the no politics/religion rule and forbidden romance

[Bramblethorn]

I was browsing Reddit and came across this post, and now I’m curious whether the story you linked is the same one this author got stuck with.


View attachment 2583650

I don't believe it was, no.

 

[TheLobster]

I was browsing Reddit and came across this post, and now I’m curious whether the story you linked is the same one this author got stuck with.


View attachment 2583650

The linked story was a 750-worder, so no.

 

[Purechicanery]

Define irony :

Claiming the sites with fewer restrictions on content are "less inclusive".

A comment I have occasionally seen regarding sites without restrictions on content is that while at first it may seem like a place that would be equally welcoming to all, in practice what happens is that whoever is most willing to loudly say the most offensive and unpleasant things gradually drives off everyone who doesn't want to contend with a site full of people saying awful things.

It's like the anecdote that concludes 'if you let one or two Nazis into your bar, eventually you have a Nazi bar.'

 

[Kelliezgirl]

A comment I have occasionally seen regarding sites without restrictions on content is that while at first it may seem like a place that would be equally welcoming to all, in practice what happens is that whoever is most willing to loudly say the most offensive and unpleasant things gradually drives off everyone who doesn't want to contend with a site full of people saying awful things.

It's like the anecdote that concludes 'if you let one or two Nazis into your bar, eventually you have a Nazi bar.'

People often make that assertion, but the evidence doesn't seem to support it.
There's a silly cartoon that people usually share as well where the gist is, "we have to censor, otherwise they will censor us".

 

[Purechicanery]

People often make that assertion, but the evidence doesn't seem to support it.
There's a silly cartoon that people usually share as well where the gist is, "we have to censor, otherwise they will censor us".

There's relatively little study on the matter, but from one such study, as it turns out, the evidence does support it.

https://arxiv.org/abs/2504.00045

EDIT: Also it's not censorship unless it comes from the autonomous region of an actual government using the legal system to silence you, otherwise it's just sparkling moderation.

 

[Off_base]

As evidenced in this thread, two people can read the same piece of fiction,
One sees it as hate speech and gets outraged,
The other sees it as satire and laughs their ass off.

The difference is, those in the hate speech camp will project their rage towards anyone who disagrees, feigning moral superiority, tossing around words like "nazi" for added emphasis.

 

[Purechicanery]

Yet a third person can see it as a shit piece of writing. A fourth can see it as a cantaloupe. A fifth can't see it because it's been deleted, what a shame.

 

[Inkognito1]

I came for the forbidden romance, stayed for the forbidden fruit.

 

[Off_base]

I came for the forbidden romance, stayed for the forbidden fruit.

Sorry, they removed the cantaloupe.

 

[Kelliezgirl]

There's relatively little study on the matter, but from one such study, as it turns out, the evidence does support it.

https://arxiv.org/abs/2504.00045

EDIT: Also it's not censorship unless it comes from the autonomous region of an actual government using the legal system to silence you, otherwise it's just sparkling moderation.

That study focuses on the "politically incorrect" board on 4chan. So they are basically saying if you set up a place with the INTENTION of filling it with a certain kind of speech, you will in fact get that kind of speech.

That doesn't support the theory that we must censor in a certain way or the Nazis will inevitably take over. This site allows stories about rape, the rapists haven't taken over.
Godwin's law aside, sites have a right to moderate content however they want. What I objected to was the characterization of silencing views you don't agree with and calling that "inclusiveness".

 

[Kelliezgirl]

Sorry, they removed the cantaloupe.

Weird, usually it's the cheese.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Who_Moved_My_Cheese?

 

[Off_base]

Weird, usually it's the cheese.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Who_Moved_My_Cheese?

It's kind of a wedge issue

 

[Bazzle]

I'm just curious about how the no politics/religion rule would be applied to a story I'm thinking up. I'd like it to be a forbidden romance and I want it to be forbidden in all of the ways - class difference, age gap, HR rules, their families' opposition to interracial marriage, they are already in relationships when they initially meet, and more if I can think of them.

Two obvious ones, given that he's rich and that she's poor, would be that he's politically conservative and she's a hardcore commie or union organizer or something; another would be that they are different religions (IDK which ones yet). I'm not interested in figuring out who's political and religious views are correct - the two are going to bang because they can't resist each other in spite of all these things, not because they resolve their differences - so I won't have them in long discussions about who's right, maybe they'll tease each other about it (aka wow commies give great head etc) but not having arguments or anything.

Is this story going to get rejected? Or do I have to simply omit these barriers? Also, if it's possible to do this, are there any advices as to how to do so without triggering the rule?

If anyone helps me with this, thanks in advance!

Young parishioner an older priest with sex in a church.

https://www.literotica.com/s/broken-salvation

Other than the plot twist annoying everyone, it didn't seem to cause offence.

 

[TheRedChamber]

What I objected to was the characterization of silencing views you don't agree with and calling that "inclusiveness".

You are mixing up 'diversity' and 'inclusiveness'

A place is a diverse if a lot of different types of people work there (by nationality, racw, gender, sexuality, age, religion etc).

A place is inclusive if it is welcoming to everyone.

A company which has 99 British men and 1 Irish man working for it and everyone is nice to the Irish man is not diverse but is inclusive.

A company which has 90 British men, 1 Japanese, 1 Kenyan, 1 Pole, 1 Brazillian, 1 Jamaican, 1 Pakistani, 1 Vietnamese, 1 Kuwaiti, 1 Spanard and 1 Moroccan men and in which the foreigners are pelted with rotten fruit every morning as they arrive for work every morning is more diverse but isnt inclusive.

When I go to work, I don't talk about religion, politics, or sexuality. I have views about some of those which would upset some of the people I work with and I'm sure they have views that would upset me. Work remains 'inclusive' because we can all get on with the jobs we're paid to do.

Whether you agree with the site having a NonConsent section (or even Incest), its at least within the remit of an erotica site. Politics really isn't.

 

[Off_base]

To think that hundreds of stories get published every day, and they can include deviant activity, but must stay completely away from politics, political figures, or plots that could somehow be interpreted as political, seems unreasonable.
Politics has never been such a huge part of daily life, as it is now, with instant information in your hand, and endless propaganda from unlimited sources.
I've read many stories on lit where politics is mentioned, up to and including, favorable dialog about a candidate in the last u.s. presidential election, by name.
You can't talk about much, without politics being perceived. Lbgtq+, for example, always invokes political implications, by mere mention.
I don't think the stories are the problem.
I think people's triggered reactions to characters they dislike, or their perception that the author is racist, bigoted, etc, is driving all the controversy.
This is just an opinion. I'm not advocating for a political sex category on lit, nor do I want to argue politics with anyone.
Inclusive shouldn't be limited to selective factors. Different ideals and morals need to be on the list.
There are plenty of authors here that I don't share the same kinks with, and wouldn't read their stuff, but I can still like them as people and enjoy their personalities here in AH.

TLDR: Reading is always completely voluntary. You can stop and click away at any time. You're never reading without your own consent.

 

[calmlikeabomb]

Well @cw5523729 @Kelliezgirl , I bit the bullet and made good on my word.

---

Two Parties, separated by Ideology,
In steamy Miami, where we lay our scene,
From ancient grudge to new mutiny,
With uncivil words, and thoughts unclean,
From across the party lines of these foes,
A pair of star-crossed lovers make designs,
Whose secret depraved lust overflows,
Unashamed yet hidden, they cross the lines.

The Rear Passage is the mark of their love,
While speakers of their parties froth and rage
Colours separated, Painted Red, Draped in Blue
In public forums and upon gaudy stage.

To the Lovers’ kinks, if you open your heart,
The Tale of Star Crossed Anal here shall start.

---

It's an interracial anal romance between a blue dog Indian American and a conservative catholic Latina. Politics are alluded to, but not explored much or judged. The story focuses primarily on the fun, smutty stuff, but is underpinned by the differences between the two lovers.

I decided to stay away from the incest angle (a rating of 4.5+ is more than what my heart can bear), and instead opted to frame it very loosely on Romeo and Juliet (and I mean very loosely, like I said, the focus is on the fun smutty bits).

I submitted it a short while ago, and the gods of this site willing, it should be up in a few days.

 

[Kelliezgirl]

Well @cw5523729 @Kelliezgirl , I bit the bullet and made good on my word.

---

Two Parties, separated by Ideology,
In steamy Miami, where we lay our scene,
From ancient grudge to new mutiny,
With uncivil words, and thoughts unclean,
From across the party lines of these foes,
A pair of star-crossed lovers make designs,
Whose secret depraved lust overflows,
Unashamed yet hidden, they cross the lines.

The Rear Passage is the mark of their love,
While speakers of their parties froth and rage
Colours separated, Painted Red, Draped in Blue
In public forums and upon gaudy stage.

To the Lovers’ kinks, if you open your heart,
The Tale of Star Crossed Anal here shall start.

---

It's an interracial anal romance between a blue dog Indian American and a conservative catholic Latina. Politics are alluded to, but not explored much or judged. The story focuses primarily on the fun, smutty stuff, but is underpinned by the differences between the two lovers.

I decided to stay away from the incest angle (a rating of 4.5+ is more than what my heart can bear), and instead opted to frame it very loosely on Romeo and Juliet (and I mean very loosely, like I said, the focus is on the fun smutty bits).

I submitted it a short while ago, and the gods of this site willing, it should be up in a few days.

Can't wait!

 

[Kelliezgirl]

You are mixing up 'diversity' and 'inclusiveness'

A place is a diverse if a lot of different types of people work there (by nationality, racw, gender, sexuality, age, religion etc).

A place is inclusive if it is welcoming to everyone.

A company which has 99 British men and 1 Irish man working for it and everyone is nice to the Irish man is not diverse but is inclusive.

A company which has 90 British men, 1 Japanese, 1 Kenyan, 1 Pole, 1 Brazillian, 1 Jamaican, 1 Pakistani, 1 Vietnamese, 1 Kuwaiti, 1 Spanard and 1 Moroccan men and in which the foreigners are pelted with rotten fruit every morning as they arrive for work every morning is more diverse but isnt inclusive.

When I go to work, I don't talk about religion, politics, or sexuality. I have views about some of those which would upset some of the people I work with and I'm sure they have views that would upset me. Work remains 'inclusive' because we can all get on with the jobs we're paid to do.

Whether you agree with the site having a NonConsent section (or eveb Incest), its at least within the remit of an erotica site. Politics really isn't.

I used the term inclusive because it was the term that was chosen by the person I replied to.

In this case the person claimed that a particular view was racist and several other buzzwords.
The point was brought up that those ideas are relative terms. People's views on what constitutes racism varies.
That is an appropriate topic for a site dedicated to writing and telling of stories.

 

[alohadave]

A comment I have occasionally seen regarding sites without restrictions on content is that while at first it may seem like a place that would be equally welcoming to all, in practice what happens is that whoever is most willing to loudly say the most offensive and unpleasant things gradually drives off everyone who doesn't want to contend with a site full of people saying awful things.

See also: 4chan

 

[TheRedChamber]

I used the term inclusive because it was the term that was chosen by the person I replied to.

In this case the person claimed that a particular view was racist and several other buzzwords.
The point was brought up that those ideas are relative terms. People's views on what constitutes racism varies.
That is an appropriate topic for a site dedicated to writing and telling of stories.

@MiaBabe23 used the word 'inclusive' perfectly correctly. If you include 'people in group A' then you, by definiton, exclude 'people who don't want group A included' Not a lot you can do about that except to make a call.

I keep banging on about this but the story was either

a) Bigoted and racist
B) Satire of bigotry and racism

Either way, Literotica doesn't allow it.

 

[Kelliezgirl]

@MiaBabe23 used the word 'inclusive' perfectly correctly. If you include 'people in group A' then you, by definiton, exclude 'people who don't want group A included' Not a lot you can do about that except to make a call.

I keep banging on about this but the story was either

a) Bigoted and racist
B) Satire of bigotry and racism

Either way, Literotica doesn't allow it.

But it isn't "people who don't want group a included".
It's "people who say things group A wants to censor".

These are not the same things.

 

[Kumquatqueen]

I keep banging on about this but the story was either
a) Bigoted and racist
B) Satire of bigotry and racism
Either way, Literotica doesn't allow it.

The Lit policy is not to allow "Works that promote or glorify hate, intolerance, or violence towards any person or group."

So on the face of it, racism should be excluded, along with stories that approve of hatred or violence against women, but either that 'promote or glorify' is a damn high bar, or a lot of LW stories should be removed.

But it isn't "people who don't want group a included".
It's "people who say things group A wants to censor".

These are not the same things.

If the people are saying group A are sick, going to hell, should be locked up, etc, do group A not have a point when arguing that group B should either stop saying that out loud, or stop staying they are inclusive, because they sure aren't welcoming group A?

If someone is insulting me, they don't get to also claim they're making me feel included.