Give the authorities the finger! Write extreme porn!

[Spacefender]

*sigh*
yes, there are a few fringe feminist types that want to ban all porn. But they are well-known to be fringey, even amongst other radical feminists.

Unlike the conservative crowd, for whom the censorship of erotica is a quondam virtue.

NOW is fringe? I guess I've been out of the loop. NOW is definitely irrelevant but I didn't know they're now considered the fringe of feminism. I get that feminism isn't some monolithic movement but the anti-porn stance had been pretty accepted by most feminists. Or so I've been led to believe.

 

[lovecraft68]

My biggest problem getting stories through is underage. I will mention something that happened when a character was fifteen, and then forget to specify that time has passed. I understand rejecting a story for that, because a person would have read it and thought that horrible things were happening to a 15-year-old. I DO NOT blame them for that.

What I DO blame them for, is recently I wrote a noncon story called The Slave Girl (link at the bottom if you're interested) and when the man is at the market, I said something along the lines of

"Unless girls were very homely, they usually were taken by several men by the age of sixteen"

Other then that, I specified that the main character was nineteen, never went into underage sex, etc, etc, and they still rejected it on the grounds of having underage sex. What makes it even worse is that lately it takes a week to get stories through, so I had to send it again! GRRR
http://www.literotica.com/s/the-slave-girl-2

PS, someone earlier said that the Marquis De Sade had nothing on what you see every day... To the person who said that, try reading 120 days of Sodom. I have nightmares from reading the wikipedia description...

I read 120 days back when I was 13. It was unbelievably strong for the time, and I did not say that it still does not 'stand up', but it has nowhere near the punch. I mean when I look at it now my reaction is "for it's day goddamn!" But surf the net there is nothing in there that cannot be found through a search engine and is not "out there".

I liken this to Blatty's "The Exorcist" when it debuted people were passing out in the theaters and people were trying to get it banned. Now 14 year old's watch it and think it's funny. Signs of a very jaded and over exposed generation.

 

[lovecraft68]

*sigh*
yes, there are a few fringe feminist types that want to ban all porn. But they are well-known to be fringey, even amongst other radical feminists.

Unlike the conservative crowd, for whom the censorship of erotica is a quondam virtue.

I'll bite on this. What is the mentality here? If the woman was being forced to do it, or getting fed coke to fuck on film like the old days that is one thing, but the porn industry is very clean these days it is a business. These women are making money hand over fist and it is their choice to do this. To me it does not make women look bad, if you have a skill you will use it, if you have a degree you will use it. These girls are gorgeous and have no inhibitions about fucking for money, who cares?

I will give you my view using strip clubs. Most Feminists think it is degrading to the strippers. Bullshit it is the men who degrade themselves.

Pathetic guys in expensive suits paying a girl money to wiggle on their lap for a three minute song. Paying hundreds of dollars to see naked girls. I mean when you think about it how pathetic is it? I mean college age guys yeah sure you're young and its fun but the average strip joint is a lot of guys 30 and up. They are practically running around going "Boobies!"

The girls are raking it in and in decent clubs the guys can't touch them. IN RI indoor prostitution was legal for a long time. Several clubs had back rooms where you could fuck the strippers. $150 for a couple of minutes. I mean these girls were not there for foreplay, it was suck fuck next! $150 for that who is the idiot?

 

[lovecraft68]

Most of the porn I write doesn't.

But what about the men! Someone please think of the men! You are treating them like pieces of meat! Please Pilot have a care!

 

[Pure]

The poins of Lovey and Stella

Lovey //...There is plenty also coming from the Left. There are people on both sides who would love nothing more than to ban all porn.//

Stella *sigh*
yes, there are a few fringe feminist types that want to ban all porn. But they are well-known to be fringey, even amongst other radical feminists.

Unlike the conservative crowd, for whom the censorship of erotica is a quondam virtue.

Both Lovey and Stella vastly exaggerate; I'll concentrate on Stella.

I don't think Catharine MacKinnon, lately of Michigan Law School, is fringey, nor on the fringe of feminism. She does not favor government censorship of porn, but rather, civil remedies. Interview with her at

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2006/apr/12/gender.politicsphilosophyandsociety

I would put the shoe on the other foot (i'm simply describing; it's not up to me to 'approve' or disapprove of some particular wing of feminism): The number of feminists who have no concerns about rampant porn, is the minority. But they don't necessarily favor theocratic remedies, such as favored by US Southern legislators; the fundie 'cure' being worse than the disease.

Putting it a bit differently, there are the apparent claims that started this thread: 1) that writing and publishing extreme porn, even the trashy sort, challenges 'censorship' and the puritanical authorities, and promotes the cause of liberty for men and women. 2) that the limitations of self-labeled liberal outfits like Literotica are cause for legitimate concern by those favoring liberty: If you can't publish snuff stories, you're being oppressed *. My personal impression is that it's a definite minority of feminists who would support such claims; who would hold such an enthusiastic, pro porn view, esp. as regards the claimed, liberty-promoting effects of extreme porn.
------


*(and Laurel speaks hypocritically in claiming to support free speech-- see the thread on Celebrity stories, in SDC, the later posts-- http://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?t=752440 )

 

[Pure]

question to lovey

you suggest below that strippers aren't exploited, are doing ok, and of course, (the touchstone of living well) making loads of money. but one doesn't have to be a puritan, or someone longing to have cops arrest the 'girls' and their bozos, to think stripping and the clubs you describe are often sad and seedy. i'd ask, if your daughter ends up making a living by stripping and giving blow jobs in the back (VIP) rooms, are you OK with that? i know, "it's her right" and all, and "let's thumb our noses at puritans who deny the beauty of the female form"-- but would you be happy about that?


=============


lovey said,
I will give you my view using strip clubs. Most Feminists think it is degrading to the strippers. Bullshit it is the men who degrade themselves.

Pathetic guys in expensive suits paying a girl money to wiggle on their lap for a three minute song. Paying hundreds of dollars to see naked girls. I mean when you think about it how pathetic is it? I mean college age guys yeah sure you're young and its fun but the average strip joint is a lot of guys 30 and up. They are practically running around going "Boobies!"

The girls are raking it in and in decent clubs the guys can't touch them. IN RI indoor prostitution was legal for a long time. Several clubs had back rooms where you could fuck the strippers. $150 for a couple of minutes. I mean these girls were not there for foreplay, it was suck fuck next! $150 for that who is the idiot?

 

[estragon]

It's all about choice. But choice means meaningful choice. If a woman must choose between starvation and prostitution, that isn't choice, that's oppression. If a woman (or man, or anyone) can choose between well-paying work repairing wind generators and equally well-paying work as a stripper, that's a choice.

As for censorship, Laurel and Manu own this site, as sr71plt, and even I, have said before. They can be as arbitrary as they like. It's their playground, and they can turn the kiddie sprinklers on or off as they choose. My very first post to this Board said substantially that, as I bitched about whatever.

Private censorship is one thing, official censorship is another. Let publishers or websiters permit or prohibit what they will; those not liking their restraints can go elsewhere. But governments? I concur that the samizdaters of the old Communist Russia days were heroes. Governments exist to limit the rights of citizens. We citizens should exist to limit the oppression of governments.

So, as to governments, let the rapists, snuffers and the child molester say what they say (but hang them from the highest scaffold if they do to anyone what they say). As to Laurel and Manu, they're paying for this party, so let's go easy on the hosts.

 

[Boxlicker101]

Lovey //...There is plenty also coming from the Left. There are people on both sides who would love nothing more than to ban all porn.//

Stella *sigh*
yes, there are a few fringe feminist types that want to ban all porn. But they are well-known to be fringey, even amongst other radical feminists.

Unlike the conservative crowd, for whom the censorship of erotica is a quondam virtue.

Both Lovey and Stella vastly exaggerate; I'll concentrate on Stella.

I don't think Catharine MacKinnon, lately of Michigan Law School, is fringey, nor on the fringe of feminism. She does not favor government censorship of porn, but rather, civil remedies. Interview with her at

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2006/apr/12/gender.politicsphilosophyandsociety

I would put the shoe on the other foot (i'm simply describing; it's not up to me to 'approve' or disapprove of some particular wing of feminism.) The number of feminist who have no concerns about rampant porn, is the minority. But they don't necessarily favor theocratic remedies, such as favored by US Southern legislators; the fundie 'cure' being worse than the disease.

Putting it a bit differently, there are the apparent claims that started this thread: 1) that writing and publishing extreme porn, even the trashy sort, challenges 'censorship' and the puritanical authorities, and promotes the cause of liberty for men and women. 2) that the limitations of self-labeled liberal outfits like Literotica are cause for legitimate concern by those favoring liberty: If you can't publish snuff stories, you're being oppressed *. My personal impression is that it's a definite minority of feminists who would support such claims; who would hold such an enthusiastic, pro porn view, esp. as regards the claimed, liberty-promoting effects of extreme porn.
------


*(and Laurel speaks hypocritically in claiming to support free speech-- see the thread on Celebrity stories, in SDC, the later posts-- http://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?t=752440 )

I agree, there is plenty of call for censorship coming from "The Women's Movement." They don't call it censorship; mostly they try to lump it under the heading of "sexual discrimination" or "sexual harassment," or some other illegal activity, but they have a hard time doing this, because it really isn't. Members of the movement who favor censorship are a lot more than a fringe, although they may not be a majority. Personally, I consider MacKinnon and her soulmate, Andrea Dworkin, to be strictly fringe, but they do have a fair amount of influence.

 

[lovecraft68]

you suggest below that strippers aren't exploited, are doing ok, and of course, (the touchstone of living well) making loads of money. but one doesn't have to be a puritan, or someone longing to have cops arrest the 'girls' and their bozos, to think stripping and the clubs you describe are often sad and seedy. i'd ask, if your daughter ends up making a living by stripping and giving blow jobs in the back (VIP) rooms, are you OK with that? i know, "it's her right" and all, and "let's thumb our noses at puritans who deny the beauty of the female form"-- but would you be happy about that?


=============


lovey said,
I will give you my view using strip clubs. Most Feminists think it is degrading to the strippers. Bullshit it is the men who degrade themselves.

Pathetic guys in expensive suits paying a girl money to wiggle on their lap for a three minute song. Paying hundreds of dollars to see naked girls. I mean when you think about it how pathetic is it? I mean college age guys yeah sure you're young and its fun but the average strip joint is a lot of guys 30 and up. They are practically running around going "Boobies!"

The girls are raking it in and in decent clubs the guys can't touch them. IN RI indoor prostitution was legal for a long time. Several clubs had back rooms where you could fuck the strippers. $150 for a couple of minutes. I mean these girls were not there for foreplay, it was suck fuck next! $150 for that who is the idiot?

apples and oranges. The strippers in the back room bj clubs are often addicts who spend the money they make and are pretty bad off so they are a bit off the path of my point, they have addictions.

High end clubs like the Foxy Lady the girls cannot be touched and they test for drugs. As for my daughters? Admittedly a tough call, would hate to think of fathers that have seen their daughters in porn videos.

But, that is a parental dilemma. if in fact one of my girls did that I would be upset but not feel she was being exploited there's a difference.

 

[Pure]

lovey: I would be upset but not feel she was being exploited

why would you be upset? money's good, yes?

 

[Pure]

box: Members of the movement who favor censorship are a lot more than a fringe, although they may not be a majority. Personally, I consider MacKinnon and her soulmate, Andrea Dworkin, to be strictly fringe, but they do have a fair amount of influence.
=============

Mackinnon's latest book, Are Women Human?, is published by Harvard University Press.

surely having a "fair amount of influence" is NOT being on the fringe.

 

[lovecraft68]

lovey: I would be upset but not feel she was being exploited

why would you be upset? money's good, yes?

I would be upset as a parent. I mean that would be a pretty tough pill to swallow. However, the point is that if no one is putting a gun to her head and she is doing this by choice she is not being exploited. That is the question at hand.

I also don;t understand the complaint they have of "objectifying women" who cares? So guys (or some women) think of women as sex objects big deal.

It's things like that, that make me think of feminists as really ugly homely women who are just jealous no one would want to see them naked.

As the kids say "haters"

 

[Spacefender]

surely having a "fair amount of influence" is NOT being on the fringe.

That's pretty much my whole point.

 

[Boxlicker101]

box: Members of the movement who favor censorship are a lot more than a fringe, although they may not be a majority. Personally, I consider MacKinnon and her soulmate, Andrea Dworkin, to be strictly fringe, but they do have a fair amount of influence.
=============

Mackinnon's latest book, Are Women Human?, is published by Harvard University Press.

surely having a "fair amount of influence" is NOT being on the fringe.

She has some influence, but not enough to move her from fringe to mainstream.

How many people have bought the book you cite and how does it compare with others published by Harvard University Press?

 

[xssve]

I'm not sure that's the best reason to write extreme porn, but the fact is, acceptability, and the definition of "extreme" is a moving target, people will bitch - if there's no rape porn, they'll want to ban anal or fisting as too "extreme" - even though they shit every day, and are all for popping out babies like gumball machines.

Personally, I just happen to think that De Sade pretty much wrung out the genre: there's really nothing left there, no matter how deeply sick, twisted and depraved you get, De Sade was already there before you.

 

[lovecraft68]

I'm not sure that's the best reason to write extreme porn, but the fact is, acceptability, and the definition of "extreme" is a moving target, people will bitch - if there's no rape porn, they'll want to ban anal or fisting as too "extreme" - even though they shit every day, and are all for popping out babies like gumball machines.

Personally, I just happen to think that De Sade pretty much wrung out the genre: there's really nothing left there, no matter how deeply sick, twisted and depraved you get, De Sade was already there before you.

Once again Desade set the standard but you're living in a hole if you don;t think there is sicker out there. Trust me I've met them.

 

[xssve]

Nah, I've read a lot of it, and it's just covering old ground at best, and not nearly so well - a lot of the real horror of De Sade is the philosophical justification, it's even beyond shock, it's routine, and that in some ways, makes the characters more human, and sympathetic, they aren't Two dimensional mannekins, much greater emotional impact than mere mechanical descriptions of random depredation.

If anything, romance is relatively virgin territory - Extreme Romance? Lol.

 

[Pure]

Note from the owner. Lit rules for postable stories.

Lit's rules besides the stated prohibitions of pedophilia and bestiality.


Laurel posts this first para to authors who've submitted, and she has now elaborated in the second para.


Laurel

While we do accept submissions with graphic violence, we don't accept "snuff" - i.e. death & extreme torture with the aim of sexual titillation. We generally do not accept submissions of nonconsensual sex in which the "victim" gets absolutely no sort of thrill or enjoyment from the acts, or is seriously physically harmed/abused.

Basically, we allow ravishment, painplay, most BDSM situations – as well as situations one finds in horror movies. What we don't publish is stuff like castration and amputation written for sexual arousal (though we do allow a character to be castrated or have a limb amputated if the plot calls for it) and stuff like erotic cannibalism and "snuff" (graphic depictions of murder meant for sexual titillation).

 

[lovecraft68]

Lit's rules besides the stated prohibitions of pedophilia and bestiality.


Laurel posts this first para to authors who've submitted, and she has now elaborated in the second para.


Laurel

Basically, we allow ravishment, painplay, most BDSM situations – as well as situations one finds in horror movies. What we don't publish is stuff like castration and amputation written for sexual arousal (though we do allow a character to be castrated or have a limb amputated if the plot calls for it) and stuff like erotic cannibalism and "snuff" (graphic depictions of murder meant for sexual titillation).

aurel
Quote:
While we do accept submissions with graphic violence, we don't accept "snuff" - i.e. death & extreme torture with the aim of sexual titillation. We generally do not accept submissions of nonconsensual sex in which the "victim" gets absolutely no sort of thrill or enjoyment from the acts, or is seriously physically harmed/abused.


Okay read this and have a question. In the AH there is currently an author looking for feedback. The author is hisperfectpet. The story (the link is in the thread) is NOn consent. I did not read it but two posters, Sydneyblake, and Stella Omega comment within the thread that the wife in the story does NOT enjoy this at all. It is a rape story. It passed and there are many more like it on here. So what does what you posted mean? She obviously received no enjoyment out of it in the story but it is up. Does it just boil down to their mood on that particular day? Or is it just subjective? Yeah like this one, don't like this one.


reason I ask is I am about to submit something that has non consent at the end. I am not writing it for arousal, but for shock value, it furthers the plot of the story. I am curious to see what happens to it.

 

[sr71plt]

reason I ask is I am about to submit something that has non consent at the end. I am not writing it for arousal, but for shock value, it furthers the plot of the story. I am curious to see what happens to it.

Why don't you just submit it and see what happens rather than chip away at what others are doing?

 

[lovecraft68]

Why don't you just submit it and see what happens rather than chip away at what others are doing?

I am submitting it tonight. Like in an hour or so as soon as I tweak a few things. I am chipping away with no one. But Pure posts Laurel's statement and as i said right now there is a story in this forum that technically breaks the rule. So what's the deal? If it's a rule enforce it, if it isn't drop it once and for all. Consistency one way or another.

For me it would suck if it gets the boot, as it is important to the storyline which is in it's final arc. I'd also like to see it up there to show up an asshole who told me that I don't have the stones to write it.

 

[Pure]

note to Lovey

jeez, luis, lovey! i talk to the boss, get her detailed rule in writing, and you're still fretting. you wonder about the oddities that have ensued during the processing of hundreds of stories every day, by a handful of people.

a propos of *your* question about hisperfectpet, i have a question for you. you know mrs. jones who lives in your neighborhood? she's not feeding her cat the best food, but she has the money. is she aware of the inconsistency? what will YOU do?

you want a grisly murder for shock value. why not disturb the authorities and expose their oppression. here's a plot summary for "Janey does Daddy". Janey having just had the crucial 18th birthday, and graduated from high school, having little tits that make most people think she's far younger, discovers Daddy in the shower, and begins frigging her clit. Far too noisily, for Daddy, upon emerging, seeing her, becomes quickly erect and you know what's next. One sees why everyone wrote WBBJ in her yearbook (World's Best...)...
After several hours of glorious interaction, during which hardly a word is exchanged, he says, by way of thanking her, "You're Daddy's little whore!" and it REALLY rubs her wrong. She whacks him on the head with a heavy lamp that's within reach, rendering him unconscious, then goes to the kitchen, gets the electric carver they use for roasts, and cuts his head off; showers again, dresses and goes out to hang with friends. THE END.

think this will TOTALLY fuck up the authorities? expose their secret censorship agenda? i bet we could REALLY demonstrate the subjectivity of their judgments.

====


Okay read this and have a question. In the AH there is currently an author looking for feedback. The author is hisperfectpet. The story (the link is in the thread) is NOn consent. I did not read it but two posters, Sydneyblake, and Stella Omega comment within the thread that the wife in the story does NOT enjoy this at all. It is a rape story. It passed and there are many more like it on here. So what does what you posted mean? She obviously received no enjoyment out of it in the story but it is up. Does it just boil down to their mood on that particular day? Or is it just subjective? Yeah like this one, don't like this one.


reason I ask is I am about to submit something that has non consent at the end. I am not writing it for arousal, but for shock value, it furthers the plot of the story. I am curious to see what happens to it.

 

[xssve]

How about a snuff where the chick strangles the guy?

Isn't there something about guys blowing a load when they're hung?

Of course as we all know from South Park, you also shit out when you die, so that would add a nice De Sadean touch, just in case it was getting too precious.

 

[autoplot]

How about a snuff where the chick strangles the guy?

...would have to be posted somewhere else, wouldn't it? I think that's against Lit's rules or whatever.

 

[lovecraft68]

jeez, luis, lovey! i talk to the boss, get her detailed rule in writing, and you're still fretting. you wonder about the oddities that have ensued during the processing of hundreds of stories every day, by a handful of people.

a propos of *your* question about hisperfectpet, i have a question for you. you know mrs. jones who lives in your neighborhood? she's not feeding her cat the best food, but she has the money. is she aware of the inconsistency? what will YOU do?

you want a grisly murder for shock value. why not disturb the authorities and expose their oppression. here's a plot summary for "Janey does Daddy". Janey having just had the crucial 18th birthday, and graduated from high school, having little tits that make most people think she's far younger, discovers Daddy in the shower, and begins frigging her clit. Far too noisily, for Daddy, upon emerging, seeing her, becomes quickly erect and you know what's next. One sees why everyone wrote WBBJ in her yearbook (World's Best...)...
After several hours of glorious interaction, during which hardly a word is exchanged, he says, by way of thanking her, "You're Daddy's little whore!" and it REALLY rubs her wrong. She whacks him on the head with a heavy lamp that's within reach, rendering him unconscious, then goes to the kitchen, gets the electric carver they use for roasts, and cuts his head off; showers again, dresses and goes out to hang with friends. THE END.

think this will TOTALLY fuck up the authorities? expose their secret censorship agenda? i bet we could REALLY demonstrate the subjectivity of their judgments.

====


Okay read this and have a question. In the AH there is currently an author looking for feedback. The author is hisperfectpet. The story (the link is in the thread) is NOn consent. I did not read it but two posters, Sydneyblake, and Stella Omega comment within the thread that the wife in the story does NOT enjoy this at all. It is a rape story. It passed and there are many more like it on here. So what does what you posted mean? She obviously received no enjoyment out of it in the story but it is up. Does it just boil down to their mood on that particular day? Or is it just subjective? Yeah like this one, don't like this one.


reason I ask is I am about to submit something that has non consent at the end. I am not writing it for arousal, but for shock value, it furthers the plot of the story. I am curious to see what happens to it.

Well 1st off in Janey does daddy no rules are broken she is 18 and death comes after sex.

As for Mrs Jones having money but feeding kitty cheap catfood? That is not inconsistency. Mrs Jones has been notoriously cheap all her life.

As for you making the effort to find that rule/statement. Thank you.

Thing is that what you found is the rule that no one said existed, that there is a stance on rape. But no one is saying hey that nutbag LC was right for once.

As for the story I mentioned? You mistake me, or I am not wording my posts correctly. I don't care one way or another what is out there, I don;t go looking for things that I know will bother me. My point was simply-now that you found the rule- is that they do not consistently enforce it.

They do upon occasions as the otehr author I mentioned has some get by and some not. Would it kill anyone to simply say "well hey they don;t always follow their rules?"

It is not meant as an insult only something I stated as a fact. I am not trying to offend anyone. I started all this off with saying lit is stricter than other sites, somehow it got to this. Honestly lit having some rules is why I chose to write here, the first site a friend sent me a link to was asstr and I didn't want anything to do with a site featuring 13 year olds having sex. (never mind getting raped or having sex with dogs) So I came here because it seemed "respectable" or as much as it can be considering the nature.