Smashwords Succumbs to Censorship

[QuantumIguana]

If PayPal says that Lolita is erotica, then that is all that matters. They are looking over your shoulder, judging a legal transaction between the buyer and the seller.

[rhadin]

Originally Posted by Yapyap

I've seen people argue (elsewhere) that paedophilia or rape fantasy fiction is bad, because it may blur the lines between what's acceptable and what not in some people's minds and drive them to act out their fantasies in reality. I am not a psychologist and won't get into whether this may be true or not - but I do think that even those arguments cannot possibly be valid for banning werewolf porn (or for that matter erotica depicting consensual sex by characters under 18 but above the age of consent in their country).

I think you miss the point, at least as far as Americans are concerned. First, when it comes to sex, sexuality, and anything related to sex (e.g., discussions about contraception), the American preference is to bury the head in the sand and hope it goes away. If it fails to go away, the next best thing is to ban under the belief that out of sight is out of mind. American attitudes toward sex and sex-related topics are more puritanical than were the Puritans' own attitudes.

Second, Americans, especially evangelical Christian Americans, firmly believe that their moral guidance is needed because no American can possibly be moral who doesn't adhere to the evangelical belief of the day. They are like horses with blinders when it comes to morals and morality.

Third, Americans tend to be gullible to the 30-second negative TV ad. If it is said in less than 30 seconds on TV and in a negative manner, then it must be true and it becomes the gospel of the masses. No matter how much evidence may accumulate to demonstrate the falsity of that ad, Americans are loathe to accept that they may have been wrong and so continue to perpetuate the false as the truth. Consequently, the mere fact that someone sometime declared writing about rape is disgusting and people should be banned from buying it is sufficient for that belief to continue and to grow. After all, if it weren't true it wouldn't have been said in America.

Fourth, a significant number of Americans believe that a woman's place is in the home, barefoot and pregnant, and in servitude to the male members of the household. They believe women are incapable of taking care of themselves and incapable of doing anything absent male guidance. In other words, they have a very byzantine attitude toward women, one that would readily be recognized in places like Afghanistan. As part of this belief, they believe that women need to be morally protected from such outrages as being able to read "racy" romance fiction that includes any type of titillation. Women simply do not have the moral stamina to not be led astray by these types of books and it is the male's duty to protect women from their weaknesses.

And the list goes on. American is not a leader in equal rights at the level of the citizen because of these attitudes, and because of the prevalence of these attitudes, censorship is considered a positive thing by much of the citizenry.

[Yapyap]

Really though, where does one draw the line? I mean, okay: bestiality bad, and as Smashwords specified, that includes shapeshifters in paranormal erotica when in animal form. But what would happen with, say, octopus-shaped tentacle aliens? Is tentacle alien erotica okay or not? If it is, what makes tentacle alien erotica okay and werewolf erotica not okay (considering neither tentacle aliens or werewolves exist in real life - well, not on Earth anyway)?

And what about necrophiliac erotica? Obviously, necrophilia is illegal in most countries in reality, but is sex with fictional dead people okay? If yes, then is there a line there somewhere? Vampire erotica is probably okay, I assume, although we're talking about people who were generally killed centuries ago. What about zombies? Or skeletons? Do ghosts count as dead people?

I'm being flippant, to an extent, but I'm also genuinely curious, because I know erotica like that exists, and I'd like to know where the line is drawn when the slope gets slippery.

[rhadin]

Originally Posted by Yapyap

Doesn't that lead us back to "but why are crime / murder novels okay in that case"? Especially as, again, there are plenty of those around where the killer isn't painted in a completely horrific light, and the reasons for the murder come off as justified and understandable?

Crime/murder books are acceptable in the United States because American puritans do not find murder morally repugnant, like they find sex, do not find it difficult to talk about openly, like they do sex, and believe that if they were to ban such books it might lead to a ban on guns, of which every American puritan has a bucketload.

That there were a number of Columbine copycats did nothing to persuade American puritans of the need to tighten gun controls. That there are a small percentage of Americans who have abortions has persuaded American puritans to ban sex as much as possible.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by Yapyap

Really though, where does one draw the line?

The better question is; why does there need to be line at all? No one is being forced to buy literature they don't like. No one is being forced to read anything they find disgusting. One line will never work, so it's best if everybody is free to have their own line when it comes to literature.

[Yapyap]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

The better question is; why does there need to be line at all? No one is being forced to buy literature they don't like. No one is being forced to read anything they find disgusting. One line will never work, so it's best if everybody is free to have their own line when it comes to literature.

I agree.

I'm just curious about the reasoning of the people who have, clearly, decided that there needs to be a line and that some things, in spite of being legal (being fictional tales of fictional characters), are "too icky" to allow people to spend their own money on them.

[Redcard]

I love how people assume that this is Paypal's forcing Smashwords.. that they are taking it for granted that this is the way it is.

Smashwords CAN switch to someone like Dwolla for US sales.. or any of the other payment processors who have indicated that they are HANDS OFF. They can have people buy "Smashword Bucks" much like FictionWise did with their internal scheme. In researching this, Smashwords is not the only company that has been hit by this, and the solutions other companies reached allowed them to keep selling their "questionable product" and mollified Paypal.

[QuantumIguana]

The mistake you are making is to equate a book not being banned with being "ok". That implies that we must have permission to read, write, sell or buy a book. We do not. To not ban certain content in no way implies approving of that content.

Free speech comes with a price. That price is that objectionable content will exist. Once you start banning books, it becomes easier for other books to be banned. We can keep the censors away from us by not banning any books.

[Redcard]

Let's be clear here.

No book is being banned.

The sale of books are being banned, and those sales are being banned by Smashwords. I can still think of a hundred ways that those books can be sold, through different companies or by individual sales. I don't read those kind of books, so I don't know what authors have websites, but I did check out a few last night and saw many of these authors offer direct sales from their websites, oftentimes not using paypal.

Books are not being banned. I can still get them, if I wanted to.

[DiapDealer]

I think you'll find that most people who are opposed to this type of literature even existing, are rarely motivated by the fear that this literature may fall into the "wrong hands." More often, they're simply bitter that someone is able to make money on something they find so disgusting.

[anamardoll]

Originally Posted by Yapyap

Really though, where does one draw the line? I mean, okay: bestiality bad, and as Smashwords specified, that includes shapeshifters in paranormal erotica when in animal form.

I'm pretty sure that has happened in Yasmine Galenorn's Sisters of the Moon novels, and she's traditionally published. Whoooooooops, Paypal and Smashwords and your silly contradictory policy that loses you money for no good reason.

[MrsJoseph]

Originally Posted by Yapyap

Doesn't that lead us back to "but why are crime / murder novels okay in that case"? Especially as, again, there are plenty of those around where the killer isn't painted in a completely horrific light, and the reasons for the murder come off as justified and understandable?

Not to mention that there are books describing in loving detail how the killer plans and executes the deed.

Exactly.

What makes murder acceptable but anything sexual fantasy related "icky" and "taboo?" Cause if this was the case, we should also start banning slasher flicks. Murder is illegal.

It's all fiction. Make-believe. False. Not-true.

[anamardoll]

We clearly also need to ban all novels containing prostitution, illegal drug use, and white collar crime. GOODBYE MILLENNIUM TRILOGY.

[MrsJoseph]

Originally Posted by anamardoll

We clearly also need to ban all novels containing prostitution, illegal drug use, and white collar crime. GOODBYE MILLENNIUM TRILOGY.

Exactly. We should also ban Harry Potter - last I heard he was a witch.

And Twilight?? OMG. Having sex with the EVIL UNDEAD.

[djulian]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

I think you'll find that most people who are opposed to this type of literature even existing, are rarely motivated by the fear that this literature may fall into the "wrong hands." More often, they're simply bitter that someone is able to make money on something they find so disgusting.

I'd be interested to see your supporting references for that claim.

I'm opposed to the existence of this type of fiction, and my motivation is that I don't want to read it, I don't want my kids (when I have kids) to read it, I don't want their teachers or scout leaders reading it, I just don't want to live in a society where depictions of this sort of behavior are readily accepted as legitimate erotic stimulants.

I'm not at all bitter that someone makes money creating representations of illegal or perverse acts. Money has nothing to do with it.