( No Title )
“I don’t want to read this” is totally valid.
“This is disgusting to me” is totally valid.
“I don’t want to read this because it is disgusting to me” is totally valid.
“I don’t think anyone should be allowed to read or write this because it is disgusting to me” is authoritarian.
Unless it’s like… Illegal or immoral. You can read that fae kinky story for all I care but if you bring a child, an animal or a dead body into this then it’s not going to end well for you.
“I don’t think anyone should be allowed to read or write this because it is disgusting to me” is authoritarian.
Necrophilia, pedophilia and zoophilia are illegal in most countries. I do not think that it is so far fetched to say that no one should read and/or write about a theme that is illegal.
And I am talking about this three subjects being the main ‘appeal’ of the book. Reading and/or writing a book about a child getting abused like in the book Lolita from Vladimir Nabokov is okay, i’m not saying otherwise, since it’s clearly meant to show that this is not something that is okay, it is to criticizing the abuser.
A book in which a human being is having intercourse with a dead body (not a vampire or a zombie, an actual dead body) and it is portrayed as “sexy” or “appealing” in another way than to criticize it should not be okay. Romancizing necrophilia is not only disgusting, but clearly immoral. Same for pedophilia and zoophilia.
I’m not saying that you are wrong in the OG post, I just wanted to put a limit to the last sentence. Yes anyone and everyone is free to read and/or write about the themes they like, but again I don’t think that it is far-fetched to say that this kind of illegal content is not valid to be written about in a positive light.
actually here, let me share another one of my posts with you.
🖤 Whether or not a taboo, unpleasant, or illegal subject in a piece of fiction has been ‘romanticized’ or ‘glorified’ is an entirely subjective opinion based on a personal reading of the text.
🖤 You cannot assume that an author is trying to make a taboo, unpleasant, or illegal subject seem appealing just because their writing made you feel like it was appealing.
🖤 ‘Glorifying’ or ‘romanticizing’ a subject is not a good reason to say that a piece of fiction should be censored, or that the author or people who enjoy it should be harmed or punished.
🖤 Your personal interpretation of a piece of fiction does not reflect on the morality or psychology of the author of the fiction.
🖤 It is authoritarian to want to censor fiction based on your interpretation that the fiction is ‘romanticizing’ or ‘glorifying’ an unpleasant or illegal topic.
🖤 An author has no moral obligation to explicitly condemn taboo, unpleasant or illegal actions by characters in their fiction.
🖤 It is perfectly fine for an author to present terrible actions and events without holding the audience’s hand to make sure they know they’re wrong.
🖤 There is nothing wrong with writing a protagonist who does evil, immoral and illegal things without the author taking pains to make certain that the audience knows that they’re wrong.
🖤 If you read a book and see taboo, criminal, or immoral actions as romantic, glorious, or something to aspire to, that is a you problem, not the author’s problem.
🖤 An author is under no obligation to be their audience’s morality teacher.
Discussion ¬