|
Ugly In The Morning posted:You are about to hit the part where the series goes to mostly ghostwriters and the series takes a pretty hard nosedive, quality wise for a while. I think the transition happens around book 26. Even when I was a kid I didn’t make it past book 30 or so, the quality change was that noticeable.  Well, AIUI she at least comes back for the last few books, and I really want to both see how it ends and read her post hoc commentary on the series, so hopefully I can struggle through the ghostwritten parts, or, failing that, find a decent summary. (and I'm not trying to power through the whole series in one go, I'm alternating one Animorphs book with 2-3 other books, so I probably won't finish the series until late this year.)
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2020 17:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 11:58 |
|
|
ToxicFrog posted:
the ghost-written stuff gets really egregious for a while. Even as a kid I was spotting some incredibly dumb mistakes and an over-reliance on comedy enemies like the Helmecrons They were pumping those suckers out monthly
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2020 17:36
|
|
|
Not a one of you mentioned Joanna Russ for excellent SF that isn’t misogynist, you heathens
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2020 18:03
|
|
|
Elviscat posted:YA fiction kinda needs to be vague on the sex scenes I would hope.... Alternatively goons could stop being such neurotic prudes about poo poo. But seriously, as someone who does read romance and doesn't mind sex scenes in other genres, is there any book with sexual content you people would actually recommend? And I mean for reasons including the sexual content, not in spite of it. It's kind of a big part of the human experience to completely throw out of an entire art form all together. Especially one so detailed and open as literature. I'd say Santa Olivia by Jacqueline Carry. It's a good scifi-ish alt-history book about a girl with super-soldier powers growing up in a disenfranchised town that's been taken over by the US military when war breaks out with Mexico. Bit on the YA side, so the sex is toned down a bit from her other big series. And there's nothing wrong with sex in YA books. Teenagers think about sex and often have sex, and there's nothing wrong with media aimed at teenagers catering to that interest. There are a bunch of books with explicit sex scenes I'd put in the hands of a teen before something like Twilight because I'd rather not pass on the idea that there's something romantic about your partner having to go to lengths to not kill you during intercourse.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2020 21:48
|
|
|
Ah Jacqueline Carey. One half of the authorial pair that, if found on a shelf, guaranteed the college date I was seeing would be really fun and think that calling someone Marquee De Sade was the height of compliment.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2020 22:16
|
|
|
PJOmega posted:Ah Jacqueline Carey. One half of the authorial pair that, if found on a shelf, guaranteed the college date I was seeing would be really fun and think that calling someone Marquee De Sade was the height of compliment. ...was the other half Laurel K. Hamilton?
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2020 23:55
|
|
|
Elviscat posted:What else should I be looking at? Vandana Singh is great http://vandana-writes.com/short-stories/ Check out Ambiguity Machines: https://www.tor.com/2015/04/29/ambiguity-machines-an-examination-vandana-singh/
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2020 00:20
|
|
|
I was reading old Sherlock Holmes stories today and while they mostly hold up I did run across one that was bizarre called "A Case of Identity." In it Sherlock and Watson meet a young woman who asks them to look into what happened to her missing fiance. She gives them her whole backstory about how her father died and her mother married a much younger man, how she gets a fairly large stipend from an uncle but since she lives at home still her mother and step-father use the money for the family. Her step-father is controlling and refuses to let her go out but one day while he was out of the country on business she went to a party hosted by friends of her deceased father and she met a young man who started courting her. He quickly asks for her hand in marriage but the day of the wedding he vanishes. Sherlock investigates and discovers that the whole thing was the step-father and mother pulling a Victorian era catfish on the young woman with the step-father playing the fiance, just in disguise. They cooked up the scheme in order to make the daughter stay at home and not marry so they could keep getting her money. Here comes the weird part, Sherlock confronts the step-father who admits to everything but says there was nothing illegal in what he did. Sherlock agrees and lets him leave. Then Watson asks if they're going to tell the young woman what happened and Sherlock just goes nah and gives a quote about how women can't be reasoned with. That's it. There's no punishment for the step-father and no resolution to the poor young woman who thinks her fiance is missing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2020 04:46
|
|
|
there wolf posted:Alternatively goons could stop being such neurotic prudes about poo poo. Sex in romance novels is fine, that's their point. Explicit sex scenes in books that are not about sex are weird, for the same reason that going to a movie theater and watching, say the latest Star Wars movie, would be really weird if it included 15 minutes of close up action shots of John Boyega hardcore penetrating Daisey Ridley would be weird. Furthermore exposure to explicit sexual literature too early can create weird thoughts and hangups around sex, remember when I said I asked what a clitorus was when I was 12? Before I had any sort of sexual identity whatsoever? Tons of books take it waaaaaay too far too, see the Sword of Truth series and loving crazy spiked demon phallus rape scenes. I'm a very sex positive person, I've been involved in my local kink community before, engaged in multiple-partner sex and whatnot, but I don't think exposing young people to hardcore sex in literature is somehow magically a much better thing then hardcore pornography, or explicit sex in movies, your sense of sexual identity as a young person should come from your elders teaching you about it in a forum where you can ask questions and understand the importance of concepts like consent (not like that sickos). A lot of sex in literature tends towards the male character (typically the protagonist) being very forceful with the female character, who then finds herself powerless to resist his masculine wiles, ESPECIALLY in sci-fi and fantasy, and that is an AWFUL thing to expose young people to, because it enforces our pretty awful gender norms where sexuality is concerned, telling young men that she'll like it if you're forceful enough and young women that it's expected for men to force themselves on them i.e. enforcing rape culture.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2020 05:47
|
|
|
Also, 99% of the time, the writing is atrocious.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2020 06:20
|
|
|
Stupid_Sexy_Flander posted:Also, 99% of the time, the writing is atrocious. And It's usually superfluous. If the details of the sex-having are somehow relevant to the plot or to the portrayal of characters, sure, give those details. Otherwise, no need to bother, really.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2020 12:43
|
|
|
Careful what you wish for there. i think media has had an overall improvement with the internet making pornography of every possible kind readily availaible, because otherwise you get people using absolutely any and every outlet available to them.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2020 14:54
|
|
|
Besides, even weird stuff isn't always harmful. I read Clive Barker's Books of Blood when I was 13/14 years old, and there's a LOT of weird sex in those books. But my main takeaway as a teen was that sex could be weird and complicated in ways I had never really thought about, and sexuality was less about doing it right or wrong and more about emotional needs, though I never would have been able to put it like that back then. I would later devour The Great and Secret Show, Everville and Imajica, books that (looking back) were queer as gently caress. You really couldn't get a combination of those themes and hardcore horror anywhere else, and it read like a way more open and honest depiction of sexuality than a lot of other media offered. For a teenage boy that was trying to figure out that maybe he also liked dudes, it was an eye-opener. Especially Imajica and its lovetriangle made a massive impression on me. Its good to have these things uncensored in literature, because books can help bridge the gap between the emotional aspects and the (sometimes weird) physicality of sex and love. You don't get that by watching porn and reading books that fade to black at the right moment. Sometimes, the book will always be better.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2020 15:25
|
|
|
Dienes posted:...was the other half Laurel K. Hamilton? Goodkind, but since you mention it it really shoulda been a trio.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2020 16:08
|
|
|
Elviscat posted:What else should I be looking at? thepopmonster posted:K. B. Spangler's Stoneskin Haven’t read Stoneskin but I’m seconding Spangler for her Rachel Peng series. It’s clear she’s done massive research for these books, and she writes in such an immersive way that you could believe that a top-secret government agency of cybernetically-enhanced humans actually exists in the here and now. Zamboni Rodeo has a new favorite as of 16:24 on Feb 28, 2020 |
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2020 16:21
|
|
|
Elviscat posted:I was allowed unfettered access to books when I turned about 11, including any book off my parent's small library-size collection, or my brother's bookcase. The protagonist also has to get naked and lubed up by a scientist before he gets into the crazy dimension travelling machine and appears in the new dimension nude. Every. Single. Time. If you want to know how messed up the Richard Blade books are, someone has recently re-read and reviewed the first eight books. Those books were definitely someones kink. (link mildly NSFW due to some of the covers)
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2020 18:30
|
|
|
Elviscat posted:Yeah, I found a "Top 20 sci-fi novels!" Listcle in google, and one of the books suggested included the phrase "raped her until she went autistic" Yeah, that's Stephen Donaldson's "The Gap" series, isn't it? The entire plot of the first book is exactly what you said, some space pirate gets a hold of a girl with some kind of control implant, and not only rapes her but literally enslaves her, forcing her body to act against her will. It must be 20 years since I read that book, but I still vividly remember a part where he makes her give him a blowjob, and then pushes some buttons on the control to make her smile at him afterwards. But as bad as that book was, the tonal whiplash in the sequel was somehow worse. Now the girl has to cooperate with her rapist in order to save humanity from some alien menace and he's actually just some misunderstood poor soul with a heart of gold deep down and shucks, what's a little rape and enslavement between friends?
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2020 22:42
|
|
|
That's the name, yeah, and the "no, but really he's an antihero" is what really puts it over the edge. He also considers using the implant to make her cut off her own breasts, and as a side effect of him using the implant she becomes addicted to it and actively obstructs any investigation into his actions so she can keep it. Only John Ringo's Ghost, with the protagonist anally raping a 15yo Russian prostitute, and later using his magic dick to cure the trauma of some women that were raped by racist charactures of Arab terrorists has left me more sickened by a plotline.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2020 23:04
|
|
|
Let's go back to the funny kind of terrible books 
|
|
#
?
Feb 29, 2020 09:15
|
|
|
My favourite book with a lot of bad in it is Krindlekrax, because while the main character is great and has a fantastic arc, most of the secondary characters only have one trait and for many of them it can be annoying, like the english teacher who breaks down in tears and the mention of Shakespeare. His joke is just exhausting. To be fair to the book it is for young children though so simple jokes are expected. The main character's father has a tic that initially is annoying until you realise why it's happening then it reads differently in a really interesting way (his tic is that every time something happens he just mutters "Not my fault", which I initially read in a childish way, but due to the events of the book it's less a childish refrain and more of a PTSD symptom, as the book makes clear that most of the problem with the giant crocodile is entirely his fault and he knows it) The protagonist of the book, Ruskin Splinter, a tiny weedy boy with BALLS OF STEEL, owns though, and it has some great illustrations:  Behold, Ruskin climbing an crocodile that's about 2 storeys long! He's the best. Edit: I made this post for you Birdmod 
BioEnchanted has a new favorite as of 09:36 on Feb 29, 2020 |
|
#
?
Feb 29, 2020 09:30
|
|
|
BioEnchanted posted:Edit: I made this post for you Birdmod 
|
|
#
?
Feb 29, 2020 23:02
|
|
|
Mr. Sunshine posted:Yeah, that's Stephen Donaldson's "The Gap" series, isn't it? The entire plot of the first book is exactly what you said, some space pirate gets a hold of a girl with some kind of control implant, and not only rapes her but literally enslaves her, forcing her body to act against her will. It must be 20 years since I read that book, but I still vividly remember a part where he makes her give him a blowjob, and then pushes some buttons on the control to make her smile at him afterwards. You know, now that you mention it Donaldson had an awful lot of rape going on didn't he? His premier series, The Chronicles of Thomas Covenant, had his entire antihero persona set up from rape, that other trilogy that was about going through the looking glass (forgot name) had one or two instances in it, and his short story compilation Daughter of Regals had rape in at least one.. hrm. gently caress. I don't like this re-examining of childhood favorites anymore =[ Elviscat posted:It's really sad, Asimov and Tolkien needed exactly 0 hosed up sex to sell novels.
|
|
#
?
Feb 29, 2020 23:19
|
|
|
Asimov didn't have hosed up sex in his novels, his kinks were expressed in different ways. Like the almost childlike "Bliss" (for gently caress's sake, Asimov) and her old-as-poo poo lover Janov Pelorat, who are in love for literally no explained reason. That poo poo turned me off of Asimov's Foundation crap forever, which I'm told continued after his death because there is no such thing as a just and loving god. EDIT: Can we just go ahead and put all of Asimov's later works in this thread? I know the man's rampant misogyny was because he was a product of his time, but that is no loving excuse.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2020 00:32
|
|
|
Asimov was also a notorious serial groper who literally wrote an essay on the virtues of pinching women's butts so
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2020 00:40
|
|
|
I stopped reading Foundation because it got skeevy and I honestly didn't think the premise was very good. The characterisation of women was uh…exclusively as set dressing, as far as I remember.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2020 01:07
|
|
|
Screaming Idiot posted:EDIT: Can we just go ahead and put all of Asimov's later works in this thread? I know the man's rampant misogyny was because he was a product of his time, but that is no loving excuse. So, as a kid I had some of the David Starr, Space Ranger books -- the middle four, we didn't have the first or last ones -- and as an adult I decided to dig up the first and last books and finally read the whole series, since I remembered enjoying them as a kid. In reading them as an adult, I was struck by two things: - how many Real Science Facts¹ about the solar system he managed to work into those books in a reasonably natural and readable manner rather than resorting to Weberesque expository digressions; and - how there are basically no women in the series. Specifically, in Pirates of the Asteroids, there's a passing mention that some of the pirates have wives and even children back at their secret asteroid base; and in Oceans of Venus there is a single female character, the wife of one of the dome engineers, who appears on page for a single scene, and has a single line in that scene (which serves to, much later in the book, trigger an epiphany that lets Starr figure out who the culprit is). That's it, in the entire six-book series. ¹ The versions I read as an adult came with a foreword explaining that many of the Real Science Facts are, in fact, dead wrong, since our knowledge of the solar system has advanced dramatically since the 1950s. But they were believed to be accurate at the time they were written.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2020 01:33
|
|
|
Yea "don't meet your heroes" is kind of a thing. I really do appreciate how Clarke and Asimov fit in so much hard astrophysics into their stories, which is why their stuff was always so cool while always being plot-focused.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2020 03:35
|
|
|
Elviscat posted:Sex in romance novels is fine, that's their point. Yeah, none of this reads as remotely sex-positive. That you think a non closed-door sex scene in a book must be equivalent to a penetrative sex scene in a film, that you think kids need to be protected from sexual content in media, that you think they're better off begin kept in the dark until some group of elders can talk to them about in in the appropriate way in the appropriate context (as a queer person this is especially laughable). That you think just because bad, misogynistic, male-gaze versions of sex exist in books, that it can't be any other way; like opening the door on sex in novels means you're letting Piers Anthony sex-creeps in by default. No we can't possibly shift our standards to positive, healthy portrayals of sex. It's either books with boning AND rape fetishist, or nothing. Since this and 'lol smutty books exists' are most of the response I got, I think I'm done trying to pretend that y'all aren't a bunch of prudes who are just uncomfortable with discussing sex outside some pretty narrow parameters.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2020 05:24
|
|
|
there wolf posted:a bunch of prudes who are just uncomfortable with discussing sex outside some pretty narrow parameters please don't doxx all goons
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2020 05:25
|
|
|
there wolf posted:Yeah, none of this reads as remotely sex-positive. That you think a non closed-door sex scene in a book must be equivalent to a penetrative sex scene in a film, that you think kids need to be protected from sexual content in media, that you think they're better off begin kept in the dark until some group of elders can talk to them about in in the appropriate way in the appropriate context (as a queer person this is especially laughable). That you think just because bad, misogynistic, male-gaze versions of sex exist in books, that it can't be any other way; like opening the door on sex in novels means you're letting Piers Anthony sex-creeps in by default. No we can't possibly shift our standards to positive, healthy portrayals of sex. It's either books with boning AND rape fetishist, or nothing.  I think you're missing the point. E: I guess I should be less of a dick. 1) Sci-fi and fantasy, as it stands (and it's getting better, I've read a couple books recently where non-traditional and homosexual relationships are stated as a given for whatever society is being portrayed) overwhelmingly portrays weird, bizarrely hard-core and penetrative heteronormative sexuality. All forms of romanticism/stated feelings etc are fine, descriptions of, as you state, penetrative sex, are distracting, unnecessary, and usually badly writtwn. 2) What I asked for is strictly limited to books about swords and fairies or pew-pew spaceships, not other genres of literature in general, the problem with tons of hardcore sex in these two genres stems from a set of almost exclusively cishet white male authors. 3) If you want hardcore loving to be included in everything you read, more power to you, and likewise I will continue to read books outside the stated ones that tend less to pew-pew laser spaceships, and more to the human condition in general, where in-depth discussions of human sexuality are integral to the book, and not arresting and distracting from the premises for the book. I.e. I don't think we're really arguing here at all. Elviscat has a new favorite as of 05:57 on Mar 1, 2020 |
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2020 05:32
|
|
|
Elviscat posted:
I don't think there wolf is the one missing the point.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2020 05:53
|
|
|
there wolf posted:Yeah, none of this reads as remotely sex-positive. That you think a non closed-door sex scene in a book must be equivalent to a penetrative sex scene in a film, that you think kids need to be protected from sexual content in media, that you think they're better off begin kept in the dark until some group of elders can talk to them about in in the appropriate way in the appropriate context (as a queer person this is especially laughable). That you think just because bad, misogynistic, male-gaze versions of sex exist in books, that it can't be any other way; like opening the door on sex in novels means you're letting Piers Anthony sex-creeps in by default. No we can't possibly shift our standards to positive, healthy portrayals of sex. It's either books with boning AND rape fetishist, or nothing. Log off
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2020 17:19
|
|
|
Screaming Idiot posted:
The Gods Themselves he seems to have learned a bit from the new wave - women actually exist in it (big move for Asimov), and there’s even a poly/tri-gendered alien race which is done well. But yeah the vast vast majority of his books are either misogynistic or just straight up don’t feature women at all.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2020 23:25
|
|
|
there wolf posted:Yeah, none of this reads as remotely sex-positive. That you think a non closed-door sex scene in a book must be equivalent to a penetrative sex scene in a film, that you think kids need to be protected from sexual content in media, that you think they're better off begin kept in the dark until some group of elders can talk to them about in in the appropriate way in the appropriate context (as a queer person this is especially laughable). That you think just because bad, misogynistic, male-gaze versions of sex exist in books, that it can't be any other way; like opening the door on sex in novels means you're letting Piers Anthony sex-creeps in by default. No we can't possibly shift our standards to positive, healthy portrayals of sex. It's either books with boning AND rape fetishist, or nothing. It very much reminds me of the old TGRS trans thread trying to go all firing squad on Isabel Fall's story about attack helicopters without reading it. God, that's an incredible story and it was sad to see it get dismissed out of hand.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2020 02:01
|
|
|
Susan Calvin, a recurring character in Asimov's stories, shows hints of that future growth. She is shown to be stern and competent, but in true Asimov fashion, he always bumbled things with her. In the short story "Liar!", which I otherwise really like, she has an emotional breakdown that, while reasonable for the situation, is also incredibly badly described by Asimov's prose. There are other such events, including one where she becomes particularly (and uncharacteristically) motherly toward a malfunctioning robot who had earlier nearly killed someone, despite her every other appearance ending in her having a dangerous robot destroyed or otherwise decommissioned.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2020 02:16
|
|
|
Screaming Idiot posted:Susan Calvin, a recurring character in Asimov's stories, shows hints of that future growth. She is shown to be stern and competent, but in true Asimov fashion, he always bumbled things with her. In the short story "Liar!", which I otherwise really like, she has an emotional breakdown that, while reasonable for the situation, is also incredibly badly described by Asimov's prose. There are other such events, including one where she becomes particularly (and uncharacteristically) motherly toward a malfunctioning robot who had earlier nearly killed someone, despite her every other appearance ending in her having a dangerous robot destroyed or otherwise decommissioned. There's a good character to be had there if you ignore all of Asimov's musing that she obviously cares so much about robots because she didn't have babies.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2020 02:31
|
|
|
HopperUK posted:There's a good character to be had there if you ignore all of Asimov's musing that she obviously cares so much about robots because she didn't have babies. Oh, absolutely! Susan Calvin is a great character in spite of Asimov's less-than-skilled handling. When it comes to logic and engineering and the actual "science" aspect of "science fiction" Asimov could be amazing, and when Calvin was allowed to focus on that and that alone, she was an ideal protagonist and a good supporting character. But Asimov fumble characterization more often than not. His worst stories were his space operas, when the focus wasn't the logical engineering issues at which he excelled, but on "Adventure!" which led him to fumble into the misogynist, racist, and outright stupid territory that plagues science fiction to this day. Even then, we have to remember his regressive stances even interfered with the better parts of his fiction. He touted the three laws of robotics as something robots should have, but his entire body of work was littered with example after example of why they were fallacious. I dislike the laws anyway since it's an example of that regressive mindset. In the short story "Evidence," it is asserted that another character by the name of Stephen Byerley, who may or may not be a robot will follow the three rules of robotics by default because to quote Wikipedia: Wikipedia posted:Were he to violate one of the Laws he would clearly be a human, since no robot can contradict its basic programming. The district attorney never seeks the death penalty and boasts that he has never prosecuted an innocent man, but if he obeys the Laws it still does not prove that Byerley is a robot, since the Laws are based on human morality; "He may simply be a very good man", Calvin says. To prove himself to be a human being, Byerley must demonstrate that he can harm a human, which would violate the First Law. Isaac Asimov's Three Laws of Robotics posted:A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm. The first law and second laws are demands to obey authority, placing the importance of authority over self-protection. Now if this were strictly for machines then the issue wouldn't be as bad. The laws are still flawed as they don't account for a lot of things and, as Asimov's own work shows, come into conflict more often than not unless the robot makes some very arbitrary and unrobotic decisions. But as evidenced by, well, Evidence, Asimov, speaking through Calvin, notes the the same laws that make a good robot would also make a good man. To a robot, a human is the ultimate authority, to be obeyed without question, and above it in all things. The human equivalent would then, logically speaking, be either God -- which is unlikely, as Asimov had no religion to speak of -- or those who had authority: the government, scientists, police, the military. In short, The Men Who Know Better. Authority. Isaac Asimov's Implied Three Laws of Robotics, as applied to humans posted:A human may not injure Authority or, through inaction, allow Authority to come to harm. To Asimov, submission to those placed above him o the hierarchy was key to being a good and moral person, even more so than self-preservation. Even his space operas were about maintaining a hierarchy. It wasn't enough to explore new worlds, they had to be colonized. It wasn't enough to span the galaxy, there had to be an empire. If that empire fell apart and worlds decided to rule themselves, why, they would inevitably become primitive and backward, which is why they needed The Men Who Knew Better -- the Foundation and the Second Foundation -- to manipulate things behind the scenes and to rebuild and reinforce the broken hierarchy. Would the worlds be allowed to vote on how they were ruled? Of course not, the "mentalics" of the Second Foundation knew better. Would worlds be allowed to leave if they so chose? Well, sure, but wouldn't you know it, everyone who was in favor of leaving either left power or somehow changed their minds for very good, very logical reasons. Sure, Asimov finally posited the possibility of Galaxia, where every man, woman, child, beast, plant, mineral, etc. would be united in a sort of shared consciousness, but even then R. Daneel Olivaw, a robot, left the decision to create Galaxia not to the galaxy, but to a single person, Golan Trevize -- A Man Who Knows Better, Somehow. Asimov believed in the patriarchy. Asimov believed in The Men Who Know Better, especially since he considered himself a Man Who Knew Better. He was a pioneer in the furthest reaches of science fiction, but he carried his baggage with him the entire while.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2020 03:22
|
|
|
I asked for literally any book in any genre where you thought the sex was good, with no qualification of what 'good' meant; it could be plot relevant, it could be about characterization, it could have revealed the secret map was tattooed on his back all along. Whatever. Instead I got a wall of text about how sex in books is always bad, problematic, and discomforting. I don't' think we're on opposite sides in a broad sense, but you looked at something open ended and immediately invent parameters that let you talk about how bad sex in books is.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2020 03:52
|
|
|
I'm not against sex scenes in theory but I can't really think of one that wasn't indulgent in a boring or creepy way. Also, people can be sex positive and still be made uncomfortable by an author's depiction of sex. Stop acting like the authority on who is and isn't prudish.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2020 04:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 11:58 |
|
|
the only good sex scene in books is the one in Angelmaker where the sexy sex lady has her bed mounted on a giant steel frame driven under the train tracks and had conditioned herself into only being able to cum when a train is passing next to her house
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2020 04:50
|
|