Easily Squicked Readers

[SimonDoom]

There are those who are squicked by right and wrong .

I'm somewhat skeptical about those who think they see right and wrong in a fantasy space for erotic stories. My sense is that they should fight their righteous battles elsewhere.

And what does it mean to be squicked by what's right?

 

[jaF0]

I'm confused .....

 

[MillieDynamite]

I just learned a new word tonight - Squick.
Never seen that before.

An online dictionary says,

squick/skwik/ verb INFORMAL cause (someone) to feel intense disgust. "we get that bodily fluids can squick people out."

 

[gunhilltrain]

I just learned a new word tonight - Squick.
Never seen that before.

I've never heard or seen it used anywhere but on Literotica. But I've lived a rather sheltered life.

 

[MillieDynamite]

I'm confused .....

Declutter your mind, replace your cannots with shoulds, silence your inner critic, and that will clear things up nicely. Or according to the article Confusion to Clarity it will.

You're supposed to be stupid, son. Don't abuse the privilege. Captain Jack Braddock to Lymangood (the first JAFO) Just realized where you handle came from, aren't I the clever one?

 

[XerXesXu]

Quick Squick.

I've never heard or seen it used anywhere but on Literotica. But I've lived a rather sheltered life.

I believe the credit goes to Handley Page, but I can't locate the original.

An elderly lady takes her even older, and hard of hearing husband to the doctor for a check-up. The doctor checks his blood pressure, pulse and oxygen saturation and says, "Now I'll need samples of your faeces and urine." The old guy says, "What?" The doctor repeats his request and the old man again says, "What". His wife loudly interrupts, "The doctor wants your underpants."

Which goes to show that it's possible to be squicked and laugh at the same time.

 

[PennameWombat]

An online dictionary says,

squick/skwik/ verb INFORMAL cause (someone) to feel intense disgust. "we get that bodily fluids can squick people out."

I've never heard or seen it used anywhere but on Literotica. But I've lived a rather sheltered life.

Squick warning

I have memory from the very early 1990s of seeing 'squick' on alt.tasteless. Prior to AOL's access to USENET fora, alt.tasteless was a wonderment of clever tastelessness. A long discussion of "the second coming of Christ" was awesome... Once the AOL users had access... sigh. Anyway.

My memory is that 'squick' was used as a synonym of a literal 'skull fuck.' The posting in mind was from someone moaning about hating on the middle-aged guy next door... his dream to knock the guy out and lock his head in a vise that was in the neighbor's garage... carefully drilling a hole through the skull and dropping his jeans and... "enjoying the matchless pleasure of squicking a still-living brain."

Wordsense: squick

Seemingly phonaesthetic, formed of squ- as in squirm and -ick as in ick. Originated in the Usenet newsgroup alt.sex.bondage; popularized primarily in the newsgroup alt.tasteless.

Slightly different meaning. But... ah... mayhaps my memory is correct. From alt.tasteless FAQ:

You should never post binaries to alt.tasteless, because it might cause some news admins to kill the group at their site. Let me rephrase that: you should never...EVER...post binaries to alt.tasteless, because it pisses off the regulars no end and we will hunt you down and kill you, slowly, painfully, and with great and lasting pleasure. Then we'll post a highly detailed description of our activities to alt.tasteless and pictures of your flayed and squicked corpse to alt.binaries.pictures.tasteless and alt.tasteless.pictures.

 

[NotWise]

An online dictionary says,

squick/skwik/ verb INFORMAL cause (someone) to feel intense disgust. "we get that bodily fluids can squick people out."

It also appears on Lit as squirk rather than squick.

 

[Kumquatqueen]

'Squick' is frequently used in the BDSM community, to mean 'something that may be a perfectly reasonable kink for others but I'm so put off I can't deal with it'
So someone might say they are happy to be beaten with all sorts of implements, but are squicked by the idea of hand spanking. Many people would be squicked by any blood appearing. Some might be squicked by seeing penises or certain piercings.

It's certainly been used since the mid-90s - I recall it on Usenet but mainly in person.

 

[gunhilltrain]

It also appears on Lit as squirk rather than squick.

If Urban Dictionary is to be believed, it's "squick."

Urban Dictionary, being user-created, has piled up an impressive number of towns, neighborhoods, streets, and schools. A quick glance shows listings for Gun Hill Road (not very flattering), Fordham, Woodlawn, Hunts Point, DeWitt Clinton High School and that's just a start - and just one borough.

 

[yowser]

It also appears on Lit as squirk rather than squick.

Captain Squirk?

 

[jaF0]

Squirtin' is squicky.

 

[lovecraft68]

We should start a thread for easily squicked authors.

That way instead of a new thread every time an author gets butthurt over a remark and feels compelled to run to the boards to whine about it, we could just have one thread about it.

I get when its a brand new author who for some reason didn't think they'd get a rude remark on a story they put up on a free site that allows comments-and anonymous- but seeing established authors still feeling the need to start the same discussion about people who say mean things about their stories over and over again.

And in doing so act as judgmental and righteous as the troll.

Even better, and I know this is something I've seen Keith say many times over the years, you just handed that troll a serious win if they happen to be someone who posts or ghosts here.

If you're putting your work out there you're going to get crap comments, many of which won't make sense, and many from people who seem to think they have some sort of "cause" behind their indignation over the story.

If you can't ignore it, or grow a skin thick enough to tolerate it, then maybe comments should be shut off until Laurel creates the "Please allow only the highest of praise" to be posted on my stories.

 

[gunhilltrain]

We should start a thread for easily squicked authors.

That way instead of a new thread every time an author gets butthurt over a remark and feels compelled to run to the boards to whine about it, we could just have one thread about it.

I get when its a brand new author who for some reason didn't think they'd get a rude remark on a story they put up on a free site that allows comments-and anonymous- but seeing established authors still feeling the need to start the same discussion about people who say mean things about their stories over and over again.

And in doing so act as judgmental and righteous as the troll.

Even better, and I know this is something I've seen Keith say many times over the years, you just handed that troll a serious win if they happen to be someone who posts or ghosts here.

If you're putting your work out there you're going to get crap comments, many of which won't make sense, and many from people who seem to think they have some sort of "cause" behind their indignation over the story.

If you can't ignore it, or grow a skin thick enough to tolerate it, then maybe comments should be shut off until Laurel creates the "Please allow only the highest of praise" to be posted on my stories.

There is one site that has virtually no trolls, or even many critical comments, because only members can comment and they can't be anonymous. So it's Nice World, almost too nice.

Yet there is another site with similar restrictions and there are some critical comments, but not too bad.

On Literotica one does need a pretty thick skin at times. (Although LW is in a class by itself.) Yet I won't turn off comments or even delete any. I want to hear what they have to say. I rebut them if I have something to offer, or I just leave them there and ignore them.

 

[jaF0]

My ketchup bottle just squicked at me. It made exactly the kind of deep, kazzoo-ish whistle-pop-click sound I would imagine 'squick' to be.

 

[CyranoJ]

We should start a thread for easily squicked authors.

https://i.gifer.com/955t.gif

 

[BuckyDuckman]

It never ceases to surprise and amuse me that Literotica readers who happily and enthusiastically embrace one sort of perversion act aghast when confronted with another.

It's the "my perversion OK, your perversion not OK" mentality.

Or, conversely, the comments/suggestions that squick out the author.

If I had wanted the story to go in THAT direction, I would have written it that way.

 

[Salacious_Scribe]

It never ceases to surprise and amuse me that Literotica readers who happily and enthusiastically embrace one sort of perversion act aghast when confronted with another.

Just today, I received the comment "Shame on you, sicko" because the son in a mom-son incest story exposed his mom's nudity to other people. It's the Taliban element in the mom-son incest readership asserting itself. It's a surprisingly large, and surprisingly un-self-aware, segment of the Literotica readership.

It's the "my perversion OK, your perversion not OK" mentality.

Incest is a little weird. The biggest fans of mom son incest want a loving monogamous relationship. They don't want mom or son to be shared with outsiders. If you do you risk their ire.

I savor pissing them off. I wrote a mom-son non-con and included sister, sister's friend dad, and a few others. The tears were delicious.

 

[gunhilltrain]

It never ceases to surprise and amuse me that Literotica readers who happily and enthusiastically embrace one sort of perversion act aghast when confronted with another.

Just today, I received the comment "Shame on you, sicko" because the son in a mom-son incest story exposed his mom's nudity to other people. It's the Taliban element in the mom-son incest readership asserting itself. It's a surprisingly large, and surprisingly un-self-aware, segment of the Literotica readership.

It's the "my perversion OK, your perversion not OK" mentality.

We've often commented on that. It's part of human nature I suppose. Also, there are are a lot of predilections that some people have probably never heard of before coming to Lit, or they didn't know they were so common. It can take some getting used to. I didn't know how popular incest was until I came here. But when I was younger, before the Internet, I thought that my interest in certain BDSM/spanking activities was weird and uncommon. Turns out that I'm pretty vanilla after all.

 

[NotWise]

Incest is a little weird. The biggest fans of mom son incest want a loving monogamous relationship. They don't want mom or son to be shared with outsiders. If you do you risk their ire.

I haven't had so much trouble with that. I think I've seen reader comments to that effect, but the stories were still well-accepted.

My last five I/T stories have all involved at least one extra party in Mom/son or brother/sister relationships. If there was a hit, then "Working for Mom" probably took it. The story (my longest) barely has a red H, but I chalked that up to no incest in the last third of the story, and no sex at all in the last quarter of it.

Edit: On the other hand, my Nude Day story (in Group) was one-bombed more than any story I've written. I suspect it was because something about the story was very "squicky" to some readers.

 

[SimonDoom]

We should start a thread for easily squicked authors.

I don't know what those are.

I suppose if you're the sort of author who can't handle any criticism, or is outraged that anyone could say anything negative about your story, you might qualify. But that's obviously -- quite obviously -- not what I'm talking about.

I don't mind criticism, and I have a very thick skin. I don't take criticism personally. But as a matter of principle I object when readers say to me -- or to any other author -- "I hate the subject matter of what you write, and I want to shut you down. I automatically give you a '1' just because I hate the subject matter."

I think it's a juvenile and narrow-minded way to be a reader, and to vote, and to comment.

I recognize that calling attention to it isn't going to stop it. Just this morning, I got another comment of this sort to my latest story. This is what they said: "Sorry 1 Star. Not interested in WHORE stories."

It doesn't bother me personally, and I haven't deleted the comment.

But I still think it's a narrow-minded and intolerant attitude that is worth calling attention to, and bringing up, and occasionally posting something new about it, even if it's been brought up before, because tolerance and free speech are always under assault, and I believe this Site should be a haven for both. And, to me, that means actively supporting a culture in which authors feel comfortable and free to explore their fantasies through their stories, without guilt or shame. I think it's a good thing. It has nothing whatsoever to do with being "squicked" as an author, which I don't even think means anything.

 

[NotWise]

I recognize that calling attention to it isn't going to stop it. Just this morning, I got another comment of this sort to my latest story. This is what they said: "Sorry 1 Star. Not interested in WHORE stories."

Similar comments have been left on stories in Romance and other categories with the all-caps WHORE. It might be the same person.

Someone commented on "Love is Enough" to the effect of "Your characters aren't flappers, they're WHORES." It made me laugh because the characters (Hannah and Gabby) were prostitutes--well, before all that happened, anyway. Even they admitted to being whores.

 

[JuanaSalsa]

I also find the downvoting just because of a certain kink/fetish disappointing.

I mean, why downvote rape when you're reading stories in the nonconsent section? Yet, I consistently find extremely well-written stories in that topic with low scores just because the scene is edgier than most.

I don't know how these same people can read the news. I can't read the news, and I can read rape fantasy all day long. One is real people which is horrible, and the other is fake and entertaining.

On the other hand, it may be that my "squick" limit for fiction is just fundamentally broken. I have, once in my life, read a fictional story that was beyond my limit. It was a story I read on Literotica when the site first started, when I was still in high school. It would NEVER be allowed today - it featured all of the banned topics, in terrible, unforgettable, detail. It is the standard by which I have measured all future fiction. Nothing has ever come close to being as disturbing at that.

 

[MillieDynamite]

Please don't kill the messenger, but I think, as a writer, I need to read things that push my boundaries at times. I have written stuff that's out there, way past appropriate, as therapy. I have published some of that. I try to get that far out in the disgust zone anymore. Still, once in a while, I like to read what's that can happen.

 

[Unknown81]

I've mentioned it before, but the strong negative reaction of the Incest Taboo readers to scenes in my story series 'Body Swap With Sister's Boyfriend' of the mother, sister, aunt and female cousin using the toilet and having their periods was amazing. I've never had such vitriol, and I've written in Loving Wives.

These readers want to read stories about people who share DNA having sex with each other sure seemed squeamish about female bodily functions.

Because it's too much information, IMO--I like your stories, RetroFan, but you have way too much information about female bodily functions...