Unpublished

[Darkniciad]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Boxlicker101
I have been reading those threads, and I am late, but maybe not too late. I might be able to describe an offered story in terms that would get past the censors but let prospective readers know what the story is about.



If I thought it was worthwhile, I would, but I am mostly referring to step relationships. I am going to try to offer a story about Stephanie and her stepfather, Roger, and see what happens. I don't believe I would try to get away with Little Mandy stories, though.

One thing I need though is a cover. How do I get one, since I can't draw water.

The current furor is over pseudo incest ( ie step ) being part of the general ban. It's no different than straight-up incest in the eyes of the distributors and publishers who are pulling things in the current wave.

You missed the boat, Box.

 

[manyeyedhydra]

Boat has sailed and gone down with all hands on deck.

 

[lovecraft68]

Boat has sailed and gone down with all hands on deck.

There is still a ton of it on Amazon including a fairly new one by Selena Kitt, something Lasso.

 

[manyeyedhydra]

There is still a ton of it on Amazon including a fairly new one by Selena Kitt, something Lasso.

Amazon doesn't deal with PayPal. They can stock or not stock whatever they like.

The other sites don't have that choice at the moment. I reluctantly concede to the other posters that it isn't censorship in the pedantic definition of the word, but eventually you do reach a point where the outcome looks exactly the same.

 

[PennLady]

When I was in college, one of my professors was from Russia. He told a story of an uncle of his (I believe) who told a joke about Stalin, and a few days later was arrested. I'm not sure they ever heard from or saw the uncle again. That is censorship.

Amazon deciding to stock, or not, an item -- even if just because Jeff Bezos doesn't want it -- is not censorship. It is a business decision, however ill-founded.

If the government tells you not to write it, or say it, then it's censorship.

 

[lovecraft68]

When I was in college, one of my professors was from Russia. He told a story of an uncle of his (I believe) who told a joke about Stalin, and a few days later was arrested. I'm not sure they ever heard from or saw the uncle again. That is censorship.

Amazon deciding to stock, or not, an item -- even if just because Jeff Bezos doesn't want it -- is not censorship. It is a business decision, however ill-founded.

If the government tells you not to write it, or say it, then it's censorship.

You are very right. And the Government knows that. There are ways to censor things without calling it censorship or saying "this is now verbotton"

One of those ways is to begin enforcing rules such as this. Now I am not crying conspiracy theory, but this seems sudden that MC/Visa are all of a sudden so concerned about this.

and paypal in the majority of people's cases is linked to a checking or savings account, not a credit card. So I am still unsure that their passing of the buck to the CC companies is indeed a fact.

 

[lovecraft68]

Amazon doesn't deal with PayPal. They can stock or not stock whatever they like.

The other sites don't have that choice at the moment. I reluctantly concede to the other posters that it isn't censorship in the pedantic definition of the word, but eventually you do reach a point where the outcome looks exactly the same.

Yes Amazon and paypal/e-bay are bitter enemies and Amazon has been handing them their heads. Which again makes me shake my head that they will throw away so much money here.

I agree that this can be described as business. But I will explain why this still seems grey to me.

Paypal does not actually sell anything. They are a service for merchants as well as consumers. They are a "template" for financial transactions. They are not a bank although I use my PP account as a slush fund savings account. You do not accrue interest, nor are there any types of fees other than your transaction fees.

As I said in my post to PL, they operate independent from MC/Visa and in many cases are a alternative to CC cards. They are generally linked to peoples bank accounts not their credit cards.

Aside from that here is why my "spidey sense" still tingles the word censorship.

They can skate on incest/rape/beastie because they are illegal activities. Now you can still argue that in the erotica sense they are simply fantasies albeit those off the beaten path, but if the law says its an illegal act they have grounds.

Now that they are talking about step incest they are heading into their "opinion" hence censorship.

Step incest is sex between non biological adults. Is is "sleazy?" yes, but not illegal anywhere.

In Selena's blog she points out that they seem to be focusing on sex between older women/men and younger women/men.

If the character is 18 their is nothing illegal here at all. It is sex between consenting adult which is legal across the board.

If they get away with this then they are now given the ability to turn around and say okay, every sexual act period will now be banned.

Under what grounds? If its not illegal then what is it? It is their choosing not to, but under what pretense other than stifling people's rights to sell and buy what they choose. to read and write what they choose.

I'm sorry, but to em this is still big brother all day long. And it will go further. I was looking at dreamstime today for a photo for a cover of a book I'm working on. I pay for my credits with paypal. How long before they say "no more lewd images" and then decide what images are lewd?

They are starting with what they feel most people consider distasteful, because it gives them the foot in the door. That foot will rapidly be followed by a shoulder.

In his site announcement Mark Coker says that hopefully the slop does not slip from here. Well if it does what is he going to do? The time to fight this is now.

Abolish real incest and rape and beastie okay fine. But step? age-play? BDSM? this is an infringement upon our rights. The fight needs to be fought here.

People like Coker and the others need to be actively pursuing other options, they need to not wait to be slapped down again, but to look for that company that is dying for a chunk of Pay pal's money.

Selena Kitt and Mark Coker and many others feeling the crunch are all pioneers in the field they need to continue to be so.

 

[PennLady]

You are very right. And the Government knows that. There are ways to censor things without calling it censorship or saying "this is now verbotton"

This is not censorship. This is business, and you may not like the way it is conducted, but it is business. If PayPal doesn't want to be involved in paying for certain types of books, then that is their right, even if you don't like it.

One of those ways is to begin enforcing rules such as this. Now I am not crying conspiracy theory, but this seems sudden that MC/Visa are all of a sudden so concerned about this.

Any business will watch the other players in that field and adjust their practices to follow what it deems the safest (and/or most profitable) path. Again, they are allowed. If MC and Visa want to avoid bad publicity or whatever else, then they may adjust their rules. It's still not censorship/ Inconvenience, perhaps, but no one is guaranteed ease of access to anything, just the right to freedom of expression.

and paypal in the majority of people's cases is linked to a checking or savings account, not a credit card. So I am still unsure that their passing of the buck to the CC companies is indeed a fact.

I know I sound like sr71 here, but do you know that to be true? That the majority of PayPal users link to a bank account? Has PayPal put that stat out. My husband does that, but a friend of mine links it to a credit card. As a consumer, you often don't think about the fees, etc., that are associated with CCs (you might, as you owned your own store, as you've said). Those all cut into a business's revenue and I can see them wanting to minimize that cut.

 

[PennLady]

Abolish real incest and rape and beastie okay fine. But step? age-play? BDSM? this is an infringement upon our rights. The fight needs to be fought here.

Why is it okay on the first three and not the others? Because you don't like the first three? What about those of us who don't like BDSM? Amazon (or Smashwords or whoever) deciding not to sell those topics does not infringe upon your rights. You have a right to freedom of speech and expression (and other things) but so does Amazon -- or Jeff Bezos -- and they don't have to sell anything they don't want.

People like Coker and the others need to be actively pursuing other options, they need to not wait to be slapped down again, but to look for that company that is dying for a chunk of Pay pal's money.

Selena Kitt and Mark Coker and many others feeling the crunch are all pioneers in the field they need to continue to be so.

I hope they can keep going. I do. But PayPal is not obligated to help them do so. I think one lesson people might take away is not to tie themselves to one payment provider, as SW did.

 

[lovecraft68]

This is not censorship. This is business, and you may not like the way it is conducted, but it is business. If PayPal doesn't want to be involved in paying for certain types of books, then that is their right, even if you don't like it.



Any business will watch the other players in that field and adjust their practices to follow what it deems the safest (and/or most profitable) path. Again, they are allowed. If MC and Visa want to avoid bad publicity or whatever else, then they may adjust their rules. It's still not censorship/ Inconvenience, perhaps, but no one is guaranteed ease of access to anything, just the right to freedom of expression.



I know I sound like sr71 here, but do you know that to be true? That the majority of PayPal users link to a bank account? Has PayPal put that stat out. My husband does that, but a friend of mine links it to a credit card. As a consumer, you often don't think about the fees, etc., that are associated with CCs (you might, as you owned your own store, as you've said). Those all cut into a business's revenue and I can see them wanting to minimize that cut.

I've been dealing with pay pal for over a decade. I have been aboard with e-bay since day one. I know hundreds of merchants in the collectible market that I have met through trade shows and conventions.

I have attended three e-bay live events around the country and even taught a workshop on shipping and handling charges at the one in Boston. I've attended the San Diego and Apple conventions multiple times as well as Wizard world. Just about everyone I have ever discussed e-bay and e-business with does not have their PP accounts hooked up to their credit cards.

Why would you? If paypal has to draw into your MC/Visa card to cover a purchase you are now being charged interest on that purchase.

Now I will make sure that I do not sound like SR and say that although I have a lot of experience in dealing with paypal and e-bay (which is their daddy) I do not know everything and can only speak of over ten years of experience and a shit load of conversations with hundreds of merchants that use it. (I do know of a couple who do in fact use their CC, but they are making hundreds of thousands a year so it may be worth it for them, to connect it to a card to have greater buying power for massive collections)

Again, this always comes down to who it effects, which determines how seriously it is taken.

Porn is business's dirty little secret, the most lucrative industry out there, but everyone denies they buy or watch it. Porn is infamous for never defending itself.

Let Paypal target something like, I don't know, let's go out on reach and say Twilight. They decide that a woman breeding with a vampire is distastful and will not allow merchants to carry the merchandise. Will it still go without a fight?

When they decide that sorcery is like witchcraft and therefore distastful so no more Harry Potter, does that go without a fight? Is it still just business?

When they say that the Caps suck so bad that Visa/MC say you can't by tickets with your card anymore what then?

When it hits home, people start caring. But most people don't want anyone to think porn is in their home.

Blows my mind in this day and age.

Everyone here can keep playing word games(including myself) and argue amongst ourselves, and sit around and do nothing or say "Okay, whatever"

Bottom line business or censorship this is a very bad sign for the future in general and not just that of erotica. The government wants to control us and they will start at the wallet. They will control your spending habits and lifestyle through limiting your options.

No one knows what is causing the CC companies to do this, perhaps their hand is being forced from higher above then them. Or perhaps not. no one will ever no for sure.

And although I enjoy mucking up shit from time to time, I am not trying to do it here. I am seriously disturbed by this, not as an erotica author, but as a citizen of this country, a country based on freedoms that are being taken away from us one degree at a time and this is one right here.

Agree or don't I'm not here to fight about it. Just trying to make a point, this is bigger than it appears.

 

[sr71plt]

And so you are yammering (and yammering) on a porn forum about. Must feel pretty impotent--or at least I'd think you would.

You'd have more impact if you went out into the street with a placard declaring, "I Write Incest; And It's Your Responsibility to Pay Me Money to Do It!"

 

[TxRad]

There is an easy solution to this problem. Get you a bumper sticker that reads: "Ask about my erotic Literature. One Half Off on Mondays."

 

[sr71plt]

There is an easy solution to this problem. Get you a bumper sticker that reads: "Ask about my erotic Literature. One Half Off on Mondays."

And another sticker below it saying, "If you wait till Tuesday, I take it all off"?

 

[PennLady]

My contribution, FWIW, to the noise on this topic: http://evemcfadden.wordpress.com/2012/02/26/lets-talk-censorship/

 

[TxRad]

And another sticker below it saying, "If you wait till Tuesday, I take it all off"?

In my case, I don't think that would drum up any business.

 

[PennLady]

I have attended three e-bay live events around the country and even taught a workshop on shipping and handling charges at the one in Boston. I've attended the San Diego and Apple conventions multiple times as well as Wizard world. Just about everyone I have ever discussed e-bay and e-business with does not have their PP accounts hooked up to their credit cards.

Why would you? If paypal has to draw into your MC/Visa card to cover a purchase you are now being charged interest on that purchase.

I would do it b/c I like that extra layer of protection, and I like limiting access to my personal bank account.

Again, this always comes down to who it effects, which determines how seriously it is taken.

It affects me b/c my publisher my shut down as a result of some or all of this. I still say it is not censorship. PayPal is a business, and when you partner with a business, you both agree to follow rules. If you don't like the rules, your choices may be a rock and a hard place -- go along or shut down at least until you can find an alternative -- but they are choices.

I could argue that my publisher shutting down is unfair to me. Why should they stop selling my book just b/c PayPal doesn't like one or two or the other authors, especially when my books don't go near the objectionable area? Why is it more important to shut down for those books than to stay open for me?

But it's their decision.

Let Paypal target something like, I don't know, let's go out on reach and say Twilight. They decide that a woman breeding with a vampire is distastful and will not allow merchants to carry the merchandise. Will it still go without a fight?

When they decide that sorcery is like witchcraft and therefore distastful so no more Harry Potter, does that go without a fight? Is it still just business?

The popularity of a work, or whether someone would fight about it, is not at issue. I have no idea how much "Twilight" contributes to PayPal's revenue. If PayPal decides they have something against Twilight, that is PayPal's right. They are a business, and that business, or the people that run it, are allowed to have opinions and expressions just as you are.

When they say that the Caps suck so bad that Visa/MC say you can't by tickets with your card anymore what then?

Use Discover.

When it hits home, people start caring. But most people don't want anyone to think porn is in their home.

Blows my mind in this day and age.

Well not everyone is as open-minded as you are.

Look, if a publisher rejects you, is that censorship? No, it's business. You are free to go elsewhere; you are free to write what you want and express yourself, and the publisher (or whatever) is free to express themselves by rejecting it.

The problem, really, is that Smashwords was too fundamentally tied in with PayPal and did not have an alternative. SW is welcome to find an alternative, but I know that's not easy.

 

[manyeyedhydra]

My contribution, FWIW, to the noise on this topic: http://evemcfadden.wordpress.com/2012/02/26/lets-talk-censorship/

I think my problem with the situation is this. It's not illegal. People are prepared to write it, people are prepared to sell it and people are prepared to buy it. If they're not able to do this then something is wrong.

We can argue the semantics of whether it's actual censorship until we're blue in the face, it makes little difference if the outcome is exactly the same. There are plenty of ways to ban something without explicitly banning it.

 

[PennLady]

I think my problem with the situation is this. It's not illegal. People are prepared to write it, people are prepared to sell it and people are prepared to buy it. If they're not able to do this then something is wrong.

They are able to do it elsewhere, although it may not be as easy. PayPal is saying that you cannot use our service to do "X." Why can they not do that?

We can argue the semantics of whether it's actual censorship until we're blue in the face, it makes little difference if the outcome is exactly the same. There are plenty of ways to ban something without explicitly banning it.

It is not banned.

You know, we've been going on about freedom of expression, speech, etc. I'm all for it. But -- you don't have the right to get paid for it. These things could be distributed for free; it would get around PayPal. Or, people could write paper checks; which I know, I said on another thread, people wouldn't want to do. But they might if they want the end product badly enough.

 

[manyeyedhydra]

It is not banned.

People want to sell it and can't. People want to buy it and can't. If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck...

 

[PennLady]

People want to sell it and can't. People want to buy it and can't. If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck...

It can be bought and sold, just not on those sites or via that payment option. I'm not saying this doesn't make things difficult. Like I said, I'm looking at my publisher closing down because of this as well. I'm not trying to say PayPal is in the right.

 

[Stella_Omega]

I think my problem with the situation is this. It's not illegal. People are prepared to write it, people are prepared to sell it and people are prepared to buy it. If they're not able to do this then something is wrong.

We can argue the semantics of whether it's actual censorship until we're blue in the face, it makes little difference if the outcome is exactly the same. There are plenty of ways to ban something without explicitly banning it.

You can arrange to have them send you cash wrapped in aluminum foil, if you want to.

 

[sr71plt]

We do seem to be going around in circles here with people saying what is can't be because they somehow are entitled.

I've been busy with one of my publishers checking over everything to see that all of the tags and blurbs and excerpts are in order for survival. If there's something in there I can't have sold at the moment--until/unless the market rebalances--I'll just pull it to protect my other works--and the otherwise permitted works of the other authors in the publishing houses I'm in.

I don't write erotica because I need the money.

 

[R. Richard]

As far as Amazon goes, I have been told by people who have had it happen, that incest stories will be pulled from Amazon faster than you can say motherfucker.

 

[lovecraft68]

We do seem to be going around in circles here with people saying what is can't be because they somehow are entitled.

I've been busy with one of my publishers checking over everything to see that all of the tags and blurbs and excerpts are in order for survival. If there's something in there I can't have sold at the moment--until/unless the market rebalances--I'll just pull it to protect my other works--and the otherwise permitted works of the other authors in the publishing houses I'm in.

I don't write erotica because I need the money.

The only thing any of us are entitled to is our basic rights. And this is the beginning of those rights being taken away.

You're doing the smart thing double checking your work and pulling anything that will get you in dutch.

Thing is you will be doing that on a fairly regular basis as they continue to tighten the noose.

I also don't put anything up to put food on my table. Unfortunately many do and that is who I feel for. This is will do even more for the economy that is rumored to be bouncing.

The point is whether you rely on this as income or not it should be of concern to you and everyone else.

 

[lovecraft68]

As far as Amazon goes, I have been told by people who have had it happen, that incest stories will be pulled from Amazon faster than you can say motherfucker.

Real incest yes, but supposedly the pseudo crap is still going up there, at least as far as I can tell. I have been doing searches and checking publication dates and a ton of step shit has been put up this month.