Moral Inhibitions

[Off_base]

I've been scolded for allowing a character to drink and drive, and for allowing a shy virgin to watch porn with friends which led to her first sexual encounter, and for that same character to choose to go to boot camp for weight loss, to help her self esteem, which led to her finding love with the object of her desire. To me, all of this was real-life behavior that people engage in, and was just a part of the story, but it's hard to know what individual readers will perceive about your intent, and how they will react.

I've got a story in the works that starts in the aftermath of a mass casualty event, that could trigger negative responses, as it's similar to an actual event where lives were lost, including children. The event and loss of life are not a big part of the story, just the opening scene, and I deal with it in a respectful way, but a small percentage of readers might find it disrespectful, especially in an erotic story. I'm still writing it, but haven't yet decided if I'll keep those elements. I write for fun, and nothing that I want to write is more important than potentially hurting someone. I've tried to imagine myself in their shoes, to see if I would be offended, but then I remember that I'm writing on an adult site, so anyone who comes here to read, probably isn't currently overwhelmed with suffering from a tragic event. Or maybe they are, which is why I'm undecided. I don't ever want to pretend that bad things don't happen, and that people don't make bad decisions, for the sake of everything being feel good in my stories. That's not real.

 

[lovecraft68]

In ghostwriting, one writes from their outline to their criteria and at the level of graphic description they require. This is fiction; what I write about and what I'd do in the real world have no relationship to one another. In my own work, I also don't have many areas that I fear to tread. Nothing I write will be worse, more evil, or more deeply depraved than far better writers than I have already pioneered. In the book, The Big Sleep, the dirty bookstore sold pedophilic books and pictures. Hell, if Raymond Chandler wasn't afraid of writing about that in the 1938 or 39, why should I fear about anything I write about? Granted, Chandler didn't get down in the dirty about it, but it wasn't something most writers would have even hinted at.

The following is a list of early pioneers in more controversal material. At first, the well-known and often used writer Mr. Anonymous played an important role.

Late 19th-century erotica
Due to strict Victorian social and moral standards, much of the era's overtly erotic literature was published anonymously and circulated secretly.

• The Autobiography of a Flea (c. 1887): An anonymously written pornographic novel that tells the story of a flea, which acts as a voyeuristic spectator to the sexual activities of a young woman and her friends.
• The Romance of Lust (c. 1873): One of the earliest examples of modern erotic fiction, this lengthy, anonymously written novel explores a wide range of sexual acts that were completely taboo in its time.
• My Secret Life (c. 1888–1894): An 11-volume erotic memoir detailing the author's sexual encounters. Published anonymously, the book was notable for its sheer volume and explicit content.
• Venus in Furs (1870): Written by Leopold von Sacher-Masoch, this novel explores the theme of sexual dominance and submission. Its publication was so influential that it coined the term "masochism".
• Forbidden Fruit (1898): A classic Victorian erotic novel published anonymously, featuring explicit sexual descriptions and taboo themes that made it highly scandalous for its time.

Late 19th-century controversial novels

• Tess of the d'Urbervilles (1891): Thomas Hardy's novel was controversial for its sympathetic portrayal of a "fallen woman." The story, about a woman who is raped and later gives birth, caused a public uproar for challenging Victorian sexual morality.
• The Picture of Dorian Gray (1890): Oscar Wilde's only novel was considered deeply scandalous due to its perceived homoerotic themes and exploration of hedonism. The explicit subtext was even used against Wilde in his trial for "gross indecency".
• The Jungle (1906): While not explicitly sexual, Upton Sinclair's book caused a sensation by exposing the horrific and unsanitary conditions in the Chicago meatpacking industry. This scandalous revelation led to significant public outcry and new food safety laws.

Early 20th-century boundary-pushing novels

• The Well of Loneliness (1928): Radclyffe Hall's novel was one of the first to feature a lesbian protagonist openly. It was banned in the U.K. for obscenity, becoming a landmark case for homosexual literature.
• Lady Chatterley's Lover (1928): D.H. Lawrence's novel about an affair between an aristocratic woman and her working-class gamekeeper was banned for its frank discussion of sex. It was the subject of a major obscenity trial in the U.K. in 1960 and remains one of the most famous sexually explicit novels of all time.
• Ulysses (1922): James Joyce's experimental masterpiece was banned for its explicit language and themes. The book was a major catalyst in testing U.S. laws on pornography and obscenity. Its publication is considered a revolutionary moment in 20th-century literature.
• Tropic of Cancer (1934): Henry Miller's novel, celebrated for its literary importance and frank depictions of sex, was banned in the U.S. for obscenity until the 1960s. The resulting obscenity trial was a key moment in challenging American censorship laws.

The moral of my post is, don't be afraid to write what you want, if it has a plot, good characters (not necessarily moral ones), and is a good story, put that puppy up.

Chandler didn't have to worry about social media crusaders calling for the death of his career, or even his actual depth.

Social media and the cultists on it have made just about anything into being 'problematic'

Chandler wrote in better times as far as creativity goes. I wouldn't have said that 10 years ago, but when a ad for jeans sends people frothing like loons its hopeless.

If I don't write something its under the concept of I loathe the topic and why would I contribute to it. I've turned down more commission requests for them being NC-even after I start every conversation with, I'll consider most ideas, but nothing NC and of course they come right back with an NC premise. Do I have an issue with anyone who writes it? No, because I try to be live and let live.

Those words are now extinct.

 

[FrancesScott]

It’s a very questionable thesis to suggest that improvement in writing is only achievable via compromising on the author’s morals. This sounds awfully like, “I want to write something I know is probably unpleasant, but want to rely on some plausible-sounding psychobabble as cover for this.”

 

[SimonDoom]

It’s a very questionable thesis to suggest that improvement in writing is only achievable via compromising on the author’s morals. This sounds awfully like, “I want to write something I know is probably unpleasant, but want to rely on some plausible-sounding psychobabble as cover for this.”

Has anyone advocated that? I don't read any of the contributions in this thread that way.

I'm one of those authors who likes to push the envelope. I take an extremely permissive view of what's OK in the field of fiction. But that's me. I don't advise other authors to do things my way. I think that in general it's good to be open minded and to push one's own boundaries somewhat, but we all have to decide what that means for ourselves and our stories. I wouldn't tell an author, "You should write a story that conflicts with your morals." I don't interpret anyone else contributing to this thread as advocating that.

 

[TheLobster]

I’ve heard arguments that such prose can be an outlet, to let people healthily deal with their transgressive imaginings. OK? But then the same people have to then also support kiddie porn for the exactly the same reasons.

That’s complete and total nonsense, and for a very obvious reason.

 

[SamanthaBehgs]

Because it is a "moral" matter.


If the writer who can not only capture the bright and sunny sides of life but also its vile and loathsome underbelly in her writing is "better" than the one comparatively restricted, and if such writing will—more or less inevitably (see @TarnishedPenny's post above)—result in preventable harm of others (preventable by refraining from becoming the "better" writer), then, yes, you may very well be justified in believing that to be a better writer, you have to become a worse human being.

I get the sense from your replies that one of two things are likely true.

1) You asked this question already having decided that it was okay to write about something that you had scruples writing about, and the second part of your question (asking if folks would just stop writing or redirect to avoid violating those scruples) was more rhetorical or maybe out of curiosity about those who would take a different path than your own.

Or

2) You asked the entire question without an answer in mind to any part of the question and have formed one based on the discussion that has occurred on this thread, at least to that second part. Your responses seem to be defending the idea of writing to overcome your scruples rather than stopping or making it more of a moral fit.

Either way - it seems from the outside looking in that you as the OP have an answer for yourself (it's clear that this answer is different for each author here) that you've somewhat settled on regarding whether you would stop writing entirely or re-write the story to avoid violating your scruples.

If so, I still feel like part of your question isn't answered, the *how.* I'm seeing arguments that talk about *why* you might do it but did I miss the answer to how? How are you as the OP feeling regarding how well your complete question has been answered?

If someone feels they answered the how (or if you, the OP, have taken away a *how* from the discussion), I'm wondering if anyone would be willing to summarize it because I've failed at wrapping my head around it. I understand that's a me problem, so I won't hold it against anyone who doesn't want to. Just figured it couldn't hurt to ask.

 

[Erozetta]

I get the sense from your replies that one of two things are likely true.

1) You asked this question already having decided that it was okay to write about something that you had scruples writing about, and the second part of your question (asking if folks would just stop writing or redirect to avoid violating those scruples) was more rhetorical or maybe out of curiosity about those who would take a different path than your own.

Or

2) You asked the entire question without an answer in mind to any part of the question and have formed one based on the discussion that has occurred on this thread, at least to that second part. Your responses seem to be defending the idea of writing to overcome your scruples rather than stopping or making it more of a moral fit.

Either way - it seems from the outside looking in that you as the OP have an answer for yourself (it's clear that this answer is different for each author here) that you've somewhat settled on regarding whether you would stop writing entirely or re-write the story to avoid violating your scruples.

If so, I still feel like part of your question isn't answered, the *how.* I'm seeing arguments that talk about *why* you might do it but did I miss the answer to how? How are you as the OP feeling regarding how well your complete question has been answered?

If someone feels they answered the how (or if you, the OP, have taken away a *how* from the discussion), I'm wondering if anyone would be willing to summarize it because I've failed at wrapping my head around it. I understand that's a me problem, so I won't hold it against anyone who doesn't want to. Just figured it couldn't hurt to ask.

My how was just accepting that the story was unfolding how it naturally flowed because of taking action that made sense for each character, for better or worse.

How I got there was reading the story again and deciding the characters were good, the story was good, even if dark, and the uncomfortable action wasn't just for shock value, there were reasons it went the way it did. Once I understood that, it became easier to finish on the path that was uncomfortable for me but stayed true to the characters journey.

 

[Levorotatory]

I’ve heard arguments that such prose can be an outlet, to let people healthily deal with their transgressive imaginings. OK? But then the same people have to then also support kiddie porn for the exactly the same reasons. You have to be consistent in the application of such arguments.

That’s complete and total nonsense, and for a very obvious reason.

It is obviously nonsense to compare a story of a fictional character being sexually assaulted to a recording of a real person being sexually assaulted, but I interpret "kiddie porn" in this context as meaning fictional, written content. With that assumption, EmilyMiller makes a good point.