Ethics of writing erotic stories

[lovecraft68]

It's something I've thought about in the past, and something I'm thinking about tonight.

On one hand, stories such as Incest, Non Consent, Loving Wives, ect... are a fantasy of many people. People love coming online and reading these stories because it pushes their 'buttons' in a way that they can't get anywhere else. It helps bring sexual joy and pleasure to their lives.

On the other hand, these topics are almost universally/publicly frowned upon in real life. (Obviously nonconsent is illegal, so is incest)


So to the authors here, do you consider yourselves "sinners" and accept that fact?

Or do you feel that you're doing something positive for society because it's all fiction and you bring happiness to people's lives? (the same way violent movies make people happy)

I guess this is up to the individual and their life experiences.

I write incest as a fun fantasy and for me it is a fantasy I have never been or known anyone who is a victim of it in real life.

If someone is then I completely understand why they would have ill feelings towards it, but would think they would not be reading in that section so I woul not feel I am offending them.

On the flip side The "rape" side of non con-because the reluctance part is a little different- is something I shy away from because I am related to and work with women who have been hurt so I avoid that section.

I also avoid LW because many, not all of those stories display a level of violence towards women that upset me, and the comments are far more disturbing than what the author writes. So again I stay away and do not feel as if these people are trying to offend me, its their thing, just not mine.

As authors I don;t believe we have to worry about what offends people. The good thing about lit is the wide range of categories allows for people to enjoy their kink and more importantly avoid what disturbs them.

If this site was a "luck of the draw site" many stories would be flamed and I think lit would have far less readership. Something for everyone here.

As for being a sinner?

Well "sin" pretty much reflects a Christian belief so I certainly don't feel as if I am one. I follow my rules not some dead gods.

But looking at the lighter side as Billy Joel says, "I'd rather laugh with the sinners than cry with the saints, the sinners are much more fun"

 

[soflabbwlvr]

But saying fiction can't have an a effect, a profound effect that changes the world and can't influence the way people live their lives? I find it ironic that English Lady said as much in the Christian thread...because religious books have had one of the biggest effect of all on people. And while a Christian may argue that this is different, because the Bible is fact not fiction...well, if they believe that then they have to believe other religious books are fiction, and look at the effect they had. So there's Scientology, and the Mahabharata, and the Koran...all these fiction books, having a profound influence on how people act. I'd say that undermines any claim we creators have on "not buying" such "bullshit."

Here's where you went off the rails. Those books aren't "fact" or "fiction." They would fall under "self-help." They aren't intended as entertainment or history. They are presented as guides to living better lives. Unlike fiction, they were written with the express purpose of influencing behavior.

 

[SecondCircle]

Before we cry "bullshit" on this, leave us remember a few things. First, if someone wrote to us and said, "you changed my life! After reading your story I tried doing X-Y-X in bed and my sex life s now wonderful!" We'd take take credit for that, wouldn't we? So why do we get to cry "Bullshit!" and "Don't buy it!" when say, a movie shows boys lying in the street and a bunch of stupid teens try and get run over? Why do we get to be all proud of our fiction when it influences for good, then deny any influence when it makes someone do bad?

And, no, I'm not absolving people from taking responsibility for their lives. But we're not totally innocents either. That I don't buy. However, for the most part people are attracted to what upholds their beliefs, what they want to be true. But fiction can reinforce these beliefs and make things worse.

For example, prior to the 70's, most fiction upheld the stereotype that gays were dangerous and sick. And in biographies of people growing up gay, they often say that they were scared of what they might become thanks to such fictions. And then they found that one book about a gay person finding some kind of love, and it was a revelation. It was a relief. It was salvation.

Bullshit? I don't think so. What is bullshit is that we writers can't *know* that if we write x-y-z it will influence all sorts of people to do x-y-z. Goethe had no idea that his "Sorrows of Young Werther" would start a fad of young men committing suicide. And J.K. Rowling had no idea that Harry Potter would be a global phenomenon and get some kids studying magic. If we don't know how popular or influential our story or a part of our story is going to be, then we can't be held accountable for doing something "unethical." One has to have an intention--like glorifying non-con and getting people to commit rape--in order for the "unethical" argument to hold water. If one just wants to help people have an orgasm at home in front of their computers...that's not really unethical.

But saying fiction can't have an a effect, a profound effect that changes the world and can't influence the way people live their lives? I find it ironic that English Lady said as much in the Christian thread...because religious books have had one of the biggest effect of all on people. And while a Christian may argue that this is different, because the Bible is fact not fiction...well, if they believe that then they have to believe other religious books are fiction, and look at the effect they had. So there's Scientology, and the Mahabharata, and the Koran...all these fiction books, having a profound influence on how people act. I'd say that undermines any claim we creators have on "not buying" such "bullshit."

We aren't saying our works as writers aren't going to influence or inspire anyone. To say that would be to think of the human race as robots that simply perform the task of reading something and draw nothing from it, no emotion, inspiration, or impression.

All forms of media CAN influence or inspire. Its why we laugh at good comedies and grow knots in our throat when our favorite characters die. And great lessons can be taken away from any form of media.

What is being asked, in other words I suppose (if I may), is "Should We as Artists feel responsible for the actions that the inspired commit after experiencing our art? Should we take the blame for atrocities committed, because of the questionable or controversial nature of our works?"

No. We shouldn't. Because mature people can take the good from our art and be responsible enough to not get carried away by the bad.

Go see Evil Dead and get freaked out. But don't try to chop off your hand in real life. Read an incest story, beat off or rub one out to it, even fantasize about it, but don't go squeezing your sister's titties. Play with the non con category. Don't go fucking rape anyone.

See? We draw inspiration from everything. Its the stupid people and psychos that participate in the second parts of the sentences above. Raping, shooting, killing, mom sex, knee boarding, cannibalism... wait one of those doesn't belong.

Yes. Our works do inspire. But if the crazies read your non con story and go rape someone, that's because they are fucking crazy, or aren't mature and responsible enough to handle life.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Before we cry "bullshit" on this, leave us remember a few things. First, if someone wrote to us and said, "you changed my life! After reading your story I tried doing X-Y-X in bed and my sex life s now wonderful!" We'd take take credit for that, wouldn't we? So why do we get to cry "Bullshit!" and "Don't buy it!" when say, a movie shows boys lying in the street and a bunch of stupid teens try and get run over? Why do we get to be all proud of our fiction when it influences for good, then deny any influence when it makes someone do bad?

And, no, I'm not absolving people from taking responsibility for their lives. But we're not totally innocents either. That I don't buy. However, for the most part people are attracted to what upholds their beliefs, what they want to be true. But fiction can reinforce these beliefs and make things worse.

For example, prior to the 70's, most fiction upheld the stereotype that gays were dangerous and sick. And in biographies of people growing up gay, they often say that they were scared of what they might become thanks to such fictions. And then they found that one book about a gay person finding some kind of love, and it was a revelation. It was a relief. It was salvation.

Bullshit? I don't think so. What is bullshit is that we writers can't *know* that if we write x-y-z it will influence all sorts of people to do x-y-z. Goethe had no idea that his "Sorrows of Young Werther" would start a fad of young men committing suicide. And J.K. Rowling had no idea that Harry Potter would be a global phenomenon and get some kids studying magic. If we don't know how popular or influential our story or a part of our story is going to be, then we can't be held accountable for doing something "unethical." One has to have an intention--like glorifying non-con and getting people to commit rape--in order for the "unethical" argument to hold water. If one just wants to help people have an orgasm at home in front of their computers...that's not really unethical.

But saying fiction can't have an a effect, a profound effect that changes the world and can't influence the way people live their lives? I find it ironic that English Lady said as much in the Christian thread...because religious books have had one of the biggest effect of all on people. And while a Christian may argue that this is different, because the Bible is fact not fiction...well, if they believe that then they have to believe other religious books are fiction, and look at the effect they had. So there's Scientology, and the Mahabharata, and the Koran...all these fiction books, having a profound influence on how people act. I'd say that undermines any claim we creators have on "not buying" such "bullshit."

Gays are sick and twisted. They know it, the world knows it.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

The fag hag is fulla shit for the reason that the inspirational books rarely change anyone for the better or smarter or wiser or nuthin.

People pretty much know what they need to do, and most don't. Theyre too goddamned lazy or high or scared or whatever.

 

[Desiremakesmeweak]

I'd like to refer back to the OP's raising of the issue of 'ethics.'

Ethics is a funny word because it's from a Greek origin and in that form simply means whether a thing is 'coming from out of the same scene/theatre.' It doesn't specifically mean to imply that 'ethical' means good, and 'unethical' means bad - merely that ethical means internally consistent with a basic theme. Thus someone can have 'a criminal ethos...'

Personally I have a completely unrestricted viewpoint regarding WHAT I might write about or include; TOTALLY anything goes as far as subject matter. But - I will make a hairwidth's distinction between what is 'good' and what is 'evil,' and that distinction will always be there in the story. If I carry off what I aim to do, then most people won't even see it there, or won't be conscious of the 'spin.'

My ethos is always going to be about what can or could justify something in a very specific or narrowly-defined context, not the justification of anything and everything in any and every situation and context.

 

[jdnunyer]

Do I think that I'm doing something positive for society? Not really. If I stopped writing stories today and pulled all of mine from the site some people might notice, but no lives would be changed. I'm not delusional. This is free porn for the masses, not classic literature.

Do I think my stories have any harmful effects on anyone? No. I write fiction, not how-to manuals. I'm not responsible for anyone's interpretation of my fantasies. That's entirely between the reader and his psychiatrist.

This.

There's a lot of research on how porn affects people, and the results are mixed. Some authors have claimed to show evidence of a decrease in violent crime, especially rape, indicating that porn is more substitute than stepping stone. Others find more damaging effects. Either way, though, we're talking big picture. Considering how many other ways people have to stimulate themselves online, I don't think I'd feel all that personally responsible even if we knew for sure that porn is harmful on net. And though I'd never go so far as to say I'm doing society a service, a handful of readers have told me that my writing has enriched their lives in some small way beyond giving them a good read, either by bringing them closer to their spouse or helping them through a recovery from a serious illness or whatever. In the end, I'd say the net effect on the world of my writing is really close to zilch, but to the extent that it differs from zero, it's in the right direction.

 

[jdnunyer]

Before we cry "bullshit" on this, leave us remember a few things. First, if someone wrote to us and said, "you changed my life! After reading your story I tried doing X-Y-X in bed and my sex life s now wonderful!" We'd take take credit for that, wouldn't we? So why do we get to cry "Bullshit!" and "Don't buy it!" when say, a movie shows boys lying in the street and a bunch of stupid teens try and get run over? Why do we get to be all proud of our fiction when it influences for good, then deny any influence when it makes someone do bad?

And, no, I'm not absolving people from taking responsibility for their lives. But we're not totally innocents either. That I don't buy. However, for the most part people are attracted to what upholds their beliefs, what they want to be true. But fiction can reinforce these beliefs and make things worse.

For example, prior to the 70's, most fiction upheld the stereotype that gays were dangerous and sick. And in biographies of people growing up gay, they often say that they were scared of what they might become thanks to such fictions. And then they found that one book about a gay person finding some kind of love, and it was a revelation. It was a relief. It was salvation.

Bullshit? I don't think so. What is bullshit is that we writers can't *know* that if we write x-y-z it will influence all sorts of people to do x-y-z. Goethe had no idea that his "Sorrows of Young Werther" would start a fad of young men committing suicide. And J.K. Rowling had no idea that Harry Potter would be a global phenomenon and get some kids studying magic. If we don't know how popular or influential our story or a part of our story is going to be, then we can't be held accountable for doing something "unethical." One has to have an intention--like glorifying non-con and getting people to commit rape--in order for the "unethical" argument to hold water. If one just wants to help people have an orgasm at home in front of their computers...that's not really unethical.

But saying fiction can't have an a effect, a profound effect that changes the world and can't influence the way people live their lives? I find it ironic that English Lady said as much in the Christian thread...because religious books have had one of the biggest effect of all on people. And while a Christian may argue that this is different, because the Bible is fact not fiction...well, if they believe that then they have to believe other religious books are fiction, and look at the effect they had. So there's Scientology, and the Mahabharata, and the Koran...all these fiction books, having a profound influence on how people act. I'd say that undermines any claim we creators have on "not buying" such "bullshit."

I think you've touched on an important difference. If instead of writing fiction, I wrote essays directly encouraging people to engage in certain acts, and those essays became wildly popular and there was a sudden increase in the very behavior I advocated, yes, I'd feel some personal responsibility. I'd also have had reason to expect such a result -- in fact, it would have been what I was after. Ultimately, the question (I think) is whether the probability that any given individual would behave a certain way differs by more than a trivial amount (and in a trivial way -- if someone who was going to commit suicide anyway chooses to do so in the same manner as a character in a work of fiction, when they might have done so in a different manner, I don't see the author as culpable) before and after reading a particular piece of writing. In some cases, it does. But in some, it does not. I rather suspect that the stuff we're posting here mostly falls into the latter category.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

I think you've touched on an important difference. If instead of writing fiction, I wrote essays directly encouraging people to engage in certain acts, and those essays became wildly popular and there was a sudden increase in the very behavior I advocated, yes, I'd feel some personal responsibility. I'd also have had reason to expect such a result -- in fact, it would have been what I was after. It's not that writers can never be considered culpable for their output, it's just that this probably isn't an example of where we should be.

I'm reading an old novel about Negro abuse in the Old South. Whew! The black teens are screwed every way possible. And its absurd. Like...4 white boys are beating the crap outta the 18 year old black guy, he's naked (cus they wanna castrate him), and its winter and raining, and a decent man comes along and says, WHATS GOIN ON HERE! And the white boys say NUTHINM SIR, and the black (who's naked) says NUTHIN SIR, WE WUZ JES TALKIN. Well, the black guy ends up dead after a husband catches him in bed with the wife, and the black guys sister has the bankers baby, tho nobody had a clue she was pregnant! and she was working for half the people in town. Its good erotica in a skanky kinda way but its so overboard you kinda laugh at it.

 

[jdnunyer]

As for being a sinner?

Well "sin" pretty much reflects a Christian belief so I certainly don't feel as if I am one. I follow my rules not some dead gods.

Ditto. I distinguish between moral and immoral acts (why do some Christians find it so hard to believe that non-believers are capable of such?), but the concept of "sin" is not one I recognize as valid. If your answer to the question "why is that wrong?" is either "it just is" or "[some moral authority] said so", I don't consider that an argument. My view of ethics is pretty consequentialist, and "it makes baby Jesus cry" isn't a consequence I'm worried about. Near as I can figure, the primary consequence of me writing erotica is that I scratch two itches at once (an impulse to fantasize about incest and a need to write fiction). Sometimes, I also bring a small amount of pleasure to a small amount of other people (and disappointment to an even smaller number of people). Other than that, I'm pretty sure it has no effect on anything.

 

[Bramblethorn]

I think there's some complexity here.

There's plenty of stuff in fiction that no reasonable person would mistake for reality. If somebody reads Harry Potter and then concusses themselves trying to reach Platform 9 3/4, well, that person has a tenuous grip on reality and was probably going to come to grief one way or another.

But pretty much nothing is 100% fiction. Children's tales like "The Ant and the Grasshopper" or "The Boy Who Cried Wolf" - we don't expect kids to believe in talking insects, but we do expect them to receive the morals of those stories as truth. That continues into adulthood, whether it's heavy-handed polemic like "Atlas Shrugged" or subtle stuff that the author doesn't even realise they're doing, driven by their own unexamined assumptions about how the world works. For me, that's where I start worrying about ethics when writing - the stuff that readers are likely to receive as truth without thinking about it.

The big one in erotica is that while probably 99% of Lit readers believe nonconsensual sex is wrong, and reading NC fantasies is unlikely to change their minds, a lot of RL rapes happen because people are fuzzy on what "nonconsensual" actually means.

As an example, I have a scene where two characters who aren't in an established relationship are sharing a bed. In the middle of the night, Yvonne wakes up and realises she's got her hand on her sleeping bedmate's breast.

I've seen enough to persuade me that there are plenty of people IRL who think it's OK to initiate sexual activity in that scenario and continue unless and until the sleeping woman wakes up and gives an emphatic "No". I really don't want to encourage anybody in that view, so instead I showed how Yvonne handles the situation ethically.

 

[StrangeLife]

I think there's some complexity here.

There's plenty of stuff in fiction that no reasonable person would mistake for reality. If somebody reads Harry Potter and then concusses themselves trying to reach Platform 9 3/4, well, that person has a tenuous grip on reality and was probably going to come to grief one way or another...

And if anybody claims to have pictures of me in a Gryffindor cape waiting in line outside the local book store I'm denying everything. Just sayin'...

 

[Handley_Page]

I think there's some complexity here.

For me, that's where I start worrying about ethics when writing - the stuff that readers are likely to receive as truth without thinking about it.

The big one in erotica is that while probably 99% of Lit readers believe nonconsensual sex is wrong, and reading NC fantasies is unlikely to change their minds, a lot of RL rapes happen
because people are fuzzy on what "nonconsensual" actually means.

I think we'd make things a bit clearer if we stopped making the two words into one;
nonconsensual
The word 'consensual' owes it's roots in Roman Law; "requiring the consent of both parties".
So, perhaps we'd be better in treating the word as 'non-consensual', in an attempt to make the negativity a bit clearer.
Maybe then RL people might be less 'fuzzy' ?

Just a thought.

 

[Zeb_Carter]

Before we cry "bullshit" on this, leave us remember a few things. First, if someone wrote to us and said, "you changed my life! After reading your story I tried doing X-Y-X in bed and my sex life s now wonderful!" We'd take take credit for that, wouldn't we? So why do we get to cry "Bullshit!" and "Don't buy it!" when say, a movie shows boys lying in the street and a bunch of stupid teens try and get run over? Why do we get to be all proud of our fiction when it influences for good, then deny any influence when it makes someone do bad?

And, no, I'm not absolving people from taking responsibility for their lives. But we're not totally innocents either. That I don't buy. However, for the most part people are attracted to what upholds their beliefs, what they want to be true. But fiction can reinforce these beliefs and make things worse.

For example, prior to the 70's, most fiction upheld the stereotype that gays were dangerous and sick. And in biographies of people growing up gay, they often say that they were scared of what they might become thanks to such fictions. And then they found that one book about a gay person finding some kind of love, and it was a revelation. It was a relief. It was salvation.

Bullshit? I don't think so. What is bullshit is that we writers can't *know* that if we write x-y-z it will influence all sorts of people to do x-y-z. Goethe had no idea that his "Sorrows of Young Werther" would start a fad of young men committing suicide. And J.K. Rowling had no idea that Harry Potter would be a global phenomenon and get some kids studying magic. If we don't know how popular or influential our story or a part of our story is going to be, then we can't be held accountable for doing something "unethical." One has to have an intention--like glorifying non-con and getting people to commit rape--in order for the "unethical" argument to hold water. If one just wants to help people have an orgasm at home in front of their computers...that's not really unethical.

But saying fiction can't have an a effect, a profound effect that changes the world and can't influence the way people live their lives? I find it ironic that English Lady said as much in the Christian thread...because religious books have had one of the biggest effect of all on people. And while a Christian may argue that this is different, because the Bible is fact not fiction...well, if they believe that then they have to believe other religious books are fiction, and look at the effect they had. So there's Scientology, and the Mahabharata, and the Koran...all these fiction books, having a profound influence on how people act. I'd say that undermines any claim we creators have on "not buying" such "bullshit."

So, a twinkie and not the Karma Sutra allowed them to explore their sexuality?

I would never take credit for people having better sex, that is not my objective. My objective is to titillate, not instruct. If they take my works as instruction, then...well don't blame me for anything you do. Good or bad. I'm not a twinkie.

So, where is my flying car and light saber? Now those would change my life in a profound way.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

I've always known what NO means, and known when the NO is serious.

If your hand is rubbing the pussy and she's got her tongue buried in your mouth youre safe ignoring the NOs. She may not want it in her mom's living room.

I even recall one gal who filed a harassment complaint against me then got caught sitting on my lap getting a feel. The HR lady got an eyeful, tore up the complaint, and left. I assume my honey was ambivalent about me.

But women are pretty clear when they aren't interested.

 

[oggbashan]

I have detailed the consequences of offending against the tenets of your faith by being here on Literotica:

http://www.literotica.com/s/literotica-the-penalties

Read and learn your punishment.

 

[lovecraft68]

Ditto. I distinguish between moral and immoral acts (why do some Christians find it so hard to believe that non-believers are capable of such?), but the concept of "sin" is not one I recognize as valid. If your answer to the question "why is that wrong?" is either "it just is" or "[some moral authority] said so", I don't consider that an argument. My view of ethics is pretty consequentialist, and "it makes baby Jesus cry" isn't a consequence I'm worried about. Near as I can figure, the primary consequence of me writing erotica is that I scratch two itches at once (an impulse to fantasize about incest and a need to write fiction). Sometimes, I also bring a small amount of pleasure to a small amount of other people (and disappointment to an even smaller number of people). Other than that, I'm pretty sure it has no effect on anything.

This brings to mind Levay's reason for starting the Church of Satan(one of them I'm sure money and infamy factored in as well)

The story of when he was a boy traveling with a circus where he played the organ. When they would set up outside town for a few days Levay would approach the local church to see if he could make some extra money playing the organ during their service.

The girls at the circus would "entertain" the men from the town after hours and the next morning Levay would see those same men in church sitting their all dressed up with their wives and kids acting pious and holier than though.

The same "christian" that claims our stories are sick is the same person watching porn, cheating on his wife, drinking to excess and trying to not only screw his best friend in work, but most likely his wife.

My stories here and for sale are well categorized, no one has to read them if they do not want to.

Like I said in a reply to JBJ I would love for my stuff to get big enough to draw the attention of some "moral" group.

I guarantee if there were ever a debate between them and I, its not me that will come out looking bad.

I freely admit to and own my "sin" they don't they point out sin in others to justify their own. I think the official term for that is organized religion.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

This brings to mind Levay's reason for starting the Church of Satan(one of them I'm sure money and infamy factored in as well)

The story of when he was a boy traveling with a circus where he played the organ. When they would set up outside town for a few days Levay would approach the local church to see if he could make some extra money playing the organ during their service.

The girls at the circus would "entertain" the men from the town after hours and the next morning Levay would see those same men in church sitting their all dressed up with their wives and kids acting pious and holier than though.

The same "christian" that claims our stories are sick is the same person watching porn, cheating on his wife, drinking to excess and trying to not only screw his best friend in work, but most likely his wife.

My stories here and for sale are well categorized, no one has to read them if they do not want to.

Like I said in a reply to JBJ I would love for my stuff to get big enough to draw the attention of some "moral" group.

I guarantee if there were ever a debate between them and I, its not me that will come out looking bad.

I freely admit to and own my "sin" they don't they point out sin in others to justify their own. I think the official term for that is organized religion.

That ain't gonna happen unless you cross the line with wares that'll land you in jail. Americans always wanna put folks in prison for doing what everbody is doing already.

 

[lovecraft68]

That ain't gonna happen unless you cross the line with wares that'll land you in jail. Americans always wanna put folks in prison for doing what everbody is doing already.

Not true the asshole westboro scum picket the funerals of dead soldiers.

Nothing says God's good work like mocking the grief of mothers, children and spouses.

A true example of why many people these days are fed up with religion.

Gandhi said it best "I like your Christ, but dislike your Christians, they are so unlike your Christ"

One of my wife's friends has a bumper sticker that says "God save me from your servants."

Says it all.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Not true the asshole westboro scum picket the funerals of dead soldiers.

Nothing says God's good work like mocking the grief of mothers, children and spouses.

A true example of why many people these days are fed up with religion.

Gandhi said it best "I like your Christ, but dislike your Christians, they are so unlike your Christ"

One of my wife's friends has a bumper sticker that says "God save me from your servants."

Says it all.

It says it all about cops and the VA and friends and pols, too.

 

[lovecraft68]

It says it all about cops and the VA and friends and pols, too.

One difference.

Christians believe in God

many cops think they are God.

More than a few Doctor's get that complex as well.

 

[MayorReynolds]

The human mind is a goddamned weird, swampy place. Psychology is a spinning compass. What people fantasize about, and—more importantly in this case—what they write about can't be defined in black and white, good or evil terms. In other words, just because somebody pens a story involving incest, rape or incestuous rape doesn't automatically make that person an evil, repugnant, hedonistic blasphemer. Maybe they're trying to express something. Maybe they're addressing a personal or sociological issue. Maybe writing the story is helping them purge their souls and become better people for it.

What I'm getting is that you should never condemn someone for writing naughty/taboo things because you don't know why they wrote said naughty things to begin with. Is Alan Moore a sick monster for Lost Girls? I mean other than the giant rings, the bridge troll beard and his whimsical whackadoos about magic he strikes me as a cool dude who most likely isn't a potential sex offender.

That's why the Religious Right and the Moral Majority's ransacking of school libraries in the 80's and 90's was overall a shit thing to do. Those people saw the books they yanked as simply offending them without taking the time to understand what the books were saying in the first place.

As for "accepting myself as a sinner" or whatever, I don't feel any guilt about what I've written. I will probably never corrupt anyone. I understand that all stories come from thousands of different little nodes and life experiences. In the case of incest (referring to one of the only two stories I have up right now) I've accepted the fact that I love thinking about women rubbing their naked bodies against each other and that sapphic incest just adds a little sugar on top of that jerk off cake. And I don't have to answer to anyone about it. I know what's acceptable and what is not. I can tell the difference between fantasy and reality.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

One difference.

Christians believe in God

many cops think they are God.

More than a few Doctor's get that complex as well.

It puzzles me how every atheist and Satanist obsesses about God. Havent met one yet who can let God go.

When the JWs come to my door I welcome them in and try to seduce the JW women, they never come back. I think they groove on the hostility, and sex depresses them (that is, not getting any at home).

 

[lovecraft68]

It puzzles me how every atheist and Satanist obsesses about God. Havent met one yet who can let God go.

When the JWs come to my door I welcome them in and try to seduce the JW women, they never come back. I think they groove on the hostility, and sex depresses them (that is, not getting any at home).

Because I enjoy mocking them, especially the Catholics who don't have a leg to stand on and who have no clue what's in the bible.

The JW's I invite in and listen to them, I don't make fun of them, but at the end just say not interested.

The reason I'm nice to them is it takes guts and conviction to get doors slammed in your face and get made fun of and I can appreciate that.

Ever see a Catholic do that?

I love how the Catholics are now trying to say the devil does not exist. They spent centuries scaring people with him now he doesn't exist?

Okaaaaaay

 

[jdnunyer]

This brings to mind Levay's reason for starting the Church of Satan(one of them I'm sure money and infamy factored in as well)

The story of when he was a boy traveling with a circus where he played the organ. When they would set up outside town for a few days Levay would approach the local church to see if he could make some extra money playing the organ during their service.

The girls at the circus would "entertain" the men from the town after hours and the next morning Levay would see those same men in church sitting their all dressed up with their wives and kids acting pious and holier than though.

The same "christian" that claims our stories are sick is the same person watching porn, cheating on his wife, drinking to excess and trying to not only screw his best friend in work, but most likely his wife.

My stories here and for sale are well categorized, no one has to read them if they do not want to.

Like I said in a reply to JBJ I would love for my stuff to get big enough to draw the attention of some "moral" group.

I guarantee if there were ever a debate between them and I, its not me that will come out looking bad.

I freely admit to and own my "sin" they don't they point out sin in others to justify their own. I think the official term for that is organized religion.

There are a lot of hypocrites. There are also believers who aren't. I respect those, even if I disagree with their beliefs. My only point was that I only feel guilty for actions that hurt people, directly or indirectly, intentionally or unintentionally. I don't feel bad about writing stories that bring me, and others, pleasure, despite my Catholic upbringing.