NEW: Scully Kink Series Presents: Please Pass the Fish
Connie
Date: Jan 2000
Rating: Adults and Perverts Only
Keywords: X-Files, M/K, and Scully/?
Warning: well telling you would take the fun of shocking you
Author's note: Scully Kink lives again, this time I must say that like Mulder, she deserves a little
prison time. Dedicated to human behavior.
Medical Alert: If you are wearing a heart monitor, using Viagra, Lithium, Prozac, Xanax and/or a
member of the Saint Scully organization, this story is not for you because it may cause vomiting or
constipation.
***************
If you ever get close to a human
And human behavior
Be ready to get confused
There's definitely no logic
To human behavior
But yet so irresistible
There's no map
To human behavior
They're terribly moody
Then all of a sudden turn happy
But, oh, to get involved in the exchange
Of human emotions is ever so satisfying
There's no map
And a compass
Wouldn't help at all
Human behavior
(Lyrics and song by Bjork)
********************
Scully Kink Series Presents: Please Pass the Fish
Scully heard the rumors but she couldn't believe any of it yet. She needed proof before coming
being able to make some kind of decision. She knew Mulder was acting strange but for so many years
'acting strange' was Mulder's normal behavior. However, Scully knew that this bit of information
that was slipped under her door would be the 'straw that broke the camel's back'.
Scully stopped the car and looked at the note in her hand. She read the address and looked up at
the number on the building.
Scully saw the flashing sign that read: Rainbow Motel. She closed her eyes and guessed that it was
just a coincidence and still meant nothing. She was a scientist and therefore she needed solid
proof.
She got out the car and pulled down the legs of her jeans. The ride had the crotch digging in her
pussy and she was sure it was shoving the tampon up her womb.
"This isn't a good idea for this Dana, because you are menstrual. Remember what you learned in
medical school about hormones." She said to herself aloud, and patted her swollen abdomen.
"I should be home now eating a large chocolate chip cheesecake and watching Titanic. Not chasing
after Mulder again." She thought to herself.
She started walking toward the motel room the note had informed her what room Mulder would be at.
She got closer and for a second sniffed the air. Dragging her hand across her crotch and sniffing
she was happy to realize it wasn't her and those deodorant panty liners were doing their job.
Finally she was standing in front of door 1013 of the motel and she could hear the ruckus inside.
She heard voices and grunts. Pulling her gun out and taking off the safety. She raised the gun and
with a good hard kick she kicked open the cheap door.
"Freeze" she yelled and gasped at the scene.
Mulder was on all fours with bit in his mouth. Krycek wore a cowboy hat, boots and fucked Mulder's
ass as he pulled on the reigns. Mulder's eyes were large as saucers when he looked at her.
"Mulder! How could you? This man is a killer, a spy and a traitor. He was involved in the murder of
my sister and your father! He has no morals and he would trade you if it saved his neck in a
heartbeat!" Scully screamed.
Mulder tried to speak but the bit in his mouth garbled his words.
"Shut up Mulder! Don't give me your psycho shit. I have been your friend for how long? Goddamn you
Mulder! Why HIM? Why didn't you ever take me to dinner, tell me I was pretty? Why didn't you ask ME
to be the horse in your sick fuck life? I WOULD HAVE WORN THE BIT FOR YOU MULDER! I WOULD HAVE WORN
THE BIT FOR YOU!"
Scully looked at Krycek and pointed the gun straight at him. She saw the look on his face, and
noticed the surreal, feral grin.
"Don't you dare." She said in a whispered voice.
Alex smiled at Scully and said, "fuck you bitch. And closed his eyes as he began to cum into
Mulder's ass.'
"Nooooooooo!" Screamed Scully and fired shots.
*********************
The Court Room
"Please rise Ms. Dana Scully." The judge said.
Scully stood up in her dark suit and looked up at the judge.
"Ms. Dana Scully, you have been found guilty of 1st degree attempted murder of a federal agent.
Lucky for you Agent Mulder was not killed although the bullet has left him in a wheel chair for the
rest of his life. Not to mention the assault on Alexander Krycek, Agent Mulder's lover that you
committed. This was not only a crime, but also a hate crime. You tried to commit murder their
homosexual relationship. That constitutes as a hate crime according to our state laws. We don't
tolerate hate crimes in my district young lady. So therefore I have no choice than to say this:
Dana Scully you are hereby convicted of both crimes, 1st degree murder and assault and therefore
sentenced to 40 years in a maximum state prison. May you have the time to think about what you
actually did and I wish you well. This court room is dismissed."
Scully turned around and watched Alex Krycek kiss Mulder's forehead and pat his hand. His eyes
looked at her with such hatred and anger. Alex grabbed Mulder's wheel chair and began to wheel him
out.
Scully shook her head and sighed. That night was a complete mess and she should have listened to
herself and known better than to go out looking for Mulder when she had her period.
****************
Prison Sweet Prison
Scully was led to her prison cell with the other recent arrivals. The women of the prison around
her yelled and spat at what they called 'virgins'.
"Hey Red, this isn't Bloomingdales!" someone yelled at her.
She walked by this one cell and tried to keep her eyes on the floor at the white line. However, she
turned her head to look and got a wad of spit on her cheek.
Scully wiped the phlegm from her face and gritted her teeth. She wished she had her gun now.
The guard named Peter halted before a cell and yelled, " prisoner 561693295, Scully!"
Scully walked over to him and he shoved her into the cell, "welcome home Red, this is your new home.
Oh and Red?" the prison guard called her towards him. She walked up to him hesitantly.
"I got a weird thing for red-heads. So don't worry you won't be lonely here." He said and walked
away.
Scully gulped and knew she had to contact her lawyer as soon as she could. She turned around and
looked at her cell and her new cell mate. Her cell mate was big, heavy set woman with glasses. She
looked like she could crush Scully with one arm.
Scully nodded a mute hello and went directly to her section of the cell.
"What's your crime Red?"
"It was 1st degree attempted murder of a federal agent and his male lover." Scully said and began to
unpack her bag.
"NO shit, little thing like you and you shot a cop? My name is Karen by the way." She walked up and
stood behind Scully. She was so close that Scully could feel the woman's breasts on her back. She
tried to move away and the big woman blocked her.
"Hey Red, where you think you are going? You want to know why I am here in prison?" she said,
breathing down Scully's neck. The actual breath was about to make Scully sick to her stomach.
"See, I used to love this man. And well he was a good guy most of the time. Now and then he would
get fucked up and beat me but I was able to get a few punches in too. I mean, the thing I loved
about this guy was the way he ate my pussy. Ever had a really good man eat your pussy Red? A good
pussy eater will munch on your twat until you are finally going to faint. He used to lap me up for
hours. I mean the wet stain on our sheets from my pussy juice would be huge." The woman began to
grind her cunt against Scully's ass. " I mean he would suck on my clit until I was screaming out my
orgasm. I would grab his head and mash my wet pussy against his face sometimes. God I miss that
man's pussy eating mouth."
She grabbed Scully by the hair and bent her over her cot. She spoke as she drove her cunt against
Scully's ass. " So this guy one day makes a big fucking mistake. I am home early from the fucking
social security office where I go collect his checks. He's a bit crazy from Vietnam. Guess what I
see in my house and in my bed?" She grabbed Scully's pants and pulled them down. She held the
ex-FBI Agent with one arm and lowered her own pants too.
Scully could feel the wet, hairy pussy rubbing and grinding against her ass. She tried to speak and
flayed her arms wondering why the guards weren't helping her. However, by now her face was mashed
into the cot and she was now hardly able to breathe.
Her cell mate, Karen, got close to her ear and continued her sexual assault and storytelling, "there
on my bed was my man and he had his face in between the thighs of some red-headed slut. I saw his
mouth working her red cunt lips as they used to work on mine. I saw my man licking pussy juice that
wasn't mine. It was a bad day. Not to mention that I had just gotten my period."
Scully stopped her flaying and listened. Her period?
"That's it Red, you listen up. It was the first day of my period and I should have known better
right? But I got so enraged as that bastard ate that whore's cunt that I grabbed the gun he kept in
the dresser. I began shooting and didn't stop until all the chambers were empty. OH god Red, this
story makes me miss my man so much." She said and rubbed her sticky clit across Scully. Scully was
still amazed at the similarity of the cases that she hardly put up a fight.
The other woman began to chant in Scully's ear, "oh god yeah, nibble my clit baby..nibble my
clit..ahhhhhhhhhhhhhh!" She began to let loose one hell of an orgasm and Scully could feel the
woman's cunt juice dripping down her ass."
The woman finally stood up and raised her pants. She went back to her side of the cell and finally
got on her cot. Within minutes she was sound asleep.
***************
Someone to Watch over me
Mulder sat in this wheel chair and looked out the window. He was tired after having his physical
therapy that morning.
Alex walked in and saw his lover's gloomy disposition.
"Mulder are you all right?" he said and kissed the back of his lover's neck. A spot that used to
drive Mulder into a sexual frenzy and now...
"It isn't fair Alex. WE finally come to terms about our relationship and about what we need to do
to solve the alien conspiracies and she does this to me. I am useless now. Not only to my profession
but to my lover." Mulder said and looked up at Alex.
"Mulder you are not useless and I love you baby." He said and kissed Mulder's face.
"Oh Alex, what about our sex life? My cock is useless. I can't feel anything from the waist down.
But I want to be with you so much. I want to give you pleasure." Mulder said and kissed Alex hard on
the mouth.
The kiss got more intense and finally Alex broke away gasping for air. "Tell me what you want
Mulder?"
"Take off your pants, I might not be able to fuck your ass but I can lick your ass."
Alex nodded and dropped his jeans. He walked over the swing that was now hanging in their bedroom.
As he got on the swing, Mulder wheeled over to him. Within moments Alex was swinging and hanging by
all fours. He felt Mulder grabbed him and suddenly a hot tongue was licking his hairy, dark
asshole. He gasped and arched his back. He opened his legs as far as he could.
"That's it Alex. Let me have that man-pussy." He said and licked deeply.
"Mulder! Oh god Mulder!" Alex yelled and felt Mulder's tongue dive into his asshole. Suddenly, he
felt a pressure building up in his bowels and he remembered now why he shouldn't have had that chili
for lunch.
"Mulder move your head for a second please!" Alex said.
"No." Mulder said.
"But?"
"Let her rip lover boy" Mulder said and continued to lick the man's asshole.
"Holy shit, fuck Mulder you are one sick fucker!" Alex said and eventually let the fart rip through
his asshole. He couldn't hold the build up of gas anymore. He watched, as Mulder's mouth never
stopped for a moment. Alex couldn't take the kinky scene anymore. He began to cum.
Once they were finished and Alex was down the swing, he held Mulder in his arms.
"Listen Mulder, Scully will get hers and that I promise you. You forget I have friends who have
friends who have friends that for a price will do what they are told. Scully will definitely get
hers."
"I am so lucky to have you to watch over me." Mulder said and held his Ratboy lover tightly.
*******************
Please Pass the Fish
Scully was on her knees scrubbing the bathroom floor. It was her job as a newbie in the prison.
She was up to her ears in shit, piss and bloody Kotex pads constantly being thrown on the floor.
She turned around when she heard a cough behind her.
It was Peter the prison guard.
"Well I see the newbie is already on her knees. I looked in your file bitch. And boy aren't you a
temperamental little cunt? You shot your partner when you caught his faggot ass being fucked by his
boyfriend. Can't say I blame you for that shit, personally I am sorry you didn't kill the faggot.
One less fruit the better. Get up bitch! I am talking to you!" He said and grabbed Scully by the
hair.
"But see I don't care if you are some crazy fucking ex-FBI Agent cause to me you ain't nothing but
pussy. I don't think pussy should be heard or treated with no special rights. To me you are
something that the Lord made for fucking and breeding. You hear me bitch?" He said to Scully and
slapped her in the face.
Scully made the judgment error of kicking the prison guard in the balls. When the man recovered and
caught up to her, he punched her so hard that she was unconscious immediately.
When Scully awoke she was naked, spread eagle in her cot. Her cell mate wasn't there either.
However surrounding her were several male prison guards, including Peter, who seemed to be leading
the wild bunch.
"So you finally woke up bitch?" he said with a snarl.
"You can't do this." Scully said with conviction but knew it was futile.
He walked over to Scully and smacked her across the face. "Shut up already, you talk so fucking
much! Remind me of my damn ex-wife. She was always yapping and bitching." He began to unzip his
pants and pulled out his cock. He stroked it in front of her. "See this is the greatest thing God
created because it's the one thing that will make any smart, big mouth woman nothing but a hole to
fuck. My cock doesn't care if you are queen, agent, grandmother, or Nobel Peace PrizeWinner; it
only cares where I stick it. And if that means on your knees, then bitch you are going on your
knees.
He climbed on top of Scully and began to lick and suck her tits. He grabbed his cock and began to
shove into her dry pussy. He had no choice than to spat on his hand and lubricate the head of his
cock. Then with one hard shove he was inside to the hilt.
"You know what Red, I am going to give you the opportunity to be a real woman. The type that god
wanted you to be. I am going to show you that a man's cock is what you got to respect and also give
you the opportunity to fulfill God's commandment to women. Being fruitful. I am going to make sure
I fuck you until you are finally pregnant with child." The man said righteously and began to fuck
Scully's pussy.
Scully closed her eyes and felt each thrust of the prison guard's cock as a knife in her pussy.
When he was finished he climbed off her.
She heard another prison guard say, "come on Pete and pass the fish". They all laughed.
Peter said, " Ok Eric, go on buddy, you are next."
She felt the next guard climb on top of her and begin to fuck her senseless.
She counted each guard that climbed on her that first round; there were four of them. However, she
could tell that only Peter wasn't wearing a rubber. He was making sure she would end up pregnant
with his little redneck child.
One of the guards said, "I am tired of wearing a rubber man!"
"I have an idea" one of them said and grabbed the jar of Vaseline that was in the cell.
"You can't knock up the bitch with shooting in her asshole." The guard named Michael said.
Scully found a sock shoved into her mouth and when she felt the first greased cock in her asshole
she knew why. Her scream if not muffled would have woken up the entire prison.
This time she lost count as the men fucked her no longer virgin asshole.
When Scully awoke it was to the gentle ministrations of her cell mate's. The big lady was wiping up
the blood, shit, cum and piss that was covering her bruised and battered body.
"Well kiddo it seems you pissed someone off big time. You know Red, I like you and I think you and
I better start getting closer if you want my protection."
Scully looked up and nodded to the big woman. She wasn't defeated yet.
******************
A Contract Fulfilled
Alex Krycek sat in a small outdoor caf笠He was smoking a cigarette as he waited for his informant to
arrive. He picked up the habit after the shooting. His asshole was sore from the ass pounding
Mulder gave him from their new collection of dildos and vibrators. They were a poor substitute for
Mulder's delicious cock. That is why Alex had no choice than to take a lover on the side. He needed
a real man's cock in his ass now and then. He could take the plastic just so far.
Finally a figure approached him.
"Mr. X?" the man said.
Alex smiled at the 'ironic' name he used. "You have the information?" he asked.
The man dropped the envelope on the table. Alex handed him the envelope full of money. "Good job
now get lost." He opened his jacket slightly to reveal a concealed weapon.
The other man scurried away.
Alex ripped open the envelope. He read as quickly as he could and then burst out laughing.
The patrons at the caf祠looked at him as if he were mad.
The slender waiter that was serving him appeared, "may I get you something else?"
Alex stood up dropped a $100 bill on the table, "Keep the tip cutie. Kid just remember revenge is
sweet."
He walked away laughing; the waiter grabbed his money and the piece of paper the stranger left
behind. Another waiter walked over and said, "Hey Tony, what the fuck was that all about?"
Tony the waiter read the paper, "Not sure, but it must be about this pregnant lady named Dana
Scully. This is a copy of a pregnancy test given in some prison."
He shrugged and curled the paper into a ball. He threw it and the other trash away.
*****************
Human Behavior
Scully patted her stomach and watched her lover Karen bring her tea. She sat in the prisoner's
lounge reading over her medical, law and psychology books.
She had finally hooked up with the massive cell mate who did nothing but treat her on the overall
with kindness and respect. Now and then she had to lick her pussy but once she got over the sloppy
wetness and taste, she was all right. Her only request was that her lover washes regularly. She
also got her a bottle of Scope for her breath. They were match made in prison heaven. The other
women respected and feared them.
The guard who got her pregnant made the mistake of trying to rape her again but this time met up
with Karen. Her lover quickly fought the man and threw him over the railing. He fell to his death
as he broke his neck. Scully and Karen were able to prove with other women of the prison that the
guard was sadistic and had raped several of them repeatedly. Not to mention many had his children,
which was proven with DNA testing.
"Hey Scully, you still trying to find a way to beat the system?" Asked Connie, a pretty, slim black
woman who sat next to her. On her lap appeared Connie's prison lover, Sarah, a tiny girl from the
backwoods of Alabama.
"There has to be a way to find the real truth at what happened to us and why we committed those
crimes. You and Sarah are both going to benefit from this if I can figure it out." Scully said.
Connie was in prison for running over her boyfriend. School authorities had told her, that her
daughter confessed the man was sexually abusing her. Connie had gotten off of work early that day
because she had gotten her period and the cramps were killing her. When she drove home to confront
her boyfriend, she remembers only the throb of her cramps and the rage in her head. He was walking
towards their mailbox when she hit the gas and plowed into him. She is serving a 20 years sentence.
Her little girlfriend who was just a girl-child was in prison for killing her step-daddy. He had
raped her. They were living in some small redneck town in Alabama. He was a drunk that usually
harassed her while her mother was too busy watching Oprah. He had finally grabbed her, thrown her
on the bed and raped her. She had begged him to stop because she had just gotten her period that
morning. He said it was ok, and the blood would help as lube. She remembers feeling the pain
afterwards, and cleaning up the blood clots from her thighs. The next thing she remembers was
holding her grandfather's shotgun and shooting the man in the chest. She was only 15 years old and
now serving a 15 years sentence.
Scully would find a way to release herself and all those women that committed crimes under what she
was calling, The Menstrual Defense.
**************
Home Sweet Home
The camera crew set up in the living room and Barbara Walters sat down in the chair that was
assigned to her. The makeup people were busy around the large group of women sitting on the sofa
and chairs.
The cameraman finally gave the signal.
Barbara Walters: Good evening and welcome to 20/20. This night's story is about courage, acceptance
and legal breakthroughs. Tonight we have the story if you remember of the ex Federal agent, Dana
Scully, who in what many considered a 'gay bashing' rage shot and almost killed her partner, Fox
Mulder and his lover Alex Krycek. She was punished for that crime and served a 5 years sentence.
When her opportunity for parole approached Ms. Scully was able to find a way to get out. She was
able to realize after all those years, much research and after talking to many women that her rage
was not brought on by hatred but by hormones. She was the creator and benefactor of the Menstrual
Defense. Not only did this defense get her out of jail but also the other women around her who had
suffered the same dilemma. Tell me Dana Scully, what is the next step for you? Because we know that
in jail you suffered abuse, rape and childbirth.
Camera focus in on Dana Scully:
Scully is sitting on the sofa next to her partner, Karen and beside her, their daughter Red. Scully
has a cigarette dangling from her mouth and various tattoos on her body. Her red hair is cut short
and spiky. A silver nose ring glitters with the lights.
"I committed a crime and yes I believe I have paid for it. It was my duty, as an ex-scientist and
doctor to search for the truth. I think I have helped all women who suffer from this terrible
affliction and committed a crime. I know that I am a better woman now because of what I went
through. My main concern now is my family and not my career. Building a home with my partner Karen
and my daughter Red. We have opened our home to the other women from the prison where we met who
were also able to receive parole instead of continuing their time."
Alex Krycek watched the TV in amazement and Mulder stopped sucking his cock to see his ex-partner's
national television interview. Both men looked at each other.
Alex shrugged his shoulders, "see Mulder, I told you she was a dyke. No woman that cold blooded and
that frigid with men could be anything else but a dyke. An angry one at that too."
Barbara Walters: For Dana Scully, this is the not the end but the beginning. She starts a new life
with a new woman. She begins the road of parenting with a child conceived in violence. Will society
accept Scully and her 'family' with open arms? Or is this a new excuse for murder? Can a tampon keep
female killers out of jail? Do the cramps women get drive them to murder? We wait and see where all
this shall go in the future. I myself for once am grateful to be menopausal. And will the future
investigation of women and their menstrual periods argue that the lack of menstruation and hormonal
change, also contribute to the making of a killer? I am sure that will be an issue for a future
date. This is Barbara Walters for 20/20 investigations.
The End
P.S. If you take this story, what I said and any of it seriously then you shouldn't be reading
fiction. If you think that anything I wrote here even remotely resembles my TRUE feelings, thoughts
and opinions, then once again I think you shouldn't be reading fiction. Flames/Feedback can be sent
to hepha...@hotmail.com. I am going to admit right off the bat that all flames will be posted
publicly. Therefore, don't send something you don't want posted on the net.
MLa1698195
>boots and fucked Mulder's
>ass as he pulled on the reigns. Mulder's eyes were large as saucers when he
>looked at her.
and then...
>Why HIM? Why didn't you ever take me to dinner, tell me I was pretty? Why
>didn't you ask ME
>to be the horse in your sick fuck life? I WOULD HAVE WORN THE BIT FOR YOU
>MULDER! I WOULD HAVE WORN
>THE BIT FOR YOU!"
oh dear god...
>Suddenly, he
>felt a pressure building up in his bowels and he remembered now why he
>shouldn't have had that chili
>for lunch.
This is without a doubt the worst thing I have ever read...but at the same
time, I laughed my fat ass of. I was crying at the end.
Matt
ä
Sadly, I laughed quite a bit. Hmmmmm...what does this say about me???
Antinomian
TAM74
revolting ...
"ä " <Brian...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:85tqu4$eiu$2...@bgtnsc03.worldnet.att.net...
T
imageof the bit and the saddle and all. I'll admit after that, I did get a
bit queasy, too.
A.I.
se_pa...@my-deja.com
This is a sad known hate-monger with the same, sad old tricks.
He's going to continue to post stories like this and berate those of us
who find them completely revolting and offensive because of the
attitudes they portray about women (and homosexuals) in general (using
the character of Scully (and Krycek) to outline them.) He will claim
we all lack senses of humor or that we're defending a fictional
character in some bout of collective insanity.
It's not his use of the character or his treatment of Scully that I
objected to the LAST time he showed up. It's the sexual abuse and
humiliation he advocates in the name of humor, both against women and
against homosexuals. Some of his Mulder/Krycek slash stuff was even
worse than this.
He had the good grace to disappear after he was confronted last time.
I can only hope he will do so again and go off to places unknown where
hate-mongering and sexual abuse in the name of humor are welcome.
While I am the LAST person on earth to suggest his free speech or
creative licence be limited, I do suggest anyone who sees either the
name Hephaestion or the "Scully Kink Series" realize that he's got an
agenda. He's been around here before. And he's very up front about
his rights to abuse his characters (and his readers) any way he sees
fit.
His stories are nasty, mean and abusive. Avoid them if you don't like
nasty, mean and abusive things.
Sarah Ellen Parsons
In article <862ua1$d4m$1...@bgtnsc02.worldnet.att.net>,
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Kelly Moreland
that I
> objected to the LAST time he showed up. It's the sexual abuse
and
> humiliation he advocates in the name of humor, both against
women and
> against homosexuals.
I agree with you completely. I read it, and while I would not
recomend it, he has as much right to post his 'work' as any of us
do. I found it disgusting, unrealistic, and demeaning.
just my slant on the subject,
Kell
--
Scully calls Skinner one morning : Sir, I won't be in today, I've
pulled a groin muscle.
Skinner : I'm sorry to hear that. I hope you feel better soon
Agent Scully
Scully: Thank you sir, Agent Mulder won't be in today either.
Skinner : Oh?
Scully: Yes sir. It wasn't mine.
patness
se_pa...@my-deja.com wrote in message <86569j$lij$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...
>To anyone who wasn't here the last time Hephaestion reared his head,
>
>This is a sad known hate-monger with the same, sad old tricks.
>
I read most of the posts last time this came up. Mucho
unpleasant. Not a good introduction to atxfc (I was relatively
new to XF fanfic at the time) I hope everyone takes Sarah's
advice and lets this story go. Something I found interesting is
that a search in deja.com turned up none of the previous
threads on this series. And the stories didn't show up either.
LisaQRoss
>This is a sad known hate-monger with the same, sad old tricks.
>
>His stories are nasty, mean and abusive. Avoid them if you don't like
>nasty, mean and abusive things.
>
>Sarah Ellen Parsons
>
still not as nasty mean and abusive as creating a web site posing as witches to
anonymouslymake fun of stories for terrible grammatical errors like using
british spellings
contume
>
> To anyone who wasn't here the last time Hephaestion reared his head,
>
He's not sad at all. And most of his tricks are pretty damn funny. I happen to know the guy, since
I'm the (female) archivist for his MWA site.
> It's not his use of the character or his treatment of Scully that I
> objected to the LAST time he showed up. It's the sexual abuse and
> humiliation he advocates in the name of humor, both against women and
> against homosexuals. Some of his Mulder/Krycek slash stuff was even
> worse than this.
I'm trying my best to understand how you could considered a gay man to be a gay basher. This makes
no sense. Actually, it's kinda silly.
I've never seen him be abusive or disrespectful towards women, either. He's owner of a list, which
is approximately 95% female, and has always been a perfect gentleman.
> His stories are nasty, mean and abusive. Avoid them if you don't like
> nasty, mean and abusive things.
>
> Sarah Ellen Parsons
No, they're not. You're obviously holding a grudge. Hep writes wonderfully romantic stories,
hysterically funny stories, and some of the hottest sex I've read. But, maybe it's because he's a
gay man, writing about gay sex...
deContume
RMS
>This is a sad known hate-monger with the same, sad old tricks.
>
>who find them completely revolting and offensive because of the
>attitudes they portray about women (and homosexuals) in general (using
>the character of Scully (and Krycek) to outline them.) He will claim
>we all lack senses of humor or that we're defending a fictional
>character in some bout of collective insanity.
>
>objected to the LAST time he showed up. It's the sexual abuse and
>humiliation he advocates in the name of humor, both against women and
>against homosexuals.
Call me freak, but it was a relief to me to see a ng with such wide ranging
interests and styles. Whether or not I liked the story in question is
irrelevant at best.
Sarah Ellen, I really need to ask a few questions. First why do you need to
tell everyone what to think of this story and author? From what I have read in
my short lurking period, most everyone here is an adult with the common sense
to know what they like and don't like. Are you afraid someone might find humor
where you do not?
Secondly, how is it that you feel comfortable speaking for gay men? As a gay
man, *I* don't even attempt anything so bold. I don't think you can tell me
what is abusive or humiliating to me personally or to my species as a whole.
Most men, gay and str8, have enough respect for women (and their testicles) not
to speak for women, but we never seem to garner the same consideration. I'm
certainly not asking you to do so, but it might be something to think about.
Thirdly, were you disappointed that no obvious flame war resulted from the
honest opinions offered by other adult readers? Is that what prompted you to
assume the role of lightning rod and post in such a way as to generate anger
and dissent?
Lastly, why is it so important to you that all fic on this ng be within the
bounds of what *you* consider tasteful? How difficult would it have been for
you to slap your forehead, bemoan the poster's reappearance, and set your
killfile?
On a personal level, it's clear the author is homosexual, so I find it ironic
that you fault his treatment of gay men. His syntax and subject matter may not
be your cup of tea, but his familiarity with the work of Preston, Cooper,
Delaney and Townsend is clear to anyone who has read them. Of course, that
doesn't include many str8 women, so I'll let you slide.
Rocky, stunned & amazed
RMS
>Just out of curiousity, who are Preston, Cooper, Delaney and Townsend?
>
John, Dennis, Samuel and Larry, respectively. Don't expect romance novels with
pseudo-gay Two men that act just like straight couples) characters, but they
represent an important element of the gay community, and have made a
significant contribution to the "genre" of gay fiction and erotica.
Rocky
swikstr
> I read most of the posts last time this came up. Mucho
> unpleasant. Not a good introduction to atxfc (I was relatively
> new to XF fanfic at the time) I hope everyone takes Sarah's
> advice and lets this story go.
Actually, as soon as I saw the "Scully Kink" subject header, I took a deep
breath and prayed that the ng would let the *post* go.
Last time, the debate raged to the point of insanity, including a vocal and
provocative defense by the author himself. And while I'm sure a lot of good
points were raised, in the end, a lot of it degenerated into personal
attacks and unnecessarily harsh judgment.
Bottom line, posting against the author's work in an outraged manner only
succeeds in drumming up a certain level of sensationalistic curiosity for
the work that it may not have otherwise gotten. And while I respect
people's (like Sarah's) right to their opinions, it's probably better to
keep the more negative commentary contained in private e-mail to the author.
My 11 cents worth...
-swik
--
"You mean you busted out."
"I prefer to think of it as an exodus from an undesirable place."
-- Jack Foley and Hijira Henry,
from "Out of Sight"
TAM74
because I don't know the man. I didn't particularly enjoy "Please Pass the
Fish", but that doesn't mean I wouldn't enjoy his other work. He has as much
a right as anyone to post his stories here or anywhere else for that matter.
I have no opinion on his sexual orientation and I don't even see how that
should be a factor when reading his work ...
I seem to have a lot to say for a person with "no opinion" LOL ... but I
smell the rank scent of censorship floating in this thread and I 'd hate to
sit back while the stench ripened ...bad analogies aside.. I for one will
check out his other stories and form an educated decision on whether I'll
read his work in the future or not ...
Calling someone a hate-mongerer is a strong accusation and not one to be
made lightly or about someone you don't really know.... I hope it isn't
true...... Tam
Nikits1
nasty, mean and abusive things.<<
And you, for saying these things are coming off as a mean and abusive person to
me. Don't the things that you are saying count as abusive? Oh, not in your
eyes. Does it give you some sort of thrill to bash other peoples writings, as
well as the induvidual. What right do you have to say such things about a
person you don't even know. A gay basher??? I'm sorry, are you for real? He is
a gay man and oh wait..he's a gay basher. I will never understand why a person
feels the need to flame..you have an opinion about a story..fine keep it to
yourself..or say it in a way that is not hateful..but the way people start
attacking someones writing and then making it personal is just cruel..and yet
the people that responded here agreeing with you..don't seem to see that
part..I guess cruelness is exceptable to them, but it isn't to me. I don't
usually respond to things like this..I don't like being mean to others..but for
once I felt the need to say something. If you say how much you don't like his
writing..why continue reading it?? Oh..no wait, I know..could it possibly be to
continue bashing him and his work? Do you have nothing better to do that you
feel the need to warn people not to read this story..can't they decide that for
themselves or do you feel they need your 'guidence'. I would never listen to
someone who said 'stay away from this story'..I choose to make up my own
mind.So if it's your goal to sway everyone away from reading Hephaestion's
work..please note that sorry, one person is not budging.
Sarah
Antinomian Idealist
RMS <rmars...@aol.comnostlkrz> wrote in message
news:20000119213603...@ng-ch1.aol.com...
> >
> >Just out of curiousity, who are Preston, Cooper, Delaney and Townsend?
>
>
>
> Rocky
Uh, Rocky...
Color me clueless and honey, lend me a quarter...okay, there you go, I'm
buying a clue...So who are John Preston, Dennis Cooper, Samuel Delaney and
Larry Townsend? I'm gonna go 'way out on a limb...are these fanfic
characters?
Jo B.
I personally find your allocations to be full of hate and intolerance. The
author only posted a story, that was dark and twisted in its humor, which I
would point out had plenty of warnings attached to it up front.
> He's going to continue to post stories like this and berate those of us
> who find them completely revolting and offensive because of the
> attitudes they portray about women (and homosexuals) in general (using
> the character of Scully (and Krycek) to outline them.) He will claim
> we all lack senses of humor or that we're defending a fictional
> character in some bout of collective insanity.
THEN DON'T READ HIS STORIES!!! If you are truly offended then block his
name so his stories don't show up on your end. I find your whole attitude
condescending. People on this newsgroup are quite capable of making up
their own minds on what they want or do not want to read. They do not need
someone censoring the newsgroup for them.
> It's not his use of the character or his treatment of Scully that I
> objected to the LAST time he showed up. It's the sexual abuse and
> humiliation he advocates in the name of humor, both against women and
> against homosexuals. Some of his Mulder/Krycek slash stuff was even
> worse than this.
You cannot speak for gay men, anymore than I can. The author is a gay male
and shouldn't be held to your perceived ideas for how you believe gay men
should think or behave. It is a complete oxymoron, that a gay male would
advocate hate and abuse against homosexuals. Sorry, I don't mean to
generalize, but all the gay men that I know have nothing but the up most
respect for women. I don't personally know the author, but I'm sure he is
not advocating anything of the sort against women.
Which one of his Mulder/Krycek stories did you find more offensive? Just
curious.
>
> He had the good grace to disappear after he was confronted last time.
> I can only hope he will do so again and go off to places unknown where
> hate-mongering and sexual abuse in the name of humor are welcome.
You seem to be the one hate-mongering here.
> While I am the LAST person on earth to suggest his free speech or
Oh pleease! I just love those types of statements! You are too trying to
limit his free speech, otherwise you wouldn't be suggesting he disappears
and takes his stories elsewhere. Until this newsgroup becomes moderated and
the moderator puts restrictions on the type of stories being posted here,
Hephaestion has just as much right to post here as you or anyone else does.
> creative licence be limited, I do suggest anyone who sees either the
> name Hephaestion or the "Scully Kink Series" realize that he's got an
> agenda. He's been around here before. And he's very up front about
> his rights to abuse his characters (and his readers) any way he sees
> fit.
For crying out loud! He has no more of an agenda than I or any other writer
does. This is one of the most inflammatory statements that I have ever
heard! How can you sit there and make such a personal attack against
someone you do not even know?
>
> His stories are nasty, mean and abusive. Avoid them if you don't like
> nasty, mean and abusive things.
I agree, if you don't like his stories then avoid them.
Jo B.
RMS
>keep the more negative commentary contained in private e-mail to the author.
Well thank god, someone with some perspective. Thank you.
Wait, wait , wait, do you mean that if I post one of my fics here, I can
anticipate nasty emails? I think that is intruding on a person's privacy. I am
just terribly unsure why such nasty comments need be voiced outside the privacy
of the critic's own head, or perhaps in private emails with personal friends on
the group. (I am NOT talking constructive criticism here.) It seems vaguely as
if there is a distinct lack of social grace involved, almost as if some were
socialized in a particularly unmannered part of society. It's a pity that
discourse over writing must sink to that level, isn't it?
Rocky, increasingly less sure of wanting to post here
RMS
>advice and lets this story go.
So you're advising us not to make up our own minds? What harm will befall us
new folks if we scorn her (and your) advice? I am still reeling from this
attitude amongst people who claim to be writers. None of you have to read
stories you don't like, but dear god, this business of pulling your petticoats
over our eyes to shield us is pretty Victorian, and to be hoenst, pretty damned
insulting.
>Something I found interesting is
>that a search in deja.com turned up none of the previous
>threads on this series. And the stories didn't show up either.
I'll bite. Why would that be so confoundedly interesting? Are you thinking
troll? He certainly wouldn't be very successful at it, if not for you and
Cotton Mather, er, Sarah Ellen.
Rocky
Nikits1
smell the rank scent of censorship floating in this thread and I 'd hate to
sit back while the stench ripened <<
Thank you. It seems people are TELLING others to stay away from this story..to
not read it..that he shouldn't post here..that makes me ill and I think it's
awful
Sarah, who messed up before and posted her original response to the board
instead of this tread. oops
Nikits1
made lightly or about someone you don't really know.... I hope it isn't
true.<<
It is not true, I know him and 'Ms. Parsons' does not. I cannot get over the
nastiness of her post..to say that about someone you don't even know..to attack
the PERSON as well as the story. If anyone actually takes her word seriously
that he is a gay basher and a hate-monger, then this is really sad.
Sarah
Nikits1
it twice. Am am getting more and more outraged by these fuckin' remarks..
>This is a sad known hate-monger with the same, sad old tricks.
And you, for saying these things are coming off as a mean and abusive person.
RMS
No, from the original posts I thought I had made it clear that they were
published authors who had been successful within the context of "gay" genre
writing, and had limitied but signficant success outside of the niche market.
Go to Amazon.com and do a search. All of these writers appeal to a very
specific demographic, much like the author of the fanfic being discussed. It
isn't for everyone, but they are gems of their kind. I think it would be hard
for Hephaestion's writing to have been heavily influenced by fanfic
characters...
Rocky
Nikits1
Exactly! To read them for the sole purpose of trashing them..I don't think I
will EVER understand what motivates a person to do that..i think you have way
too much free time on your hands.
>How can you sit there and make such a personal attack against
>someone you do not even know?
I've been asking myself that over and over. This all just shocks me so much..I
have to wonder where such hate and anger comes from. Jo B, you said everything
that I've been thinking too, thank you for your sensible response.
Sarah
RMS
>
>Exactly! To read them for the sole purpose of trashing them..I don't think
>I
>will EVER understand what motivates a person to do that..i think you have
>way
>too much free time on your hands.
At the risk of revealing the copious hours spent on the couch, I think this is
less about hate and more about control. Most of us are content with controlling
ourselves and our children, since we are directly responsible for them and
their actions. The dysfunction comes when a personality quirk makes one attempt
to control the entirety of the environment. It seems that the rabid hatred
necessary to elicit the response in question would have taken years of personal
contact.
Rocky
Jo B.
"RMS" <rmars...@aol.comnostlkrz> wrote in message
That makes perfect sense. I can't even control my cats.<g> So, I have a
hard time fathoming why anyone would want to try to control what other
adults read, think, and write in the realm of fan fiction. It just gets
really annoying when it is turned into a personal attack against a writer.
Jo B.
Nicotine
ability to decide what they want to read and what their likes are. But
taking a public forum to bash the writer is uncalled for.
Can't we all just get along? :)
Nicotine
--
AOL IM: Nicotine247
Nicotine's Online Home:
http://www.geocities.com/nicotine247
WU Name: Flailing Fanatical Skeleton
http://www.recordstore.com/cgi-bin/wuname/wuname.pl
se_pa...@my-deja.com
The only reason I posted in the first place was because I received a
number of e-mails from friends of mine new to XF fanfic who were not
aware of Hephaestion or his stories. They mentioned finding this
terribly offensive because of the humiliating content.
I HAVE read a number of Hephaestion's stories in the past because he
used to be on a list I subscribed to until the listmom banned him
because of numerous protests from other subscribers. I debated him
publically last time and know his sexual affiliation.
That doesn't change the fact of the abusive nature of his stories and
the fact that they are about humilation - not humor. Calling a spade a
spade isn't an insult, nor is it abusive. We may disagree about
content, but that's just an opinion and we'll have to agree to disagree.
I also never debated ANYONE's right to read whatever they like. I just
offered a warning to those who are not aware of Hephaestion and who
might like to avoid stories like this in the future. It's the same as
the rating system on films and television programs. I don't think it's
abusive to label content accurately. And, surely, anyone out on the
internet who is reading my post, knows that it is my opinion I'm
expressing. They can take it or leave it. But as I know who
Hephaestion is, have read his writing and formed an opinion, I'm free
to express it and to warn others who will likely find it similarly
offensive.
You're just as free to support him, though I am quite amazed you can do
so in good conscience. His free speech rights are not in question.
He's free to do whatever he likes and say whatever he likes. But you
say you'll support him in the content of this and similar stories about
humiliating people and sexually abusing them? I find that frightening.
Sarah Ellen Parsons
In article <20000120055822...@ng-da1.aol.com>,
nik...@aol.com (Nikits1) wrote:
> >>His stories are nasty, mean and abusive. Avoid them if you don't
like
> nasty, mean and abusive things.<<
>
> And you, for saying these things are coming off as a mean and abusive
person to
> me. Don't the things that you are saying count as abusive? Oh, not in
swikstr
> >it's probably better to
> >keep the more negative commentary contained in private e-mail to the author.
>
> Well thank god, someone with some perspective. Thank you.
> Wait, wait , wait, do you mean that if I post one of my fics here, I can
> anticipate nasty emails? I think that is intruding on a person's privacy.
Well, I don't know how to tell you this, but ATXC is a public forum. If you choose
to post either your opinions or your writing here, you have to expect that people
are going to comment on it. No matter if it contains good or bad characterizations,
poor or decent grammar and spelling, or so-called "controversial" material and
POV's.
If you post publicly, you need to be prepared to deal with why you may get in
reply. That's not an invasion of privacy. 99.99% of the people who do post stories
*request* feedback. And the majority of feedbacking is done through private
e-mail. There are exceptions with popular authors and/or stories. The discussions
last year over "Tikkun Olam/Iolokus" and "The Professional" come to mind.
Opinions seem to be mixed over whether negative criticism should be posted publicly
on the ng or not. In theory, it would seem to be a good idea and the font from
which a lot of good commentary should spring. But OTOH, I think a lot of
participants (myself included) have at least some reservations in the back of their
head about having their work publicly dissected in this matter.
I guess my only point was to say that if one has specific, negative hang-ups about
an author or their work, it is much better dealt with one-on-one between that
individual and the author. The exchange of opinion is more focused for one thing.
(If you don't like what somebody is doing, challenge them directly rather than
hiding behind a more nebulous general posting in a large forum.) It helps keep huge
flame wars from erupting. And frankly, it keeps from lending notoriety to the
'controversial' material in question.
> I am
> just terribly unsure why such nasty comments need be voiced outside the privacy
> of the critic's own head, or perhaps in private emails with personal friends on
> the group. (I am NOT talking constructive criticism here.)
But that's a tough line to draw. I mean, hate mail is one thing, and I don't
advocate that any more than the dumping of any other kind of toxic waste. However,
if you don't like a certain characterization, or a situation the characters are
placed in, I think a reader has every right to let the author know.
If the conversation degenerates into something less than savory, there's always a
killfile.
> It seems vaguely as
> if there is a distinct lack of social grace involved, almost as if some were
> socialized in a particularly unmannered part of society. It's a pity that
> discourse over writing must sink to that level, isn't it?
I'm not sure it's that, so much as Usenet tends to incite all kinds of behavior that
people would never even consider in normal conversation -- probably because of the
blanket of anonymity.
However, I will say that controversial forms of writing (rapefic, extreme violence,
etc) tend to provoke controversial responses. You say ill-mannered. You use the
phrase "sinking to that level." Some might ask what came first -- the chicken or
the egg?
> Rocky, increasingly less sure of wanting to post here
I'm not sure how to respond to that other than to say this is a big Usenet forum
where just about anything goes. People are going to say what they think. If you
want to be heard, than this is the place. And if you don't like people's responses,
you're only real recourse (and probably the most effective one) is to ignore them.
The alternative is to find a mailing list or other alternative forum where you can
interact with more like-minded people, or people with whom you at least feel more
comfortable. You'll miss some of the diversity you get with ATXC, but you'll
probably miss some of the more unpleasantness as well.
I've been here for two years, and as much as the ng has changed, it's also remained
the same in this regard. I don't see it changing any time soon.
-swik
Fic Bullpen at http://bullpen.simplenet.com
Isahunter
>Thank you, thank you , thank you for giving
>the group some balance. I was really beginnning to worry and my finger was
>hovering nervously over the unsub button. Not that a soul would miss me, but
>just the same...
Well, I don't know about the others, Rocky, but I think I'd miss you. It's not
often we find a voice of reason in these matters, just as you pointed out so
eloquently. I read the story, and although I didn't particularly like all of
the subject matter, I laughed quite a few times...and won't hesitate to read
any of the author's previous or future works. It's rare to find something
original in the world of fanfic, and that's exactly what this story was. If
others want to live in their happy little shipper world, let them be. Myself,
I prefer a little bit of creativity.
~Isa.
~X~+~X~+~X~+~X~+~X~+~X~+~X~+~X~
"...There's no truth. These men, they
make it up as they go along"
--Krycek, in Tunguska.
~X~+~X~+~X~+~X~+~X~+~X~+~X~+~X~
http://www.angelfire.com/ak3/expositions/index.html
Dasha K.
didn't we already go through this?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dasha K.
I wouldn't kick him outta bed for eatin' cookies, especially espresso chocolate
chip shortbread. And if he brought me an iced latte, he could stay all day...
FishnDonna
>
>didn't we already go through this?
AMEN Dasha!!!!
The voice of sanity and reason finally comes shinning through!
RMS
>that advocate intolerance win
I have a much better feel for the group, having read the very literate and
logical balance in your post and others. I think I might stay low for a week or
so, and then give it a go : ) Thank you for your encouragement.
Rocky
RMS
>But that's a tough line to draw. I mean, hate mail is one thing, and I
>don't
>advocate that any more than the dumping of any other kind of toxic waste.
> However,
>if you don't like a certain characterization, or a situation the characters
>are
>placed in, I think a reader has every right to let the author know.
Seems to me there is a huge gap between your idea of telling someone you
didn't care for their story and calling them gay bashing hate mongers.
I am well aware that ngs are a public forum, and if I post here, I anticipate
replies here. I don't invite you or anyone else to fill my inbox with your
opinions. If I so desired, I would ask for feedback in that form, or better
yet, I would join a mailing list.
Rocky
Dasha K.
>The voice of sanity and reason finally comes shinning through!
Wow, I do believe that that's the first time anyone has called me sane *or*
reasonable. <g>
Don't you think that calls for some cookies for everyone? I have
macadamia-chocolate chunk (white, dark or milk-- take your pick).
Teddi Litman
se_pa...@my-deja.com wrote:
>
>
> I also never debated ANYONE's right to read whatever they like. I just
> offered a warning to those who are not aware of Hephaestion and who
> might like to avoid stories like this in the future. It's the same as
> the rating system on films and television programs. I don't think it's
> abusive to label content accurately.
The problem is you didn't just comment on your opinion of the
content of his stories. The problem is you called *him* a
"hate-monger."
Last time we had this discussion, the man was mentally ill.
These are the type of opinions I, and obviously many others,
consider to be invalid and unfair.
> And, surely, anyone out on the
> internet who is reading my post, knows that it is my opinion I'm
> expressing. They can take it or leave it.
Since you tend to offer totally unsubstantiated opinions of writers'
personal qualities, I'll leave them.
> But as I know who
> Hephaestion is,
No, I don't believe you do.
> You're just as free to support him, though I am quite amazed you can do
> so in good conscience. His free speech rights are not in question.
> He's free to do whatever he likes and say whatever he likes. But you
> say you'll support him in the content of this and similar stories about
> humiliating people and sexually abusing them? I find that frightening.
I'm not a "Scully Kink" fan. After reading the couple of stories back when
we
had this discussion before, I haven't read any of the series since.
However, what I find truly frightening is that some people see nothing
wrong with expressing opinions on a writer's personal character or mental
health
based solely on some fictional stories he wrote.
Teddi
Brandon Ray
Isahunter wrote:
> Rocky wrote--
> It's rare to find something
> original in the world of fanfic, and that's exactly what this story was. If
> others want to live in their happy little shipper world, let them be. Myself,
> I prefer a little bit of creativity.
>
> ~Isa.
You know, I was fine with what you posted, right up until the last two sentences.
Wasn't it enough that you got some sort of reward out of reading the story? I've
been defending (in private conversations) the right of the author to post
something like this, and I also defend the rights of others to read and enjoy it.
I don't think there's anything wrong with you or anyone else who got something
from the experience.
But I don't think it's naive or uncreative of me to prefer shipperfic, and I can't
help but wonder why you couldn't express your preference in a positive manner.
--
Build a man a fire, and you keep him warm for a single night. Set a man on fire,
and you keep him warm for the rest of his life!
==========================
My fanfic wants to keep you warm:
http://www.avalon.net/~publius/MyStories.html
And here's the page of recs that light *my* fire:
http://www.avalon.net/~publius/MyRecs.html
Brandon Ray
mabtng wrote:
> In article <38875E51...@earthlink.net>, swikstr
> <swi...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> I'm NOT going to get into the basics of this discussion...however, I do
> think it's only fair to point out the comment the author made at the end
> of his own work:
>
> "P.S. If you take this story, what I said and any of it seriously then you
> shouldn't be reading
> fiction. If you think that anything I wrote here even remotely resembles
> my TRUE feelings, thoughts
> and opinions, then once again I think you shouldn't be reading fiction.
> Flames/Feedback can be sent
> to hepha...@hotmail.com. I am going to admit right off the bat that
> all flames will be posted
> publicly. Therefore, don't send something you don't want posted on the net."
>
> I'm not here to point out the first bit (although I find it a bit
> "baiting"), but in the last bit, he clearly states that all flames will be
> posted PUBLICLY (and let's face it...no one here truly agrees as to what a
> real flame is or is not...what's simple criticism to me may be an all out
> flame to someone else). So, what's your recourse if you want to be
> critical of this story in a private e-mail???? You risk having everything
> posted in public that author deems is a flame. Even with that "warning"
> at the end, posting private e-mail to a public forum is a breech of
> netiquette.
I don't agree. Usually, yes -- you shouldn't publicly post a private email. But
the author posted fair warning, and anyone who emails him has had a fair chance to
be aware of his intention. So if you don't want to express an opinion, and then
wind up having to defend them publicly, don't send them to him. That's pretty
simple, it seems to me.
>
> If you don't want flames...don't ask for them and don't act as though you
> expect them. It DOES make an author look as though they have ulterior
> motives for posting (whatever those motives may be).
*shrug* The tone of the message was a bit baiting, but that's hardly anything new
or unique to this ng.
RMS
I am considerably eased from my discomfort by replies like yours. More "no
opinions" please : )
>but I
>smell the rank scent of censorship floating in this thread and I 'd hate
>to
>sit back while the stench ripened ...bad analogies aside..
*And* you made me laugh out loud. Thank you, thank you , thank you for giving
the group some balance. I was really beginnning to worry and my finger was
hovering nervously over the unsub button. Not that a soul would miss me, but
just the same...
Rocky
Nikits1
way. You couldn't just say to them 'I'm not sure this is your type of story,
you might not want to read it'. no, you called him a hate-monger and gay
basher! those are to very different ways of expressing yourself. You are the
one that said the mean and abusive things..being called a hate-monger is not
abusive? Yes, it is. As for the story, if you read the end note he said anyone
that believes he really feels this way and takes this seriously should
obviously not be reading fiction. I think you are one of those people. As for
your friends, I think if they can read fiction, they can read warnings. I just
feel that if you truly had good intentions it would not have turned into a
bash, which it did.
Sarah
SIRPAUL10
In this bit of fiction, Alex Krycek kidnaps Mulder and Scully and rapes them in
front of each other.
I guess her "humiliation and abuse" protest does not apply to her own works.
Katy
Nikits1
>in
>front of each other.
Oh..Oh my god..That is YOUR story? I am aware of that story..I can not believe
you have the nerve to sit there and talk about abuse and raping scully when you
have done it in your own story? What makes the difference? Is it that he is a
man and you are a woman? Is it OK for a woman to write about Scully being raped
but not a man? Or is just your personal dislike of the author that insult him
and his work. I cannot believe the irony of this.
Sarah, having a good laugh now
Nikits1
and a woman having mulder raped? I think not. If you discriminate against one,
then why not discriminate against the other. This is a total bias and you have
become a hypocrite
sera lysea
don't, which of course means I shouldn't post. But, well, I like having a
say in debate and such, SO.....
I read the story and didn't particularly enjoy it. Oh well, I read a lot of
stories I like, I also read a fair number that I don't. The reason I didn't
like the story wasn't that I was offended (I think it's pretty damn hard to
offend me), nor was it that I thought it was badly written. I don't often
enjoy fanfic in which characters behave in such a way that it's entirely
outside of my view of their character. Oh well, my loss.
I'm absolutely apalled, however, by the degree of censorship and intolerance
in the post attacking the story. I didn't see anything in the initial story
as coming from a "hate mongor". Nor did I see any reason it wasn't
appropriate to post to this NG. Actually, I saw the attacking post as being
much more inapropriate than the original story. We're not posting to
alt.tv.x-files.creative.all-g-rated.catering-to-certain-tastes.non-questiona
ble-material. (at least, I don't think that's what this ng is...maybe my
newsreader shortened the name...)
If you don't like a story, fine. Your loss, more power to you,
blahblahblah. Not liking a story and critiquing it is very different from
telling people not to read it, and calling it's author a hate mongor.
Personally, I'd be much interested in seeing some honest critique of the
writing style, the characterization, etc. than an attack on the author.
Anyway, that's my 2/100 of a dollar.
---
sera
am i the one to blame for your typographical complex?
http://www.angelfire.com/ca/ChezSera/
Binah
news:3887E81C...@avalon.net...
> Isahunter wrote:
>
> > Rocky wrote--
> > It's rare to find something
> > original in the world of fanfic, and that's exactly what this story was.
If
> > others want to live in their happy little shipper world, let them be.
Myself,
> > I prefer a little bit of creativity.
> >
> > ~Isa.
>
> You know, I was fine with what you posted, right up until the last two
sentences.
>
> Wasn't it enough that you got some sort of reward out of reading the
story? I've
> been defending (in private conversations) the right of the author to post
> something like this, and I also defend the rights of others to read and
enjoy it.
> I don't think there's anything wrong with you or anyone else who got
something
> from the experience.
>
> But I don't think it's naive or uncreative of me to prefer shipperfic, and
I can't
> help but wonder why you couldn't express your preference in a positive
manner.
>
Ahh, but it's so fashionable to insult shipperfic as uncreative. So many
have done it so well, it's hard for some to find a new angle on the
essential relationship in the show. Ironically, it takes more 'creativity'
to make the beloved MSR shiny and new.
Yet, just when you think it's all been done, somebody comes up with that new
angle and fresh perspective. And those stories are as every bit as creative
as anything else dreamed up in XF land. Each time I find one of these gems,
I remember why I love fanfic so.
There has always been an undercurrent of bitterness for shipperfic by many
who write primarily in other genres of XF fanfic. The MSR genre has always
taken abuse unchallenged that would have caused flamewars if directed at
genres like slash or alt. pairings. I suppose it boils down to the
majority/minority status. The other genres feel more threatened and often
lash out at the perceived majority (shipperfic). Hence the 'uncreative'
attacks, as if every other genre story was original and daring simply by
virtue of not being a MSR.
--
Binah
XFW#1013 ggg
SMUTster#1013
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"I have had a wonderful evening. This wasn't it." --Groucho Marx
Isahunter
>You know, I was fine with what you posted, right up until the last two
>sentences.
>
>Wasn't it enough that you got some sort of reward out of reading the story?
>I've
>been defending (in private conversations) the right of the author to post
>something like this, and I also defend the rights of others to read and enjoy
>it.
>I don't think there's anything wrong with you or anyone else who got
>something
>from the experience.
>
>But I don't think it's naive or uncreative of me to prefer shipperfic, and I
>can't
>help but wonder why you couldn't express your preference in a positive
>manner.
>
At the risk of stepping on someone's toes, I'll clarify myself--I have nothing
wrong with shippers. I am one myself to a certain extent. I used to write MSR
only. I have since branched out, but that's besides the point. What I meant
to say was that ATXC seems to be very much MSR friendly, while resistant to
anything else. Now, obviously, that's a generalization. And I know the
'genre' is popular...but it's increasingly hard to write an original MSR story
these days. I commend those who do. Still, original non-MSR fic should be
given a sounding board as well.
I apologize if I offended anyone with that earlier statement. I should have
made my wording more precise.
Kim
which is something good that came out of this crappy thread.
*~*~*~*~*~*
Kim
Journ...@aol.com
http://journeytox.simplenet.com <------ Note New URL
"Did I look adorable?" Mitch Pileggi, Season 4 Gag Reels :-)
"Words are, of course, the most powerful drug used by mankind." Rudyard Kipling
RMS
>Oh one more thing..is there a difference between a gay man having scully
>raped
>and a woman having mulder raped?
I don't think there is, logically, but for me, I could never write a rape. I
just dont' have it in me. I'll tell you what I do think is frighteneing tho.
Having taken a glimpse of Miss Sarah Ellen's story, she warns us that a rape is
included, then tells us there is no violence. Now that is more fuct than
anything I read in the other guy's story. Heck, even the police call rape a
violent crime, and they aren't the most sympathetic joe's in the world.
Rocky, still aghast, but seeing her picture more clearly
swikstr
<snip warning from author of work in question>
> I'm not here to point out the first bit (although I find it a bit
> "baiting"), but in the last bit, he clearly states that all flames will be
> posted PUBLICLY (and let's face it...no one here truly agrees as to what a
> real flame is or is not...what's simple criticism to me may be an all out
> flame to someone else). So, what's your recourse if you want to be
> critical of this story in a private e-mail????
You have none. The only thing to do would be to close out the story from your PC
and your life and never open anything by the author again.
I can see why you've brought this up, but are you advocating making a public
response just because the author states he'll post private flames to a public
forum? That doesn't make sense to me.
> You risk having everything
> posted in public that author deems is a flame. Even with that "warning"
> at the end, posting private e-mail to a public forum is a breech of
> netiquette.
It's a breach of netiquette, but that's about it. So were the vicious personal
attacks this author was subjected to the last time his work was discussed. I really
don't think it's "baiting" as you may have surmised. Frankly, after the last flame
war, I'm certain he knows exactly how his work will be received in some quarters.
Those notes at the end look to me like an attempt to head off that kind of
response. At least the author has warned people up front.
-swik
swikstr
> Seems to me there is a huge gap between your idea of telling someone you
> didn't care for their story and calling them gay bashing hate mongers.
Know what? That's not what you asked in your original post. What you said was,
> Wait, wait , wait, do you mean that if I post one of my fics here, I can
> anticipate nasty emails? I think that is intruding on a person's privacy.
To this I merely gave my own observations of the general ways things are done on this
particular ng.
> I am well aware that ngs are a public forum, and if I post here, I anticipate
> replies here. I don't invite you or anyone else to fill my inbox with your
> opinions.
Actually, you do, if you post to ATXC. And if you spend a lot of time here, you'd
realize that. As I stated in my previous post, the majority of feedbacking on ATXC
is done through private e-mail. I don't know if that's the best course or not, but
it's what people here *do*. If that's a problem for you, then perhaps this *isn't*
the forum for you to post your work.
> If I so desired, I would ask for feedback in that form, or better
> yet, I would join a mailing list.
Whatever.
RMS
>the forum for you to post your work.
Fortunately, not everyone here has your attitude. Fortunately, I've been on
the net long enough to use a killfile. Thank you for your help and your lovely
attitude.
Rocky
Nikits1
>which is something good that came out of this crappy thread.
>
what the hell are you talking about? And if you don't like the tread why are
you reading it??
Brandon Ray
hard. :)
Isahunter wrote:
>
> At the risk of stepping on someone's toes, I'll clarify myself--I have nothing
> wrong with shippers. I am one myself to a certain extent. I used to write MSR
> only. I have since branched out, but that's besides the point. What I meant
> to say was that ATXC seems to be very much MSR friendly, while resistant to
> anything else. Now, obviously, that's a generalization. And I know the
> 'genre' is popular...but it's increasingly hard to write an original MSR story
> these days. I commend those who do. Still, original non-MSR fic should be
> given a sounding board as well.
>
> I apologize if I offended anyone with that earlier statement. I should have
> made my wording more precise.
>
> ~Isa.
>
> ~X~+~X~+~X~+~X~+~X~+~X~+~X~+~X~
> "...There's no truth. These men, they
> make it up as they go along"
> --Krycek, in Tunguska.
> ~X~+~X~+~X~+~X~+~X~+~X~+~X~+~X~
> http://www.angelfire.com/ak3/expositions/index.html
--
Isahunter
>hard. :)
Not at all, Brandon. I've always respected what you have to say--and will
always consider your writing in the "original" MSR category.
~Isa.
~~~( 8:> <:8 )~~~
"...There's no truth.
These men, they make it
up as they go along"
--Krycek, in Tunguska.
swikstr
(putting in the full quote and attributing it so as to quash any misconceptions)
> swikstr wrote:
> > Actually, you do, if you post to ATXC. And if you spend a lot of time here, you'd
> > realize that. As I stated in my previous post, the majority of feedbacking on ATXC
>
> > is done through private e-mail. I don't know if that's the best course or not, but
>
> > it's what people here *do*. If that's a problem for you, then perhaps this *isn't*
>
> > the forum for you to post your work.
> Fortunately, not everyone here has your attitude. Fortunately, I've been on
> the net long enough to use a killfile.
What 'attitude?' All I've done here is explain the basic method by which this
*particular* ng provides feedback to those who post here. It's not something I
personally control or have a particular opinion about. It's just your basic FYI,
really. In fact, here's a quote from the ATXC FAQ
(http://www.loop.com/~sue/atxc-325.htm):
"Feedback and Discussion on the Newsgroup: Up until recently, most feedback has been
done in private
email. However, recently we've been attempting to do some critiquing and discussion on
the newsgroup
itself. Any author who would like to see their work discussed on the newsgroup should
say so at the top
of their posts *when they post their stories*."
and
"Please note: While it's great to have discussions on the newsgroup, detailed critiques
only belong there
when an author says they're interested in this. General discussion of what you liked
and why (as in the
"Read Anything Good Lately?" thread) is great and should be encouraged, but
point-by-point commentary
on someone's work, unless it's requested by the author that it be done on the
newsgroup, is probably best
kept to email."
You've indicated that you have a problem with people invading your privacy by
responding one-on-one through e-mail to what you may choose to post publicly (quote):
"I am well aware that ngs are a public forum, and if I post here, I anticipate
replies here. I don't invite you or anyone else to fill my inbox with your
opinions. If I so desired, I would ask for feedback in that form, or better
yet, I would join a mailing list."
If that really *is* a serious concern for you, then common sense would warn you that
ATXC, by its very nature, may not be the forum you're looking for.
> Thank you for your help and your lovely
> attitude.
Actually, it *was* help. By the nature of your posts, it seemed to me that you're
slightly unfamiliar with certain characteristics of this ng. I was merely trying to
explain the nature of this ng's feedback process.
And, for the record, in *no way* was I implying that your posts and/or your work were
unwelcome here. That you've chosen to interpret it that way -- and that you snipped up
my original post so as to imply this -- only creates further conflict where there
should be none.
Jintian Li
> that a search in deja.com turned up none of the previous
> threads on this series. And the stories didn't show up either.
I'm not going to comment on this thread in any way, but I will give you
an FYI about searching for the one from last year. That one is called
"Hepaestion's Scully Kink Stories." Note the different spelling of the
author's name, without the "h." If you search under that on deja.com,
you'll probably find it. Or click on the "Thread" link at the top of
any old message you do find (dated in May of 1999, I believe) and
you'll see all the rest of it.
Jintian
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
sera lysea
> that a search in deja.com turned up none of the previous
> threads on this series. And the stories didn't show up either.
That's probably because they were posted with the words "X No Archive Yes"
at the top, which means that they don't go to any usenet archives.
Teddi Litman
Alice In Wonderland wrote:
>
> Okay, watch me exercise it. I hate what Hepaestion does. It sucks - and I
> think it's morally objectionable. (Ooh! Value judgement! Bring on the Thought
> Police!) And I feel free to draw conclusions about his character and his
> social and psychological politics from reading his works in the same way that
> anybody that reads my posts is free to draw conclusions about mine - this is a
> public forum, I put myself here, nobody asked for my opinion, but nobody has
> the right to shut me up, in the same way that Hepaestion put himself here,
> nobody asked for his(?) opinion, and nobody can shut him up.
>
Ok, here's a quote I just found by a famous author that I think
fits the bill:
"...any reviewer who expresses rage and loathing for a novel
(or its author) is preposterous. He or she is like a person who
has put on a full armor and attacked a hot fudge sundae or a
banana split." --- Kurt Vonnegut
Y'all would just *love* the story that prompted a thread
participant to use this quote! <G> No, it wasn't a fanfic
story. Not for the faint of heart!
Teddi
Brandon Ray
swikstr wrote:
> RMS wrote:
> > I am well aware that ngs are a public forum, and if I post here, I anticipate
> > replies here. I don't invite you or anyone else to fill my inbox with your
> > opinions.
>
> Actually, you do, if you post to ATXC. And if you spend a lot of time here, you'd
> realize that. As I stated in my previous post, the majority of feedbacking on ATXC
> is done through private e-mail. I don't know if that's the best course or not, but
> it's what people here *do*. If that's a problem for you, then perhaps this *isn't*
> the forum for you to post your work.
>
> > If I so desired, I would ask for feedback in that form, or better
> > yet, I would join a mailing list.
>
> Whatever.
That doesn't seem like a very helpful response, quite honestly. While it's true that
the general custom is to respond in private email, it isn't universal. If an author
wishes only to receive public feedback, he or she can certainly indicate that in the
"Feedback" line of the headers.
Alice In Wonderland
have to wander out into No Man's Land.
I hoped the last Hepaestion posting would slip below radar. Indeed, it looked
like that was about to happen (doubtless much to the chagrin of certain
individual(s), but there you go).
But I have to say I'm confused at the slant this thread is taking.
If it is okay to post anything to the newsgroup, and an attempt to criticize
any posting is ipso facto censorship, then it seems to me that we are
descending to an absolute moral relativism where everything is okay.
I hate to rain on the parade here, but everything is NOT okay, and some things
are, excuse the heresy, just plain old *wrong*. I didn't read Hepaestion's
latest, having had the poor fortune to read an earlier one, but I picked up,
really strongly, that it wasn't a story about the X-Files, it was a story
about hating women, about finding them threatening and disgusting, and
punishing them for it. (Excuse me, I guess I just have a long memory for this
shit.)
Now, I don't mean to be inflammatory here (but maybe that's inevitable, and
hey, maybe that's a good thing) but I can't help feeling that if the story in
question had been explicitly racist, for instance, that we wouldn't be
entering into territory about freedom of speech and "it's only fiction" so on.
And I'm not against freedom of speech. I'm all for it. I think it's important
that there is something like usenet where no legislation exists and where
ideas can have, I don't know, a non mainstream forum where they can be debated
without fear of legislation.
I believe in it, right?
Okay, watch me exercise it. I hate what Hepaestion does. It sucks - and I
think it's morally objectionable. (Ooh! Value judgement! Bring on the Thought
Police!) And I feel free to draw conclusions about his character and his
social and psychological politics from reading his works in the same way that
anybody that reads my posts is free to draw conclusions about mine - this is a
public forum, I put myself here, nobody asked for my opinion, but nobody has
the right to shut me up, in the same way that Hepaestion put himself here,
nobody asked for his(?) opinion, and nobody can shut him up.
Furthermore, I would like to state that remarks about "ignoring him" and
hitting the killfile are all well and good, but remember, that silence has
often been historically construed as assent and frankly, I do NOT assent, and
I never will do. I am a woman, and as a woman I resent being first viciously
insulted and then that I'm some sort of intolerant monster for feeling the
insult.
People want to do slash? Fine. They want to write rapefic? Fine. Everybody can
post what they like. They can all do what they want, and post all the warnings
that they like. But nobody gets to tell me to shut up and take my lumps while
they are serving me great steaming piles of unabashed misogyny, because it is
not going to happen.
Sorry guys, but it was important to me and I had to get it off my chest.
Alice
X
Teddi Litman wrote:
>
>
> se_pa...@my-deja.com wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > I also never debated ANYONE's right to read whatever they like. I just
> > offered a warning to those who are not aware of Hephaestion and who
> > might like to avoid stories like this in the future. It's the same as
> > the rating system on films and television programs. I don't think it's
Nikits1
From: "Nicolas Fairy" <hepha...@hotmail.com>
this is from ATXC newsgroup
alt.tv.x-files.creative
thread: scullykinkstoriesbanned
subject: scully kink stories banned
date: 5/6/99
author: se_parsons<se_pa...@my-dejanews.com>
As the writer of the quoted post below, let me make the point again because
you've obviously failed to grasp it.
If someone like the people you portray in your Scully Kink stories got a
HOLD of you and behaved the way you have the people behaving in your
stories, you might as well end up DEAD.
That is why your stories are so heinous, the complete disregard of MORALITY
and your glorification of behavior just like that of the people who murdered
MATT SHEPARD.
What do you fail to get the point? You glorify EVIL murderous behavior and
torture and then you whine because I told you that isn't acceptable. It's
not.
I never said people were going to klil you. I just TOOK your fictional
example and brought it into the REAL world, that's all.
That's what you do when YOU write fiction. You CREATE something that didn't
exist before. That's POWER. You are ABUSING your power. You are abusing
US.
I asked you to take RESPONSIBLITY for yourself and said that I would WARN
people about you. Warning isn't censorship. I don't ADVOCATE censorship. I
don't advocate censorship EXCEPT FOR SELF CENSORSHIP
Get it?
Ian's pile of shit example is exactly the way I feel about these stories you
are writing. There's nothing WRONG with MANY of your stories except for bad
spelling, subject-verb agreement problems and other clues that you haven't
really much of a clue when it comes to the English language.
But that's not the issue here.
You obviously have no intention of being responsible and will continue to
ADVOCATE RAPE, torture, sexual abuse and hatred of WOMEN. So I will simply
continue to warn people away. You have the right to do what you want.
And I have the right to do what I must, in good conscience, do.
MORAL RELATIVISM is nice in theory. In practice, it sucks, because it lets
people get away with abuse. When I USED TO BE A TEACHER, I was mandatory
reporter of abuse when I saw it. I guess I just haven't over that yet, even
though I've changed careers.
Sarah Ellen Parsons
(please note that this word for word..only the LARGE PRINT on certain words
were made by me..i made no change..and it can be viewed on deja.com)
*************
Of course...we now know..that her morality was hypocrital..because if you
follow this link you will be taken to a RAPE FIC written by Sarah Ellen
Parsons..
A story that anyone can argue 'advocates' the RAPE of Scully by Alex Krycek
in front of Fox Mulder's eyes! Please take note of her heading where she
calls the story TWISTED (SOUND FAMILIAR to a certain series I wrote)..
There is nothing more disgusting in life than a hypocrite..reminds me of
those preachers..'do what I say..not what I do..'
http://members.xoom.com/MSKRA/Prone.txt
Thank you everyone who has supported the fact, that she like everyone else
can hate the stories..but attacking me personally was uncalled for by
someone who is so quick to say how MORAL and self-righteous they are..and
then we find the real TRUTH..
I don't advocate rape at all or abuse of anyone! Not women, children,
animals or men... I don't get on a pulpit either..I believe in Free Speech.
Period. I believe in NO Censorship. We all as adults have the right to turn
off our computers, change the station, return the book, and leave the
theater..;-)
Remember the saying..and it's the one..I TRULY ADVOCATE..'I might not like
what you are saying.(writing), But DEFEND TO THE DEATH for your right to say
(write) it!!!' So I say..lets not stop writing EVER..whether you are MSR,
slash, gen, poetry, songfic, rape fic, torture fic, humor fic etc...I will
make sure I will do my part in supporting you! I still believe we are a
community of good, smart, daring, creative and open-minded people..hopefully
all this will find its way into the 'real world' as Miss Parsons puts
it..;-)
Thank you again, keep the stories coming!
Nicolas aka Hephaestion
ps.Happy New Year!
Brandon Ray
swikstr wrote:
> RMS wrote:
>
> (putting in the full quote and attributing it so as to quash any misconceptions)
>
> > swikstr wrote:
>
> > > Actually, you do, if you post to ATXC. And if you spend a lot of time here, you'd
> > > realize that. As I stated in my previous post, the majority of feedbacking on ATXC
> >
> > > is done through private e-mail. I don't know if that's the best course or not, but
> >
> > > it's what people here *do*. If that's a problem for you, then perhaps this *isn't*
> >
> > > the forum for you to post your work.
>
> > Fortunately, not everyone here has your attitude. Fortunately, I've been on
> > the net long enough to use a killfile.
>
> What 'attitude?' All I've done here is explain the basic method by which this
> *particular* ng provides feedback to those who post here. It's not something I
> personally control or have a particular opinion about. It's just your basic FYI,
> really. In fact, here's a quote from the ATXC FAQ
> (http://www.loop.com/~sue/atxc-325.htm):
>
The quotes from the FAQ were helpful, but it must be kept in mind that the FAQ only
reflects the perceptions of the person who keeps the FAQ. There are no rules here, and no
moderators. Anyone is free to request that feedback be made only in the ng, or only by
private email, or not at all. These are customs, not regulations.
Alice In Wonderland
writing was the exhibition of a moral force, in any form, and I don't think I want
to think differently. Because in that case, why do it all since it's meaningless and
makes no difference to anybody, writer or audience included? In such an instance,
writing is valuable time taken away from sex and drugs.
I guess we'll have to agree to differ.
Yours preposterously,
Alice
X
Teddi Litman wrote:
>
>
> Alice In Wonderland wrote:
>
> >
> > Okay, watch me exercise it. I hate what Hepaestion does. It sucks - and I
> > think it's morally objectionable. (Ooh! Value judgement! Bring on the Thought
> > Police!) And I feel free to draw conclusions about his character and his
> > social and psychological politics from reading his works in the same way that
> > anybody that reads my posts is free to draw conclusions about mine - this is a
> > public forum, I put myself here, nobody asked for my opinion, but nobody has
> > the right to shut me up, in the same way that Hepaestion put himself here,
> > nobody asked for his(?) opinion, and nobody can shut him up.
> >
>
Pyrephox
>Whereas I merely think Kurt Vonnegut is being disingenuous here. I always
>thought
>writing was the exhibition of a moral force, in any form, and I don't think I
>want
>to think differently.
Not to try to persuade you otherwise, but I disagree. Writing, *especially*
fiction I believe, is an exercise of an imaginitive force, and has no moral
obligations to the reader, whatsoever. Our urge to create, you might say, comes
from the Id, not the Superego. :>
>Because in that case, why do it all since it's meaningless and
>makes no difference to anybody, writer or audience included?
It doesn't have to be morally correct to be meaningful... and that's assuming
we all obey the same moral principles, anyway. There are lots of different
reasons to write something that have nothing to do with putting forward the
"right" or the "wrong". Everything from personal exploration, testing of
audience boundries, sheer mindless entertainment, mockery of a group or "sacred
cow"; all of these and more are *excellent* reasons to write, and yet may
actively attack established moral conventions. As far as influencing the
audience, it's like hypnotism: no piece of writing can influence someone who is
not willing to be influenced.
And on this group in particular, willingness to be in a position to be
influenced can be measured by who reads past the warnings. :>
Pyrephox
swikstr
> That doesn't seem like a very helpful response, quite honestly. While it's true that
> the general custom is to respond in private email, it isn't universal.
Your reasoning is lost on me. How is explaining to someone unfamiliar with this ng what
its "general customs" are not helpful?
> If an author
> wishes only to receive public feedback, he or she can certainly indicate that in the
> "Feedback" line of the headers.
Well that makes sense. Wait. A new author unfamiliar with this forum would know
this...how?
I appear to be fighting the wrong battle here for all the wrong reasons.
-swik
--
"The rule is perfect: in all matters of opinion our adversaries are insane."
-- Mark Twain
Brandon Ray
swikstr wrote:
> Brandon Ray wrote:
>
> > That doesn't seem like a very helpful response, quite honestly. While it's true that
> > the general custom is to respond in private email, it isn't universal.
>
> Your reasoning is lost on me. How is explaining to someone unfamiliar with this ng what
> its "general customs" are not helpful?
Your tone, for the most part. It came across as "this is the way it is, take it or leave
it". I'm sure you didn't intend that, but that's the way it read to me -- and apparently
the original poster thought so, too.
>
>
> > If an author
> > wishes only to receive public feedback, he or she can certainly indicate that in the
> > "Feedback" line of the headers.
>
> Well that makes sense. Wait. A new author unfamiliar with this forum would know
> this...how?
They wouldn't. That's why I suggested it. I was trying to offer an alternative solution
to the problem, rather than telling the person s/he just had to live with things the way
most people do them.
swikstr
> swikstr wrote:
>
> > Your reasoning is lost on me. How is explaining to someone unfamiliar with this ng what
> > its "general customs" are not helpful?
>
> Your tone, for the most part. It came across as "this is the way it is, take it or leave
> it". I'm sure you didn't intend that, but that's the way it read to me -- and apparently
> the original poster thought so, too.
Ok, I'll give you that. I have no other excuse except to say that I guess I feel pretty
protective of this forum, chaotic though it may be, and I tend to get snarky when it's
attacked -- even if the attack is unintentional. (My use of the term "attack" is completely
subjective, btw.)
> > > If an author
> > > wishes only to receive public feedback, he or she can certainly indicate that in the
> > > "Feedback" line of the headers.
> >
> > Well that makes sense. Wait. A new author unfamiliar with this forum would know
> > this...how?
>
> They wouldn't. That's why I suggested it.
Well, they would if they looked up the FAQ. But where I hang out on Usenet, it seems that
FAQ's have become passé in this day and age <g>.
> I was trying to offer an alternative solution
> to the problem, rather than telling the person s/he just had to live with things the way
> most people do them.
In retrospect, your alternative of posting a feedback "guideline" in the story header probably
seems more constructive than mine of just finding an alternative forum.
Believe it or not, the suggestion you offered had occurred to me as well, until I got to
thinking -- how many people actually *read* all those headers? Some do and some don't I
guess. But when I first began posting work here, a third party friend used to scoop up the
posts for me and put them up on the XFC list. Even though she stated way at the top that she
was not the author and that feedback should be sent to me directly, replies to the story
almost always went to her directly and she had to forward them on to me. That wasn't a
problem, but at the time it indicated quite clearly that folks either didn't read the feedback
guideline in the header, or they forgot about it, or it was just easier to hit the "repy"
button.
Anyway, long-winded as that explanation may be, it was in the back of my head when I made the
comment about looking for an alternative forum to ATXC.
And now that I've whipped this topic to death and then some, I think I'm in need of a
vacation. "Roswell" is lookin' pretty good right now...<g>.
shanswo...@xemplary.com
<dei...@x-philes.com> wrote:
>On 20 Jan 2000, deirdre wrote:
>
> I believe that both XFC and XFC's
>discussion list are fully moderated. I remember that Hep was banned
>from XFC due to the content of the Scully Kink stories.
>
>Deirdre
He was not banned because of his stories, but because of his
insistence on taking mailing list business to the newsgroup.
However, he was told that his stories were unwelcome on the
private mailing list, but whatever stories he directly
posted on the newsgroup were not the concern of the list.
But he couldn't distinguish between the mailing list and the
newsgroup no matter how many times it was explained to him
and continued to say we were banning him from posting to the
newsgroup.
-------------------------------------
Laurie Haynes
Co-archivist Xemplary
http://www.xemplary.com
Xemplary Music Reviews and MP3s
http://www.xemplary.net
-----------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe to the xfc fiction list, go to
http://www.onelist.com/subscribe/xfc-atxc
To subscribe to the xfc feedback list, go to
http://www.onelist.com/subscribe/xfc-fdbk
Teddi Litman
Pyrephox wrote:
>
>
> >Because in that case, why do it all since it's meaningless and
> >makes no difference to anybody, writer or audience included?
>
> It doesn't have to be morally correct to be meaningful... and that's assuming
> we all obey the same moral principles, anyway. There are lots of different
> reasons to write something that have nothing to do with putting forward the
> "right" or the "wrong". Everything from personal exploration, testing of
> audience boundries, sheer mindless entertainment, mockery of a group or "sacred
> cow"; all of these and more are *excellent* reasons to write, and yet may
> actively attack established moral conventions. As far as influencing the
> audience, it's like hypnotism: no piece of writing can influence someone who is
> not willing to be influenced.
>
Thank you! I'd also like to add a few comments to this me too
post. I also think there's a tendency to believe an author
always *supports* activities or attitudes presented in the fiction
he or she writes. This is a major fallacy; and it is quite obvious it
is at work here. In this case the author has actually stated that
the stories don't reflect his true feelings, opinions and attitudes.
Yet, some still want to go on about the *hateful* man who wrote
those *loathsome* stories.
Also, I can't see how Vonnegut's quote, disingeneous or not,
can be interpreted as claiming that fiction is "meaningless."
He is not claiming fiction can not or should not inspire thought
and emotion. He is merely stating that it is preposterous to
express true *rage* and *loathing* towards a work of fiction
or it's author simply for writing it.
>
> And on this group in particular, willingness to be in a position to be
> influenced can be measured by who reads past the warnings. :>
>
> Pyrephox
Amen. The fact of the matter is oftentimes people simply *want* to
be outraged.
Teddi
Alice In Wonderland
perfectly happy to *not* be outraged.
As I believe I explained in a previous posting, I don't like what Hepaestion does,
and I asserted my right to say so.
I also object to the rather facile insinuation that I'm too stupid to distinguish
between author and story. I have read and enjoyed a lot of very provocative, very
edgy fiction, and some works and some doesn't, and that's fine. I appreciate why
people do it and I have tried my hand at it myself. In this case the agenda in
question is to push the boundaries of imagination, and I don't have a problem with
that, because there is a moral force there - new forms and ways of looking at things
can be created - new statements can be made on the way we see and do things. And that
has a moral force the way I mean it.
But, as I grow weary of stating, these stories don't qualify to me, and when I look
all I see is misogynist troll-bait and its ensuing circus, with the dubious
distinction of last time having the author posting as a woman, to tell all of us
"ladies" to stop getting our panties in a wad after he declared he would never post
again - any argument that has to be bolstered by deceit and "sockpuppetry" is not
worth having, in my book.
I think I have made my postion plain and having registered it, I intend to put this
thread in the killfile as others have been so urging me to do.
Alice
Teddi Litman
Alice In Wonderland wrote:
> I don't want to be outraged, as you so flippantly and dismissively declare. I'm
> perfectly happy to *not* be outraged.
>
> As I believe I explained in a previous posting, I don't like what Hepaestion does,
> and I asserted my right to say so.
>
> I also object to the rather facile insinuation that I'm too stupid to distinguish
> between author and story.
I'm sorry this debate has become so personal to you. I never stated
you were stupid, nor was it my intention to imply you were stupid.
I'd never claim someone who used words I had to look up in
the dictionary was stupid. <G>
Peace,
Teddi
Brandon Ray
Alice In Wonderland wrote:
> But, as I grow weary of stating, these stories don't qualify to me, and when I look
> all I see is misogynist troll-bait and its ensuing circus, with the dubious
> distinction of last time having the author posting as a woman, to tell all of us
> "ladies" to stop getting our panties in a wad after he declared he would never post
> again - any argument that has to be bolstered by deceit and "sockpuppetry" is not
> worth having, in my book.
THIS is why you are getting accused of confusing the author with the story. You're
judging someone you have never met and don't know, based on the fiction he has posted --
despite his clear statement that he doesn't agree with the things expressed by the
characters in the story.
And if you're not looking for an opportunity to be outraged, then why did you even read
the story? By your own admission, you were already familiar with the sorts of stories
this author writes, and if you had any doubts, the headers were pretty clear. So why
did you read it, if it wasn't your cup of tea?
--
Teddi Litman
Mia Munro wrote:
> The Internet and Usenet has been accused of
> spawning hatred, racial, religious, sexual and gender-based. And,
> unfortunately in many cases it is true.
I adamantly disagree with this statement. I just don't believe
the Internet and/or Usenet *spawns* hatred in any way.
Yes, hatred does get expressed here just as it is expressed
in any public forum. However, the haters were haters long
before they ever learned to express themselves in an online
forum. I simply don't believe a reasonable human being
will suddenly be converted into a racist or a violent rapist,
or a serial killer simply from reading a violent fictional story
or even some white supremacist manifesto on the web.
I don't even believe this happens with those "highly
impressionable" children. If that were true, every woman who
read "Flowers in the Attic" when she was 12 (It was very
popular when I was that age.) would now be sleeping with her
brother.
I also don't believe either the computer game "Doom" or the movie
"Scream" were responsible for the Columbine shootings.
People want simple reasons to explain why evil exists in this
world. They want simple solutions to fix the problem.
Take away the bloody video games, ban the scary movies,
expel 10 year old children who joke about "hit lists",
lock up 12 year old children who write violent fictional stories for class
projects and there will be no more Columbines.
Yeah right!
Teddi
Mia Munro
I don't come here too often, and really only stumbled into the whole Scully
Kink debate by accident. The very strong views presented on both sides made
me curious enough to go dig the story up and have a look. And to be honest,
once I'd read the story I felt sick.
It wasn't the content matter of the story per se or the fact that it was a
rapefic. I am a great Krycek fan (that's how I got into the x-files fanfic
in the first place) and because so many Krycek stories are slash, and
sometimes violent slash - including a thriving sub-genre of Krycek
rape-fics, I think I've managed to read a good portion of all the varieties
out there. The 'Krycek/Mulder get married and/or run away to live happily
ever after', the 'Krycek rapes Mulder', the 'Mulder rapes Krycek', 'the
Mulder gets raped and Krycek comforts him', the 'Krycek gets raped and
Mulder comforts him', the 'Mulder/Krycek have sex/rape each other and then
die,' the very, AU stories ranging from Mulder/Krycek as a sex-slave to
Krycek being a Nazi and a very strange (but well-written) fic where Krycek
is a fish and he and Mulder run off to the ocean together and live happily
ever after.... Most of the fanfic I skimmed once, some I thought, not my cup
of tea and deleted from my hard drive, some I thought, wow, great writing,
and kept.
What I'm trying to say is that what struck me most is not the content of the
Scully Kink story, or even the quality of the writing (which btw is
abyssmal) I haven't read much porn, but surely there is more than one
description for female genitalia? But rather the underlying theme of hatred.
A hatred directed at women.
I think, what the debate about the story should be, is not whether the
author believes in what he writes or not (frankly I don't really care) but
rather that this is the kind of story that is found in serial rapists and
murderers apartments after they've killed. This is the fannish equivalent of
the infamous 'Hustler' front with a naked woman being ground into beef. And
that damned well scares me!
I believe in freedom yes, but I also believe that with freedom comes
responsibility. You've got the privileges, you also have the obligations.
And we have the obligation as responsible adults, to see that this kind of
hatred is not tolerated. I can't remember who said that for evil to triumph
all it takes is for good men to do nothing. But it is something worth
remembering. Freedom of Speech is one of the most precious rights we have,
anywhere in the world. It's a right, but it's also a privilege that cannot
and should not be abused. The Internet and Usenet has been accused of
spawning hatred, racial, religious, sexual and gender-based. And,
unfortunately in many cases it is true. It has become all too easy for white
supremacist groups, right-wing extremists and neo-fascist groups to spread
their message of hatred and destruction through home-pages and e-mails. Just
as the net has become the bastion of sickness such as paedophiles and, men
who truly, honestly believe that women secretly yearn for rape and torture.
That 'the bitch asked for it' and that torturing and raping a woman is the
right thing to do for a manly man. As I said, I really don't care what the
author thinks or doesn't think. What I think is that he should be adult and
resonsible enough not to spread his message of hatred in the thinly
disguised shape of a fanfic.
Which brings me to a second point, there is a reason why what is posted here
is called *fanfic.* It's because the stories are based on the characters
taken from a tv show. And even the most AU of all fanfics usually try to
keep the characters at least vaguely familiar. In this story, the characters
for all their similarity to the show could be called Tweedlee and Tweedelum
and Evil Bitch tm. I noticed that earlier in this thread there was a
personal attack on Sarah Ellen Parson who wrote the original warning. I have
read her stories, both 'Prone' and the sequel, and I thought them excellent.
The writing was first rate, and while yes it was an AU, the characters,
Mulder, Scully and Krycek were still recognizable. The fundamental
difference between Parson's stories and the one under discusssion is that
she has taken the time and effort to examine the Krycek/Scully/Mulder
relationship from a different but very interesting angle, and above all, she
has tried (and I think) succeeded in painting a vivid and believable
portrait of three complex and three dimensional people. It cannot and should
not be compared to the story we are discussing.
To conclude then, (and I apologize for being so wordy) instead of discussing
and/or personally attack people in this debate, let's ask ourself this
question. If tomorrow, next week, next month, we read of a man raping and/or
killing a woman, and pointing to stories such as the Scully Kink series as
evidence that women are fundamentally evil, what will we feel if we did
nothing to stop the spread of such hatred and lies? Freedom of Speech is
important, but then, so is a human life.
Mia
Pyrephox
>What I'm trying to say is that what struck me most is not the content of the
>Scully Kink story, or even the quality of the writing (which btw is
>abyssmal) I haven't read much porn, but surely there is more than one
>description for female genitalia?
There's plenty. And most of them, in my opinion, are pretty silly. ;>
But rather the underlying theme of hatred.
>A hatred directed at women.
Which doesn't mean that the author hates women. I personally, have written some
stuff that would get me locked away *forever* if anyone believed that I
actually thought that such things should happen.
>I think, what the debate about the story should be, is not whether the
>author believes in what he writes or not (frankly I don't really care) but
>rather that this is the kind of story that is found in serial rapists and
>murderers apartments after they've killed.
Unlikely. Serial killers and rapists favor pictoral material, not stories. Even
so, just because one does tend to find S&M pornography in the possession of
killers, it does not follow that all S&M (or even a statistically significant
amount) practitioners or enthusiasts will become serial killers or rapists. Or,
for that matter, that the creators of consensual S&M pornography (that involves
real people) have any responsibility for what the people who buy it think or do
afterwards.
After all, some of the most common materials found in child molesters' homes
are copies of children's clothing catalogs.
>This is the fannish equivalent of
>the infamous 'Hustler' front with a naked woman being ground into beef. And
>that damned well scares me!
Does Maplethorpe scare you as well? It's just art. It may be bad art, offensive
art, or art that just makes you run screaming. But that doesn't mean that the
author/artist *believes* what s/he puts on paper.
>I believe in freedom yes, but I also believe that with freedom comes
>responsibility. You've got the privileges, you also have the obligations.
>And we have the obligation as responsible adults, to see that this kind of
>hatred is not tolerated.
Prove, conclusively and beyond a reasonable doubt, that the author in question
has a pathological and potentially harmful hatred towards the female sex, and I
won't tolerate it. Till then, it's just words on a page, not hurtin' nobody who
doesn't agree to read it.
>I can't remember who said that for evil to triumph
>all it takes is for good men to do nothing. But it is something worth
>remembering.
"Although I may despise what he may say, I will fight to the death for his
right to say it."-- Voltaire, paraphrased.
"Freedom is indivisible- it exists for all, or for none."-- don't remember.
>Freedom of Speech is one of the most precious rights we have,
>anywhere in the world. It's a right, but it's also a privilege that cannot
>and should not be abused.
It's either a right or it's a privledge. Can't be both.
>The Internet and Usenet has been accused of
>spawning hatred, racial, religious, sexual and gender-based. And,
>unfortunately in many cases it is true. It has become all too easy for white
>supremacist groups, right-wing extremists and neo-fascist groups to spread
>their message of hatred and destruction through home-pages and e-mails.
Yeah, so? It's easy for *anyone* to spread their message throughout the
Internet. The big difference between a hate page on the Web, and a KKK rally in
the street is that on the Web, no one can force you to listen. Ergo, they are
actually expressing a more acceptable form of free speech than if they held a
rally outside your house.
Always remember, the Web provides a way to express yourself, but it denies that
sort of "captive audience" that you get in real life.
>Just
>as the net has become the bastion of sickness such as paedophiles and, men
>who truly, honestly believe that women secretly yearn for rape and torture.
Really? Most of the legitimate web hosters will kick a page off for running
anything with illegal content (child pornography) or anything that they
consider "offensive" (like NC-17 fic, for example). Can you find it? Yeah, if
you *really* want to, and don't mind paying, or the (good) chance that the
message board or site you've found is really a sting operation.
Hardly a bastion. Molesting pedophiles and rapists act, by definition, on a
real-world basis.
>That 'the bitch asked for it' and that torturing and raping a woman is the
>right thing to do for a manly man. As I said, I really don't care what the
>author thinks or doesn't think. What I think is that he should be adult and
>resonsible enough not to spread his message of hatred in the thinly
>disguised shape of a fanfic.
So you evidently care enough about what the author thinks to think that he is
"spreading hatred" and should stop.
>Which brings me to a second point, there is a reason why what is posted here
>is called *fanfic.*
Yup. Fiction made by Fans of the show.
> It's because the stories are based on the characters
>taken from a tv show. And even the most AU of all fanfics usually try to
>keep the characters at least vaguely familiar.
Not at all. I've seen several parodies and humorous pieces here (popular ones,
as well) that made no attempt to keep to *my* vision of what the characters
are... as a matter of fact, very few keep to my vision of the characters. Of
course, that could be because it's *my* vision, and not some Holy Standard that
all fic should be held too.
>I noticed that earlier in this thread there was a
>personal attack on Sarah Ellen Parson who wrote the original warning. I have
>read her stories, both 'Prone' and the sequel, and I thought them excellent.
Goodie for you. Does that mean that someone who found them foul and offensive
is wrong? And if someone finds them foul and offensive, shouldn't the author be
responsible and take them down before a rapist (gasp) gets his/her greedy
little hands on them and uses them? Personally, my vision of Krycek in no way
has him feeling any sort of desire to rape either Mulder or Scully, so the
character in that story might has well been named Gratuitous Bastard #1 for all
I thought he matched 1013's Krycek.
Luckily, I don't get to decide whether the author of "Scully Kink" or "Prone"
or any of the other authors' works get to stay around. Because of that
neato-keen thing that is Usenet anarchy. I don't get to make unfounded
accusations as to the authors' mental states either, because I know I'd
probably be wrong.
>The writing was first rate, and while yes it was an AU, the characters,
>Mulder, Scully and Krycek were still recognizable.
... to you. However, that does not mean that your vision is the only one that
exists.
>The fundamental
>difference between Parson's stories and the one under discusssion is that
>she has taken the time and effort to examine the Krycek/Scully/Mulder
>relationship from a different but very interesting angle
In your opinion.
>and above all, she
>has tried (and I think) succeeded in painting a vivid and believable
>portrait of three complex and three dimensional people. It cannot and should
>not be compared to the story we are discussing.
Why not? They're all just words on (virtual) paper.
>To conclude then, (and I apologize for being so wordy) instead of discussing
>and/or personally attack people in this debate, let's ask ourself this
>question. If tomorrow, next week, next month, we read of a man raping and/or
>killing a woman, and pointing to stories such as the Scully Kink series as
>evidence that women are fundamentally evil, what will we feel if we did
>nothing to stop the spread of such hatred and lies?
If that exact situation ever happens, I'll check to see exactly what planet I'm
living on. First of all, rape is not motivated in whole or in part, by
literature. Rape is the act of one person against another. If a man is going to
rape, t'aint no amount of fuzzy-bunny and flowers stories going to stop him. If
a man is *not* going to rape, there's no amount of rapefic that is going to
*make* him do it.
And the only person who would seriously point to one story as the motivation of
his crimes has problems that stretch far beyond his fictional pastimes.
>Freedom of Speech is
>important, but then, so is a human life.
>
>Mia
And you've yet to prove that this story or any like it, endangers a human life.
Do *that* first, then talk about censorship "for the good of mankind".
Pyrephox
Teddi Litman
Pyrephox wrote:
> If tomorrow, next week, next month, we read of a man raping and/or
> >killing a woman, and pointing to stories such as the Scully Kink series as
> >evidence that women are fundamentally evil, what will we feel if we did
> >nothing to stop the spread of such hatred and lies?
>
> If that exact situation ever happens, I'll check to see exactly what planet I'm
> living on.
LOL!
Well, Charles Manson did claim the Beatles were prophets who
told him to start the "revolution" in their White album. He pointed to
specific song lyrics as evidence that he was doing the right thing in sending
out followers to brutally murder people.
>
> And the only person who would seriously point to one story as the motivation of
> his crimes has problems that stretch far beyond his fictional pastimes.
Yep, I would say Manson and his "family" had problems that stretched
way beyond their pastime of listening to that "devil music." <G>
Teddi
S. Jameson
feel compelled to remind everyone that when you put your work out there for
people to read, some people are going to like it and others are going to hate
it -- and some of the latter group are going to claim that you therefore have
no right to publish it. (Try diagramming THAT sentence.)
Whether Hephaestion is right or Ms. Parsons is right, only the heavenly powers
can say. I doubt that any of us is possessed of wisdom so great.
Object all you like to what they say, but please, I beg of you, don't suggest
they -- either of them -- shouldn't be allowed to say it. It is no more
productive, or supportive of the First Amendment, to try to squelch the
protester than it is to try to squelch the original writer.
"Wherever you go, there you are."
Teddi Litman
"S. Jameson" wrote:
>
>
> Object all you like to what they say, but please, I beg of you, don't suggest
> they -- either of them -- shouldn't be allowed to say it. It is no more
> productive, or supportive of the First Amendment, to try to squelch the
> protester than it is to try to squelch the original writer.
The First Amendment has been brought up a few times in this thread;
but really, it's not quite as relevant as it seems to be. The First
Amendment protects against any potential action by the US government
to limit free expression. As no one in this thread has suggested the *US
government*
somehow prevent anything that has been written here from being written or
read (so far, anyway), the First Amendment of the US Constitution is really
not an issue here.
Teddi
Red Valerian
<dayb...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>The First Amendment has been brought up a few times in this thread;
>but really, it's not quite as relevant as it seems to be. The First
>Amendment protects against any potential action by the US government
>to limit free expression. As no one in this thread has suggested the *US
>government*
I agree with Teddi that the First Amendment is largely irrelevant
here, but for different reasons. The net is not exclusively American,
and therefore US Constitutional law does not apply to it.
Even though it may have had its genesis in the States, the intenet
now knows no national boundaries. Readers from other countries find
it rather disconcerting when Americans assume ownership of the
internet and start applying US law to it.
Remember, the First Amendment is unknown in the UK. And Canada. And
Australia. And South America. And Europe. And Scandinavia. And in all
of the many other non-US countries of the world where this ng is
being read, judging by the posts we've had here in the past.
While Hepaestion may well be American (his email address doesn't make
it clear one way or the other - hepae...@aol.com ) his stories are
available to anyone in the world with a modem and a newreader. As far
as I know, they are subject to the laws of no single country.
I'll concede that the content of his work may well breach the AOL
Terms of Service, but that's another thing altogether.
I hope we never reach the point where we start TOSsing atxc writers
because we don't like the content of their fic.
Red
Red Valerian
>....Serial killers and rapists favor pictoral material, not stories. Even
>so, just because one does tend to find S&M pornography in the possession of
>killers, it does not follow that all S&M (or even a statistically significant
>amount) practitioners or enthusiasts will become serial killers or rapists.
>
Ah Pyrephox - the voice of reason as usual. Tact may have been a
little bit wanting - but otherwise I can't fault a single sentiment in
this post.
Red
Red Valerian
<dayb...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:> >
>People want simple reasons to explain why evil exists in this
>world. They want simple solutions to fix the problem.
>Take away the bloody video games, ban the scary movies,
>expel 10 year old children who joke about "hit lists",
>lock up 12 year old children who write violent fictional stories for class
>projects and there will be no more Columbines.
>Yeah right!
>
> Teddi
Well said, Teddi. I wish people would remember that violence is not
something new. Jack the Ripper hadn't watched any video nasties or
read any misogynistic fanfiction.
I think we are in danger of mixing up the symptom with the disease,
here.
Someone suffering with flu may well run a temperature and develop a
cough. However, the temperature and cough haven't *caused* the
illness. Rather, they are the evidence that it is present.
In the same way, someone with violent tendencies towards women might
well exist on an exclusive diet of rape/snuff/torture fics or films.
(They exist, believe me.) And while these reading/viewing habits
could be interpreted as one of the symptoms of their pathology,
it is simplistic to see them as the root cause.
What was that line in Scream? I'm paraphrasing here - but it went
something like this:
"Movies don't invent serial killers - they just make serial killers
more inventive."
Logically, the same argument applies to fan fiction. In the highly
unlikely event that any rapist is ever found with one of Hepaestion's
stories on their hard drive, all it would prove to me was that they
lacked discernment and imagination.
Red
Jean Helms
>productive, or supportive of the First Amendment, to try to squelch the
>protester than it is to try to squelch the original writer.
I, too, am an ink-stained wretch of the newspaper variety, and the First
Amendment has no greater booster than I.
However, freedom of the press belongs to the person who owns the presses. I
doubt that any of our colleagues would argue seriously that the Bill of Rights
gives us the freedom to have anything we like published in our newspaper.
As to who the owner is in this instance, I have no earthly idea.
Jean
Pyrephox
>>....Serial killers and rapists favor pictoral material, not stories. Even
>>so, just because one does tend to find S&M pornography in the possession of
>>killers, it does not follow that all S&M (or even a statistically
>significant
>>amount) practitioners or enthusiasts will become serial killers or rapists.
>>
>Ah Pyrephox - the voice of reason as usual. Tact may have been a
>little bit wanting - but otherwise I can't fault a single sentiment in
>this post.
>
>Red
>
>
::sigh:: Tact never was my strong point. But to suggest punishing someone for
their thoughts (or for thoughts that may not be an accurate expression of their
own-- i.e. fiction) instead of their actions is one of the most offensive
things I can think of as both a fiction writer and just a plain ol' regular
person. *Especially* in a medium such as this, where each person exercises full
control over what they do or do not view, and thus, what offends them.
Pyrephox
--
www.geocities.com/Area51/Hollow/2623/BMB.html
Blue Moon Madness
Teddi Litman
Red Valerian wrote:
> On Sun, 23 Jan 2000 01:32:51 -0500, Teddi Litman
> <dayb...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
> >The First Amendment has been brought up a few times in this thread;
> >but really, it's not quite as relevant as it seems to be. The First
> >Amendment protects against any potential action by the US government
> >to limit free expression. As no one in this thread has suggested the *US
> >government*
>
> I agree with Teddi that the First Amendment is largely irrelevant
> here, but for different reasons. The net is not exclusively American,
> and therefore US Constitutional law does not apply to it.
Yes, that was my point too, even though I didn't state it specifically.
A lot of times, people refer to the "First Amendment" as if
it were a basic human right rather than a legislation by a
specific government. Ironically though, it would seem
that it tends to be American legislators who want to find
a way to restrict expression on the net for everyone.
Now, I recently read an article about how the Cuban government
is actively restricting their citizens' *access* to the net.
(Not that it is too difficult as most people do not own
computers.) However wrong we might think that is,
they are still not trying to legislate against non-Cubans.
Teddi
MerckDEPA
>I'm not going to express any particular opinions about this
>hephaestion fellow or his work, but I do want to say one thing--Alice
>has raised probably the only important points, certainly the only ones
>that warrant impassioned discussion in ANY forum..
Tripe, Ad nauseum...
To equate writing fiction with overt racism or ignoring the Nazi threat is
puerile and childish.You might recall that the Nazis and the Cultural
Revolution practiced book burning in order to maintain the boundaries of
thought. You ideas of patriarchal censorship veer far closer to theirs. Your
words are well-placed but your understanding is poor, your thoughts and
concepts, shallow. This is not unusual nor abnormal, but I would suggest law
school would not be your forte. Not insult, merely observation.
Value judgments are a personal thing. You are entitled. You are not entitled to
publicly declare them in inflammatory or accusatory ways, particularly as
statement of fact. That is way attorneys enjoy libel, slander and DC cases.
There it is, in public, just waiting for the value judgment of... well.. a
judge. He almost always sees this as wrong. YMMV.
But you beg the question: Is Stephen King not fit for your company because he
publishes things that are disturbing? Should Poppy Z. Brite be denied a
publishing contract because the females in her stories tend to end badly? If
Dennis Copper's leering old man dare rape an underage boy, is he better
silenced because he speaks of things that happen and you do not like? And who,
precisely, might you appoint to this omniscient, omnipresent board? Yourself,
obviously. What about me? That would leave us in need of a third because I am
sure nothing would get published in our tenure of deadlock. (I, for example,
would refuse rights to romance novels-- harmful to our budding females as
unrealistic and paternal-- and diet books, which have been a secret war on
women for 30 years.)
Unlike you, I did read the story. It was, indeed, gross, but the entire plot
was presented broadly, obviously in a darkly humorous tone. It spoke of no
ingrained hatred to me, rather the hyperbolic examination of some of life's
less attractive moments. And I am always confused about PMS. If women say they
have it, it is a right and good defense. If men say it, they are hateful
sexists. I would like a ruling on this, but know it isn't likely to hold.
Sometimes humans with depth of thought use fiction with outrageous situations
to portray things that anger them. Have you seen "In The Company Of Men?" Here
is a film that puts women in horrendous positions of weakness, both corporate
and personal, shows them as easily manipulated, naive, possibly stupid. But to
what end? As a contrast to ugly cynicism, feelings of superiority, and
manipulation. I am not placing the story in league with this, but to offer an
example of how one must occasionally step beyond the surface to grasp the
meaning planted there for the mature, thoughtful reader/viewer.
I am not asking you to like things you do not see as morally acceptable. I do
ask you to divide fiction from reality, and to allow others to exercise their
own rights without your instruction. Take into consideration your reaction if
the government decided that fan fiction and illegal for various copyright and
moral reasons, all of which sound very logical if I were to present them to
you, and was inherently bad, and because of the ease with which minors access
the net, should be locked behind closed doors or outlawed in public forums.
This can be evaluated in many lights. First, it is anti-woman, since most
writers of the genre are female. Secondly, it can be seen as homophobic, since
a goodly portion of the writings are slash, mostly of the male/male variety.
Thirdly, it can be seen as an attack on the constitutional right to free
speech, the right to publish and freedom of assembly, even though you are a
virtual gathering. My point is that many well-meaning and intelligent people
can take a limited understanding of the law and transmute it into their own
vision of what is right and good for all. Unfortunately, once precedent has
been set, others with contrary opinions will then use your precedent to
restrict YOUR ideas of what should and should not be. And THAT, madam, is why
the First Amendment is so closely guarded and so broadly interpreted. It
protects not only the writer of the story in question, but you, as well.
MerckDEPA
>and/or personally attack people in this debate, let's ask ourself this
>question. If tomorrow, next week, next month, we read of a man raping and/or
>killing a woman, and pointing to stories such as the Scully Kink series
>as
>evidence that women are fundamentally evil, what will we feel if we did
>nothing to stop the spread of such hatred and lies? Freedom of Speech is
>important, but then, so is a human life.
>
>Mia
This is the precise reason that you are not on the Supreme Court, nor can you
control international copyright law. If one were to take your Moral High Road,
how long before it would become a witch hunt?I would suspect history was not a
strong subject for you. Even the 50s is lost to you in the lessons it taught
our society about blanket statements and condemnations based merely on what a
person thought. At least, you have not had to face any of them lately.
If, and god knows we have to stay alert for such things, your philosopohy were
to hold the day in court, imagine what would have happened to the Beatles in
the aftermath of Manson. Not only did the perpetrators have the White Album in
their possession, but scrawled the lyrics hither and yon in the victims' own
blood.
Your unschooled desire to hold someone, anyone but the perpetrator responsible
for his or her crimes is now new; it is an emotional response to anger and
frustration based in feelings of helplessness that are summarily dismissed by
the judiciary. Not backwards masking, not Judas Priest or Ozzie Osborne can be
held legally responsible for your child taking up arms against himself or
others. It is, as the Christians and the legal system calls it, free will, and
so long as an individual cannot be proved to be maliciously manipulating for
specific effect, it's just the guy and the gun on trial.
Every once in a while, the alarm bunnies get some press and those who cannot
see past their own nose begin to think it all sounds reasonable and right.
Fortunately, there are others with the good sense, training and vision to keep
them from slashing off their own noses.
MerckDEPA
>accusations as to the authors' mental states either, because I know I'd
>probably be wrong.
And in your haste to be grounded only in your own opinions, you avoid those
taxing legal encounters. I wonder if they have the good sense to realize how
close some of them are coming to actionable defamation?
MerckDEPA
>>productive, or supportive of the First Amendment, to try to squelch the
>>protester than it is to try to squelch the original writer.
Please be cognizant of the division between eviscerating a fictional story, and
stating without reserve that an author is mentally ill.
Pyrephox
Brandon Ray
MerckDEPA wrote:
Very true. The first is protected by the first amendment, no matter how tacky it
may be; the second is quite possibly libel, and *not* protected.
Brandon Ray
Pyrephox wrote:
What s/he is saying is that some of the other participants in this discussion
have come perilously close to libel. They could theoretically be taken to court
for making false and defamatory statements about the author of the story. This
is distinct from criticism of the story, which is fair game. But when you start
making assertions about he moral character and mental equilibrium of the author,
you are playing on dangerous ground.
Pyrephox
>What s/he is saying is that some of the other participants in this discussion
>have come perilously close to libel. They could theoretically be taken to
>court
>for making false and defamatory statements about the author of the story.
>This
>is distinct from criticism of the story, which is fair game. But when you
>start
>making assertions about he moral character and mental equilibrium of the
>author,
>you are playing on dangerous ground.
>
Thank you kindly. I was obviously having a not-too-bright moment. Probably
brought home by the unexpected sight of over three inches of snow in my part of
South Carolina. A lot of us native Southerners have been in sort of a daze for
the past two days. ;>
Pyrephox
MerckDEPA
>>taxing legal encounters. I wonder if they have the good sense to realize
>how
>>close some of them are coming to actionable defamation?
>
>With all due respect... huh?
People who have enough sense not to make unfounded claims about someone in
public forums rarely find themselves in court for things like slander, libel
and defammation. It seems not everyone has the same degree of sense that you
apprently possess.
MerckDEPA
>brought home by the unexpected sight of over three inches of snow in my
>part of
>South Carolina. A lot of us native Southerners have been in sort of a daze
>for
>the past two days.
One of the wonderful things about carpet bagging is that sometimes you come
with seemingly useless paraphanelia, like the plow blade for your riding mower.
Today I am king of the whole white world.
MerckDEPA
>> >>productive, or supportive of the First Amendment, to try to squelch
>the
>> >>protester than it is to try to squelch the original writer.
>>
>> Please be cognizant of the division between eviscerating a fictional story,
>and
>> stating without reserve that an author is mentally ill.
>
>Very true. The first is protected by the first amendment, no matter how
>tacky it
>may be; the second is quite possibly libel, and *not* protected.
But a lot more fun to play with in court. Beats contract cases all to hell for
the simple joy watching one's government work.
se_pa...@my-deja.com
and lawsuits. Things are actually much more murky than you folks are
saying.
Here's what my research turned up. The citations are in here, so you
can view them yourselves if you like.
I don't think you're at all correct about these comments in what
constitutes libel. And in this case, I think defamation is really what
you're talking about.
Here's info on defamation suits filed about internet speech, few if any
are applicable. The closest things were the chatroom ones, where
chatrooms were labeled public spaces with no expectation of privacy, and
the "anonymous defamer" one where jurisdiction couldn't be established
because they couldn't locate the person who wrote the "defamatory"
content.
From the Libel Defense Web Site (This is a rundown of all applicable
cases in the U.S. about Internet "publishing" of info.)
http://www.ldrc.com/cyber6.html#Defamation/First Amendment
In each case, there had to be real loss proven for a ruling. There's
nothing said here about anyone saying things the other person doesn't
like in a public forum. I don't think a newsgroup like this could be
ruled a "private space" nor could a message here be considered
advertising.
There seems to be no Internet case law in existence where someone got
sued because someone didn't like an expressed opinion about them. The
only hurt feelings case was tossed out of court.
It has yet to be determined whether posting to a newsgroup or a bulletin
board service constitutes "publication" of a libelous statement.
However, as in the case against Matt Drudge, you have to report the
false statement and assert that it is TRUE before you can be held liable
for libel.
That means, folks, that opinion doesn't constitute libel. It
constitutes opinion.
If someone were to say, "I KNOW that so and so has a history of mental
illness", which is a falsehood and then publishes it, they might be held
as making a libelous statement, particularly if the statement were held
by a court to be "published" which posting to a newsgroup has not been
thus far. However, if someone were to say, "Anyone who would say
something like that has got to be nuts" in the context of an article
putting forth their opinion, the suit would be thrown out of court as
frivolous. Besides which, libel has got to cause measurable damage and
hurt feelings isn't measurable damage, as in the case filed by Jerry
Falwell. If someone's job was being impacted or someone was harassed by
the police or something because of the falsehood, that would be
different.
Another example: if someone were to write a letter to law enforcement
saying that so-and-so was violating some law, and then the person about
whom the statement was written was investigated - you could win that one
because there would be damage you could prove.
But disagreement and speculation - the key being the speculative nature
of speculation - as to someone's mental state isn't libel. Libel is
telling a known falsehood and saying that it's the truth. Speculating
isn't saying something is true at all and you can't sue someone for it.
Or, you could, but you'd just be wasting your time and money.
From About.com's "What is Libel?"
"Limitations and Defense
Truth: This is a rather obvious one. If you have evidence
supporting the truth of the statement you made, the plaintiff
can't prove it is false.
Opinion: Another obvious one. An opinion is an opinion and
can't be proven false. On the other hand, if your statement
includes a defamatory fact, or implies a defamatory fact along
with your opinion, you might find yourself a defendant in a libel
suit. Only pure opinion is a defense against libel.
Again, you have to say something is true, not speculate about it. Even
"so-and-so is obviously mentally ill", within the context of an opinion
article isn't defamatory. It's still just someone's opinion vs. someone
else's.
Public Persons: In NY Times v. Sullivan, the U.S. Supreme
Court decided that the media could freely report on the affairs
of "public" people (like politicians and movie starts) unless
statements are made with malice.
Statute of Limitations: One year after making a libelous
statement, you can breathe easy in most states. In others, you
may have to worry for two years."
More on libel from About.com
"Besides making distinctions between public and private figures,
American courts also have ruled that
various kinds of published information are generally immune from libel
charges. For example, it is
almost impossible for a writer to be found guilty of libel if the
writing deals with opinions rather than
facts. "Under the First Amendment, there is no such thing as a false
idea," the Supreme Court said in
a 1974 libel ruling.
(I think that's pretty definitive, don't you?)
Not long ago, the owner of a restaurant in New Orleans sued a food
critic for writing unflattering
things about his eating establishment. Too bad, the Louisiana Supreme
Court told the restaurant
owner, before sending him back to his kitchen empty-handed.
More recently, Jerry Falwell, an American religious leader, sued a
magazine after it published a biting
satire of Falwell that mocked his piety. Indeed, a state of Virginia
jury awarded Falwell $200,000
after concluding that the magazine had inflicted "emotional distress"
on the well-known clergyman.
But the U.S. Supreme Court later threw out the award by explaining that
satire, no matter how
scathing and upsetting to its target, was protected by the First
Amendment."
So there you go. I think it would be extremely difficult for anyone to
sue anyone for libel if the content was opinion, no matter what the
opinion speculated about them or how much it hurt them or their
reputation. (A humorous example: I could say, I think so-and-so is a
pig-f****r, but he couldn't sue me for libel unless I said I KNEW he was
a pig-f****r and had pictures to prove it (providing that was false),
and testimony from the pig in question. You have to have a defamatory
FACT for it to be libel.)
But, the legal system being what it is, I'm sure there'd be a lawyer
somewhere to take the case. I mean, they get paid no matter what.
But, IMHO anyone who makes a decision guided SOLELY by the opinion of
another is making a bad decision. An opinion is just one source of
information, and a dubious one at that, unless the opinion is from a
trusted source. Look at opinion, look at original source material,
weigh your evidence and then come up with your decision.
People on this thread are acting as though opinion IS fact, and that's
very wrong-headed indeed.
Sarah Ellen Parsons
In article <20000126101130...@ng-fi1.aol.com>,
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
lee burwasser
a nice report of research into libel, defamation and law.
A nice breath of reason, too.
Lee Burwasser
*working stiff--don't blame me for policy*
lee burwasser
[[ snip ]]
> And I am always confused about PMS. If women say they
> have it, it is a right and good defense. If men say it, they are hateful
> sexists. I would like a ruling on this, but know it isn't likely to hold.
[[ snip ]]
Not everyone sees it as "a right and good defense," but there is a real and factual
difference between a woman saying that she herself did/said something because she
had PMS and a man saying that a woman must have done/said something because of PMS.
A woman presumably knows her own cycle well enough to say that she's just about
due, or if she speaks about something that happened in the past, need only check
her calender. In any case, she knows whether she was pre- or not. A man
attributing a woman's anger to PMS is presumed not to know her cycle, or have
access to her feminine supplies, unless he's her husband or doctor or the like.
His dismissal of her is the old "any stick to beat a dog"; he doesn't know if she
has PMS or not, but he wants to discount her argument, so he attributes it to her
"raging hormones."