A Warning

[Saint of Fools]

I just read a new story that was added today called "The Encounter Ch. 1" by the author Writer_Pete.

I have to say that I feel disturbed by this story and feel that it was either mislabled or doesnt belong on Literotica.

The woman in the story has the crap beaten out of her for no other reason than the satisfaction of the male in the story.

I'm not sure what the purpose of this post is other than to warn other readers where I was not.

 

[71bruce8]

Bad story.

O.K. Did not read the story. Sounds like unacceptable and non-enjoyable material. Does anyone screen incoming stuff or is there an editor or whatever who can check this out and remove it? I am new to this site and cannot tell you . Help out there?

 

[71bruce8]

Laurel

I sent an e-mail to Laurel- check first posting in this area- re. this story.

 

[VeraGem]

Freedom of comfortable speech?

Just a heads up -

Freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom to speak as long as everyone likes what is said.

Rather, it means freedom to speak even when some people hate what is said.

Otherwise it would be an empty freedom, wouldn't it?

I can hear them already, the outcries of: "But, but THIS is just too much, we HAVE to draw the line HERE - in THIS case BANNING an authors work is the RIGHT thing to do."

- And so on and so forth.

I'm defending it, therefore I must be sick too: refutation by denigration. An intent to scare off the defenders; no one wants to defend a witch for fear of being burned as well.

Where does it end? Do we purge everything that doesn't please everyone and end up living in Barney World? Or, as adults with a freedom of choice, do we simply move the fuck on to another story?

 

[VeraGem]

A brief addendum:

O.K. Did not read the story. Sounds like unacceptable and non-enjoyable material.

That's good Bruce: you hate it, you want Laurel to remove it, you haven't even read it.

 

[Guest]

I think it's safe to state we all hold freedom of speech sacred. However, that does not mean that everything should be everywhere. A well-run site has parameters limiting the material it presents to its patrons. If every site had everything on it, every site would be the same--and since we are not all the same, where would be the sense in that?

I've seen a lot of gratuitously violent porn on a lot of other sites, which is a big turn-off to me. One of the reasons I like this site better is that it, for the most part, has material I enjoy reading. Freedom of speech is essential, but that doesn't mean a site shouldn't be allowed to develop its own style that sets it apart from the others. Just as a restaurant decorates in a certain way and serves a certain menu to create an ambience, so do the best sites. There are many ways to do this, and one of them is to exclude content that is a turn-off to most of their readers. Maybe this writer should publish the story at a site that specializes in the gratuitous brutalization of women--there are plenty of them around.

You may argue--'don't read it if you don't like it!' I say, if I went to an elegant restaurant and found Coquilles St. Jacque, Beef Wellington, and Vienna Sausages on the menu, the sausages would strike a disturbing note in my heart, and my liking of the restaurant would almost certainly be diminished. The same would apply to this web site. I would not feel as comfortable as I do because I would no longer feel as if I were among kindred spirits.

 

[Whispersecret]

The freedom of speech argument has come up before. Of course, we all believe in it.

If I had a party and some person was spouting off about some foul subject that I didn't like, I have the right to kick him out of my house. Freedom of speech doesn't mean he can spout his garbage in my house.

Literotica is Laurel's house.

If she decides not to allow certain types of stories on her site, that is her right. Her exclusion of that (or any) story is not infringing on this guy's freedom of speech at all. He is still able to freely write and distribute his story in this country. It just has to be somewhere other than Literotica.

 

[Jigs]

I did read the story, both chapters, which goes to prove that nothing draws readers to trash more quickly than a little bad publicity.

I would agree that there's not much about either of the two chapters that could be called either literature or socially redeeming. I don't think that if I knew Pete I would like him very much, and indeed if he's not personally dangerous, I can see why some people might be afraid could plant some very bad ideas into the head of someone who is.

Pete has a good touch for description, maybe too good considering his subject matter, and he uses adjectives quite well. For all of that, however, is a story is our not mechanically very well done. For openers, in the very first paragraphs of Chapter 1 he switches from a first-person to a third person narrative that leaves you wondering just who the hell he's talking about when he introduces his main character "Mark".

In fairness, the author's profile lists him as being between 18 and 22 years old, and he describes himself as a "talented young writer caught in the body of a programmer." He is a resident of London, yet he includes the Waco Texas Police Department in Chapter 2. He is therefore arrogant, young, and attempting to write about about people and a place he knows nothing about. ( I suspect he has little personal experience with $500 an hour hookers either. It boggles my mind to believe that there is any working girl who can command a such a price.) Yet, what did I know when I was 22 years old?

As far as whether or not he should be allowed raise his voice in Laurel's house, I think we ought to leave that to Laurel. The First Amendment, as in all 9 that follow, do not apply to, or limit in any way, the choices and actions of private individuals. The Constitution of the United States limits the powers of government, and is not applicable to purely private choice or conduct. It may, or may not, be a violation of freedom of speech, but it is Laurel's house. Legally she is entitled to do with it just as she damn well pleases, the First Amendment be damned .

What I think, or anybody else thinks about Pete or his story, the only person whose opinion counts is Laurel's. Having said so, I'll put my oar in the water . On balance, if it were up to me, I wouldn't take the story down. I have some pretty rough stuff posted on Literotica myself, and I am in no position to throw stones or to become the thought police. Jigs

 

[VeraGem]

Maybe I shold clarify.

Her exclusion of that (or any) story is not infringing on this guy's freedom of speech at all.

The First Amendment, as in all 9 that follow, do not apply to, or limit in any way, the choices and actions of private individuals.

I agree, and I'm very aware of the difference between individual choice and government censorship.

All I'm saying is this: if every story that one or two people choose to be offended by were removed there would, in all likelihood, not be very much left to read at all.

 

[KillerMuffin]

I read it. I don't see what the big deal is, actually. It's a non-consent story in the wrong category according to the local and vocal BDSMers because it violates the safe-sane-consensual precept.

Personally, I'm not sure why it hasn't been banished to allextreme.com simple because the woman involved only gave implied consent by being a hooker accepting cash involved. However, Laurel obviously believes it belongs where it is, so that's what's going to happen. Neh?

As far as the entire censorship issue is, Laurel has chosen what is allowable on the site based on the laws where the server is located. She doesn't censor a story based on whether or not she likes or whether or not someone might find it disgusting. Her basis is strictly for legal considerations. Many people find BDSM, incest, or anal highly offensinve. Should we censor those because they are harmful as well?

 

[ozeboi69]

unnacceptable behaviour

I'm a non-violent person who has never and will never participate in violent acts of any kind. However most of the stories I have written have involved sex through violence of some kind. This is because I have been writing for specific targetted groups. I've placed a few of these stories on Literotica to get more general feedback outside of the targetted audience.

The feedback I've received from these violent stories have received a mixed reaction. I've received as many angry, insulting and rude feedback as I have feedback thanking me for writing such stories and telling me how much they love it.

Personally, I would rather that a person lived out their violent fantasy through reading stories than by living them out on another non-consenting person.

There is a place for all shades of stories, and if violence was really such a disturbing issue for people, we would be banning the trash on TV and in films that propogate such behaviour - reality-TV being the worst of these at present (since it encourages the negative traits of humankind).

We live in a diverse world with diverse desires. Let's treasure that and accept the desires and needs of others as 'different', and not necessarily 'bad'.

 

[Saint of Fools]

That's exactly what I was getting at.

The story was mislabeled or perhaps belongs on Allextreme.

 

[Guest]

Re: Bad story.

HAHAHHAAHAAHAAHAHHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA

O.K. Did not read the story. Sounds like unacceptable and non-enjoyable material. Does anyone screen incoming stuff or is there an editor or whatever who can check this out and remove it? I am new to this site and cannot tell you . Help out there?

 

[Guest]

Re: Bad story.

O.K. Did not read the story. Sounds like unacceptable and non-enjoyable material. Does anyone screen incoming stuff or is there an editor or whatever who can check this out and remove it? I am new to this site and cannot tell you . Help out there?

It's not easy being gay, is it brucie? Get a life.

 

[bicelebs]

Get a name, "Unregistered". Insulting people behind a mask doesn't suit you...