Removing the sex

[Kelliezgirl]

Romantasy author Elisabeth Wheatley took the sex scenes out of her books because she was concerned about objectification.

 

[TheLobster]

When you are so progressive, you horseshoe right back into puritanism...

 

[forgotmyantidepressants]

I've never read Wheatly's work, but I used to follow her channel because her skits were actually kind of funny.

But I always found her a little condescending in the way only white Christians can be. I don't believe Wheatley at all when she says her recent conversion to Catholism has nothing to do with her decision. She's always been religious. Progressive Christians can be just as uptight about sex as the conservative ones.

 

[AwkwardlySet]

On the plus side, I expect her book sales to go up, as some people will probably feel enticed to buy the old version while it's still available. There's no greater lure than getting something that's forbidden or censored.

 

[SmilingLez]

There is, perhaps, a curious asymmetry here.

She made a choice.
A personal choice.
An artistic choice.

Apparently, this necessitates adjudication.

Her rationale must be interrogated.
Her motives must be excavated.
Her convictions must be reclassified.
Her autonomy must undergo peer review.

How fascinating.

A woman removes something from her own books.

Men immediately convene a tribunal to determine whether she was permitted to do so.

The jurisprudence of personal preference remains a formidable discipline.

The punchline - this tribunal is taking place on a commercial porn site.

The majesty of literary governance is apparently without jurisdictional boundaries.

YMMV

 

[lovecraft68]

When you are so progressive, you horseshoe right back into puritanism...

They become what they claim to hate.

Rebelling their way right back to the cause of said rebellion.

 

[PennyThompson]

When you are so progressive, you horseshoe right back into puritanism...

I don't know much of anything about this author, but a quick Google search says that she converted to Catholicism earlier this year and then her de-sexification came after, so...

 

[Soixenta]

If you can remove the sex from your stories, what was it doing there in the first place?

 

[TheLobster]

I don't know much of anything about this author, but a quick Google search says that she converted to Catholicism earlier this year and then her de-sexification came after, so...

Right, but according to the video she clarified that this allegedly wasn't the reason for the removal. But if it actually was the reason, then I still wouldn't think she would phrase it as concerns over "objectification", as it doesn't seem like a particularly Christian terminology

 

[MrHereWriting]

There is, perhaps, a curious asymmetry here.

She made a choice.
A personal choice.
An artistic choice.

Apparently, this necessitates adjudication.

Her rationale must be interrogated.
Her motives must be excavated.
Her convictions must be reclassified.
Her autonomy must undergo peer review.

How fascinating.

A woman removes something from her own books.

Men immediately convene a tribunal to determine whether she was permitted to do so.

The jurisprudence of personal preference remains a formidable discipline.

The punchline - this tribunal is taking place on a commercial porn site.

The majesty of literary governance is apparently without jurisdictional boundaries.

YMMV

Men?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the majority of her readers are women and it's those women who are driving the discussion. I'm sure she has male readers as well and they have an opinion as well, but let's be honest about the who is doing most of the talking.

If you have proof to the contrary, post it.

 

[SmilingLez]

Men?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the majority of her readers are women and it's those women who are driving the discussion. I'm sure she has male readers as well and they have an opinion as well, but let's be honest about the who is doing most of the talking.

If you have proof to the contrary, post it.

Fair point on the demographics. I don't have a census of the commenters.

My observation was about the reaction, not a statistical survey of who is participating.

She removed the sex from her own books.

The discussion on this for-profit commercial porn site immediately became an examination of her motives, religion, terminology, and whether the decision represents puritanism.

Whether the tribunal is male, female, non-binary, or bipartisan seems somewhat secondary to the fact that a tribunal was convened at all.

YMMV

 

[lovecraft68]

Fair point on the demographics. I don't have a census of the commenters.

My observation was about the reaction, not a statistical survey of who is participating.

She removed the sex from her own books.

The discussion on this for-profit commercial porn site immediately became an examination of her motives, religion, terminology, and whether the decision represents puritanism.

Whether the tribunal is male, female, non-binary, or bipartisan seems somewhat secondary to the fact that a tribunal was convened at all.

YMMV

You're missing the point that every thread like this becomes a thread attacking the person being discussed. They stated their motive was not due to some religious conversion, but of course people here insert themselves and say it is.

My previous comment was a generalization that many people seem to create something then regret it and think what they did was wrong. People can do that for non religious and non political reasons, they can do it because for whatever reason they had a personal change of heart.

If someone says a reason, that's the reason unless one can prove otherwise, but where would the fun be in needing proof to demonize someone?

 

[forgotmyantidepressants]

Right, but according to the video she clarified that this allegedly wasn't the reason for the removal. But if it actually was the reason, then I still wouldn't think she would phrase it as concerns over "objectification", as it doesn't seem like a particularly Christian terminology

My guess is used this terminology to try and appease her more liberal readers. Mind, this is a young woman who is/was pro-choice and LGTBQ+ affirming (while using her social media platform to talk about her religious beliefs) becoming more openly conservative. Conservative people can have weird hang ups about sex.

Which is even weirder to me because the sex scenes in her book were already very conservative. She a made a point to let all of us know that she only wrote sex between MARRIED characters, even thought it was perfectly fine for us dirty, yucky, no-good sinners the rest of to do so.

And they are her books. She can do whatever she wants with them. But I'm allowed to speculate.

 

[MrHereWriting]

If you can remove the sex from your stories, what was it doing there in the first place?

Sex is probably the easiest thing to remove from any story.

 

[Soixenta]

Sex is probably the easiest thing to remove from any story.

But from a storytelling standpoint, I do not believe it has any right to be included in the first place if it can be removed. It seems as if it was there initially only to attract readers.

 

[lovecraft68]

Sex is probably the easiest thing to remove from any story.

Unless you're on an erotic story site or in the erotic genre, otherwise I agree

Except its also an easy way to spice a story up and get the reader more 'interested' sex doesn't have to be written hardcore XXX style like it is here but more subtle.

It still depresses me so many people, I suppose mostly women, thought the crap is 50 shades was hot. Steady diet of vanilla led to that.

 

[MrHereWriting]

But from a storytelling standpoint, I do not believe it has any right to be included in the first place if it can be removed. It seems as if it was there initially only to attract readers.

Sex is just sex. Everything leading up to the sex tells the story. The emotions someone feels during sex can easily be described before and after the event. I don't need a sex scene to tell me two people are in love, in lust, feel safe, protected, respected, etc.

 

[lovecraft68]

But from a storytelling standpoint, I do not believe it has any right to be included in the first place if it can be removed. It seems as if it was there initially only to attract readers.

Kind of the point of writing.

King is famous for inserting not just sex scenes but raunchy ones.

Funny he has never once taken a beating for writing an underage gang bang in It. That and two underage boys touching each other in the same book.

Which is why things like this are laughable, its never what you do, its who you are and King is on the right side of the coin here because of his personal political views so I guess its okay to be a creep, but don't take something out for a moral reason, just have no morals.

 

[Comshaw]

When you are so progressive, you horseshoe right back into puritanism...

It isn't just "progressives". Take the political division in the US right now. People become more and more extreme in their views. The right gets more and more conservative. The left gets more and more progressive. The thing neither side understands is it's a curve, a globe. The sides will eventually meet when they get extreme enough.

You'd think they would recognize how close their philosophies have grown. They don't. Because each has labeled the other and they have hated that label for so long, they will not join together. They turn around and begin the process in reverse.

So much for the "intelligence" of the human race.

Comshaw

 

[MrHereWriting]

Unless you're on an erotic story site or in the erotic genre, otherwise I agree

Except its also an easy way to spice a story up and get the reader more 'interested' sex doesn't have to be written hardcore XXX style like it is here but more subtle.

It still depresses me so many people, I suppose mostly women, though the crap is 50 shades was hot. Steady diet of vanilla led to that.

She writes romantasy, I think. Sex is probably a small part of her story. If I removed the sex from my stories, there'd be hardly any words on the page, but it could be done if I rewrote everything else, so in that aspect it wouldn't be easy at all.

Never read 50, have no plans to read it, was disappointed the movie wasn't more graphic. Never saw the movies, but I did look up the scenes and none of them compare to Jeanne Tripplehorn's scene in Basic Instinct.

 

[SmilingLez]

You're missing the point that every thread like this becomes a thread attacking the person being discussed. They stated their motive was not due to some religious conversion, but of course people here insert themselves and say it is.

My previous comment was a generalization that many people seem to create something then regret it and think what they did was wrong. People can do that for non religious and non political reasons, they can do it because for whatever reason they had a personal change of heart.

If someone says a reason, that's the reason unless one can prove otherwise, but where would the fun be in needing proof to demonize someone?

I don't think we're actually disagreeing about the important part.

She can change her books for whatever reason she chooses.

People can speculate about those reasons.

And people can disagree with the decision.

All perfectly permissible.

What I find amusing is how quickly a simple personal and artistic decision becomes a collective inquiry into her motives, theology, morality, and literary judgment.

And then we apparently require evidence before the speculation can be considered speculation.

The proceedings grow increasingly elaborate.

All over a woman removing sex from her own books.

On a commercial for-profit porn site.

Perhaps the institutional gravity is beginning to explain itself.

YMMV

 

[lovecraft68]

I wrote a story back in 2015 for sale. As time went on I started thinking about it, and not sure I liked how I portrayed certain events. The story was a commission originally so not even my own idea but I picked it up and ran with it. I told myself, whatever, live and learn. Couple years back I stumbled on the PDF on my PC and looked at it again.

I ended up unpublishing the book.

It had nothing to do with religion as I have no belief in any god whatsoever, nor was it political in anyway, it was because anytime I thought of it I thought of a certain scene and just didn't feel comfortable with it. I don't believe our work is responsible for others behavior or meant to impart a certain message-although it could- but I felt like I didn't want people to associate me with that specific thing which I'd never written before or after so it went into the 'dumpster'

It happens.

 

[lovecraft68]

I don't think we're actually disagreeing about the important part.

She can change her books for whatever reason she chooses.

People can speculate about those reasons.

And people can disagree with the decision.

All perfectly permissible.

What I find amusing is how quickly a simple personal and artistic decision becomes a collective inquiry into her motives, theology, morality, and literary judgment.

And then we apparently require evidence before the speculation can be considered speculation.

The proceedings grow increasingly elaborate.

All over a woman removing sex from her own books.

On a commercial for-profit porn site.

Perhaps the institutional gravity is beginning to explain itself.

YMMV

I was replying to you not 'at' you if that makes sense.

 

[GuiltyCowboy]

People become more and more extreme in their views. The right gets more and more conservative. The left gets more and more progressive.

There's a word for this dynamic: schismogenesis. Came across it in Graeber's book The Dawn of Everything, which is well worth a read if you're into that sort of thing (that sort of thing being the latest discoveries about farming practices in the neolithic period).

 

[forgotmyantidepressants]

I think it says a lot about the American psyche right now. People are scared and they're turning to old forms of comfort to feel safe.

This is, of course, fine. I just think it's interesting to talk about. Wheatley talks very openly about her relationship with religion on her YT channel. She makes this public information herself.