hey KillerMuffin- or anyone who might know-?

[Madame Manga]

Originally posted by DarlingNikki
Well I'm not convinced that nothing can be done.

Not with current techniques. The brain is a mystery for the most part. Every study contradicts the last--in a few hundred years, 'modern' psychiatry is going to be looked at the same way we now look at theories of the humors of the body. I'm coming at this from the perspective of having one autistic son and another who is on medication for behavior problems. Believe me, I wish anyone knew jack about mental conditions. Brain function research isn't even at the status of a rigorously tested science yet--they're all guessing.

And I don't think empathy (which has nothing at all to do with "feeling sorry for" - pity is an opposite of empathy) is ever beside the point. And if people are just "born that way," well then it seems even more cruel to hate them for it.

I used "feeling sorry" because I didn't think you meant empathy in the sense of 'identifying with and understanding'. I don't believe that any normally functioning person can genuinely understand or picture what goes on in the head of a person who has been severely abused, whether they act out on it or not. You can pray for them, you can do your best to help, and still you will not know why they do what they do. I don't define "pity" as sneering at the unfortunate--I define it as charity, which is something you give to someone who has done nothing to deserve it and can't return it. It's a gift of grace, not a put-down.

I don't think that compassion and kindness alone make things all better. (Were you deliberately trying to make my point of view sound silly and simplistic, or did I just express myself poorly? I think sometimes that simple sounding statements can be mulled over and disected for hours, but people don't always want to join me in that...)

No, I didn't intend to make your opinion sound silly, and I apologize for giving that impression. On re-reading my post, I realize it could be construed that way. I don't think you are a Pollyanna; you have generally struck me as a sensible and good-humored person. I wrote that with a sigh of resignation, not a contemptuous laugh. I wish that human love and human help were enough to change the world or even one person's fate, but they never will be, in my opinion.

However if someone is angry and damaged, calling them names and refusing to see them as a fellow human being only reinforces their point of view that no one cares about them, everyone is against them, and really they deserve it anyway, so hell, they might as well commit whatever crime is expected of them.

I don't think I ever referred to the people under question as non-human. The worst possible person is still part of the race. In other words, evil is part of humanity, and evil acts are not grounds for redefining anyone's species any more than mental retardation, age or skin color is. But I believe it's necessary to confront the fact that evil exists and that it has to be dealt with head-on or it will take good things down with it. Even if we understood why one abused person became a evildoer when another did not, we would still have to treat him as an autonomous being with free will who has to suffer the consequences of his acts. Human dignity, in my opinion, requires that no one gets a free pass.

We each have a threshold past where we feel we can no longer do good, and mine stops well short of death row, but I have nothing but sincere admiration for those who can go that distance. I feel that the fact that I can't stems only from my lack of skill, not from the impossibility of the task. I don't think there is ever a "too late."

Then we differ on that question. I wish I could share your optimism, but I no longer can. Perhaps I've gone sour, or perhaps my eyes got opened somewhere along the way. Certainly reasonable people can see the world in divergent ways. I am not suggesting that when you are my age, you will inevitably come around to my point of view. ;-)

Best, MM

 

[Guest]

DarlingNikki:

I was terse, though I tried to be thoughtful. At any rate, you made me think more, but it's nothing I wish to write more about at this time. Thank you for your reply, you have a big heart and mine is old (not an excuse however).

Best, Perdita

 

[Guest]

I really don't care

I agree with Perdita that while history can show a source for anger, as adults we must be responsible for our choices. We can choose to release our anger or we can choose to marinate in it and feed it.

I recall the author's persona here in the AH. He was angry, tiresome and obnoxious. I doubt that his poem is autobiographical.

A second freedom that hasn't been mentioned, but is just as important is Freedom of Association. This hate-filled man has freedom of speech, but I have freedom of assication. I don't want to be associated with material that promotes such sickness. I hope that Mlle and MM can help non-consent to be cleaned up, otherwise I will have to rethink having my stories here.

My greatest concern, now, is the safety of women in Chicago.

b

 

[destinie21]

okay taking this a step further... please explain how, if the story is moved into the 'extreme' category, it becomes acceptable there?

the kind of portrayal of events that this story represents is not acceptable to many people no matter where it's located. do we agree there? i'm sure we do basically.

therefore, should all such stories be banned from Literotica?

yes i saw KMs comment on the orgasm... i haven't had a chance to check out where it says that specifically... i'll have a look tomorrow.

No because that would violate free speech. This story is like green eggs and ham. (It's not acceptable here nor there It's not acceptable anywhere) but at least in the extreme category it will only be found by those who want that kind of content. Non consent is (IMHO ) no where near what this story was. For example I like to be spanked lightly in a sexual setting however a spanking is a far cry from being beat within ad inch of my life. (Which by the way I wouldn't find at all erotic). Putting this story in non consent would be like putting a story about the kkk lynching and raping a black woman in interracial as long as she "enjoyed" it. I've seen comments about the writting being well done but the passage that I read nauseated me. I have to wonder where the line should be drawn. I fantasize about plenty of things that I'd never act out and I've written plenty of non erotic stories with graphic murders in them but I think what makes this story so disturbing is the underlying realism and the enjoyment involved. It seems as though the author is transferring his feelings to the character rather than inventing feelings for the chracter.(does that make sense?) anyway that's just my opinion.

 

[MlledeLaPlumeBleu]

[edited for expressed analogical sensitivity]

The Nature/Nurture debate has been raging for decades with definitive proof that either or both can create a violent criminal; as MM so eruditely pointed out (without wanting to get too in depth about the mechanism itself) recent studies have identified a genetic pre-disposition that explains why some people rise to the top, cream-like, after negative life experiences, and others become abusers, murderers and rapists themselves.

The pre-disposition is contained in a gene weakness that renders the individual incapable of dealing with stress in a healthy manner. People with this pre-disposition may live completely normal lives if there is never a negative event that triggers the onset- but otherwise, they go on to become criminals and violent offenders.

Psychiatrists have long suggested that heros and villains are two sides of the same coin. It depends on whether unacceptable behaviors are channeled into healthy risk-taking- i.e. being a fireman, or an astronaut.

In any case, your empathy is wasted on a sociopath.

Part of the antisocial personality make-up is a complete inability to empathize or recognize humanity in any form. He doesn't want your pity, unless he can somehow exploit you through it- otherwise it means absolutely nothing to him.

A sociopath is a clock-work human. They do not believe that other people are real. To a sociopath, you are a bookshelf. A "baby-machine". A "cum-bucket". A "breeding toy". An object, to be used and thrown away.

He will never benefit from all your pity, tears, empathy, bleeding, understanding.

There is no one home.

 

[Chicklet]

I ran across a story in the non-consent section that really turned my stomach. What exactly are the requirements that would put something out of non-consent and into "extreme"?

Okay, I believe that the kicker is if it's real, unenjoyable (for the victim) "Violent Rape."

As KM said, if the female orgasms, if she deep down "enjoys" it, it's considered "Non-consent."

I figure, though, just like I find a few stories with Beastiality slipped in, there are a few violent one's around here. But, when you find those, you've just gotta click back and wander off for a bit.

-Chicklet

 

[rosco rathbone]

It's really hard to draw a line here. People whine and bitch about not getting there stories posted. Favorite complaint: so and so got theirs posted!!!

The line was drawn as objectively as possible. The victim must enjoy the experience. She orgasmed.

I had no idea how that line was drawn. They let one of mine in there (NC) that certainly had no female orgasming or enjoyment of any kind.

 

[rosco rathbone]

.

However, in my opinion the "orgasm" is clearly included for the delusional author's gratification and not for the [fictional] gratification of the female character.

That orgasm rang totally wrong to me-in fact; it leapt off the page as out-of-place. I've seen plenty of rape stories that featured some kind of orgasm-for-deluded-author and none of them had the feeling of raw malice I got from the SUV tale. Perhaps it was added in order to qualify the story for the NC section?

 

[Pure]

The inconsonant addition of the orgasm seems obvious, but of course, implausible turns of events in not exactly fatal for most stories submitted to literotica, and they typically involve female gratification; and yes, Mlle, it's the delusional author talking.

J.

 

[Wantonica]

Aw, sheesh, just put it in extreme and admit that a woman in such a situation wouldn't orgasm. When you check out extreme (I have), you should prepare for the worst, the ultimate taboo, the off-the-wall. In most cases of non-consent a woman wouldn't orgasm, but in many cases (fictionally) she does. Just as a woman taken captive in real life often comes to depend, even love, her captor. For the sake of fiction and fantasy, however, all kinds of things may happen. Just put the really odd stories where the oddity-seekers look. No offense to the writers or readers, unless they are actually sadistic perverts, and then may the shit come out in court.

Hugs,
Wantonica

 

[rosco rathbone]

[edited for expressed analogical sensitivity]


A sociopath is a clock-work human. They do not believe that other people are real. To a sociopath, you are a bookshelf. A "baby-machine". A "cum-bucket". A "breeding toy". An object, to be used and thrown away.

Perhaps, if the americandemon were a better writer, his fantasies would be taken less seriously as "excerpts from the diary of a sociopath".

Wonderful imaginary scientific experiment: all writers of "extreme" sherotica are tested for sociopathy, using the most modern and up-to-date methods availible.

 

[MlledeLaPlumeBleu]

Darling, I'm a woman.

If I were a gorilla, I'd worried about losing my hands and head to a machete.

If I were a tiger, I'd be worried about penis-poultice poachers.

I'm aware of the possibility of the predators I need to.

It's only self-preservationist instinct. I would think that even a self-proclaimed misogynist like yourself would understand and relate to the biological imperative behind that.

Stupid women are their own worst enemies.

And yes, you raise an excellent point. If AD were a better writer, his story wouldn't be so offensive. It would then be art.

mlle

 

[pop_54]

Hmmmmmm

Doesn't sound the kind of story I'd want to read and definitely wouldn't write anything like it, I like a bit of non-consent fantasy, but real fantasy fiction where the woman is allowed to wind up liking it and having an orgasm.

This kind of thing is too life like to be entertaining, just read the newspapers if you want that.

How anyone can get excited over visualisations of some poor young female being beaten and raped to this degree is beyond me, some sick fuckers about out there.

Should it be on lit? No it shouldn't, we're constantly told by the powers that be to improve our English language and spelling, make sure the grammar is perfect, ensure paragraphs are a certain length.
We get slated if everything isn't spot on and high-brow enough for lit. This is a serious erotic story site we're told.
Then they allow a bunch of shit like this to be published here, the mind boggles.

 

[Pure]

Mlle: //And yes, you{RR] raise an excellent point. If AD were a better writer, his story wouldn't be so offensive. It would then be art.//
----

So then in respect of art, the diagnosis is irrelevant. Assuming there is a 'psychological disorder' corresponding to sociopathy, is there any reason to treat its existence differently from other disorders? Some writers had schizophrenia. Some had manic depression. And so for any disorder. But either they write well or they don't. Maybe the disease shows in the writing. If you're looking for it.

 

[destinie21]

Mlle: //And yes, you{RR] raise an excellent point. If AD were a better writer, his story wouldn't be so offensive. It would then be art.//
----

So then in respect of art, the diagnosis is irrelevant. Assuming there is a 'psychological disorder' corresponding to sociopathy, is there any reason to treat its existence differently from other disorders? Some writers had schizophrenia. Some had manic depression. And so for any disorder. But either they write well or they don't. Maybe the disease shows in the writing. If you're looking for it.

I for one applaud you Pure
You use so many words yet you still manage to say nothing.

 

[Pure]

Destinie,

Gee and I posted the condensed version of the excerpts from my actual response.

I appreciate your checking me for content. I try to be as vapid as possible.

J.

 

[Pure]

//This is a serious erotic story site we're told.//

we are?

//Then they allow a bunch of shit like this to be published here, the mind boggles.//

There's a serious commitment to free expression, not quality.
Any story on topic; semi-readable; grammar, spelling and punctuation correct is posted.

Dont'yakno?

 

[rosco rathbone]

Darling, I'm a woman.

If I were a gorilla, I'd worried about losing my hands and head to a machete.

If I were a tiger, I'd be worried about penis-poultice poachers.

I'm aware of the possibility of the predators I need to.

It's only self-preservationist instinct. I would think that even a self-proclaimed misogynist like yourself would understand and relate to the biological imperative behind that.

Stupid women are their own worst enemies.

And yes, you raise an excellent point. If AD were a better writer, his story wouldn't be so offensive. It would then be art.

mlle

If I were a worm, I'd be worried about fisherwomyn....

I'm not suprised at your "self-preservation" reaction. As I said before, there's a clear sense that the author is feeeling the scenario-and that's feeeling with three "eee"s.

If the americandemon had a thimbleful of talent and used it to describe his sexual rage--let's say he "made the art grade", even if just-barely--would his not-so-offensive story still ring your bells?

There is something sinister about the raw fantasies of the semi-literate....

 

[rosco rathbone]

Re: Hmmmmmm

How anyone can get excited over visualisations of some poor young female being beaten and raped to this degree is beyond me, some sick fuckers about out there.

The phrase "raped to this degree" strikes me as hilarious; especially in the midst of this particular discussion.

I admit it: I enjoy fictional depictions of "extreme rape" (as opposed to tales of quid-pro-quo-orgasm "non-consent"); even when the "sick fucker" doing the depicting is a no-talent lolife like the americandeamon. I offer this unsavoury info only as an antidote to the dull and self-serving oatmeal being served in the above quote.

 

[Guest]

Yaaaaaaaaawwwwwwwwn...

The war of the pricks is much more fun.

Gen. Perdita

 

[MlledeLaPlumeBleu]

No need to worry about my angling skills or my rod as a compensatory extension. I'm the opposite of you. I'm actually an androphile. I identify far too strongly with men; all my friends are male.

As a rule, I'm the kind of girl who regularly appalls other women. A "Juliette" if you will.

As with most things, the validity of the message is reliant on the messenger.

I'm a firm believer that almost anything can be written about in an artful way. That goes for murder, rape, whatever.

What is artful? More so than aesthetic, it's the savoir faire of the writer, and an expression of his erudition, i.e. "I can write about this because I have thought about it, the the connotations, the ramifications"- it isn't a knee-jerk infliction of primal brain-stem mind-spunk.

Art means the subject has been vivisected under the sodium light of the author's Reason.

No matter what the context or thesis, or how topically offensive, I can't be disgusted by intelligent writing.

"There is something sinister about the raw fantasies of the semi-literate..."

Yes, because the impulse only goes two steps beyond Id in its expression. Good writing reflects an ability to manipulate the approach of a subject; bad writing displays a lack of the awareness of a need to do so.

If 'Demon was a literary tsunami would it still ring my pathology bells? Maybe.

That's an intangible. The elusive aura of "intent" that I was unable to adequately explain l on this thread is not a myth. Intent exists, and is palpable in people's work. My works transmit an intent, a macro-view. So does yours.

You seem to be the individual everyone was trying to characterize AD as. However, I don't read your intent the same way.

X_miss blue pen

 

[MlledeLaPlumeBleu]

Mr. Rathbone- I'll warn you that I'm very protective of Pops.

Violent rape isn't his cup of tea, and he's a wonderful gent who is fucked and loved by more intelligent people than AD could hit with a dead prarie dog.

Nothing about him is oatmeal. There are men in the world who don't happen to eroticize the subjugation of women.

They're not sick or wrong.

 

[Guest]

Mr. Rathbone- I'll warn you that I'm very protective of Pops.

Violent rape isn't his cup of tea, and he's a wonderful gent who is fucked and loved by more intelligent people than AD could hit with a dead prarie dog.

Nothing about him is oatmeal. There are men in the world who don't happen to eroticize the subjugation of women.

They're not sick or wrong.

What she said and if you take us on together a good number of other AH women will join us and you won't have enough pixels to make a blip of an avatar.

Pops' cyber-slut, Perdita

 

[TheEarl]

Rosco: If you enjoy fictional descriptions of extreme rape, then that's your fantasy, not arguing with your right ot enjoy that. However it isn't a common fetish and I think you're way out of line calling Pops names because he doesn't like that kind of thing.

Let me put it this way. If there was someone who enjoyed reading fictional stories about underage sex, would you think it was fair if they laid into you for not finding that erotic?

The Earl

 

[pop_54]

Re: Re: Hmmmmmm

The phrase "raped to this degree" strikes me as hilarious; especially in the midst of this particular discussion.

I admit it: I enjoy fictional depictions of "extreme rape" (as opposed to tales of quid-pro-quo-orgasm "non-consent"); even when the "sick fucker" doing the depicting is a no-talent lolife like the americandeamon. I offer this unsavoury info only as an antidote to the dull and self-serving oatmeal being served in the above quote.

As I said some sick fuckers about out there