Writer responsibility

[Former Member]

10 minutes ago, Carlos Hazday said:

Warnings suck. This is just more liberal political correctness. If anyone finds something they don't like in a story, they should stop reading. And if as an author I don't like comments by readers I should stop publishing. What the hell happened to personal responsibility and thinking for ourselves?

Not everyone has access to the latest information about HIV. There are many who seem to be under the very false impression that there is a cure. Young people and people who are just Coming Out need to be reminded that not everything in a story should be emulated.

[Carlos Hazday]

31 minutes ago, droughtquake said:

Not everyone has access to the latest information about HIV. There are many who seem to be under the very false impression that there is a cure. Young people and people who are just Coming Out need to be reminded that not everything in a story should be emulated.

 

That's NOT an author's responsibility. Unless they choose to make it part of their story. You have to realize this is coming from someone who has dealt with myriad social issues in my own stories. But that has been my choice. We write for many reasons and not all of them need be education.

 

Hell, I had a gay couple talk about their sexual practices and PrEP with a gay 15 yo in an early chapter and there was pushback from a couple of readers. I explained what I wanted to accomplish and that the conversation was realistic in the setting. But I kept on writing what I wanted to write. I featured safe sex, multiple partners and even had the 15yo forget about condoms once when he screwed a guy against the wall. Some ignored that little episode, others wanted more. He supported Hillary Clinton but I have readers who backed Trump and stuck it out. I always tried to portray an honest scenario because that's what I wanted to write.

 

We preach to new authors they should write the story they want to tell and not worry about negative comments. Unless they're of a technical nature, of course. LOL I'll paste a warning on a story if I'm required to but will do so reluctantly. Reminds me too much of those IMO idiotic Parental Warnings on music Tipper Gore championed years ago.

[Timothy M.]

On 1/4/2018 at 9:52 PM, LJCC said:

You're writing a Fiction story...which means it's not real. So if readers want realistic sex with the ministrations of what real M/M sex requires...the prelude to every sex scene should be, "Have you cleaned down there?"

 

That question need not be asked directly, nor do we need to hear about the necessary prep for anal sex, but I prefer if there's a small hint, such as 'taking a shower' or 'a trip to the bathroom' or some other clever story trick. But I can pretend it's been sorted out, if I like the story.   I don't need any preaching about safe sex, but authors like Mark Arbour and Carlos weave the subject into their stories with great skill. 

 

Tags are warnings of 'special content' but I'm fine with authors sticking extra warnings on specific chapters. It's their choice, and nothing I would demand.

[Daddydavek]

There are so many sensibilities out there, that if every one of them was taken into account, then stories would be very bland and vanilla.....and frankly boring.

 

I suggest that authors write what the know about and try to tell an amazing story that stirs one's interests and passions.   If you only read something that you agree with, then you are in a box and a boring one  at that. It's ok to read a story and think, I would have told that differently or I would have taken the story line in this direction.  Everyone is entitled to an opinion, including the author!  The point is to read, write and think!

 

Because we have young people under age 18 on the site, we are required to label stories "Mature" that are mature.  The god of the internet GOOGLE has so decreed and we as minions must obey.  Otherwise, labels can be informative but should only be required if you are writing something truly controversial and the site administrators deem it necessary.

Edited January 6, 2018 by Daddydavek

[Dabeagle]

This is a neat question. I think it depends on what your goals are. If your target audience is teens, then the discussion of safe sex should come up even if the characters ultimately don't use it or if them doing so isn't explicitly stated. The tough part about that is that our target audience doens't always cooperate and read what we intend them to. There will always be a portion of a society that will get it's information -sexual or otherwise - from sourced like TV or the internet, stories like these included. There are various reasons for that, of course, such as lack of resources, perhaps they are isolated within society for one reason or another. That dos not, however, confer a responsibility that any particular fiction writer must educate or warn them appropriately. Life happens. People do have unprotected sex. In some instances it is unwise - some would say healthier to always have protected sex, even with a monogamous partner.

 

People do unwise things every day and there are no shortage of people willing to fight one way or another over how unwise or if it was, in fact, unwise at all. So, if you were writing for teens or young adults, I think it would be wise to include at least the discussion, however in passing (and sometimes even have a natural consequence occur) but there is no responsibility attached to that. Even if you laid things our very well in the most compelling story ever, people are still going to have unprotected sex and a plethora of other things.

[Former Member]

I’m not here to argue with anyone. I expressed my opinion and that’s all it was. I did not try to tell anybody to censor their content or avoid any topic.

 

I will not contribute any further to this conversation.

[Dabeagle]

On 8/31/2017 at 4:40 PM, BHopper2 said:

I'm shamelessly going to plug my Blog post.

What this topic and my blog post have in common is the same thing. People are too Politically Correct, and some readers can not let Entertainment, be Entertainment. So what if two characters have Unprotective Sex? So what if one is a Racist, or Homophobe, or Agesist, Ableist, Heterophobe, etc. it's for Entertainment. Not everything has to be some stunning critique on the Human Condition.

 

To me, in America at least, we've become an overly analytic society, where everything has to be for a cause.

I'd have to disagree. Political Correctness as defined by Merriam Webster is : conforming to a belief that language and practices which could offend political sensibilities (as in matters of sex or race) should be eliminated. If we have, for instance, a racist character who is allowed to spread that ideology, then it normalizes that 'entertainment'. It's the same play book the gay community used by clamoring for more onscreen portrayals of LGBT characters; so that we would become demystified to the rest of society. A racist joke, accepted as entertainment (feel free to substitute misogynistic, homophobic, your choice really) allows it to be repeated and normalized as something to laugh at or otherwise dismiss because it's just entertainment.

 

I'm not trying to say these should never be employed. Entertainment doesn't have to hurt or be abusive to anyone in order to  entertain. Using those as springboards to bringing us closer rather than increasing divides can and, IMHO, should be a worthy goal.

[LJCC]

4 hours ago, Timothy M. said:

Tags are warnings of 'special content' but I'm fine with authors sticking extra warnings on specific chapters. It's their choice, and nothing I would demand.

 

So I think if I'm going to be posting a story, my stories would have such warning:

 

"Warning: Some parts require an emotional qoutient. Please skip if one is emotionally stunted. And yes, there is unprotected sex because there is; my brain who imagined the narrative says so otherwise. Thank you for your non-participation by reserving your feelings of unsolicited thoughts."

[Brayon]

2 hours ago, Dabeagle said:

I'd have to disagree. Political Correctness as defined by Merriam Webster is : conforming to a belief that language and practices which could offend political sensibilities (as in matters of sex or race) should be eliminated. If we have, for instance, a racist character who is allowed to spread that ideology, then it normalizes that 'entertainment'. It's the same play book the gay community used by clamoring for more onscreen portrayals of LGBT characters; so that we would become demystified to the rest of society. A racist joke, accepted as entertainment (feel free to substitute misogynistic, homophobic, your choice really) allows it to be repeated and normalized as something to laugh at or otherwise dismiss because it's just entertainment.

 

I'm not trying to say these should never be employed. Entertainment doesn't have to hurt or be abusive to anyone in order to  entertain. Using those as springboards to bringing us closer rather than increasing divides can and, IMHO, should be a worthy goal.

I'll agree to disagree with you. While your point does have some merit, please note that in the USA we do have freedom of speech and expression. All speech is protected, and frankly already normalized. There is no carve out for so-called "Hate Speech."

 

If one doesn't like what a story is saying, or what someone is saying, or a joke that someone told... then that person should read something else, or change the station on the t.v., radio, internet site, etc.

 

I won't go further into the political realm, as this topic is not in the Pit. 

 

I'll end by saying this. It is NOT my responsibility to temper my writings, my artwork, my projects because someone can't handle opposing views and opinions. I write for entertainment, and entertainment only. I follow the site's rules on content, and will only do warnings on specific content as required. Such as Rape and Incest.

[Dabeagle]

3 hours ago, BHopper2 said:

I'll agree to disagree with you. While your point does have some merit, please note that in the USA we do have freedom of speech and expression. All speech is protected, and frankly already normalized. There is no carve out for so-called "Hate Speech."

 

If one doesn't like what a story is saying, or what someone is saying, or a joke that someone told... then that person should read something else, or change the station on the t.v., radio, internet site, etc.

 

I won't go further into the political realm, as this topic is not in the Pit. 

 

I'll end by saying this. It is NOT my responsibility to temper my writings, my artwork, my projects because someone can't handle opposing views and opinions. I write for entertainment, and entertainment only. I follow the site's rules on content, and will only do warnings on specific content as required. Such as Rape and Incest.

Don't misunderstand - as a writer, you can write what you want and I wouldn't tell you differently. However, I'm fond of a phrase which goes 'take what you want, but pay for it'. Many people who choose to use language or follow the tenets of philosophies that would try to normalize this sort of speech have been losing their jobs for years. As a teen I was obsessed with baseball (long suffered Padres fan) and I'll never forget the day the news broke about Al Campanis of the Dodgers organization. It was the first time I'd been confronted with someone claiming an entire race lacked certain skills or qualifications to advance in an industry. Baseball is a sport, entertainment. I don't think players would get away with such things either.

 

That's being a little obtuse of me, though, so I'll apologize for stretching that point. Archie Bunker used to be a favorite and considered quite entertaining as he talked down about anyone that wasn't white. Sure we can watch something like that, but how can we casually call something like white supremacy mere entertainment? A more recent bit of slang was to refer to anything that was undesirable as 'gay'. I'd argue that attaching that word to that idea is bad for all of us. We don't say 'that's so black/Jewish/insert group of your choice.

 

Free speech only covers you from the government; it's still illegal to yell fire in a theater full of people. I do think hate speech exists, but I'll concede that this isn't the place and I thank you for pointing that out. But to your point, no you shouldn't change how you write, construct characters or the stories you tell. People who are entertained by them will read them and talk about them. However it will not insulate any writer from others who disagree with the views presented in that work. They may simply not read an authors work or they may discuss it negatively, as that freedom of speech goes both ways.

[Brayon]

19 minutes ago, Dabeagle said:

Free speech only covers you from the government; it's still illegal to yell fire in a theater full of people. I do think hate speech exists, but I'll concede that this isn't the place and I thank you for pointing that out. But to your point, no you shouldn't change how you write, construct characters or the stories you tell. People who are entertained by them will read them and talk about them. However it will not insulate any writer from others who disagree with the views presented in that work. They may simply not read an authors work or they may discuss it negatively, as that freedom of speech goes both ways.

Exactly! Though some minor disagreement on the Free Speech part. According to the Federalist papers, and the journals that the Founders wrote, Free Speech was supposed to be protected at all times from everyone, and countered by someone else's Free Speech. It's why they encouraged Discussions and Healthy Debate. To quote a TV Political Pundit Greg Gutfield, "Freedom of Speech is Ugly, and that's the Beauty of it." By all means, if someone finds my works, offensive, I expect them to either counter it with remarks or just read something else. I like to call it, "voting with my wallet." If I get bad service somewhere, I go somewhere else. Same applies to stories. In the realm of Free Online stuff. Bad reviews, and negative reactions to show my input, works. Tolerance is a two-way street.

 

Also, let me apologize if my tone in my last post came across as harsh. It was not my intent.

[Carlos Hazday]

16 hours ago, BHopper2 said:

Exactly! Though some minor disagreement on the Free Speech part. According to the Federalist papers, and the journals that the Founders wrote, Free Speech was supposed to be protected at all times from everyone, and countered by someone else's Free Speech. It's why they encouraged Discussions and Healthy Debate. To quote a TV Political Pundit Greg Gutfield, "Freedom of Speech is Ugly, and that's the Beauty of it." By all means, if someone finds my works, offensive, I expect them to either counter it with remarks or just read something else. I like to call it, "voting with my wallet." If I get bad service somewhere, I go somewhere else. Same applies to stories. In the realm of Free Online stuff. Bad reviews, and negative reactions to show my input, works. Tolerance is a two-way street.

 

 

 

Someone privately objected to my use of a racial slur in Hunting Season and a couple of readers about the use of a demeaning term aimed at women in particular in an early chapter of the CJ series. Both are words people use in daily speech and my stories are based on real life. My reply in all cases has been the use of those words was warranted at the time. If someone wants to think I'm glorifying or normalizing them, they should hang out with a bunch of guys (outside the brie and chardonnay crowd.) I've heard worse. Considering my character stuck a gun in the face of the racist guy, I think I made my opinion of anyone using racist insults quite clear.

Edited January 7, 2018 by Carlos Hazday

[Dabeagle]

11 hours ago, BHopper2 said:

Exactly! Though some minor disagreement on the Free Speech part. According to the Federalist papers, and the journals that the Founders wrote, Free Speech was supposed to be protected at all times from everyone, and countered by someone else's Free Speech. It's why they encouraged Discussions and Healthy Debate. To quote a TV Political Pundit Greg Gutfield, "Freedom of Speech is Ugly, and that's the Beauty of it." By all means, if someone finds my works, offensive, I expect them to either counter it with remarks or just read something else. I like to call it, "voting with my wallet." If I get bad service somewhere, I go somewhere else. Same applies to stories. In the realm of Free Online stuff. Bad reviews, and negative reactions to show my input, works. Tolerance is a two-way street.

 

Also, let me apologize if my tone in my last post came across as harsh. It was not my intent.

I didn't think it was harsh. Honestly I thought maybe a little defensive, since someone you likely don't know was responding directly to your ideas, maybe? Sometimes these sorts of things are subjective in terms of what your reader gets from a comment or a story. Don't get me started about texts. I agree free speech can be ugly, but that's from simple opposing viewpoints. I do think there is a line. Companies sometimes place that line, like Twitter, and when you cross it they cut you off. Some folks scream censorship and free speech but, like it or not agree or not, Twitter makes the rules there. It's why most of us don't visit the Daily Stormer, because we don't like the very real hate language used. Should they be allowed to do what they do? That's a debate, though I'd come down on the side of no.

 

I do think, like with most things, there is a limit to the effectiveness of any one way to handle something. For instance, voting with one's wallet can be effective if many are motivated, but insignificant in small doses. Tolerance is a two way street, but where do we define where that street ends and we are just in the mud? Racial slurs? Homophobic rants? Condemning or approving one region over another? To me that's the real question.

 

Thanks for he mental exercise.

[Myr]

I should point out that the system now automatically moderates certain words.  If you have those words, the system will block the post.  This is so that Google doesn't punish us.  Please keep the public areas teen friendly.  If you want to have a debate on that, I suggest The Pit, which Goggle does not access.  Those words are allowed in stories, but should be rated appropriately. 

 

[TetRefine]

2 hours ago, Myr said:

I should point out that the system now automatically moderates certain words.  If you have those words, the system will block the post.  This is so that Google doesn't punish us.  Please keep the public areas teen friendly.  If you want to have a debate on that, I suggest The Pit, which Goggle does not access.  Those words are allowed in stories, but should be rated appropriately. 

 

 

That's really unfortunate that we basically have to kiss Google's ass (am I allowed to say that?) Not that it's GA's fault, but just really annoying. 

 

I remember when I was writing my short-lived story, I got a very angry message about a scene that the reader found disturbing in its content. My reaction: I showed them directly where the 'block user's content' button was. This is sort of like the free market. Don't like the product, vote with your wallet (or in this case, your readership) and don't give them your view. I admire a lot about Europe, but their censorship of speech always irked me, but that is off topic...

Edited January 7, 2018 by TetRefine

[Dabeagle]

8 hours ago, Myr said:

I should point out that the system now automatically moderates certain words.  If you have those words, the system will block the post.  This is so that Google doesn't punish us.  Please keep the public areas teen friendly.  If you want to have a debate on that, I suggest The Pit, which Goggle does not access.  Those words are allowed in stories, but should be rated appropriately. 

 

Did the conversation cross into that territory? I'm sorry if so, I'm not aware of words that would violate a policy.

[Timothy M.]

9 hours ago, TetRefine said:

That's really unfortunate that we basically have to kiss Google's ass (am I allowed to say that?) Not that it's GA's fault, but just really annoying. 

 

If enough GA users had Premium subscriptions we wouldn't need advertising and could ignore Google rules. However, since we do have The Pit and PMs to indulge in such conversations, words and pictures which cross the GA lines, I'm not complaining. I think the rules make sense, even though it means I can't post my graphic stories here.  

[Myr]

4 letter slang words for upper and lower female anatomy. Google really loves flagging those words. 

Obnoxiously insulting word starting with an N for people of African descent. Also highly flagged. 

Posts in this topic using those words appropriately as examples were blocked automatically because Google only flags the word, not the context. 

@Timothy M.And yes, I'd love to have everyone subscribe and kick touchy advertising rules to the curb.