? How is pointing out this ironic tragedy 'fun'?

I do not argue against criticism, it has its value and should be handled as given with the best of intentions, however my point was that if criticism gets to point of driving any author out of the Library due to discouragement then it is not fair or just. Critics can help us improve our writing and our thinking abilities but when it is constantly a critical message to any one or a group of writers because of a type of story(s) they write, it goes beyond helping and becomes destructive.