Call for discussion re: alt.startrek.creative.pg-13
shanna...@pnx.com
This is an official call for discussion to create an offshoot
of alt.startrek.creative that will answer the pleas for no slash and
no graphic adult stories.
The proposed new group would be alt.startrek.creative.pg-13
Natch, stories posted there would also be posted on a.s.c., just
like stories posted on a.s.c.erotica are also posted on a.s.c., but
it should satisfy those begging for a family-friendly group.
I'm just offering my services to help in the creation of the thing.
These people's requests are reasonable, in a sense, but no
way should a.s.c. change. I believe a new group is the way
to go. It will take some work to get it accepted, but Trek
groups are popular, so it shouldn't be too hard.
shan...@pnx.com (use this for replies)
Webmaster for ST: The Ultimate Fantasy (adults only)
http://www.serve.com/Shannara/index.html
George Morgan
Ms. Shannara:
This would be a Good Thing if it flies. When I logged on the first few
times, about all I was getting was the slash stuff and other things that
triggered the Great Gay Stories Flame War. While this has passed, the
responses in the news-group have showed the need for a more general
newsgroup for those who would like to not read about Kirk and Spock
boinking each other, among other things. Second, the idea of a Mirror
Universe to ASCE appeals to me.
The only real concern that I have are the spammers, the people posting
their ads about the various forms of Adult alleged-entertainment all over
the alt. This is perhaps the Big problem to the acceptance of ASCE to the
slashers. If you want a slash-free environment, you are going to have to
deal with the spammers, or Creative/PG-13 will surely meet the same low
acceptance rate as Creative/Erotica.
I look forward to the response.
George D. Morgan
shanna...@pnx.com wrote in article <337b147e...@news.pnx.com>...
Simhomer
To Shannara and all other interested parties,
This is an excellent suggestion and one I would fully support.
Nevertheless,
as most anyone who browses the Usenet Trek groups can attest, it would
be virtually impossible to guarantee the new group would stay spam-free
and
family-friendly -- unless it was a *moderated* group. IMHO, if you don't
have definite, enforced guidelines from the start, you'll be wasting
time
and bandwidth.
The discussion of moderation in ASC is an old one. It seems that a lot
of
the authors who oppose it do so out of fear of censorship. Whether or
not
this concern is valid, I don't believe it would be as much of an issue
in a PG-13 group since its purpose would be to *censor* out material
deemed inappropriate to minors.
What *is* appropriate material might become the subject of much heated
debate, of course; that's why I think it should be unequivocally spelled
out
in the group's FAQ.
So, if a *moderated* PG-13 group is on the table, I say go for it. :)
Lynda Simhomer
(simh...@buffnet.net)
Eric Bohlman
shanna...@pnx.com wrote:
: The proposed new group would be alt.startrek.creative.pg-13
: Natch, stories posted there would also be posted on a.s.c., just
: like stories posted on a.s.c.erotica are also posted on a.s.c., but
: it should satisfy those begging for a family-friendly group.
alt.* is an international hierarchy, but "pg-13" is a US-specific term.
alt.startrek.creative.non-sexual would be a reasonable name, but
unfortunately it matches /sex/ which would make it a spam target. Maybe
alt.startrek.creative.all-ages would work.
Webbie
[Did you all miss me? I doubt it] :-)
Anyhow, my two cents ... Shannara's idea is quite sound. Eric brings up an
interesting point though...
Might I humbly suggest:
alt.startrek.creative.family
or alt.startrek.creative.family-oriented?
This would (as much as can be expected in cyberworld) likely keep the adult
spammers away. (one hopes)
In article <ebohlmanE...@netcom.com>, eboh...@netcom.com (Eric Bohlman)
wrote:
Eric Bohlman
Webbie (webw...@hotmail.com) wrote:
: [Did you all miss me? I doubt it] :-)
: Anyhow, my two cents ... Shannara's idea is quite sound. Eric brings up an
: interesting point though...
: Might I humbly suggest:
: alt.startrek.creative.family
: or alt.startrek.creative.family-oriented?
That particular usage of "family" is also somewhat US/UK specific (with a
nasty pedigree dating back to the early Victorian era (I actually typed
"error" here initially) when Thomas Bowdler published "the Family
Shakespeare" and gave us the verb "to bowdlerize"). It's also potentially
ambiguous.
shanna...@pnx.com
On 17 May 1997 04:57:16 GMT, allr...@ix.netcom.com(Jessica Krucek)
wrote:
>
>
>
> My vote's for just one newsgroup, since I helped build a newsgroup,
>and saw it overrrun with spam before I even could SEE it.
>
> Newbies know where asc is, and if stories are labelled, there
>shou;dn't be a problem.
>
>
> - Jessica
The problem is some people object to having to sort through
the slash and NC-17 posts. This would give them an alternative.
Sort of like a.s.c.e was intended as a branch alternative for
folks looking for nothing but slash and NC-17. a.s.c.e was
certainly not intended to be the only place slash was posted,
but, as I understand it, a place where slash and NC-17 was
concentrated. It would be a similar idea with the new group,
and, by the way, I am definitely open to suggestions about the
name. PG-13 is U.S. specific I guess. I suppose "family" would
be okay, although we do intend to allow sexy stories, just not
graphic stuff (which I personally enjoy, but I'm trying to address
two groups of people here -- those that just don't like slash, and
those that don't want to see any NC-17 type stories at all in their
group. a.s.c. is operating beautifully as it is, no need to change.
We just need to make a branch group where people can look
for a concentration of non-slash and non-adult stories.
Sort of like a genzine as opposed to a slash zine.
Marlissa Campbell
shanna...@pnx.com wrote:
>This is an official call for discussion to create an offshoot
>of a.s.c. that will answer the pleas for no slash and no
>graphic adult stories.
>The proposed new group would be alt.startrek.creative.pg-13
>Natch, stories posted there would also be posted here, but
>it should satisfy those begging for a family-friendly group.
I think it would be useful to clarify the *purpose* of this proposed
new group. Is it strictly so that the squeamish don't have to even
see headers for R & NC-17 stories? Or is it an attempt to promote
writing of fanfiction that would be suitable for children to read or
have read to them? If the former, then I don't really see the point -
I've never had any trouble using the headers to identify stuff I
didn't want to retrieve or read. If the latter, then the question is
whether there are writers who would like to write and post more
family-oriented fare, but who have been put off by the proliferation
of adult stories. Is that the case?
I'm curious because, while I like having the full spectrum available
to me, I would love to have a source of Star Trek stories that would
suitable for sharing with my children. As has been pointed out by
others previously, even a G rating is no guaruntee that the material
will be suitable for, or of any interest to, children. While I bet
I'm not the only one who would be grateful for some children's
stories, I would question whether there's enough interest to keep an
entirely separate ng viable.
Are there possible alternatives to consider? - such as a separate
website (or a corner of the current archive) where "family-friendly"
stories could be archived (whether they were first posted here or
not)?
>I'm just offering my services to help in the creation of the thing.
And it's very generous of you too. I've no doubt it's a lot of work.
Just some thoughts from a mom raising 2d generation Star Trek fans,
and who is dead weary of "Goosebumps."
Marlissa
Ruth Gifford
On 16 May 1997 22:45:48 GMT, Jeanita wrote:
>
>Eric Bohlman (eboh...@netcom.com) wrote:
>:
>: alt.* is an international hierarchy, but "pg-13" is a US-specific term.
>: unfortunately it matches /sex/ which would make it a spam target. Maybe
>: alt.startrek.creative.all-ages would work.
>
>What about a.s.c.juvenile?
Another idea would be ascya (sounds like a name for an elf, doesn't it), or
alt.startrek.creative.young_adult. Young adult is the publishing category
that most closely corresponds to PG-13. Both bookstores and libraries use it
to separate the picture books and kid's books from the stuff for the teen
set.
Ruth
--
***************************************************
* Ruth | FAQ Maintainer for *
* Gifford | alt.startrek.creative.erotica *
*-------------------------------------------------*
* Better living thru TrekSmut--See for Yourself! *
* http://www.capital.net/users/rjs1/asce *
***************************************************
"To hell with your assumptions. I've got problems
of my own. Just when it looks like everything in
my miserable little life is starting to go well, my
father up and dies, and the love that dare not speak
its name has set up shopkeeping in my guest room."
"The Life, Thoughts and Deeds of Hieronymous Jobs"
Emily Gifford
Zepp
On Fri, 16 May 1997 20:05:36 GMT, eboh...@netcom.com (Eric Bohlman)
wrote:
>Webbie (webw...@hotmail.com) wrote:
>: [Did you all miss me? I doubt it] :-)
;-)> 'Nuff said... <evil wolvish grin>
>: Anyhow, my two cents ... Shannara's idea is quite sound. Eric brings up an
>: interesting point though...
>
>: Might I humbly suggest:
>: alt.startrek.creative.family
>: or alt.startrek.creative.family-oriented?
>
>That particular usage of "family" is also somewhat US/UK specific (with a
>nasty pedigree dating back to the early Victorian era (I actually typed
>"error" here initially) when Thomas Bowdler published "the Family
>Shakespeare" and gave us the verb "to bowdlerize"). It's also potentially
>ambiguous.
Out of the various suggestions, I think probably the most useful and
international is alt.startrek.creative.all-ages. I admit to having
little interest in such an NG myself; OTOH, I fully support its right
to exist, and if by doing so, it will relieve us of some of the
outraged wails and wanks, then this cannot but be a Good Thing!
So, I support, and say, count my vote as a yes to form that group.
Might not see me in it very often, but I'm all for more peace and
quiet!
Greywolf the Wanderer
--borrowing Zepp's account.
--header munged to foil spambots; remove the extra "p"
Taffy
On Sun, 18 May 1997, Zepp wrote:
>Out of the various suggestions, I think probably the most useful and
>international is alt.startrek.creative.all-ages. I admit to having
>little interest in such an NG myself; OTOH, I fully support its right
>to exist, and if by doing so, it will relieve us of some of the
>outraged wails and wanks
<sarcasm mode on> Oh, but I've been so looking forward to screaming for
everyone to put the boring het stories over on asc.all-ages where they
belong. <sarcasm mode off>
<deep breath> Okay, that's as much of a rant as you're going to see from
me, simply because I promised myself that I would not get overly pissy.
(What's that you say? Too late? Oh. Drat.)
Now, to quote Shannara's original post on creating a children-friendly
group:
>This is an official call for discussion to create an offshoot
>of alt.startrek.creative that will answer the pleas for no slash and
>no graphic adult stories.
Why 'no slash?'
You see, contrary to popular belief, not all slash stories are NC-17 or
even R. There are a couple beautiful Chakotay/Paris stories that are
rated PG. (And before anyone asks, I don't think the author wanted to
post here. Gee, I wonder why. Everyone around here is so sweet and
accepting of -- oops! Slipped into sarcasm mode again. Sorry 'bout
that.) These are very good, non-explicit stories about two men in love.
In my opinion as a teacher and as a gay woman, such stories are very
appropriate reading for young adults.
Taffy, hoping she won't get flamed for revealing that she's a teacher.
<pause><examines the sarcasm filter><hits it experimentally><sigh> This
thing's broken!
shanna...@pnx.com
On Sat, 17 May 1997 16:44:40 GMT, cpad...@mail.idt.net (Marlissa
Campbell) wrote:
>shanna...@pnx.com wrote:
>
>>This is an official call for discussion to create an offshoot
>>of a.s.c. that will answer the pleas for no slash and no
>>graphic adult stories.
>
Well, I think a newsgroup is the way to go. It's basically the same
premise as a.s.c.e in that it's a place to find a concentration of
non-slash and non-NC-17 stories. I had envisioned up to an R
rating, but maybe that's too racy for a family group. Folks can
always come here to read the juicy stuff. Maybe PG-13 is the
highest rating that should be on the family group.
shanna...@pnx.com
On 18 May 1997 01:46:28 GMT, umbj...@cc.umanitoba.ca (Natalie Kim
Bjorklund) wrote:
>I like this idea but...
>
>We had this PG13 rule on alt.startrek.uss-amagosa. It didn't work.
>Some people (myself included) pushed the limit to an occasional R and
>then another writer just plain busted the thing wide open with an
>outright NC-17. (Not that I neccessarily think that was a bad thing).
>
>It won't fly without a moderator. The temptation is too great. But if you
>get a moderator I'd LOVE to post there. I'd even clean up my moderately R
>stuff to bring it in line with a PG-13 guideline IF you get a moderator.
>
>Natalie
That's a valid idea -- a moderated group. What do others think about
having the new family group as a moderated group? I'll have to look
up the technical aspects on how to create a moderated group, but in
the meantime, let's see how many would favor a moderated family group.
Ruth Gifford
On 18 May 1997 01:46:28 GMT, Natalie Kim Bjorklund wrote:
>
>I like this idea but...
>
>We had this PG13 rule on alt.startrek.uss-amagosa. It didn't work.
>Some people (myself included) pushed the limit to an occasional R and
>then another writer just plain busted the thing wide open with an
>outright NC-17. (Not that I neccessarily think that was a bad thing).
>
>It won't fly without a moderator. The temptation is too great. But if you
>get a moderator I'd LOVE to post there. I'd even clean up my moderately R
>stuff to bring it in line with a PG-13 guideline IF you get a moderator.
The one thing to remember is that the moderator(s) will have to have a very
careful set of guidelines. How much "mushy stuff" is too much? How much
violence is too much? There are romantic moments in PG-13 movies and in
young adult novels and there is a fair amount of violence and scary stuff in
both as well (has any one looked at a Goosebumps book--ewwww!).
My gratuitious advice (after all, I've only written *1* story that would
qualify for such a group) would be that the first order of business on the
new ng would be a long discussion of the standards by the people who would be
reading and writing for the new group.
Another thing that I should mention here. Will stories on the new group be
crossposted to ASC? Will stories on the new group be archived in the
ASC/ASCE archive? If so, whoever writes the FAQ might want to bing the
posting suggestions in line with the ASC posting suggestions.
Ruth
ofering to help the FAQ writer and Maintainer if they'd like somone to
beta-read.
bl...@funpics.com
On 17 May 1997 16:40:19 GMT, "George Morgan" <pata...@evansville.net>
wrote:
>Ms. Krucek:
>
>I sympathize. It must have hurt to see that happen.
>
>However, there have been debates, discussions, and flame-wars over the
>presence or absence of certain types of stories, and while the slashers
>have their place to go, others with different tastes do not. I think that
>Shannara is doing a service by offering a place where the less slash-minded
>can go and be free of slash.
>
>George D. Morgan
>
>gund...@evansville.net
>
>
>Jessica Krucek <allr...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in article
><5ljdrc$d...@dfw-ixnews11.ix.netcom.com>...
>>
>>
>>
We also need to address the folks who want a group
free of ANY graphic sex, whether it be slash or hetero.
The best thing would be for the new group --
shall we call it alt.startrek.creative.family ?
(I think most folks think of the term "family"
in a non-sexual way) Adults wanting to read graphic hetero stories
will just have to come to a.s.c. I enjoy a good steamy hetero
story myself, but I can get that easily on a.s.c.
That's my take on the thing, but let's see what
is actually wanted in the new group.
Aleph Press
shanna...@pnx.com wrote:
: That's a valid idea -- a moderated group. What do others think about
: having the new family group as a moderated group? I'll have to look
: up the technical aspects on how to create a moderated group, but in
: the meantime, let's see how many would favor a moderated family group.
I've been saying all along this will only work if you get it moderated.
You just need some suck -- er, kind person to volunteer as moderator.
--
If blacks were supporting whites through their taxes, regardless of need
or income, while whites sat back and insulted their intelligence and
culture, we would call it racism. If women were supporting men through
their taxes, regardless of need or income, while men called them lazy
whining slackers, we would call it sexism. When it's the young and the
old, we call it Social Security.
-- Alara Rogers, Aleph Press
al...@netcom.com
All Aleph Press stories are available at http://www.mindspring.com/~alara.
George Morgan
Ms. Shannara:
This is worth looking into.
George D. Morgan
> That's a valid idea -- a moderated group. What do others think about
> having the new family group as a moderated group? I'll have to look
> up the technical aspects on how to create a moderated group, but in
> the meantime, let's see how many would favor a moderated family group.
>
shanna...@pnx.com
On 17 May 1997 03:15:46 GMT, eres...@cyberg8t.com (Ruth Gifford)
wrote:
>On 16 May 1997 22:45:48 GMT, Jeanita wrote:
>>
>>Eric Bohlman (eboh...@netcom.com) wrote:
>>:
>>: alt.* is an international hierarchy, but "pg-13" is a US-specific term.
>>: alt.startrek.creative.non-sexual would be a reasonable name, but
>>: unfortunately it matches /sex/ which would make it a spam target. Maybe
>>: alt.startrek.creative.all-ages would work.
>>:
>>
>>What about a.s.c.juvenile?
>
>Another idea would be ascya (sounds like a name for an elf, doesn't it), or
>alt.startrek.creative.young_adult. Young adult is the publishing category
>that most closely corresponds to PG-13. Both bookstores and libraries use it
>to separate the picture books and kid's books from the stuff for the teen
>set.
>
>Ruth
>
That sounds like an excellent name. I'd thought of youth, but it
sounds too much like "child." Young_adult seems a pretty good
description of the content.
And hey ;) although "young adult" is a bookstore "label" indicating
teen, any of us adults can consider ourselves young adults (no matter
what age we are. Hehe.
>--
>***************************************************
>* Ruth | FAQ Maintainer for *
>* Gifford | alt.startrek.creative.erotica *
>*-------------------------------------------------*
>* Better living thru TrekSmut--See for Yourself! *
>* http://www.capital.net/users/rjs1/asce *
>***************************************************
>
>"To hell with your assumptions. I've got problems
>of my own. Just when it looks like everything in
>my miserable little life is starting to go well, my
>father up and dies, and the love that dare not speak
>its name has set up shopkeeping in my guest room."
>
>"The Life, Thoughts and Deeds of Hieronymous Jobs"
>Emily Gifford
>
shan...@pnx.com (use this for replies)
shanna...@pnx.com
On Sun, 18 May 1997 08:41:19 -0400, Taffy <mtsa...@wam.umd.edu>
wrote:
>On Sun, 18 May 1997, Zepp wrote:
>
>>Out of the various suggestions, I think probably the most useful and
>>international is alt.startrek.creative.all-ages. I admit to having
>>little interest in such an NG myself; OTOH, I fully support its right
>>to exist, and if by doing so, it will relieve us of some of the
>>outraged wails and wanks
>
><sarcasm mode on> Oh, but I've been so looking forward to screaming for
>everyone to put the boring het stories over on asc.all-ages where they
>belong. <sarcasm mode off>
>
><deep breath> Okay, that's as much of a rant as you're going to see from
>me, simply because I promised myself that I would not get overly pissy.
>(What's that you say? Too late? Oh. Drat.)
>
Hehehe. Good one!
>Now, to quote Shannara's original post on creating a children-friendly
>group:
>
>>This is an official call for discussion to create an offshoot
>>of alt.startrek.creative that will answer the pleas for no slash and
>>no graphic adult stories.
>
>Why 'no slash?'
>
>You see, contrary to popular belief, not all slash stories are NC-17 or
>even R. There are a couple beautiful Chakotay/Paris stories that are
>rated PG. (And before anyone asks, I don't think the author wanted to
>post here. Gee, I wonder why. Everyone around here is so sweet and
>accepting of -- oops! Slipped into sarcasm mode again. Sorry 'bout
>that.) These are very good, non-explicit stories about two men in love.
>In my opinion as a teacher and as a gay woman, such stories are very
>appropriate reading for young adults.
>
>Taffy, hoping she won't get flamed for revealing that she's a teacher.
><pause><examines the sarcasm filter><hits it experimentally><sigh> This
>thing's broken!
>
It's a good point, Taffy, but there have been many cries for
no slash and no homosexual themes.
Now, before I get flamed, although I don't enjoy reading such
stories myself, I see nothing wrong with people reading and
writing them. It's not for me to say what somebody should
read or write. But we have a.s.c for that. a.s.c is sort of the
mama group and a.s.c.e and the new group are the offspring,
albeit lying at opposite ends of the spectrum.
shanna...@pnx.com
On 18 May 1997 19:47:57 GMT, eresh...@earthlink.net (Ruth Gifford)
wrote:
Yes, the idea is to crosspost to a.s.c and follow
the posting guidelines set here, such as labeling
fandom, characters featured prominently and
... rating?
shanna...@pnx.com
On Sun, 18 May 1997 20:36:01 GMT, al...@netcom.com (Aleph Press)
wrote:
>shanna...@pnx.com wrote:
>
>: That's a valid idea -- a moderated group. What do others think about
>: having the new family group as a moderated group? I'll have to look
>: up the technical aspects on how to create a moderated group, but in
>: the meantime, let's see how many would favor a moderated family group.
>
>I've been saying all along this will only work if you get it moderated.
>You just need some suck -- er, kind person to volunteer as moderator.
>
>
Yes, moderated is going to be the way to go.
I've found out how to create such a group,
now to settle on a name (best one I've heard so
far is alt.startrek.creative.young-adult) and get some
moderators lined up. I figure three would be ideal, with two
approvals sending the story to the group.
It wouldn't be good for one person to have
all the say, not to mention all the work.
I'm willing to be a moderator and I think
George Morgan is, too. But because
I already maintain one newsgroup,
alt.binaries.startrek.adult, not to mention
the webpage for it, I don't have the time
to be the sole moderator. I'll create the
thing and come up with a FAQ, based
on a.s.c, for approval by those interested
in participating in the new group. Morgan has
volunteered his services as FAQ maintainer
and group promoter.
shanna...@pnx.com
On Sun, 18 May 1997 14:20:14 GMT, art...@voy.net (Arthur Kraft) wrote:
>On Sun, 18 May 1997 04:03:57 GMT, ze...@snowcrest.net (Zepp) wrote:
>
>>>
>>>: Might I humbly suggest:
>>>: alt.startrek.creative.family
>>>: or alt.startrek.creative.family-oriented?
>>>
>>Out of the various suggestions, I think probably the most useful and
>>international is alt.startrek.creative.all-ages. I admit to having
>>little interest in such an NG myself; OTOH, I fully support its right
>>to exist, and if by doing so, it will relieve us of some of the
>>outraged wails and wanks, then this cannot but be a Good Thing!
>>
>>So, I support, and say, count my vote as a yes to form that group.
>>Might not see me in it very often, but I'm all for more peace and
>>quiet!
>>
>
>After lurking for awhile, here is my two cents worth also. This is a
>trend that I have noticed. Any newsgroup with an "alt" gets more spam
>and junk than any other groups in the listing. So instead of having a
>alt.startrek.creative how about changing it to startrek.creative or
>startrek.creative.moderated or just change the "alt" to "rec" like
>rec.startrek.creative and so forth.
>
As Alara explained, there is no "startrek" hierarchy and no
reason to change names of established groups.
Because the new group will be an offshoot of alt.startrek.creative,
it will have better propagation (and be more correctly named) as
alt.startrek.creative.young-adult
shanna...@pnx.com
On Mon, 19 May 1997 13:26:14 GMT, shanna...@pnx.com wrote:
>On Sun, 18 May 1997 08:41:19 -0400, Taffy <mtsa...@wam.umd.edu>
>wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 18 May 1997, Zepp wrote:
>>
>>>Out of the various suggestions, I think probably the most useful and
>>>international is alt.startrek.creative.all-ages. I admit to having
>>>little interest in such an NG myself; OTOH, I fully support its right
>>>to exist, and if by doing so, it will relieve us of some of the
On the other hand, the more I think about it, the more
I think Taffy may be right. There are plenty of teens
out there who themselves are gay and might like
to read stories about characters with similar inclinations.
These don't have to be graphic stories.
But let's hear from those of you that were wanting a group free of
slash, homosexual themes and NC-17 stories.
Zepp
>On Sun, 18 May 1997, Zepp wrote:
>
>>Out of the various suggestions, I think probably the most useful and
>>international is alt.startrek.creative.all-ages. I admit to having
>>little interest in such an NG myself; OTOH, I fully support its right
>>to exist, and if by doing so, it will relieve us of some of the
>>outraged wails and wanks
>
><sarcasm mode on> Oh, but I've been so looking forward to screaming for
>everyone to put the boring het stories over on asc.all-ages where they
>belong. <sarcasm mode off>
Yah cho, Taffy -- I never meant that het or non NC17 shouldn't be
posted on a.s.c. Hell, truth be told, I don't give a rat if it's
created at all, or not. Some folks want it, more power to 'em sez me.
But for me, I'll keep posting on a.s.c. cos that's my home turf. All
I was trying to do, above, was talk them into a name that would have
some meaning to our non-USA readers, of which we have more than a
few...
><deep breath> Okay, that's as much of a rant as you're going to see from
>me, simply because I promised myself that I would not get overly pissy.
>(What's that you say? Too late? Oh. Drat.)
>
>Now, to quote Shannara's original post on creating a children-friendly
>group:
>
>>This is an official call for discussion to create an offshoot
>>of alt.startrek.creative that will answer the pleas for no slash and
>>no graphic adult stories.
>
>Why 'no slash?'
>
>You see, contrary to popular belief, not all slash stories are NC-17 or
>even R. There are a couple beautiful Chakotay/Paris stories that are
>rated PG. (And before anyone asks, I don't think the author wanted to
>post here. Gee, I wonder why. Everyone around here is so sweet and
>accepting of -- oops! Slipped into sarcasm mode again. Sorry 'bout
>that.) These are very good, non-explicit stories about two men in love.
>In my opinion as a teacher and as a gay woman, such stories are very
>appropriate reading for young adults.
I agree completely. I also think there's no reason "young adults"
should be forbidden to be *here*, if it comes to that. Most of 'em
are mature enough; them as won't would be bored and leave, most
likely. Now: IF I am understanding them correctly, there are a few
folks who don't want to deal with slash. Damifino why, and I don't
reckon it matters. Let 'em have their own group <and much luck
getting it propagated>; just make sure the het or whatever is posted
in here, too. UseNet plenty big, folks -- dere be room here for us
all....
>Taffy, hoping she won't get flamed for revealing that she's a teacher.
><pause><examines the sarcasm filter><hits it experimentally><sigh> This
>thing's broken!
Yours too, huh? Ain't it a bitch and a half? <evil wolvish grin> And
no, I ain't gonna flame ya. What would I do that for?
Aleph Press
shanna...@pnx.com wrote:
: It wouldn't be good for one person to have
: all the say, not to mention all the work.
: I'm willing to be a moderator and I think
: George Morgan is, too. But because
: I already maintain one newsgroup,
: alt.binaries.startrek.adult, not to mention
: the webpage for it, I don't have the time
: to be the sole moderator. I'll create the
: thing and come up with a FAQ, based
: on a.s.c, for approval by those interested
: in participating in the new group. Morgan has
: volunteered his services as FAQ maintainer
: and group promoter.
I'd appreciate it if whoever moderates it forwards all story posts (as
opposed to discussion posts) to arch...@mindspring.com. This isn't
necessary-- I'll probably read the group to archive it-- but I think it
would be relatively easy for a moderator, and it would save me *so* much
time.
Jeff Vinocur
On 19 May 1997 15:50:59 GMT, Greg Berigan
<gber...@cse.unl.edu> wrote:
:alt.startrek.creative is for stories, so I'm directing this discussion
:to alt.config only.
No, subdivision of a group is relevant to it. If you
personally don't want to read it, killfire it.
Especially since your post, being only in alt.config, didn't
inform the asc people that they were being shut out of
discussion.
--
Jeff Vinocur
chi...@ix.netcom.com
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/3768/
Ruth Gifford
On Mon, 19 May 1997 13:29:03 GMT, shanna...@pnx.com wrote:
>>--
> Yes, the idea is to crosspost to a.s.c and follow
>the posting guidelines set here, such as labeling
>fandom, characters featured prominently and
>... rating?
Yes, you should use some sort of rating system, just to point out violence or
mild romance.
Ruth
--
***************************************************
* Ruth | FAQ Maintainer for *
* Gifford | alt.startrek.creative.erotica *
*-------------------------------------------------*
* Better living thru TrekSmut--See for Yourself! *
* http://www.capital.net/users/rjs1/asce *
***************************************************
The Bad News: Because homophobia still exists,
not everyone you invited to your wedding will come.
The Good News: Because homophobia still exists,
not everyone you invited to your wedding will come.
The Essential Guide to Lesbian and Gay Weddings
Tess Ayers and Paul Brown
Taffy
On Mon, 19 May 1997, Zepp wrote:
>All I was trying to do, above, was talk them into a name that would have
>some meaning to our non-USA readers, of which we have more than a few...
<sincerely apologetic> Oh, I know what you were trying to do. I was just
using your post as a jumping off point for a my little rant. Sorry about
that. Next time I'll rant independently. :)
>I agree completely. I also think there's no reason "young adults"
>should be forbidden to be *here*, if it comes to that. Most of 'em
>are mature enough; them as won't would be bored and leave, most
>likely. Now: IF I am understanding them correctly, there are a few
>folks who don't want to deal with slash. Damifino why, and I don't
>Let 'em have their own group <and much luck getting it propagated>; just
>make sure the het or whatever is posted in here, too. UseNet plenty
>big, folks -- dere be room here for us all....
True. But if a group is to be created for the express purpose of avoiding
slash stories ... well, I'd just like for people to admit to what they're
doing. Hiding behind children is not only unfair, it's cowardly.
If people really are trying to create a group appropriate for children,
well that's fine. But that means that *all* G, PG, and PG-13 stories
should be welcome there. Shannara made a very good point earlier about
the appeal of non-explicit slash stories to gay youth. I'd like to extend
that to *all* children. Exposure as a child to positive gay role-models
is one of the best ways to combat homophobia.
But, if the purpose of this new group is to create a slash free atmosphere
... that's very different. For a group of people to say that they cannot
tolerate the sight of slash stories on a newsgroup that they frequent is
beyond offensive, it's absolutely homophobic. I realize that there are
people who want a slash-free group. That does not mean that we need to
cater to that. At my university the Office of Resident Life gets dozens
of requests from students every year, asking that they not be placed with
homosexual roommates. These requests are not honored. Why? Because, in
the opinion of the university administrators, they don't deserve to be.
I think we're faced with a similar situation here. Now, obviously I can't
stop anyone from establishing alt.startrek.creative.no-slash-here. But I
don't have to approve of it, and I'm not going to just sit here and allow
people to hide their homophobia behind our children. If you want to
establish a non-explicit stories group, great. If you want to establish a
slash-free group at least have the courage to admit to what you're doing.
And I'd like to encourage everyone who is currently involved in creating
the new group to examine what they are doing and determine if it is really
something that they feel they should be involved in. I know Shannara
(just to use an example) was probably just responding to a perceived
demand.
Taffy
Never let school get in the way of your education.
Carol Thomas
Taffy <mtsa...@wam.umd.edu> wrote:
>You see, contrary to popular belief, not all slash stories are NC-17 or
>even R. There are a couple beautiful Chakotay/Paris stories that are
>rated PG. (And before anyone asks, I don't think the author wanted to
>post here. Gee, I wonder why. Everyone around here is so sweet and
>accepting of -- oops! Slipped into sarcasm mode again. Sorry 'bout
>that.) These are very good, non-explicit stories about two men in love.
>In my opinion as a teacher and as a gay woman, such stories are very
>appropriate reading for young adults.
I agree with you one hundred per cent. I've been reading this debate
rather casually, wondering why a corner of my brain kept saying, "That's
a scary idea," and wrote it off to not liking children. <g> But you're
right on, Taffy -- letting kids see m/f kissing (but not sex) but not
letting them see m/m or f/f kissing (but not sex) is homophobic and (IMO)
morally wrong. Right up there with only letting them read stories about
white people, or about men, or about... you all get the picture.
>Taffy, hoping she won't get flamed for revealing that she's a teacher.
><pause><examines the sarcasm filter><hits it experimentally><sigh> This
>thing's broken!
LOL! You're wonderful, Taffy. Will your S.O. hit me for sending you a
warm electronic hug? Tell her I couldn't help myself!
Carol Thomas
Jeanita
5570...@news.snowcrest.net>
<Pine.SOL.3.95q.97051...@rac6.wam.umd.edu>:
Organization: Capital PC User Group, Inc., Rockville, Maryland, USA
Distribution:
Taffy (mtsa...@wam.umd.edu) wrote:
[snip of Zepp's comments]
:
: True. But if a group is to be created for the express purpose of avoiding
: slash stories ... well, I'd just like for people to admit to what they're
: doing. Hiding behind children is not only unfair, it's cowardly.
:
Yes, and we have some cowards around here obviously, but hiding is what
cowards do best. They hide behind white sheets, they hide behind kids,
they hide behind fake addresses, they hide behind immoral laws, in fact,
they hide behind anything that's convenient. I do not think you can
convince a coward not to hide. Once he/she/it stops hiding, reprehensible
as their point of view may be, they are no longer showing cowardice.
: If people really are trying to create a group appropriate for children,
: well that's fine. But that means that *all* G, PG, and PG-13 stories
: should be welcome there. Shannara made a very good point earlier about
: the appeal of non-explicit slash stories to gay youth. I'd like to extend
: that to *all* children. Exposure as a child to positive gay role-models
: is one of the best ways to combat homophobia.
:
Um, Taff? I could be wrong, but I suspect combating homophobia is not an
objective here...
: But, if the purpose of this new group is to create a slash free atmosphere
: ... that's very different. For a group of people to say that they cannot
: tolerate the sight of slash stories on a newsgroup that they frequent is
: beyond offensive, it's absolutely homophobic. I realize that there are
: people who want a slash-free group. That does not mean that we need to
: cater to that. At my university the Office of Resident Life gets dozens
: of requests from students every year, asking that they not be placed with
: homosexual roommates. These requests are not honored. Why? Because, in
: the opinion of the university administrators, they don't deserve to be.
:
Well, people are homophobes because they want to be. Somewhere down the
line they default on the decision to try to see all fellow humans as
human, so they not only blindly accept spurious divisions based on things
like sexual preference, they then enshrine those divisions, catering to
them instead of trying to overcome their fears. It seems we have a bunch
of separatists among us (separatist trekkies!? Whoda thunk? No IDIC
here, obviously) but you can't unfrighten somebody or de-homophobe them
if that's how they choose to be, so if they choose to act on their fears
by leaving, let them go. Maybe they could all move out to Montana
together... :-)
: I think we're faced with a similar situation here. Now, obviously I can't
: stop anyone from establishing alt.startrek.creative.no-slash-here. But I
: don't have to approve of it, and I'm not going to just sit here and allow
: people to hide their homophobia behind our children.
How will you stop them?
If you want to
: establish a non-explicit stories group, great. If you want to establish a
: slash-free group at least have the courage to admit to what you're doing.
:
<shrug> They won't.
Jeanita
--
Sharon Freeman
> graphic adult stories.
>
> Natch, stories posted there would also be posted here, but
> it should satisfy those begging for a family-friendly group.
>
> I'm just offering my services to help in the creation of the thing.
> way should a.s.c. change. I believe a new group is the way
> to go. It will take some work to get it accepted, but Trek
> groups are popular, so it shouldn't be as hard as it was
> to get my adult Trek binary group accepted. ;)
>
> shan...@pnx.com (use this for replies)
> Webmaster for ST: The Ultimate Fantasy (adults only)
> http://www.serve.com/Shannara/index.html
I think it could work, might make all of our lifes a little easier,
can't say I'm interested in "Family oriented stuff" <big groan>, but if
there's good stories posted there I'll read them!, so I guess I would
have that newsgroup on my list but this (alt.startrek.creative) is the
best variety for the Fan Fic I like (TrekSmut, Romance, PWP's, straight
out stories, poems, and parodies).
________________________________________________________________________
"I said what I said and no one has to apologize for me"
- Howard Stern
________________________________________________________________________
lmsp...@nicoh.com
After much thought and consideration I think as it has been described to
this point in time. If it has the number of people supporting it to keep
it alive I hope it will encourage discussion of the tamer stories. I
don’t have much hope for it staying an active news group but I will
support it
LMSparks
lmsp...@nicoh.com
-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet
George Morgan
Shannara:
I seem to recall my asbestos underwear getting singed on account of my
inability to find a nonslash story on ASC. It seems to me that Taffy,
bless her, has a problem with a newsgroup that does not conform to her
tastes. Something like I have been accused of.
Everybody has ASC. Adult-fiction enthusiasts and slashers have ASC and
ASCE. Adult-fiction non-enthusiasts and slash-avoiders have ASC and . . .
ASC? Excuse me, Taffy, but I sense an inequity here.
George D. Morgan
shanna...@pnx.com wrote in article <33839b97...@news.pnx.com>...
> On Mon, 19 May 1997 17:19:06 -0400, Taffy <mtsa...@wam.umd.edu>
> wrote:
>
>
TAFFY> >True. But if a group is to be created for the express purpose of
avoiding
TAFFY> >slash stories ... well, I'd just like for people to admit to what
they're
TAFFY> >doing. Hiding behind children is not only unfair, it's cowardly.
> >
> There is a group established for a concentration of NC-17
> stories, what's wrong with having one for a concentration
> of non- NC-17 stories?
shanna...@pnx.com
>True. But if a group is to be created for the express purpose of avoiding
>slash stories ... well, I'd just like for people to admit to what they're
>doing. Hiding behind children is not only unfair, it's cowardly.
>
>If people really are trying to create a group appropriate for children,
>well that's fine. But that means that *all* G, PG, and PG-13 stories
>should be welcome there. Shannara made a very good point earlier about
>the appeal of non-explicit slash stories to gay youth. I'd like to extend
>that to *all* children. Exposure as a child to positive gay role-models
>is one of the best ways to combat homophobia.
There will be no NC-17 stories of any kind on the new group.
Neither hetero nor homosexual. Non-explicit stories about
homosexual characters will be fine, but the sexuality of
established characters will be as in canon.
Podkayne Fries
On Thu, 22 May 1997 01:10:01 GMT, shanna...@pnx.com wrote:
>On Mon, 19 May 1997 17:19:06 -0400, Taffy <mtsa...@wam.umd.edu>
>wrote:
>
>There is a group established for a concentration of NC-17
>stories, what's wrong with having one for a concentration
>of non- NC-17 stories?
>
>shan...@pnx.com (use this for replies)
>Webmaster for ST: The Ultimate Fantasy (adults only)
>http://www.serve.com/Shannara/index.html
I think it's an excellent idea. I know several local teens who
are big fans and would love this NG.
Joyce Harmon
In article <01bc666f$734f2160$d21678cc@morgan1>, pata...@evansville.net
says...
>
>Shannara:
>
>I seem to recall my asbestos underwear getting singed on account of my
>inability to find a nonslash story on ASC. It seems to me that Taffy,
>bless her, has a problem with a newsgroup that does not conform to her
>tastes. Something like I have been accused of.
>
>Everybody has ASC. Adult-fiction enthusiasts and slashers have ASC and
>ASCE. Adult-fiction non-enthusiasts and slash-avoiders have ASC and . . .
>ASC? Excuse me, Taffy, but I sense an inequity here.
What Taffy was pointing out was that there are slash stories that are rated
PG-13. While the proposed newsgroup is claiming to be "family friendly",
and will not post stories that are rated over PG-13, they are also
intending to deny access to the slash stories that *meet* that criteria.
Imagine if someone proposed a newsgroup called
alt.startrek.creative.all-white, and didn't allow stories about Sisko,
LaForge, Sulu, Kim, Uhura, etc.
Sure smells like bigotry to me....
Joyce
Aleph Press
Joyce Harmon (jlha...@mail.crosslink.net) wrote:
: What Taffy was pointing out was that there are slash stories that are rated
: PG-13. While the proposed newsgroup is claiming to be "family friendly",
: and will not post stories that are rated over PG-13, they are also
: intending to deny access to the slash stories that *meet* that criteria.
: Imagine if someone proposed a newsgroup called
: alt.startrek.creative.all-white, and didn't allow stories about Sisko,
: LaForge, Sulu, Kim, Uhura, etc.
Let's be careful here.
slash is not about being gay. Slash is about taking characters who are
usually presented as het in canon, and portraying them as involved in a
homosexual relationship. I think most slashers would agree that being gay
isn't the point of slash.
Therefore, there is a difference between being offended by slash-- which,
as a general rule, shows characters in a relationship which is against
what canon implies-- and being offended by gays. For instance, if someone
were to write a non-explicit story about Dax and Kon in their Jadzia and
Lenara bodies, and this was posted to asc.ya (or whatever you're calling
it), and the modeerator rejected it because it shows lesbianism, this
would clearly be a bias against gay and homosexuality. Dax and Kon are a
canonical relationship.
However, if you write a non-explicit story in whch Paris and Kim are
lovers, one can be offended by this *without* being a homophobe. I would
find it very irritating if a canonically gay character in Japanese
animation was portrayed as straight for the purposes of a fanfic. (Yes,
anieme has canonical gays, that's why I use them as an example.) So I can
understand how people might find it irritating that slash takes
canonically sstraight characters and puts them in homosexual relationships.
I don't know if this would have anything to do with the group's charter,
though. If you guys want to create a "family-friendly" group, why would
it be more offensive to have a non-explicit slash story than a
non-explicit Mary Sue story? Even if you don't like slash and think it's
way out of character, isn't it also way out of character for Picard to,
oh say, adopt a child as his daughter and leave her in command of his
ship when he's gone, when she's 12? :-) (Sorry, stephen.) I have no
problem with people who dislike slash because they think it's stupid and
out of character. But you're not trying to create
alt.startrek.creative.stories.that.we.like, you're trying to create
alt.startrek.creative.young_adult (or family, or pg_13, or whatever.)
Your mandate is to display stories that are not sexually explicit or
violent, which kids and parents can enjoy together. So why is slash
(non-explicit, mind you-- no more than kisses) considered more offensive
to children than othe forms of bad writing? (Mind you, *I* am not saying
slash is bad, I'm arguing that from your point of view it is, ebcause
it's out of character.)
You basically have two choices:
1. You dislike slash because it's out of character for people portrayed
as het on the show to be in a homosexual relationship. it is, in fact, no
more or less out of character than Stephen's Marissa stories, or Karmin
St. Jean's Q stories where Q falls madly and sappily in love with people,
or any story in which an unlikely pairing, such as Janeway and Paris,
occurs. So if you reject slash because it's out of character, you must
also reject all those other stories-- and at that point, it becomes
alt.startrek.creative.stories.the.moderator.likes.
2. You dislike slash because it personally offends you. why is your right
not to be personally offended greater than the right of a teenage boy to
read a story where the handsome and respected doctor aboard DS9 is
bisexual, just like him? I don't like stories where Christianity is
portrayed as objectively correct and true-- there was a Q story where Q
told Picard that Jesus Christ really was the son of God. This offends my
religious beliefs. Would you say this story can't be posted, because it
would be offensive? But then, *most* Star Trek stories take the premise
that if God exists He is unknowable. Doesn't that offend deeply religous
people? If you are excluding slash from a group for kids because it
offends *you*, aren't you saying that your morality and mores are more
correct than anyone else's?
So I'm not saying you're a homophobe if you don't like slash. Far from
it. But if you decide to reject non-explicit slash stories from your
group for young adults, is't that privileging one form of offense at
writing over another? Aren't you really saying "I find slash so offensive
that I don't believe any children should be exposed to it"-- and if so,
*why* do you find slash so offensive? Finding slash offensive because
it's out of character is not homophobia-- but finding slash so offensive
that it can't be shown to kids, even though other stories that are out of
character can be, *is* homophobia.
As for the argument that there would then be nowhere to go to escape
slash, and slashers have two groups so why shouldn't non-slashers--
you're conflating two separate scales.
*Erotica* can be het or slash. Erotica contains sexually explicit
material and is not for kids. All forms of erotica, het and slash both,
are permissible on both asc and asce.
*Slash* can be erotic or non-erotic. Slash contains two same-sex
characters in a relationship, usually characters that are canoncically
portrayed as straight. *Erotic* slash can be posted to asce, but
*non*-erotic slash does not belong on asce.
When you say slashers have two groups, why not non-slashers, you're
confusing slash wth erotica. *erotica* writers have two groups-- why not
non-erotica writers? That's the whole idea behind asc.ya, to make a group
that has no erotica in it. But when you talk about *non-erotic* slash--
that is, Bashir and Garak are lovers, and the story is about them having
tea, and there's absolutely no sex in it-- it seems to me that the story
should not be excluded from asc.ya. I am fully behind the notion of a
group dedicated solely to non-erotic works, but let me abuse my power for
a moment here. If you exclude *non-erotic* slash from your group, the
only possible reason can be homophobia-- just beccause you don't agree
with it and think it's way out of character is no reason why it is not
appropriate for teenagers, some of whom are gay and need positive role
models. The quantity of such slash is incredibly small-- your group will
*not* be overrun with non-erotic slash-- but it does belong on a group
whose charter is "a safe group for young people."
if your charter really is "a safe group for young people", I am all foor
you. If your charter is "a group that conforms to our personal prejudices
and censors stories we don't like even if they contain no erotica or
violence", then find your own damn archivist, because I will not archive
any story posted solely to a group that exists to promote censorship.
Sorry-- I really don't like saying something like this, but I won't
support a group I don't believe in. Exclude erotica and violence-- fine,
great, we do need more stories that aren't erotic or violent. Exclude
slash, and you will be saying you don't feel homosexuality is appropriate
for teens to read about-- and that offends *me*.
Ruth Gifford
On 22 May 1997 05:16:17 GMT, George Morgan wrote:
>
>Shannara:
>
>I seem to recall my asbestos underwear getting singed on account of my
>inability to find a nonslash story on ASC. It seems to me that Taffy,
>bless her, has a problem with a newsgroup that does not conform to her
>tastes. Something like I have been accused of.
>Everybody has ASC. Adult-fiction enthusiasts and slashers have ASC and
>ASCE. Adult-fiction non-enthusiasts and slash-avoiders have ASC and . . .
>ASC? Excuse me, Taffy, but I sense an inequity here.
Hello??
Did you actually pay attention to what Taffy was saying? She was talking
about NON-EROTIC stories that happened to be about gay or bi characters. If
someone posted something like that to ASCE, I wouldn't flame them, but I'd
probably write them a nice polite letter (yes, Ruth can be polite) explaining
that they might find more of an audience on ASC or (hypothetically) on ASCYA.
I'm going to drag out my favorite analogy: ASC/ASCE/ASCYA as a book store.
In the Barnes & Noble near our house (in vanilla conservative suburban
SoCal), in the children's section, there is a copy of a book called "Heather
Has Two Mommies," which was written by a fairly famous lesbian writer. It's
a basic picture book about tolerance and so on, kinda long on message (as are
many kid's books about "moral" issues) and short on story, although it has
nice pictures. That same writer is editing an anthology of vanilla lesbian
smut which will include a story by one Atara Stein and will be out in 1998
("Pillow Talk"). Now, neither Atara nor the editor would think that "Pillow
Talk" would belong in the kids section and B & N won't put it there; they'll
put it with the rest of the smut. But a kid's book about the daughter of two
dykes does belong in the kid's section. I think I've made my point, but for
those that want me to go "from a to b to c . . ." Any Non-smut, non-violent
Trek stories about gay or bi characters belongs on an ng whose stated purpose
is the posting and discussion of Star Trek fan fiction that is suitable and
written for the young adult audience.
Shannara has said that she wants the sexuality of the characters to be as
established in canon. I ask that trickiest of questions: Who decides what's
canon? Are you going to somehow get Berman, Piller and Taylor to moderate
your group? Are you going to ask the actors? Hint: *Don't* ask Andrew
Robinson, John deLancie or Patrick Stewart. The first two have said that
*they* think their characters are bi (deLancie actually said "bi-special" and
Robinson said Garak would probably jump "anything that moves"), and the
latter has said that he thinks it's "certainly possible" that Picard might
have some repressed homoerotic tendencies (see .sig quote).
If you choose to go by filmed canon, it has been established that there is
*one* character out of 4 incarnations of Trek who would not get involved with
someone of the same sex, and her stated reason wasn't about not being bi.
This leaves all the other characters open to interpretation. Again I ask,
*who* does the interpreting? Obviously Shannara and I don't agree on certain
characters, but why is her interpretation any more or less valid than mine?
Because Character A hasn't ever been shown with a person of the opposite sex
before? Talk to gay or bi people about when they first came out publicly or
even just to themselves. We don't *all* know from birth, you know. I
couldn't tell simply by looking at Alara (not a typo, I mean Ms. Rogers our
Archivist) that she's bi. She has a male SO, and there are probably many
people that she works with or knows on a casual basis who don't know she's
bi. The same goes for Trek characters.
If you don't want anything queer, fine. If you don't want to extend Trek's
famous message of tolerance (which helped a confused American teenager living
in Iran in dealing with the fact that all people don't think the same way she
did) to gay and bi people, fine (well, it's *not* fine, really, but it's your
prerogative). But don't you see that you're laying yourself open to charges
of hypocrisy if you hide behind canon? Trek canon, like the Christian canon,
can be interpreted in many ways. When you say, "my way is right, yours is
wrong," you're acting like bigots have through the centuries. If you exclude
queer fiction from ASCYA, have the guts to stand up and say so. ("Hi! I'm
________ and I don’t think fags and dykes have a place in the 23rd/24th
centuries because I don't like or approve of their lifestyle." "Hi ______!")
I've supported the idea of ASCYA, because I have an 8 year old step-daughter
who reads Trek YA novels. She also likes to write stories and may (like so
many of us in our teenaged years) want to write or read fanfic. The fanfic
writing teenaged daughter of dykes may choose (like so many writers) to write
about what she knows and make up a Mary Sue whose mother suddenly fell in
love with another woman after being married to a man. It'd be a pity if you
wouldn't let her post it in your sandbox.
Ruth
who wishes it known that she's not calling *anyone* a bigot, just pointing
out that this thread makes certain people *look* like bigots.
--
***************************************************
* Ruth | FAQ Maintainer for *
* Gifford | alt.startrek.creative.erotica *
*-------------------------------------------------*
* Better living thru TrekSmut--See for Yourself! *
* http://www.capital.net/users/rjs1/ASCe *
***************************************************
Advocate: If Q is the freed nature of Picard, and
Q might be gay, is there some possibility that
Picard is repressing homoerotic parts of himself?
Stewart: It's *certainly* possible. Picard's had
plenty of affairs and relationships.
Patrick Stewart interviewed in The Advocate
(The Advocate, Aug 22, 1995, issue 687/688)
shanna...@pnx.com
I consider "slash" by definition to be explicit in nature.
The new group is for non-explicit stories.
Alara, you're welcome to archive any of it or none of it.
You work very hard at archiving and do a good job of it
and I won't think any less of you if you decide not to
include the new group because it doesn't allow slash.
Anyone is welcome to frequent the group, or not.
The group is being created to provide an alternative.
shan...@pnx.com (use this for replies)
Webmaster for ST: The Ultimate Fantasy (adults only)
Kamin
shanna...@pnx.com wrote:
>
> I consider "slash" by definition to be explicit in nature.
> The new group is for non-explicit stories.
characters are featured in a ROMANTIC intanglment. Romance need not
involved sex. I've read several PG slash stories, by torch, if memory
serves(which it often does not) on Atara's very archive. I honestly
found them as good or better than the majority of NC-17 slash stories.
--
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+"I calculated the odds of this succeeding+
+versus the odds I was doing something +
+really stupid, and I decided to go ahead +
+anyway." +
+ --Crow T. Robot +
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Jane Harmon
shanna...@pnx.com wrote:
>
> I consider "slash" by definition to be explicit in nature.
> The new group is for non-explicit stories.
Shannara - this is ambiguous, and you need to clarify what you mean.
This could mean:
a.) any story, however non-sexual, featuring a same-sex couple in a
sexual relationship (with the 'sex' part of the relationship being
pursued 'off-screen', as it were) is unsuitable for a general audience,
since it could potentially corrupt the young and is an affront to
'family values'. (I know many people feel this way; it's not clear to me
that this is what you mean, however.)
or
b.) 'slash' means 'sex' and if no sex acts are depicted (however
implied), a story featuring a same-sex couple isn't slash (and hence,
one would assume, would be suitable for your group.)
Before anyone can decide what they feel about your 'slash-is-explicit'
you need to clear up what you mean. If Number One, btw, I agree with
Taffy, Alara et al, and suggest you call the proposed group
alt.startrek.creative.no-queers and be done with it.
shanna...@pnx.com
On Fri, 23 May 1997 01:03:40 -0700, R'rain <umpr...@cc.umanitoba.ca>
wrote:
>shanna...@pnx.com wrote:
>>
>> I consider "slash" by definition to be explicit in nature.
>> The new group is for non-explicit stories.
>> Alara, you're welcome to archive any of it or none of it.
>> You work very hard at archiving and do a good job of it
>> and I won't think any less of you if you decide not to
>> include the new group because it doesn't allow slash.
>> Anyone is welcome to frequent the group, or not.
>> The group is being created to provide an alternative.
>
>I consider the creation of a new newsgroup to cater to younger
>readers an admirable endeavor, but I have some questions about
>what will and will not be allowed. Shannara, you say that you
>consider "slash" to be by definition explicit in nature (which
>it is most certainly not) and that it will not be allowed on the
>new group. What I would like to know is who made this decision?
>Was it the decision of a single moderator or a consensus (which would
>probably be impossible to reach without being able to ask each and every
>person who would potentially read and post to the group)?
Think of the new group as an online fanzine.
Stories are submitted to fanzines, which can
essentially be divided into slash zines and
genzines. The new group will be a genzine.
Stories must be submitted. Unlike a regular
fanzine, we'll pretty much take anything
(that isn't explicit sex or graphic violence).
We have three moderators, and all agreed that
characters established as straight on the shows
should not be portayed as gay in the new group.
As was stated in the beginning, the new group
is being created to satisfy TWO groups of people,
those that don't want slash on the group and
those that don't want ANY NC-17 at all.
a.s.c and a.s.c.e exist for those who want
to post slash stories, whether explicit or not,
about the established characters. There have
been many calls, and even fights on a.s.c
between those who, wrongly, insisted that
a.s.c not allow slash stories. a.s.c was
established to allow everything. That's
cool. The new group will be a more
limited group however and answers
the calls for no slash and no explicit
stories.
Gay stories about author-created
characters are welcome on the new group,
provided they are not sexually explicit.
If this discussion has now degenerated
into a flame war on the part of the
slash-lovers, then it's time to call the
discussion to an end and go about the
business of creating the new group,
alt.startrek.creative.all-ages
(Thanks for the name suggestion, Zepp.)
shanna...@pnx.com
On 23 May 1997 06:47:47 GMT, cmdr...@aol.com (CmdrBevC) wrote:
>Look, I'm REALLY tired of this fight. No one designated this, this was
>never specified as that...bull$#!^ (AOL TOS). This is a case of either
>NOT being able to access the DESIGNATED (define the word EROTICA if you
>don't get it) newsgroup (NOTE: Violence doesn't apply, unless it's of a
>sexual nature. ), or being LAZY.
>
>I am going to ask politely that you utilize the gift that *someone* gave
>you and post the sex-oriented NC-17 smut/adventure/rape stories in it's
>place.
>
>I ANNOUNCE TO THIS GROUP THAT I AM NOW OFFICIALLY BOYCOTTING
>ALT.STARTREK.CREATIVE UNTIL THIS IS RESOLVED. I WILL NOT POST MY STORY
>HERE ANYMORE, NOR WILL I POST ANY FUTURE STORIES HERE. I WOULD ALSO
>REQUEST THAT ANY PART OF THE STORY "PARALLEL POWERS" (TNG, P/C) THAT HAS
>BEEN ARCHIVED BE PULLED AND DELETED.
>
The new group will be created in the next few days.
Perhaps you'd like to post your stories there.
Jessica Krucek
>>Look, I'm REALLY tired of this fight. No one designated this, this
was
>>never specified as that...bull$#!^ (AOL TOS). This is a case of
either
>>NOT being able to access the DESIGNATED (define the word EROTICA if
you
>>don't get it) newsgroup
Or someone just not reading the FAQ. I don't read smut, but that
NC-17 S&M Dax/Worf has the same right to be here as my PG-13,
non-sexual post-"Quickening" Dax & Bashir vingette.
(NOTE: Violence doesn't apply, unless it's of a
>>sexual nature. ), or being LAZY.
You know, there is a real puritannical attitude towards sex in
American Society, but we seem to have very little problem in comparison
with graphic violence. It seems that we have no problem with blowing
each other's brains out, fistfights, and other displays of hatred and
malice.
But two loving, consenting ADULTS expressing a sexual
attraction...HEAVEN FORBID!
Tell me, do we, as Americans, have SUCH a problem with love that
we'd rather hate? From our murder rate, the avilability of guns, and
typical TV programming, it would appear so.
BTW, while I have written a couple scenes that are rated "R" for
sexual content, the only "R-rated" stories I have in the Trek universe
are because of "adult themes" and some pretty brutal violence.
>>I am going to ask politely that you utilize the gift that *someone*
gave
>>you and post the sex-oriented NC-17 smut/adventure/rape stories in
it's
>>place.
Its place is here, like it or not. I don't like the smut, but
there's a simple thing you can do.
SKIP OVER IT!
>>I ANNOUNCE TO THIS GROUP THAT I AM NOW OFFICIALLY BOYCOTTING
>>ALT.STARTREK.CREATIVE UNTIL THIS IS RESOLVED.
A new newsgroup is being created, if you haven't been listening...
- Jessica
Atara Stein
> I consider "slash" by definition to be explicit in nature.
> The new group is for non-explicit stories.
> Alara, you're welcome to archive any of it or none of it.
> You work very hard at archiving and do a good job of it
> and I won't think any less of you if you decide not to
> include the new group because it doesn't allow slash.
> Anyone is welcome to frequent the group, or not.
> The group is being created to provide an alternative.
>
So does this mean that your new group will accept romance stories with
same-sex characters, as long as they aren't explicit in describing sex?
The question here isn't how *you* define slash. Several posters have
already pointed out that there is PG13 rated slash out there. The
question is will you accept stories with a man and a woman kissing *and*
stories with a same-sex couple kissing OR is the very fact of a same-sex
relationship in a story (even without sex) somehow more "explicit" than a
het story? How about adventure stories in which a same-sex relationship
is taken for granted, even if the relationship is not the point of the
story? It *sounds* like what you're saying is that any mention of a
same-sex relationship is unsuitable for younger readers, even if the story
isn't sexual in nature. Please clarify; I hope I'm reading you wrong.
atara
--
Atara Stein ____
\ /
\/
"I always thought the world was divided into only two kinds of people--those who think the world is divided into only two kinds of people, and those who don't."--Molly Ivins
Emma
> it's time to call the
> discussion to an end and go about the
> business of creating the new group,
> alt.startrek.creative.all-ages
I second the motion and I commend Shannara for her efforts.
I think that the suggested name "alt.startrek.creative.all-ages" is
perfect. As much as a few people don't seem to like the idea, there is a
definite need for a group like this.
--
R'rain
shanna...@pnx.com wrote:
>
> I consider "slash" by definition to be explicit in nature.
> The new group is for non-explicit stories.
> Alara, you're welcome to archive any of it or none of it.
> You work very hard at archiving and do a good job of it
> and I won't think any less of you if you decide not to
> include the new group because it doesn't allow slash.
> Anyone is welcome to frequent the group, or not.
> The group is being created to provide an alternative.
I consider the creation of a new newsgroup to cater to younger
readers an admirable endeavor, but I have some questions about
what will and will not be allowed. Shannara, you say that you
consider "slash" to be by definition explicit in nature (which
it is most certainly not) and that it will not be allowed on the
new group. What I would like to know is who made this decision?
Was it the decision of a single moderator or a consensus (which would
probably be impossible to reach without being able to ask each and every
person who would potentially read and post to the group)?
There are a number of books on the young adult and even children's
market that depict or feature relationships between people of
the same gender. These books do not go into any sort of graphic
detail. Neither do some slash stories. Adult-only oriented fiction
would clearly have no place on such a group, but slash isn't
automatically adult-only oriented (R or NC-17).
My main question would have to be: what is the purpose of the group?
To carry non-explicit stories suitable for reading by Star Trek fans of
all ages? Because if that is the case, then slash should not be
arbitrarily excluded.
R'rain Prior
shanna...@pnx.com
On 21 May 1997 03:09:14 GMT, jea...@cpcug.org (Jeanita) wrote:
> If you want to
>: establish a non-explicit stories group, great. If you want to establish a
>: slash-free group at least have the courage to admit to what you're doing.
Ahhh. Get a life! You go do your thing, and we'll do ours.
From the very first post, we said the new group would have no slash.
shanna...@pnx.com
On Fri, 23 May 1997 09:37:56 -0700, ast...@cyberg8t.com (Atara Stein)
wrote:
>In article <338521ba...@news.pnx.com>, shanna...@pnx.com wrote:
>
>> I consider "slash" by definition to be explicit in nature.
>> The new group is for non-explicit stories.
>> Alara, you're welcome to archive any of it or none of it.
>> You work very hard at archiving and do a good job of it
>> and I won't think any less of you if you decide not to
>> include the new group because it doesn't allow slash.
>> Anyone is welcome to frequent the group, or not.
>> The group is being created to provide an alternative.
>>
>
>So does this mean that your new group will accept romance stories with
>same-sex characters, as long as they aren't explicit in describing sex?
Sure, as long as the characters engaging in same-sex romance
are not characters who are established in canon as being straight.
Author-created characters in gay relationships and characters like
Dax (the only one I can think of) who are established as being other
than straight, are fine being depicted in such relationships.
Paul Carver
On Thu, 22 May 1997 01:10:01 GMT, in alt.config, shanna...@pnx.com
wrote:
>There will be no NC-17 stories of any kind on the new group.
>Neither hetero nor homosexual. Non-explicit stories about
>homosexual characters will be fine, but the sexuality of
>established characters will be as in canon.
I was under the impression that there are no canonically homosexual
characters in Star Trek. I have heard rumors that Paramount is
homophobic and deliberately gives a heterosexual love interest to any
character that the fans perceive as potentially gay.
I don't understand the logical argument that PG-13 stories must
maintain canon sexuality. Are there any other areas of canon that
must be maintained in order for a story to be considered PG-13?
If the sexual preference of the characters is being singled out as the
only element of canon which must be maintained in order for a story to
be considered PG-13 then I must conclude that this rule is using
Paramount's anti-gay attitude to justify discrimination against gay
young adults.
Paul
--
Remove the capital letters from my email address if
you wish to contact me by email.
Paul Carver
Jeanita
shanna...@pnx.com wrote:
: On 21 May 1997 03:09:14 GMT, jea...@cpcug.org (Jeanita) wrote:
:
:
: > If you want to
: >: establish a non-explicit stories group, great. If you want to establish a
: >: slash-free group at least have the courage to admit to what you're doing.
:
: Ahhh. Get a life! You go do your thing, and we'll do ours.
: From the very first post, we said the new group would have no slash.
Stupid is as stupid does, Shannara. If you'd bothered to pay a *little*
bit of attention you'd have seen that you were quoting Taffy, not me.
Not that I disagree with her sentiment (you've no doubt read my opinions
on cowardice) but if you're going to make poisonous little comments
like the above (get a life... how original of you) you could at least
*try* to quote me correctly.
Now go back, re-read my post, and get it right next time.
Good luck, little girl.
--
Zepp
On 21 May 1997 03:09:14 GMT, jea...@cpcug.org (Jeanita) wrote:
>5570...@news.snowcrest.net>
><Pine.SOL.3.95q.97051...@rac6.wam.umd.edu>:
>Organization: Capital PC User Group, Inc., Rockville, Maryland, USA
>Distribution:
>
>Taffy (mtsa...@wam.umd.edu) wrote:
>
>[snip of Zepp's comments]
>:
>: True. But if a group is to be created for the express purpose of avoiding
>: slash stories ... well, I'd just like for people to admit to what they're
>: doing. Hiding behind children is not only unfair, it's cowardly.
>
>Yes, and we have some cowards around here obviously, but hiding is what
>cowards do best. They hide behind white sheets, they hide behind kids,
>they hide behind fake addresses, they hide behind immoral laws, in fact,
>they hide behind anything that's convenient. I do not think you can
>convince a coward not to hide. Once he/she/it stops hiding, reprehensible
>as their point of view may be, they are no longer showing cowardice.
<snippage>
> If you want to
>: establish a non-explicit stories group, great. If you want to establish a
>: slash-free group at least have the courage to admit to what you're doing.
>:
><shrug> They won't.
>
>Jeanita
Gawd. I 'ad no idea... Last time I paid any attention <I've missed
most of the last 3 days worth of messages ;-( > the idea was just a
non-explicit NG for them as don't like NC17 type stuff. Well, hell.
If it's no-slash-here they want, piss on 'em. They can do it without
my support -- I'd be pretty goddamn hypocritical if I suddenly started
wanking about slash, now, woulodn't I? <evil and preverted grin>
Gaaah. I say it's spinach, and I say the hell with it.
Greywolf the Wanderer, Animist, Furvert, and TOS Author
--borrowing Zepp's account.
--header munged to foil spambots; remove the extra "p"
Ruth Gifford
On Sat, 24 May 1997 02:09:17 GMT, Paul Carver wrote:
>
>On Thu, 22 May 1997 01:10:01 GMT, in alt.config, shanna...@pnx.com
>wrote:
>
>>There will be no NC-17 stories of any kind on the new group.
>>Neither hetero nor homosexual. Non-explicit stories about
>>homosexual characters will be fine, but the sexuality of
>>established characters will be as in canon.
>
>I was under the impression that there are no canonically homosexual
>characters in Star Trek. I have heard rumors that Paramount is
>homophobic and deliberately gives a heterosexual love interest to any
>character that the fans perceive as potentially gay.
Yup! That's about right. Interesting that Picard got laid in the two
episodes in which he's actually in the same bed with Q. ;-)
>I don't understand the logical argument that PG-13 stories must
>maintain canon sexuality. Are there any other areas of canon that
>must be maintained in order for a story to be considered PG-13?
From what I've read, no. The only other guidlines I can recall seeing is no
explicit sex and no explicit violence. Sudden Monty Python moment: And Rule
#6 *No* pofftas!!
>If the sexual preference of the characters is being singled out as the
>only element of canon which must be maintained in order for a story to
>be considered PG-13 then I must conclude that this rule is using
>Paramount's anti-gay attitude to justify discrimination against gay
>young adults.
Nice point. Good thing this isn't a discusson for alt.B5.creative.all-ages.
And there are even straight and/or bi young adults who don't suffer from the
notion that same sex relationships are tearing this country (not to mention
asc) apart.
Ruth
so much for me not saying anything more
--
***************************************************
* Ruth | FAQ Maintainer for *
* Gifford | alt.startrek.creative.erotica *
*-------------------------------------------------*
* Better living thru TrekSmut--See for Yourself! *
* http://www.capital.net/users/rjs1/asce *
***************************************************
"Hold on to your crucifix . . . I'll get the
garden hose."
"9 Chickeed Lane"
by Brooke McEldowney
Keikimo
Hmmm...just caught this thread tonight...and of course, I have a reply! :)
Yes, it's not polite...yes it's my usual rant...yes, you are welcome
to direct replies to me...I'd love to hear them...
In article <19970523064...@ladder02.news.aol.com>, cmdr...@aol.com (CmdrBevC) says:
>This solves NOTHING! Then you would have the problem that prevents so
>many from posting to alt.startrek.creative.EROTICA (where such material
>SHOULD be posted...), and that is that some servers may not ACCEPT this
>lower level group, and therefore restrict access to alt.startrek.creative.
Okay...can I first ask...what the hell is your problem? You obviously
have a problem with the amount of EROTIC fiction out there, you now
have a problem with the creation of a new FAMILY newsgroup. So what
DO you want? Wait...I think I can answer that. You want us NC-17 users
to stay off your "oh so pure" ASC. Well we just went through two sets
of these arguments, I'm really tired of hearing them and I hate to break
it to you...but there ain't no chance in hell of convincing NC-17ers to
switch when it's clearly stated we can post here if we want.
>Look, I'm REALLY tired of this fight. No one designated this, this was
>never specified as that...bull$#!^ (AOL TOS). This is a case of either
>NOT being able to access the DESIGNATED (define the word EROTICA if you
>don't get it) newsgroup (NOTE: Violence doesn't apply, unless it's of a
>sexual nature. ), or being LAZY.
Well aren't we so high and mighty. In case you didn't notice, the fight
was over long ago. This thread was on the creation of a family-oriented
newsgroup (Something positive that came out of that whole, drawn out,
aggrivating mess.) So maybe we aren't the ones who are being lazy.
I seem to think that not setting a kill file, not reading the FAQ where
it states ALL FICTION can be posted and posting an article that has nothing
to do with the topic at hand is outright laziness.
And as for designated newsgroups, that's what Alt.Startrek.Creative.Family
is supposed to be doing. (At least I think...:) It's for people like
you, who have a problem with people like me, to congregate and enjoy
the company of underagers, Sumt haters, or puritains like themselves.
If/When you cannot get to the ASCF site, I'd love to see you eat your
words. You'll know how much of a pain it is for us NC-17 users to expect
everyone to be able to access ASCE. It's not laziness that's the
problem, its just common sense.
>I'm NOT going to deal with this. It looks like this place is as cought up
>in POLITICS as the rest of the world. I come to post the next part of my
>story and what do I find? This. A fight that LOGICAL people wouldn't be
What is the fight? Who's having a fight? Where the hell do you see a
fight? It looked like a perfectly intelligent discussion until you
butted in with your comments that don't even have anything to do with
the topic at hand. Try reading the articles before shooting your mouth
off...
>having. A fight that any idiot could solve by looking in a dictionary. I
Exactly what are we looking up here? Erotica? Creative? Family? Does
this have ANYTHING to do with creating a new newsgroup? How about we
look up idiot and see if it has a picture of you there.
>had enough of this in my hometown, relatively small as it is, and after a
>year and a half of "improvement" the place is more currupt than it ever
>has been. I will NOT be party to this any longer.
We're corrupt? Cause we post NC-17? (Now I'm branching off topic here...
accept my apologies early! :) IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT YOU THINK ANYMORE,
the discussion about NC-17 on ASC is over, fini, complete, done... We
are allowed to post here, end of story. Now, if you have a problem with
that, you should be supporting the formation of ASCF (Or pg-13, I've
seen both mentioned). Not blathering on about removing smut from
ASC.
>I am going to ask politely that you utilize the gift that *someone* gave
>you and post the sex-oriented NC-17 smut/adventure/rape stories in it's
>place.
And I'm going to ask you politely to...hmmm...well...I guess what I was
gonna write isn't so polite. :) How about I just ask you politely to
stay on topic here and know when to let something die...
>I ANNOUNCE TO THIS GROUP THAT I AM NOW OFFICIALLY BOYCOTTING
>ALT.STARTREK.CREATIVE UNTIL THIS IS RESOLVED. I WILL NOT POST MY STORY
>HERE ANYMORE, NOR WILL I POST ANY FUTURE STORIES HERE. I WOULD ALSO
>REQUEST THAT ANY PART OF THE STORY "PARALLEL POWERS" (TNG, P/C) THAT HAS
>BEEN ARCHIVED BE PULLED AND DELETED.
Wonderful...means one less person who's gonna be whining and complaining
cause the world doesn't revolve around them. I'm sorry, but I for one
could care less about you, your decision or your stories. If you don't
want to be here, I say have a nice life. This newsgroup will continue
to function without your presence.
>I'd wish you all luck in resolving this, but you can just kiss my (AOL
It was resolved. And after you, as you so graciously put it, boycott
ASC, it will be resolved once again. So like I said before, I'm not
going to shed any tears at your absense.
>TOS). As one of the unfortunate UNDERAGE victims, I can tell you that
You are a victim now? Where do you get this stuff? So you are underage,
is that my problem? It's no more my problem than it is your parents for
having you a year later (Or two, or 12 or however old you are.) Why don't
you stop pissing off ASCers, go join ASC-pg13 and make everyone happy.
>this is not fair to me or anyone else. You are fighting over a quarter of
>the story population. COUNT! The percentage of NC-17 is from 10 to 40 %,
>varying...that does NOT constitute majority.
And you are trying to make the entire world revolve around you. It doesn't.
If you wanna talk majority, here it is. The MAJORITY of people on this
newsgroup who vocalized their opinions WANTED NC-17. Those who didn't
are trying to establish ASCpg-13. And then there's you who seems to
think we've comitted some absolute injustice by forcing YOU to go to
ASCpg-13 when ASC should be yours. It's no more yours than it is mine.
You have a problem with the propagation problems with ASCpg-13, then I
have just as much of a right to have a problem for the same reasons with
ASCE. You believe that I should post to ASCE, the same goes for you.
In the end, it all comes down to ASC belonging to everyone. Whether you
choose to support ASCpg-13 is totally up to you. But stop whining when
things don't go YOUR way. The world does not revolve around you... deal
with it.
>Saying "Adios" to this disgrace to Trek (and cursing the entity of
>politics),
Toodles...
Keikimo
(kei...@hotmail.com)
Visit Keikimo's Realm at:
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Corridor/2206
Aleph Press
Paul Carver (pca...@SnPaAcM.net) wrote:
: On Thu, 22 May 1997 01:10:01 GMT, in alt.config, shanna...@pnx.com
: wrote:
: >There will be no NC-17 stories of any kind on the new group.
: >Neither hetero nor homosexual. Non-explicit stories about
: >homosexual characters will be fine, but the sexuality of
: >established characters will be as in canon.
Does this mean Picard cannot date a black woman and Sisko cannot date a
white woman? in canon, even when these two were paired with aliens, it
was always aliens played by a woman of heir respective race, black or white.
Natalie says that what you are rejecting is any story with sex, and that
same-sex relationships between two canonically het characters is all
right if one can justify it within the series, so long as there is no
sex. (For instance, once could justify a relationship between Paris and
Kim, but not a relationship between Janeway and Paris. Or, to use
Natalie's example, Picard could have a fling with a homosexual original
character, because just because canon has put him with women doesn't mean
he would *never* sleep with a man-- that's a judgment call. But he
couldn't have a fling with Riker, *or* Deanna, beccause it violaetes
their professional relationship. I still think this smacks a little of
"you write what we like", but it's much more open than what I had
previosuly thought.)
So which is it, Shannara? Are we to take your word on the subject (which,
given that Dax is the only canonically bisexual character, means that
non-sexual stories about garak and Bashir cannot be posted), or
Natalie's? If you meant what you said, then your group excludes *all*
same-sex relationships except for those with original characters or Dax,
because you are enforcing your interpretation of canon on other writers.
And whether you intend this to exclude gays or not, the fact that TPTB
are scared of homosexuality and have to make sure that all characters are
established het-- hell, they tried to make *Q* het! Q has no gender!--
means that if you enforce this interpretation of canon, and do not
enforce other interpretations (for instance, the interpretation that
Sisko cnnot get involved with a white woman because in canon all his
lovers are black) it *does* come across as selective homophobia. But if
you really mean Natalie's interpretation, you are giving authors much
more freedom, and enforcing canon in a way that's based on the
*characters*, not on you personal interpretation of whether they'd be gay
or not.
: I was under the impression that there are no canonically homosexual
: characters in Star Trek. I have heard rumors that Paramount is
: homophobic and deliberately gives a heterosexual love interest to any
: character that the fans perceive as potentially gay.
Explain Ziyal and Suzy-Q any other way. (Well, okay, I have, but I'm
afan writer-- it's my job. :-))
: I don't understand the logical argument that PG-13 stories must
: maintain canon sexuality. Are there any other areas of canon that
: must be maintained in order for a story to be considered PG-13?
Shannara has not said any canon will be enforced other than "no
homosexuality unless canonical." Natalie has sid "non-canonical is okay
in terms of sexual orientation, but no pairings for the sake of
pairings-- Picard should not be with Riker *or* Troi because there is no
eviednce of such a relationship and it would wreck their owrking
relationship. However, Picard could be with an original gay character
because even though canon presents Picard as het, he could be bi, prefers
women." (I am paraphrasing both; don't get confused by my use of quotes.)
: If the sexual preference of the characters is being singled out as the
: only element of canon which must be maintained in order for a story to
: be considered PG-13 then I must conclude that this rule is using
: Paramount's anti-gay attitude to justify discrimination against gay
: young adults.
If Shannara is correct, yes. If Natalie is correct, no. I wish the
moderators would figure out which version they're going to go with,
because I will archive the group if Natalie is correct, but not if
Shannara is, for reasons i've explained.
Aleph Press
Natalie Kim Bjorklund (umbj...@cc.umanitoba.ca) wrote:
: I have discussed this with Shannara. We discussed it at length. By slash
: she means a sexually oriented love story that includes explicit sex that
: involves canon characters outside their established canon sexuality. If
: you want to redefine slash as a love story that is not explicit, is
: consistent with canon sexuality, and remains at the PG-13 level, then
: some slash would be acceptable on our proposed group.
This sounds perfect. If by "no slash" you and she both *mean* "no exually
explicit stories featuring characters who are canonically portrayed as
het having a relationship", obviously it's not within the charter of a no
NC-17 group. However, if stories where two canonically-portrayed-as-het
characters are established as having a romance, but there is no sex in
the story (rather like amny P/C's and J/C's where the characters may talk
about their relationship, but the story ends with the first kiss-- in
fact there *are* Garak/Bashir stories like this on the archive-- Roman a
Clef, for instance, which I haven't put up yet, has no sex)-- if these
stories are acceptable, then we have no argument with you whatsoever.
: This does NOT mean I'm homophobic, that I think alt.startrek.creative
: should be shut down, or that I'm passing judgement on those who read,
: write, and enjoy NC-17, or that I believe in censorship. It simply means
: NC-17 is not this vanilla's cup of Earl Grey and I would better enjoy a
: newsgroup where it wasn't around. Personal taste and personal taste
: only.
The argument is not that your attempt to get away from NC-17 stories
makes you homophobic, but that your attempt to get away from *non*-NC-17
stories which have ne sex but do feature two canonically het charaters
having a same-sex relationship would be homophobic. The reason why this
is homophobic is that the argument "but Bashir is het in canon, so he
*wouldn't* be interested in garak" is much like saying "but Sisko has
onlydated black women in canon, so he *wouldn't* be interested in your
white-skinned Mary Sue." Does the fact that Sisko has only dated black
women mean Sisko could *never* be interested in a white woman? Well,
maybe, but it's open to interpretation. Maybe Sisko just isn't turned on
by pale skin-- or maybe it's the cowardly Powers That Be trying to avoid
controversy by keeping their star from mixing races. (Notice Picard only
dates white women, even if they're aliens. Lesser characters get to mix
races, but apparently Picard and Sisko have to stick to "their own kind.")
So if you were creating your no-NC-17 group, and someone wrote a sweet
and totally non-sexual romance about Sisko falling in love with a Bajoran
woman with pale skin, and you rejected it, even though there was no sex
and no pornographic material in it whatsoever, because "in canon, Sisko
only dates black women", you would be opening yourself up to two
charages: firstly, that you're racists, and secondly, that even if you're
not racists, you're imposing your idea of "canon" on a group whose
*charter* is only to keep out the porn. If it's the first, obviously you
have a problem. You wouldn't be doing ttens of mixed race any favors by
creating a group which disguises a racist, "races shouldn't mix" agenda
under the heading of protecting children and creating a place safe from
smut. But suppose that's not it? Suppose you totally support the rights
of real life blacks and whites to have romances, but it doesn't fit your
interpretation of Sisko's character so you won't allow it? Well, *then*
you're practicing censorship. Not the kind of censorship a madorator is
supposed to practice, to keep a group on-topic, but the kind that says "I
don't like it so you can't post it, *even though* it meets the guidelines
for the group's charter." At that point, you could well reject my
non-romantic Q stories because they violate the canon we've seen in "Q
and Grey." You could reject stories that explore plotical ramifications
you don't believe in. If you are not racist, but you reject stories where
sisko has a non-sexual romance with a "white" person, beccause in canon
he doesn't, then you are practicing censorhsip based on personal taste.
That's the analogy for "rejecting non-sexual stories if two caonically
het characters are having a same-sex romance." But! If you are not doing
that, the argument disappears! You're not being homophobes, you're not
being censors, you're not imposing your personal tastes on the group--
all you're doing is creating a group to be free of sex stories. And
that's fine. i support you in that. As long as you stay on your charter,
and don't reject non-sex stories (withou extreme violence or language as
well) because *you* don't agree with the portrayal of the characters.
That's all anyone here is sayng.
Jana C.
In article <3386a08b...@news.nac.net>, pca...@SnPaAcM.net (Paul
Carver) wrote:
> On Thu, 22 May 1997 01:10:01 GMT, in alt.config, shanna...@pnx.com
> wrote:
>
> >There will be no NC-17 stories of any kind on the new group.
> >Neither hetero nor homosexual. Non-explicit stories about
> >homosexual characters will be fine, but the sexuality of
> >established characters will be as in canon.
>
> I was under the impression that there are no canonically homosexual
> characters in Star Trek. I have heard rumors that Paramount is
> homophobic and deliberately gives a heterosexual love interest to any
> character that the fans perceive as potentially gay.
>
> I don't understand the logical argument that PG-13 stories must
> maintain canon sexuality. Are there any other areas of canon that
> must be maintained in order for a story to be considered PG-13?
>
> If the sexual preference of the characters is being singled out as the
> only element of canon which must be maintained in order for a story to
> be considered PG-13 then I must conclude that this rule is using
> Paramount's anti-gay attitude to justify discrimination against gay
> young adults.
Paul --
If you are going to apply this sort of argument, then how, what with the
perceived anti-gay attitudes of TPTB, how can you even stand to support
_any_ of Paramount's creations? If you and others feels _so_ strongly
about the gay rights issue, why not boycott everything that comes out of
the evil, anti-gay Paramount?
-jc-
--
as...@hotmail.com
For those of you that have forgotten or didn't see the original
post on this subject, this was it:
>This is an official call for discussion to create an offshoot
>of alt.startrek.creative that will answer the pleas for no slash and no graphic adult stories.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>The proposed new group would be alt.startrek.creative.pg-13
>Natch, stories posted there would also be posted on a.s.c., just
>like stories posted on a.s.c.erotica are also posted on a.s.c., but
>it should satisfy those begging for a family-friendly group.
>I'm just offering my services to help in the creation of the thing.
>These people's requests are reasonable, in a sense, but no
>way should a.s.c. change. I believe a new group is the way
>to go. It will take some work to get it accepted, but Trek
>groups are popular, so it shouldn't be too hard.
Zepp's original post on this was:
>Out of the various suggestions, I think probably the most useful and
>international is alt.startrek.creative.all-ages. I admit to having
>little interest in such an NG myself; OTOH, I fully support its right
>to exist, and if by doing so, it will relieve us of some of the
>outraged wails and wanks, then this cannot but be a Good Thing!
>So, I support, and say, count my vote as a yes to form that group.
>Might not see me in it very often, but I'm all for more peace and
>quiet!
>Greywolf the Wanderer
Nothing has changed from the original post, other that to specify
that non-explicit slash stories about AUTHOR-CREATED characters
are fine. Established characters' sexuality must be as in canon.
I don't know why I'm even bothering, other than to point out
that the stated content of the new group has never changed,
but just because someone couldn't stand the idea of someone
NOT wanting slash in a BRAND NEW group (not talking about
a.s.c), well then somehow those people are not entitled to
read and write what THEY like, only you detractors are allowed
to have free speech.
Greg Berigan
In alt.config, umbj...@cc.umanitoba.ca (Natalie Kim Bjorklund) wrote:
>Secondly, NO ONE said anything about banning any
>slash stories.
Stories of a murder in a Star Trek story have occurred both on air and
in books after all. If I understand the term correctly, a slash story
without sex is simply a murder story. In general, violence is no
stranger to Star Trek.
And besides, you can have sex be a part of a story without verbally
consummating the act between the characters.
>Shanara was quite explicit. No NC-17. Period. Gay/Lesbian stories welcome
>that are NOT explicit in nature. The only limitation is that that
>established canon characters like Sisko and Picard will be expected to
>conform to canon sexuality. Therefore, since Picard is always presented
>as heterosexual, then only stories protraying him as such will be
>allowed. However since Dax has been shown as essentailly bisexual, a
>bisexual story that is not explicit but does show her in a lesbian
>relationship would be perfectly wlecome.
For example, Geordi could get deeply involved with another character,
they could retire to his quarters... and Geordi could be in very good
spirits the next morning. Enough is implied for furthering the plot
without going into a play-by-play of the act. The camera falls away so
to speak. But of course, to maintain the character, the relationship
must end by some driving element of the plot. Or at least for _our_
Geordi. She could run of with his quantum transporter clone.
Sounds like an alt.startrek.creative.canonic group (canonic meaning the
portrayals of established characters, ships, and other technology are
true to established canon, but not a canonicAL story that actually is a
part of the canon of Star Trek). Just an idea that came to me upon
reading this article. I'd probably read it.
From my checking, there is an a.s.c.adult newsgroup, so what's wrong
with getting those posting adult material to the parent group to move?
Are you victims of failing to create a misc group to replace the parent
group? After all, a misc group is a sibling group of disjoint charter
to its siblings, while a retained non-misc group has a superset charter
to its child groups.
(Yeah, I know, it is futile to replace an alt group with any group.)
--
_-<#)-=# http://cse.unl.edu/~gberigan/War-of-the-Worlds.html
___/___
_-~_--<###) "Take a look around you at the world we've come to know
<~c>' __--< Does it seem to be much more than a crazy circus show
\_--=____#) Maybe from the madness something beautiful will grow...."
Keikimo
I promised myself in the very beginning, I wouldn't be a part of this
discussion. And now...here I am, once again.
In article <3386401c...@news.pnx.com>, shanna...@pnx.com says:
>> If you want to
>>: establish a non-explicit stories group, great. If you want to establish a
>>: slash-free group at least have the courage to admit to what you're doing.
>
>Ahhh. Get a life! You go do your thing, and we'll do ours.
>From the very first post, we said the new group would have no slash.
Sigh...its amazing. In the course of a month we've now combined two
arguments into one post - against NC-17 and against Slash. Okay, personally
I'm very happy that we've all come to a decision that makes (most)
everyone happy. Everyone gets to post at ASC, I will post to ASCE as well
and those who cannot stand to wade through my NC-17 drivel can go to
ASCpg (Or ASCF or ASCA or whatever it's called now.) However, I think
you should reconsider the slash part of the newsgroup. There are a lot
of good arguments for having PG rated slash on the newsgroup, actually
there are a lot of good reasons as to why we shouldn't pair up characters
for the sake of pairing up characters. But I'm not sure why you don't
want slash on your newsgroup. The Paris/Kim playboy series by Torch,
minus the few sex scenes in the middle, talks about a wholesome relationship
between two guys. Personally, I think if someone CAN write this stuff
without turning it into sex-fiction, they should be able to post in
an all-ages newsgroup.
Again, something that was supposed to try and alliviate some of the
tensions here between the two encampments just got a little more nasty.
I'm not sure if I caught all the messages posted (There's been quite a
few of them lately) but from the gist of what I got, this was a friendly
debate over whether to include slash or not. How we deteriorated once
again into the debate about homophobias, (Both Paramounts and this
newsgroups) and also into poisonous barbs like get a life, is beyond me.
Sometimes I wonder if we're going to be split down the middle forever,
in an eternal ASC civil war...
Keikimo
torch
In article <5m8nvg$3p...@elmo.cadvision.com>, kei...@hotmail.com (Keikimo)
wrote, among other things:
But I'm not sure why you don't
> want slash on your newsgroup. The Paris/Kim playboy series by Torch,
> minus the few sex scenes in the middle, talks about a wholesome relationship
> between two guys.
Not that I'm not grateful for the endorsement, Keikimo, but I think you're
thinking about another series; the playboy series is built around sex
scenes, and only one of the eight stories is *not* rated NC-17. I still
think that, as you said, it's a series that deals with a wholesome
relationship between two guys, but the love affair is tracked largely by
the development of their physical relationship and its impact on their
emotions.
The reason I wanted to correct this is that I don't want anyone to look
the stories up in the mistaken belief that they are relatively free from
sex; anyone doing that would probably get a bit of a shock. ;-)
torch
--
Remove the x to reply.
Natalie Kim Bjorklund
>: >There will be no NC-17 stories of any kind on the new group.
>: >Neither hetero nor homosexual. Non-explicit stories about
>: >homosexual characters will be fine, but the sexuality of
>: >established characters will be as in canon.
>
>white woman? in canon, even when these two were paired with aliens, it
>was always aliens played by a woman of heir respective race, black or white.
>
>Natalie says that what you are rejecting is any story with sex, and that
>same-sex relationships between two canonically het characters is all
>right if one can justify it within the series, so long as there is no
>sex. (For instance, once could justify a relationship between Paris and
>Kim, but not a relationship between Janeway and Paris. Or, to use
>Natalie's example, Picard could have a fling with a homosexual original
>character, because just because canon has put him with women doesn't mean
>he would *never* sleep with a man-- that's a judgment call. But he
>couldn't have a fling with Riker, *or* Deanna, beccause it violaetes
>their professional relationship. I still think this smacks a little of
>"you write what we like", but it's much more open than what I had
>previosuly thought.)
>
>So which is it, Shannara? Are we to take your word on the subject (which,
>given that Dax is the only canonically bisexual character, means that
>non-sexual stories about garak and Bashir cannot be posted), or
>Natalie's?
>
I am writing the first draft of the FAQ today and I will be FAQ
maintainer for the new group. So the first draft will have MY version of
what is and is not acceptable. For the record, if the group excludes gay
and lesbian relationships simply because they are gay or lesbian then
this will be the shortest FAQ maintainer's office in the history of
internet. I have every confidence in both George and Shannara that this
will not be the case however. Once we have thrashed out a draft that all
three of us agree on we will post it. It can be discussed again then.
Also we have agreed that we should have a way of dealing with appeals
that address either:
1) How could you call THAT appropriate for children!
2) How could you call THAT inappropriate for children!
I am now asking for volunteers interested in being part of our appeal
board of moderators to offer us opinions in the case of dispute. We
don't yet have all the details worked out about how this will go but if
you are concerned about homophobia, censorship, and the like, then please
volunteer for the appeal board. I would especially like to invite Taffy
and Alara to be part of such an appeal board because they both have
excellent perspectives and would help us be certain that undue unfair
censorship and/or homophobia DO NOT become part of the
alt.startrek.all-ages mandate.
Being a moderator means you will occasionally make mistakes and
occasionally your point of view won't reflect the best point of view. We
are human after all.
We would appreciate support in this, not accusations, thank you.
Natalie
Zepp
>>>Neither hetero nor homosexual. Non-explicit stories about
>>>homosexual characters will be fine, but the sexuality of
>>>established characters will be as in canon.
This right here is why I backed off a bit. I still support the
creation of the group -- but I vehemently disagree as to what canon
is. Therefore I have a conflict of interest with the founders. I do
hope that stories posted in the new group, if it gets made, *will*
also be posted to a.s.c., as I would love to read them. But I cannot
support the concept that suddenly, in the 24th century, there are no
gay or bi characters.
IDIC must prevail, I suppose -- but on this, we will never agree. So
it goes. Yes, I have changed my mind somewhat -- I had to, once this
portion of the wording was pointed out to me. The idea that a
completely non-seuxally explicit story is somehow bad or offensive
simply because the characters are gay -- bothers me. The founders of
this group have the same freedom of speech that I do, and I support
said right -- it does not mean I have to either agree with or approve
of them -- merely that I tolerate their existence. And I do. May it
go well for them, if this is really what they seek.
Greywolf the Wanderer, sadder and a wee bit wiser
Aleph Press
Greg Berigan (gber...@cse.unl.edu) wrote:
: In alt.config, umbj...@cc.umanitoba.ca (Natalie Kim Bjorklund) wrote:
: >Secondly, NO ONE said anything about banning any
: >slash stories.
: Stories of a murder in a Star Trek story have occurred both on air and
: in books after all. If I understand the term correctly, a slash story
: without sex is simply a murder story. In general, violence is no
: stranger to Star Trek.
No. Slash in terms of Trek is a story where two same-sex charaacters have
a relationship. There is no violence implied. I think you're thinking of
snuff.
: From my checking, there is an a.s.c.adult newsgroup, so what's wrong
: with getting those posting adult material to the parent group to move?
: Are you victims of failing to create a misc group to replace the parent
: group? After all, a misc group is a sibling group of disjoint charter
: to its siblings, while a retained non-misc group has a superset charter
: to its child groups.
It sounds like you're from alt.config and not asc, so I urge those of us
on asc who have had this argument before not to attack you, you didn't
know. ASCE (alt.startrek.creative.erotica) was *not* created as a split
from alt.startrek.creative, but as a replacement for
alt.sex.fetish.startrek. It also has truly sucky propagation and is
spammed to death, so that's why we argued that adult stories still belong
on asc.
Ruth Gifford
Interesting isn't it? Here we are, writers and/or readers of fan fiction
about a universe that preaches the doctrine of equality (whether Trek lives
up to that doctrine is another tangled web, and I ain't going there today)
but the mere thought that some of the established characters might be even bi
let alone gay, sends people into a tizzy. Do people think that homosexuality
is a disease that will be "cured" by the 24th century? Do they really think
that none of the people in Starfleet will be gay? What about being bi? I
don't remember the percentage of people who claim to be bi, or who have had
the occasional gay encounter, but it's higher than the 10% that we usually
get as the percentage of gays in the population. Do we really believe that
*none* of our established characters ever walked on the other side of the
street, even if it was only to discover that they liked the opposite sex
bettr after all? Apparently those thoughts are too dangerous and too much to
bear for some people. Why??
I get sad every time I read this thread, and a lot of people probably think I
should just shut up now. They're probably right, but does anyone understand
just how hypocritical the whole arguement is? To hide behind the Almighty
Canon in only *one* area, over only *one* issue is mindboggling and indicates
either massive self-delusion or rampant hypocrisy. Shannara made a point of
assuring the underage poster that her P/C story would be welcome on ascaa.
Why? It ain't canon unless it ends with one of them backing off from the
relationship and the other one staring soulfully into the camera as the music
heads toward the credits.
So if you really want the stories posted to ascaa to not go where Paramount
won't go, then there can't be *any* P/C (never happened), J/C (admitted
attraction but they both backed off), R/T (it happened, but it's over), J/J
(sorry she's with Worf now), P/T (they haven't gone there yet), K/T (that
nevr happened eithr, mores the pity) and so on, unless there stories that
ankowledge the attraction and then deny the relationship. *PERIOD*
The minute you argue that the attraction is implied, then you must either
allow every attraction that others can infer from the show, or explain why
the idea that some of these characters might be gay or bi offends you so
much. But if you simply single out same sex relationships, how can you avoid
charges of homophobia? I really *don't* see homophobes everywhere. The fact
that I'm gay may make me more aware than most that homophobia is alive and
well in this world, but I don't automatically assume that everyone I meet is
a homophope. When I do see it however, I'll point it out, the same way I
object to racism, sexism and so on.
Finally, *why* hasn't the question that several of us have asked been
answered? Has any attempt been made to work out the contradiction between
Natalie's comments and Shannara's?
To Greywolf:
Ya know, I can really relate to sadder and wiser. I'm thinking of finding an
old nag, calling it a warsteed and roaming the countryside looking for
windmills. Can you possibly lend me a lance or two?
Ruth
still banging her head against the wall in a seemingly futile cause.
--
***************************************************
* Ruth | FAQ Maintainer for *
* Gifford | alt.startrek.creative.erotica *
*-------------------------------------------------*
* Better living thru TrekSmut--See for Yourself! *
* http://www.capital.net/users/rjs1/asce *
***************************************************
The Bad News: Because homophobia still exists,
not everyone you invited to your wedding will come.
The Good News: Because homophobia still exists,
not everyone you invited to your wedding will come.
The Essential Guide to Lesbian and Gay Weddings
Tess Ayers and Paul Brown
Ruth Gifford
On 25 May 1997 13:27:27 GMT, Natalie Kim Bjorklund wrote:
snip
>I am now asking for volunteers interested in being part of our appeal
>board of moderators to offer us opinions in the case of dispute. We
>don't yet have all the details worked out about how this will go but if
>you are concerned about homophobia, censorship, and the like, then please
>volunteer for the appeal board. I would especially like to invite Taffy
>and Alara to be part of such an appeal board because they both have
>excellent perspectives and would help us be certain that undue unfair
>censorship and/or homophobia DO NOT become part of the
>alt.startrek.all-ages mandate.
>
>Being a moderator means you will occasionally make mistakes and
>occasionally your point of view won't reflect the best point of view. We
>are human after all.
>
>We would appreciate support in this, not accusations, thank you.
If this is the final word, you have *my* uspport for what it's worth. In the
ASCE FAQ, I have section that lists the other startrek ngs and the other
creative ngs. The idea (Stephen's idea actually) behind that section is to
let people know where to post if they didn't think that their story belonged
on ASCE. I've been intending to update the FAQ before I get totally caought
in wedding fever, and I'll go ahead and add ascaa to the list. I don't know
if you've written a FAQ before, Natalie, but I'd like to recommned Stephen's
massive effort. It was a lot of help when I was revising the ASCE FAQ.
I'm looking forward to reading your FAQ, and I'm glad this discussion has
finally been resolved.
Ruth
feeling better about the Trek creative community; now back to Chapter Five
of ACT.
Ruth Gifford
On 25 May 1997 08:11:09 GMT, torch wrote:
>
>In article <5m8nvg$3p...@elmo.cadvision.com>, kei...@hotmail.com (Keikimo)
>wrote, among other things:
>
> But I'm not sure why you don't
>> want slash on your newsgroup. The Paris/Kim playboy series by Torch,
>> minus the few sex scenes in the middle, talks about a wholesome
relationship
>> between two guys.
>
>The reason I wanted to correct this is that I don't want anyone to look
>the stories up in the mistaken belief that they are relatively free from
>sex; anyone doing that would probably get a bit of a shock. ;-)
On the other hand, anyone looking for a really good series about the growth
of a relationship should run, not walk, and grab these stories. They're . .
. *real* is the best way to describe them. Not only do they ring true to the
characters, they aslo ring true to RL.
Ruth
Paul Carver
On 24 May 1997 07:43:11 GMT, in alt.config, ja...@wynet.edu (Jana C.)
wrote:
>If you are going to apply this sort of argument, then how, what with the
>perceived anti-gay attitudes of TPTB, how can you even stand to support
>_any_ of Paramount's creations? If you and others feels _so_ strongly
>about the gay rights issue, why not boycott everything that comes out of
>the evil, anti-gay Paramount?
>
I'm not sure what you mean by supporting Paramount, I've never said
anything about supporting Paramount. We were discussing the potential
creation of a newsgroup which would be for PG-13 or young-adult
stories. Certain people have been proposing rules which would in
effect ban any suggestion of a same sex relationship. This is even
more disturbing considering that the possibility of making this a
moderated group.
I have no objection to a newsgroup dedicated to bigotry as long as it
is clearly as such. I strongly object to a newsgroup identified as
young adult which uses a round-about way of censoring stories based on
same sex relationships since young adults who are attracted to members
of their own gender are in no way inferior to young adults who are
attracted to members of the opposite gender.
My previous post has not been answered. Is canon going to be
rigorously enforced in this new group or is canon only going to be
used to reject same sex stories.
George Morgan
Hail Graywolf!
This is exactly the best sentiment for those who like slash. Those of us
who don't like slash now have our place where we can have our haven.
If you must piss on us, Graywolf, be advised that I do have a bucket and
disinfectant :)
George D. Morgan
Zepp <ze...@snowcrest.net> wrote in article
<3386794a...@news.snowcrest.net>...
>
> Gawd. I 'ad no idea... Last time I paid any attention <I've missed
> most of the last 3 days worth of messages ;-( > the idea was just a
> non-explicit NG for them as don't like NC17 type stuff. Well, hell.
> If it's no-slash-here they want, piss on 'em. They can do it without
> my support -- I'd be pretty goddamn hypocritical if I suddenly started
> wanking about slash, now, woulodn't I? <evil and preverted grin>
>
> Gaaah. I say it's spinach, and I say the hell with it.
>
> Greywolf the Wanderer, Animist, Furvert, and TOS Author
George Morgan
Ms. Rogers:
Here's another monkey-wrench in the works: I am one of the moderators.
George D. Morgan
Aleph Press <al...@netcom.com> wrote in article
<alephEA...@netcom.com>...
> Ruth Gifford (eres...@cyberg8t.com) wrote:
>
> : Finally, *why* hasn't the question that several of us have asked been
> : answered? Has any attempt been made to work out the contradiction
between
> : Natalie's comments and Shannara's?
>
> Dunno if you've seen it yet, but Natalie has. The moderators are going to
> try to pull themselves together, but the short form is that natalie is
> FAQ Maintainer, and the FAQ she writes will reflect her views. She's also
> suggested an appeals board. So watch for her post. (Which you will
> probably get before this one... :-( )
George Morgan
Mr. Carver:
Just so you know, it's done. It's called alt.startrek.creative.all-ages.
Object all you wish. You have your place. We have ours. Live with it.
Paul Carver <pca...@SnPaAcM.net> wrote in article
<339378b8...@news.nac.net>...
Carmen Williams
George Morgan wrote:
>
> Hail Graywolf!
>
> This is exactly the best sentiment for those who like slash. Those of us
> who don't like slash now have our place where we can have our haven.
>
> If you must piss on us, Graywolf, be advised that I do have a bucket and
> disinfectant :)
>
> George D. Morgan
I wasn't planning to get involved in this, but I just feel the need
to say this.
If you want alt.startrek.creative.no_slash, Mr. Morgan, then please,
go create it. I certainly wouldn't mind. But why should slash of
the non-explicit variety automatically get banned from
alt.startrek.creative.all_ages? Adult stories and slash stories really
are *not* the same things, as half the newsgroup has been pointing out...
Carmen W.
Paul Carver
On Fri, 23 May 1997 04:53:57 GMT, in alt.config, shanna...@pnx.com
wrote:
> I consider "slash" by definition to be explicit in nature.
That's nice, but it would probably be better if you use the existing
definition of slash rather than creating your own. A romantic story
without any explicit sex can still be slash.
>The new group is for non-explicit stories.
>Alara, you're welcome to archive any of it or none of it.
>You work very hard at archiving and do a good job of it
>and I won't think any less of you if you decide not to
>include the new group because it doesn't allow slash.
>Anyone is welcome to frequent the group, or not.
>The group is being created to provide an alternative.
I think a young-adult group is a great idea. I object to your
classification of same-sex relationships as inappropriate for young
adults. If you want a newsgroup that only allows stories that you
like then say so. Stop claiming that same-sex relationships are
inherently explicit or inherently inappropriate for young adults (many
of whom are attracted to members of the same sex.)
George Morgan
Ms. Rogers:
I don't think I'm on a power trip here. I've been asked, I think it's a
good idea, and I'm doing it. Call it your influence and Keikimo's too. On
the other hand, CameronB has mortally offended me, while Ruth Gifford and
Atara Stein have gotten under my skin. I have the feeling I've gotten into
something my box can't handle, but I am literate and, theoretically,
intelligent. As far as I know, all I have to do is read and vote, and I am
only one of three. There is an appeal process being set up. My opinion
about the appeal process is that if an author needs to appeal, he or she
should be posting on ASC anyway.
George D. Morgan
Aleph Press <al...@netcom.com> wrote in article
<alephEA...@netcom.com>...
>
> So what you're saying is that you, too, would like to go on a power trip
> and exclude stories that are acceptable for young people simply because
> they don't fit your view of how the characters would act?
>
> If this is what you believe, then you don't understand Usenet and you
> don't understand the responsibilities of a moderator. It doesn't matter
> if you *like* the story. It matters if it is on topic. If you create a
> group intended for children and family viewing, and then exclude *any*
> stories that don't have sex or violence, your group is no longer about
> children and family viewing. It's about your personal tastes. Well, if
> you want a forum that caters to your personal tastes, create a Web site,
> don't waste bandwidth with a newsgroup.
Ruth Gifford
On Mon, 26 May 1997 14:29:16 GMT, Aleph Press wrote:
>If this is what you believe, then you don't understand Usenet and you
>don't understand the responsibilities of a moderator. It doesn't matter
>if you *like* the story. It matters if it is on topic. If you create a
>group intended for children and family viewing, and then exclude *any*
>stories that don't have sex or violence, your group is no longer about
>children and family viewing. It's about your personal tastes. Well, if
>you want a forum that caters to your personal tastes, create a Web site,
>don't waste bandwidth with a newsgroup.
Or maybe a moderated mailing list might be better. People have very differnt
expectations of mailing lists than they do of Usenet groups.
>I don't care what your personal opinion of slash is. I have archived
>things that were so terrible they made me want to barf. I have archived
>things that were so offensive they made me want to castrate the poster. I
>am the archivist for this newsgroup, and therefore, if the material fits
>the purpose of the archive-- to record all stories posted to this group--
>I have to archive it, whether I believe in it or not. A moderated group
>should work the same way. Regardless of whether you *like* slash or not,
>if the material is PG-13 rated, it belongs on an all-ages newsgroup.
>Otherwise the group is *not* a forum for all ages and you may as well
>change the name to
>alt.startrek.creative.stories.shannara.george.and.natalie.all.like.
Alara, if Greywolf comes up with those lances I asked for, shall we both tilt
at windmills together? I'd like to see Shannara and George realize that
moderating a newsgroup is not a lisence to play God.
>Besides, I hope you realize we're discussing an exrtemely tiny fraction
>of stories. Your group will *not* suddenly become flooded with non-sexual
>slash stories, for the simple reason that most slashers like to write
>sex. I think the argument is largely being brought up only because
>recently, we *have* had some non-sexual slash posted to the group. But I
>think the proportion is less than .1% of the entire archive.
And this is what I don't understand at all. Why are they *so* afraid and
replused by this .1 % of all the PG-13 material? It's not like it's actually
going to have guys doing guys or anything gross like that. If it's so
offensive and scary that neither George nor Shannara can even read it read
it, maybe they should ask anything that's slash to be mailed *only* to
Natalie so she can make the PG-13 call.
Ruth
George Morgan
Ms. Gifford.
Deal with it. I have to, and now, so do you!
George Morgan
Ms. Williams:
Nothing is automatic here. I am one of three moderators who votes on what
gets into ASCA. If I don't like a story, I'm going to vote against it. If
Shannara and Natalie like it, then I am SOL.
I appreciate your concern, and I hope I can settle it for you.
George D. Morgan
Carmen Williams <ari...@erols.com> wrote in article
<338A0F...@erols.com>...
Lyric
George Morgan wrote:
>
> Ms. Gifford.
>
> Deal with it. I have to, and now, so do you!
Actually, I think she's dealt with it QUITE well.
Ruth Gifford
On Mon, 26 May 1997 03:01:10 GMT, Paul Carver wrote:
snip
>My previous post has not been answered. Is canon going to be
>rigorously enforced in this new group or is canon only going to be
>used to reject same sex stories.
That would be the $64 question. I've asked it, but Shannara hasn't answered
(granted both my ISPs aren't the fastest). Since she told a P/C writer that
PG-13 Picard/Crusher romances would be OK, I'm thinking not, because, unless
the story ends without any resolution in the relationship, it's not supported
by canon.
Ruth Gifford
On 26 May 1997 09:02:23 GMT, George Morgan wrote:
>
>Ms. Rogers:
>
>Here's another monkey-wrench in the works: I am one of the moderators.
>
>George D. Morgan
Just when you thought it was safe!
George,
If you're going to throw a monkey-wrench into the discussion, do everyone the
courtesy of explaining what it is. Are you saying here that you are going to
reject any slash story, regardless of whether or not it fits into the PG-13,
Young-Adult, All-Ages category? Or are you just trying to get a rise out of
Alara?
Natalie seems to be of the opnion (and yes Alara, I saw that post after I
psted--two different ISPs and I still get lags) that non-explicit slash
stories are OK. OTOH Shannara is calling for no slash unless it's supported
by filmed canon, although I haven't seen any post in which she explains how
she's going to deal with other storeis ath aren't supported by filmed canon,
which essentially includes *all* fanfic, yours George, mine, Alara's,
Macedon's, Stephen's, *everybody's*.
Instead of stating *your* position on all of this, you settle for the above
post which could mean *anything*. I'm glad Alara gave you what for (a post I
did see; you go Alara!), although it seems that your flip little statement
was abiguous enough so that you can later look innocent and claim she was
picking on you.
Sheesh!
So what is it gang? alt.strtrek.creative.all.ages or
alt.startrek.creative.scared.of.stories.that.aren't.mainstream.and.might.
make.people.think.now isn't.that.scary
Ruth
who has given up hope that one of these days people who argue aganist slash
will explain why it frightens them so.
Natalie Kim Bjorklund
First I would like to thank those who have called for calm to prevail.
Second I would like to thank those who have supported our efforst to
create th alternative group. Finally I would like to especially thank all
of those who have decided to reserve judgement until the FAQ is out.
It is in the process of being written. We are very close to a final
draft. We do not yet have the final draft. When we have it, we will post it.
We have decided there will be an appeal process to ensure all concerns
are aired. We have had several volunteers for our appeal board and we are
designing the appeal process so that everyone can have input whether or
not they are on the board. Only Alara has been confirmed as one of our
board members and I am grateful she has agreed. The others are still
under discussion but i think once the group is chosen and posted everyone
will agree it represents a balanced and fair group representing all views.
Regarding homophobia and the abscence of gays and lesbians on St and an
attempt to make them go away and not exist. Please note that the concern
is groundless and is directly addressed in a positive manner in the FAQ.
I am not prepared to post the FAq yet because we are still discussing
minor details but i think everyone will be very pleased with the even
handednes of the FAQ and the appeal process.
Finally I have not been posting ay more because I have been quite
literally spending hours sorting out FAQs and the appeal process.
PLEASE be patient, be optimistic, and hold your judgements (and flames)
until after the FAQ and the Appeal process are posted.
Natalie
(Who is beginning think maybe negotiating Peace in Middle East should be her
next task. It would be a lot easier!)
Swlove
I have not read the FAQs for the new site and so will reserve some
judgement. That Alara is on the board is a saving grace, even though she
is but one voice.
In principle, I have no problem with the creation of a PG-13 fiction
site. What I am at a loss to understand, is the exclusion of same-sex
romance stories.
I think that the only valid reason for excluding non-graphic slash would
be because it can be a confusing proposition, even for adults. However,
this does not mean that readers below the age of 13 should not be helped
toward an understanding of differing lifestyles at a time when they are
still open to new views.
The portrayal of loving relationships between two adults of the same
gender is something that should be encouraged and applauded. Excluding the
stories presumes there is something inherently wrong in the behavior. I
feel this sends the wrong message, offering a judgment that young readers
might carry with them into the "real" world and into adulthood.
As fanfic writers, we influence opinions, views --- and prejudices. The
appropriate message is that loving relationships should be treasured -, no
matter the gender - for the precious and rare gifts that they are.
sw
Jeanita
5570...@news.snowcrest.net>
<Pine.SOL.3.95q.97051...@rac6.wam.umd.edu> <33839b97...@news.pnx.com> <3386a08b...@news.nac.net> <5m5oev$h3t$1...@nntp.cyberg8t.com> <33888d8f....@news.snowcrest.net> <5ma549$3a6$1...@nntp.cyberg8t.c:
om> <alephEA...@netcom.com> <01bc69b3$b0a99ee0$791c78cc@morgan1>
<5mcq1h$m68$1...@nntp.cyberg8t.com> <01bc6a23$b07839c0$ca1678cc@morgan1>:
Organization: Capital PC User Group, Inc., Rockville, Maryland, USA
Distribution:
George Morgan (pata...@evansville.net) wrote:
: Ms. Gifford.
:
: Deal with it. I have to, and now, so do you!
:
:
"Deal with it." This is the response of a man self-described as
intelligent and literate? You disappoint me, George, though I find it
fascinating that when your logic is put to the test you and Shanarra both
resort to childishness. If this is your consistent response to pressure,
how long will it be before you turn on one another?
Jeanita
--
Ruth Gifford
On 26 May 1997 22:21:29 GMT, George Morgan wrote:
>
>Ms. Gifford:
>
>1. Moderating not a license to play God, but moderating is a mandate to
>exercise judgement. If you don't trust mine, then do like some of your
>colleagues have been suggesting and don't come over to ASCA. You won't
>like it there any more than I would like it on ASCE.
Moderating is a duty. You are expected to be scrupulously fair in carrying
out that duty. If, as Natalie has said, the FAQ will allow for same-sex
stories to be posted on ASCAA as long as they do not contain explicit sex or
violence, then your duty as a moderator will be to allow them to be posted.
If a story sucks rocks because it's unbelievably badly written, too bad, it's
still your duty to allow it to be posted as long as it fits the parameters.
Knowing Alara's high standards, we should all be glad that she views her
poosition as archivist as a duty, because she archives *everything*. Your
(and Shannara's and Natalie's) duty will be to simply weed out stories that
don't fit the parameters of the ng. And now, as we all wait to see what
those parameters are, I suggest you think about what you're going to do if
the FAQ allows for non-explicit slash.
As for rather or not I'd like ASCAA, how do you know? While we all know
*your* opinion on slash, you have no idea what I think of all ages stuff (did
you know I've actually managed to write an utterly G rated serious story in
my 2 year ASC/ASCE career?). Maybe I would like it there. If I didn't, I
sure as hell would insult the writers who put time and effort into their
stories by making a graphic public announcement of my dislike.
>2. As for your .1% figure, that .1% was all I was getting my first few
>days on this newsgroup. I do not like the idea of Gresham's Law operating
>on ASC, but apparantly it is.
May I suggest that before you get snide, you really *read* a person's post.
It'll save you the embarassment of looking like a fool. My .1% number was in
refference to Alara's point that of the slash that's written and posted to
ASC only .1% of it would qualify for a PG-13 group. I'm well aware that
slash makes up more than .1% of the stories posted on ASC. Hell, I've
probably written .1% of ASC's slash all by myself and there are writers who
are a lot more prolific than I. The writers like writing it, and,
considering the responses I get after posting a story, quite a few readers
like to read it.
Finally, let me tell you something. I may have gotten under your skin by
reacting negatively when you insulted my genre and by extensionn my writing,
but consider this. I *will* jump down the throat of the first person that
tells you or anyone else not to post your G and PG-13 stories to ASC because
there's ASCAA for that. Do you think I like every bit of TrekSmut or even
slash that comes down the pike? Hell no, there are stories I cross the
street to avoid having to read. I don't even like all the bdsm that gets
written. But it belongs on a group dedicated to Star Trek fanfiction and
I'll fight like hell for all of it. I happen to believe very strongly in fan
writing; as I've said before anything that turns us from being passive
viewers and into active participants in a creative process is a good thing.
If nothing else, it found me my future wife, made me a lot of friends, nad
gave me the confidence that it takes to stand up for myself.
Ruth
Aleph Press
: 1. Moderating not a license to play God, but moderating is a mandate to
: exercise judgement. If you don't trust mine, then do like some of your
: colleagues have been suggesting and don't come over to ASCA. You won't
: like it there any more than I would like it on ASCE.
: 2. As for your .1% figure, that .1% was all I was getting my first few
: days on this newsgroup. I do not like the idea of Gresham's Law operating
: on ASC, but apparantly it is.
No, no, no. The stories you complined about were *erotica*. You weren't
saying "there are too many stories about Garak and Basjir having tea!"
You complained about *erotic* stories. The argument is that .1% of all
stores (or less) are slash stories that are not erotic. Most slash *is*
erotic and does *not* belong on a newsgroup for children. No one thinks
it should. We are discussing the stuff that is *not* erotic, which is a
very small percentage of the total and which is not what you complained
about when you complained about slash stories.
Lyric
Greg,
The term "slash" meaning same-sex stories came about from the first ones
of the genre - stories about Kirk and Spock. These stories were
indicated by "Kirk/Spock" or "K/S." And somehow that little "/" in the
middle became the moniker for the stories.
You'll see listings for J/C (Janeway/Chakotay), B/P (Be'lanna/Paris),
J/J (Jadzia/Julian), etc. Yet those are not "slash" stories. (though you
gotta be careful not to confuse Picard/Crusher with Paris/Chakotay...)
Greg Berigan wrote:
>
> al...@netcom.com (Aleph Press) wrote:
> >Greg Berigan (gber...@cse.unl.edu) wrote:
> >>In alt.config, umbj...@cc.umanitoba.ca (Natalie Kim Bjorklund) wrote:
>
> >>> Secondly, NO ONE said anything about banning any
> >>> slash stories.
>
> >> Stories of a murder in a Star Trek story have occurred both on air and
> >> in books after all. If I understand the term correctly, a slash story
> >> without sex is simply a murder story. In general, violence is no
> >> stranger to Star Trek.
>
> > No. Slash in terms of Trek is a story where two same-sex charaacters have
> > a relationship. There is no violence implied. I think you're thinking of
> > snuff.
>
> Strange choice of terminology then. I've never encountered that usage
> of "slash". I saw "slash" and I got an image of the stabbing and
> cutting with sharp knives. Oh well, neither type of story, slash or
> snuff, is among my personal tastes, so the confusion over the types
> won't affect me. Still, those interested in same-sex stories might be
> turned away from stories marked as "slash".
>
> Well, whatever non-obvious name you want to call those stories, I guess
> I don't understand the issues involved. I haven't read a.s.c in a long
> time, and that was when I was looking for good parodies and crossovers.
> (And then UNL dropped all the alt groups, only allowing a few back in if
> they met certain educational criteria and were requested.)
>
> It still sounds though that you want a group for stories that are
> canonic. I know a group based along that line would be one I might get
> back into. A "kid-safe" group would not get my interest since I don't
> trust other people's judgements about what is and is not safe for kids.
> That, and I'm not a kid.
>
> --
> _-<#)-=# http://cse.unl.edu/~gberigan/War-of-the-Worlds.html
> ___/___
> _-~_--<###) "Take a look around you at the world we've come to know
> <~c>' __--< Does it seem to be much more than a crazy circus show
> \_--=____#) Maybe from the madness something beautiful will grow...."
Keikimo
Keikimo once again...
In article <01bc6a22$39422600$ca1678cc@morgan1>, "George Morgan" <pata...@evansville.net> says:
>
>Ms. Rogers:
>
>I don't think I'm on a power trip here. I've been asked, I think it's a
>good idea, and I'm doing it. Call it your influence and Keikimo's too.
Oh my gods...ME? I did something? I'm not sure whether I should be
pleased to hear my name come up here or not. Considering the dangerous
trek this thread is taking I'm starting to think it would be better for me
to shut my mouth entirely.
On
>the other hand, CameronB has mortally offended me, while Ruth Gifford and
>Atara Stein have gotten under my skin. I have the feeling I've gotten into
Great...I agree with Ruth and Atara. Now are you so sure my name belongs
with those who influenced you? :) I'm not sure exactly what Ruth and Atara
have written on this lately (I'm really not interested in the PG-13 debate
anyways...) but I'm almost positive that whatever they said are vaild
points. (Of course, I'm only basing this on what they have posted in
the past on discussions like this...not on what I have read...)
>something my box can't handle, but I am literate and, theoretically,
>intelligent. As far as I know, all I have to do is read and vote, and I am
But are you biased? See, the problem with having people violently opposed
to "gay" stories (Which if I recall correctly, you were one of) be on
a voting committee is that you aren't going to be as unbiased as someone
who could care less either way. (I'm not saying I would be a good moderator,
I'm probably too biased...) But then I'm not sure whether you would be
either. And I hate to say this but your attitude about having all this
"power" really bites. You are flauting this in the faces of Alara, Atara
and Ruth...as well as anyone else on this newsgroup. Personally, I think
the idea of having a selection committee is great, but if you have biased
people making it up, what's the point? (It's like saying...hey let's
have an election and then only allowing your candidates to run. Nothing
is accomplished except it makes it look fairer. IMHO)
>only one of three. There is an appeal process being set up. My opinion
>about the appeal process is that if an author needs to appeal, he or she
>should be posting on ASC anyway.
If the voting is fair (Which I haven't been convinced of yet...) then,
yes, I agree. But I think there's too much wavering of what is allowed,
what isn't allowed, who says this, who says that to be totally fair. I
think you need an appeal process, at least for the first little while until
the "final" rules are decided. (And we can be sure there isn't a direct
bias with the judges.) Otherwise, you're just pretending every decision ]
is fair when really it's already been decided from the start.
Always ready to be proven wrong...
Keikimo
(kei...@hotmail.com)
Visit Keikimo's Realm at:
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Corridor/2206
Greg Berigan
GreenWoman
Ruth Gifford wrote:
>To hide behind the Almighty Canon in only *one* area, over only *one* issue is mindboggling<
Agreed! Regardless of the point of departure from canon, *departure
from canon itself* is one of the prime motivations behind most
fanfiction. If TPTB always gave us what we wanted to see, who would be
writing? ;-)
I write very little, and I have had no sex scenes in any of my small
vignettes (so far, anyway). I'm not a big fan of the erotic (as someone
unfortunately flying solo these days, it can get a bit frustrating to
read such stuff) and I don't care for slash (because for the most part
it does seem out of character).
*HOWEVER*, I think that anyone who invests the time and the effort into
putting their story into words for the rest of us to read (OR NOT, AS WE
SO CHOOSE) should be allowed and applauded for doing so! And if those
with children aren't willing to invest time in reviewing what they read,
or those whose beliefs and sensibilities are offended by such things
can't be relied upon to use their own discretion in their reading, it
does not automatically follow that that responsibility should fall upon
the rest of the posters and readers in this group.
As a person who posts here on an extremely limited basis, I have been a
lurker throughout this debate. Now that the issues have been more
clearly defined, I feel a strong need to register my opinon:
Creating a newsgroup in which sexual content is not welcome makes sense,
I suppose. However, regulating who is attracted to whom in fan fiction
set in the Star Trek universe is an unwelcome intrusion into the freedom
of the fanfic writer to explore that which TPTB have not.
GreenWoman (who posts here in an uncharacteristicly vehemant tone and
does not mean to flame anyone, but who feels very strongly about this
issue ...)
gw0...@swansea.ac.uk
On 1997-05-27 swl...@aol.com(Swlove) said:
>What I am at a loss to understand, is the exclusion
>of same-sex romance stories.
I would have to agree.
Excluding this category of story is, in my opinion, akin to
excluding, say, stories about black people, disabled people, in other words, anything which you do not
perceive to be the norm.
If it is not explicit, and therefore could be given a pg13 rating.
I personally do not read much of the adult stuff, and dislike a good deal of it, but
at the same time, I respect people's rights to write what they wish, so long as it is legal.
Each to their own, and in a newsgroup you are catering for a variety,
however narrow, of different tastes. What you like or dislike should not com into
to it, George, and if it does, I would strongly
suggest that you resign your position as moderator.
Just my couple of pence worth.
73, de Toby Fisher
email: gw0...@swansea.ac.uk, tel. 01792-295896
Nettamer, the best dos-based ppp package around;
visit http://people.delphi.com/davidcolston/ and find out for yourself!
Net-Tamer V 1.08.1 - Registered
Natalie Kim Bjorklund
In article <5n1adc$s6r$3...@news.swan.ac.uk>, <gw0...@swansea.ac.uk> wrote:
>On 1997-05-27 swl...@aol.com(Swlove) said:
> >What I am at a loss to understand, is the exclusion
> >of same-sex romance stories.
>
>I would have to agree.
>Excluding this category of story is, in my opinion, akin to
>excluding, say, stories about black people, disabled people,
in other words, anything which you do not
>perceive to be the norm.
>
has not, never did, and never will exclude any story solely because it has
same sex romance stories, I have forwarded to you both your very own
copy of the FAQ to read at your leisure.
Natalie
Zepp
On 4 Jun 1997 13:32:32 GMT, umbj...@cc.umanitoba.ca (Natalie Kim
Bjorklund) wrote:
Please to be so kind as to repost said FAQ, Natalie -- it seems the
Message Demons have eaten it, and I'm sure I'm not the only one who
actually would like to see the latest version.
Thank you.
Greywolf the Wanderer