What you can get away with in a Science fiction or fantasy context

[Wifetheif]

What you are looking at, is a panel from Alex Raymond's "Flash Gordon" Comic Strip from a Sunday in 1935. Think about that. This image ran in millions of Sunday papers and no one batted an eye. My Dad, who was born in 1930, learned how to read from the Flash Gordon comic strip. This is exactly what it looks like, Dale Arden stripped to the waist and flogged with definite lesbian overtones. This strip was read by everyone, moms, dads, kids, teens, and grandparents, and ALL accepted this image and others like it without complaint or outrage! The moral of the story is that you can get away with just about anything if you couch it in a fantasy or Science Fiction context. Imagine this image running in a newspaper today. People would be outside the newspaper offices with picket signs. It sure as shoot isn't Garfield! Raymond got away with stuff like this all the time. The fact that he is still considered by many to be the single greatest comic strip artist of all time helped. In one strip he pulled off a strip search in a comic strip! Dale was sent to a Mongo prison. Two very mannish-looking female guards take utter delight in tearing off Dale's clothes. Her prison duds, when she finally gets them are just a step above actual nudity, triangular, open-backed top, micro-mini, and, of course, punishing heels! There is a moral for all of us artists and writers here. Add a bit of magic, make it interplanetary, and toss in a muscular dude and a bodacious babe and you too can subvert the values of middle America and perhaps become internationally famous.

 

[yibala]

I think there's truth to this. Perhaps for the same reason, speculative fiction genres have always permitted commentary on social issues that would be too controversial if stated in a nonfiction or contemporary fiction context. The genres are detached enough from "reality" that standard societal rules don't apply.

On the other edge of that sword, some readers simply don't take spec fiction seriously, because it isn't real enough for them.

-Yib
My stories

 

[ronde]

Very true. I've had stories rejected for stating the current politics of a situation, but had sci-fi stories accepted that mirrored current politics but in a future time.

 

[EmilyMiller]

What you are looking at, is a panel from Alex Raymond's "Flash Gordon" Comic Strip from a Sunday in 1935. Think about that. This image ran in millions of Sunday papers and no one batted an eye. My Dad, who was born in 1930, learned how to read from the Flash Gordon comic strip. This is exactly what it looks like, Dale Arden stripped to the waist and flogged with definite lesbian overtones. This strip was read by everyone, moms, dads, kids, teens, and grandparents, and ALL accepted this image and others like it without complaint or outrage! The moral of the story is that you can get away with just about anything if you couch it in a fantasy or Science Fiction context. Imagine this image running in a newspaper today. People would be outside the newspaper offices with picket signs. It sure as shoot isn't Garfield! Raymond got away with stuff like this all the time. The fact that he is still considered by many to be the single greatest comic strip artist of all time helped. In one strip he pulled off a strip search in a comic strip! Dale was sent to a Mongo prison. Two very mannish-looking female guards take utter delight in tearing off Dale's clothes. Her prison duds, when she finally gets them are just a step above actual nudity, triangular, open-backed top, micro-mini, and, of course, punishing heels! There is a moral for all of us artists and writers here. Add a bit of magic, make it interplanetary, and toss in a muscular dude and a bodacious babe and you too can subvert the values of middle America and perhaps become internationally famous.

View attachment 2281044

I like the illustration .

Em

 

[TheRedChamber]

See also the original Star Trek interracial kiss - true the heroic (and famously womanizing) captain had to be mind-controlled into kissing an attractive black woman by an all-powerful God-like entity - but it was able to boldy go where no other TV show could have gone before.

The later Star Treks played with this as well - it's not (quite) lesbian if the woman the female character is kissing is the new host of the alien symbiant that was her dead husband - or something.

Basically, I think what happens is that the censors say - "We don't like the fact you're including racially tolerant/homosexual content in your shows" and the producers go "No, you've got it all wrong. You see the Trill are a symbiotic lifeform where a long-lived parasitic organism binds their mental processes to the humanoid host creating a new gestalt entity which has the memories of all the previous..." At which point the censors eyes glaze over and they go, "Fine, whatever."

 

[Bamagan]

See also the original Star Trek interracial kiss - true the heroic (and famously womanizing) captain had to be mind-controlled into kissing an attractive black woman by an all-powerful God-like entity - but it was able to boldy go where no other TV show could have gone before.

To be fair, I don't recall Kirk ever macking on his subordinates outside of the various mind control or amnesia episodes. I could be forgetting some since it's been a while, but he mostly confined his smooching to diplomats, robots, shapeshifters, foreign dignitaries, and the like. I'm excluding the new movies, where I understand Carol Marcus was in Starfleet, but I doubt Abrams and his team did more than glance at the wiki before making their stuff.

 

[TheRedChamber]

To be fair, I don't recall Kirk ever macking on his subordinates outside of the various mind control or amnesia episodes. I could be forgetting some since it's been a while, but he mostly confined his smooching to diplomats, robots, shapeshifters, foreign dignitaries, and the like. I'm excluding the new movies, where I understand Carol Marcus was in Starfleet, but I doubt Abrams and his team did more than glance at the wiki before making their stuff.

While making an exhaustive list of the sexual conquests of James Tiberius would be an exhausting (and suitably nerdy) task, I dare say you are right for the most part.

 

[Bramblethorn]

See also the original Star Trek interracial kiss - true the heroic (and famously womanizing) captain had to be mind-controlled into kissing an attractive black woman by an all-powerful God-like entity - but it was able to boldy go where no other TV show could have gone before.

It was certainly an important moment, but whether it was the first interracial kiss on US TV (as often claimed) or even on Star Trek is arguable. "First black-white lip-to-lip kiss" might be more accurate: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_interracial_kiss_on_television

Shatner gets three appearances in that list, which seems kind of fitting.

 

[AwkwardlySet]

That is the beauty of fantasy and sci-fi. You can twist and turn social norms; you can change morality; you can invert dynamics that exist in the real world. The funny thing is that I've yet to read any fantasy or sci-fi work that portrays a reality that is worse than the one that exists in our own world, usually behind the curtains.
The real world gets away with far more than any fantasy or sci-fi work.

 

[Bamagan]

That is the beauty of fantasy and sci-fi. You can twist and turn social norms; you can change morality; you can invert dynamics that exist in the real world. The funny thing is that I've yet to read any fantasy or sci-fi work that portrays a reality that is worse than the one that exists in our own world, usually behind the curtains.
The real world gets away with far more than any fantasy or sci-fi work.

I'd argue 1984 is a little worse.

 

[nice90sguy]

1930's were less prurient than later decades, undoubtedly.

As a congenital Sci Fi nerd (my father was an avid reader and writer of SF), I got most my youthful BDSM jollies from the sex-bits in science fiction.

Another way of pasding under the radar is to couch sex in "humor" -- witness the images first few Mad comics (from the early 1950s).

OMNI, the short-lived SF spinoff from Playboy, was edited by Robert Sheckley, whose own sexy SF stories appeared frequently in Playboy. They were similar to Woody Allen's "Sleeper" in style. Absurd, playful. But a lot sexier.

Humorous SF is still my preferred mode of writing.

 

[AwkwardlySet]

I'd argue 1984 is a little worse.

1984 is so "bad" exactly because it is based entirely on the real world seen in somewhat darker tones. If you compare it to modern Western society, sure, it is much worse. Compare it to some totalitarian systems that existed in history and still exist in some countries and yeah, it is much harder to tell. It has been a while since I've read 1984, but I don't believe anyone was getting raped and physically tortured in it.

 

[Bamagan]

1984 is so "bad" exactly because it is based entirely on the real world seen in somewhat darker tones. If you compare it to modern Western society, sure, it is much worse. Compare it to some totalitarian systems that existed in history and still exist in some countries and yeah, it is much harder to tell. It has been a while since I've read 1984, but I don't believe anyone was getting raped and physically tortured in it.

Physical torture, yes:

There were times when it went on and on until the cruel, wicked, unforgivable thing seemed to him not that the guards continued to beat him but that he could not force himself into losing consciousness.

Rape? Not on screen, but no reason to believe it wasn't happening.
Still, my point remains that the world depicted in the book is worse than ours. Maybe only by a degree or two, and maybe only by deliberately taking the bad stuff in ours and dialing it up a bit, but still seems to fit as a counterexample to your comment. Perhaps dystopian future settings were not what you had in mind for sci/fi and fantasy worlds in your previous comment, so I may have given you a (clockwork) orange in a conversation about bad apples.

 

[TheRedChamber]

It was certainly an important moment, but whether it was the first interracial kiss on US TV (as often claimed) or even on Star Trek is arguable. "First black-white lip-to-lip kiss" might be more accurate: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_interracial_kiss_on_television

Shatner gets three appearances in that list, which seems kind of fitting.

Yeah, okay, you are technically correct - race and racism are peculiar things though and it was certainly more taboo than those involving Asian or half-Asian actresses. It still feels like it was the one that counted. Alas, the Wikipedia article doesn't tell us what the first 'black-white lip-to-lip not-mind-controlled kiss' was.

 

[Bamagan]

Yeah, okay, you are technically correct - race and racism are peculiar things though and it was certainly more taboo than those involving Asian or half-Asian actresses. It still feels like it was the one that counted. Alas, the Wikipedia article doesn't tell us what the first 'black-white lip-to-lip not-mind-controlled kiss' was.

Possibly this. Spoiler: it's British, not American, but they actually had two such kisses in two different shows before the Star Trek episode.

 

[Bramblethorn]

Yeah, okay, you are technically correct - race and racism are peculiar things though and it was certainly more taboo than those involving Asian or half-Asian actresses. It still feels like it was the one that counted. Alas, the Wikipedia article doesn't tell us what the first 'black-white lip-to-lip not-mind-controlled kiss' was.

I'd agree with Black-White being more taboo, but in that era White-Asian wasn't just "technically" interracial. At the time of Shatner's 1958 kiss there were still something like ten US states where it was illegal for Whites to marry Asians.

 

[EmilyMiller]

but I don't believe anyone was getting raped and physically tortured in it.

Rats put in a cage strapped to Winston’s face. Just good clean reluctance. And he probably came.

Em

 

[MillieDynamite]

Roddenberry wanted to show the underside of a woman's breasts, as opposed to the acceptable cleavage shot nearly to the areola, and the censor said no in the 1960s. But in the 80s, there are several Next Gen episodes where he did exactly that. He famously asked one censor in the 60s, "Are you afraid that moss is growing there?" Of course, the 80s weren't the 60s. The television restrictions were looser by then. But, according to him, it was still a difficult task to show the 'lovely lower curve.'

I just checked, no moss on my underboobage.

 

[AwkwardlySet]

Rats put in a cage strapped to Winston’s face. Just good clean reluctance. And he probably came.

Em

To both @Bamagan and @LittleNerd (btw, that name isn't taken on Lit... just saying)
The book is a dystopian view of modern Western society. It is horrific, but in comparison to what used to be the real world just a few hundred years ago...
You had far worse in some parts of the world; people of different colors were treated worse than animals; religious torture and murders; people being skillfully impaled through their bodies so that they could live as long as possible and suffer and serve as an example; brutal rape and body mutilations; brutal murders of family members in front of the eyes of the person being tortured; etc.
I stand by what I said - The real world was always worse, if not today, then a hundred years ago, or a thousand years ago, or three thousand years ago.
There is nothing written in fantasy (to my, of course, limited and modest knowledge) that is worse than some period in human history in some part of the world. If you know such fantasy or sci-fi work, then by all means name it, and I would be very happy to extend my knowledge of those fields, but 1984 is definitely not such an example.

 

[EmilyMiller]

To both @Bamagan and @LittleNerd (btw, that name isn't taken on Lit... just saying)
The book is a dystopian view of modern Western society. It is horrific, but in comparison to what used to be the real world just a few hundred years ago...
You had far worse in some parts of the world; people of different colors were treated worse than animals; religious torture and murders; people being skillfully impaled through their bodies so that they could live as long as possible and suffer and serve as an example; brutal rape and body mutilations; brutal murders of family members in front of the eyes of the person being tortured; etc.
I stand by what I said - The real world was always worse, if not today, then a hundred years ago, or a thousand years ago, or three thousand years ago.
There is nothing written in fantasy (to my, of course, limited and modest knowledge) that is worse than some period in human history in some part of the world. If you know such fantasy or sci-fi work, then by all means name it, and I would be very happy to extend my knowledge of those fields, but 1984 is definitely not such an example.

Not my point @bignerd. You said no torture in E A Blair’s seminal work. Room 101 disagrees .

Em

 

[AwkwardlySet]

Not my point @bignerd. You said no torture in E A Blair’s seminal work. Room 101 disagrees .

Em

That user actually exists but yeah, point taken.
You even remembered the room number... NERD.

 

[EmilyMiller]

That user actually exists but yeah, point taken.
You even remembered the room number... NERD.

It’s a common English phrase. Not sure how many people know it’s origin.

Em

 

[AwkwardlySet]

It’s a common English phrase. Not sure how many people know it’s origin.

Em

I meant - point taken about the torture.
I also meant that you tagged a random user and now he is going to think you are stalking him

 

[EmilyMiller]

I meant - point taken about the torture.
I also meant that you tagged a random user and now he is going to think you are stalking him

Makes a change to be that way round I guess.

Em

 

[Bamagan]

To both @Bamagan and @LittleNerd (btw, that name isn't taken on Lit... just saying)
The book is a dystopian view of modern Western society. It is horrific, but in comparison to what used to be the real world just a few hundred years ago...
You had far worse in some parts of the world; people of different colors were treated worse than animals; religious torture and murders; people being skillfully impaled through their bodies so that they could live as long as possible and suffer and serve as an example; brutal rape and body mutilations; brutal murders of family members in front of the eyes of the person being tortured; etc.
I stand by what I said - The real world was always worse, if not today, then a hundred years ago, or a thousand years ago, or three thousand years ago.
There is nothing written in fantasy (to my, of course, limited and modest knowledge) that is worse than some period in human history in some part of the world. If you know such fantasy or sci-fi work, then by all means name it, and I would be very happy to extend my knowledge of those fields, but 1984 is definitely not such an example.

This discussion feels increasingly pointless. You seem to be suggesting that if the setting of a story is not itself worse than the worst possible event in reality then it is not a valid counterclaim to your original assertion of fantasy worlds never being worse than the real one. My assertion is that if the setting in general is demonstrably worse than the real world, then the depths to which it sinks are likely to be correspondingly lower, even if the author doesn't feel the need to drag us there to witness such atrocities. It feels like the goalposts are kind of moving, though, with each additional clarification, so I think we're just talking past each other and suggest we table the issue as unresolvable.