[ on the squick factor ]

[winterlive]

after lengthy discussion with my friend fodian on the subject, i felt compelled to edit my previous post. to short it up for you, i find many things objectionable, offensive and unsexy, but the only ones i can understand suspending outright are the ones that are illegal. i do not feel qualified to condemn anybody for what gets them off, and i wouldn't want to try - it's not my job to police other people, only myself. policing others and interpreting our varying rights and freedoms is a job that belongs to the government.

now. that said, i would like to briefly discuss my stance on abuse fic in general.



i find that fandom has a big fascination with abuse. rape, child abuse, bestiality and torture get a lot of play around here, and as i said in conversation with traveller tonight, while i don't share that kink, it's one i think i understand.

by and large, when fandom writes these subjects, one is meant to sympathize and identify with the victim. the image i posted previously is a great example: harry is the sole focus of the picture. he is the brightest color, he's front and center, and his emotion is the one we're meant to be feeling - blush, tears. by contrast, snape is the same color as the background and his body is less a person and more an oppressive presence. most of his face is outside the frame. we aren't intended to identify with him; hell, it's hard to even tell who he is.

abusers are widely acknowledged to get off on the power. now of course fandom's aware that there are healthy ways to get off on power - hence the prevalence of dom/sub fic. but in abuse stories, the focus is almost always on the victim - helpless, powerless, ashamed and miserable.

women in the last few decades have been repeatedly informed that they are not supposed to feel any of those things. we're supposed to be feminists, we're supposed to be empowered and fight for our beliefs and be proud. and yet women are hugely victimized in north america all the time.

i think it's small wonder that women wind up sexualizing those feelings - indeed, i imagine that doing so can even lead to a feeling of empowerment, taking ownership of those feelings for one's own pleasure. i can understand it, and while i don't share it as a kink, i certainly can't condemn people for it any more than i would condemn somebody for getting off on the opposite. there are lots of healthy ways to explore that whole aspect of one's sexuality, and one of those is absolutely to deal with it in a fictional environment like fandom.

i don't have to like it to see its value, at least in that regard.



and now, to take this all from the other point of view.

i'm the sort who gets off on power, i make no bones about it. i have written a LOT of dom/sub fic in my time, i own a flogger and i have used it on everybody who's ever seen it. most of the draw of that, psychologically speaking, is the responsibility - caring for somebody who's totally under your control, who trusts you to see that they get what they need, having that kind of trust placed in you, and being able to satisfy them.

so perhaps those of you who like abusefic can now see how, when i view that picture, my instinct is to identify with snape. he's the one with the power, he's the one i default to. and then i look at the person i'm supposed to be getting off on dominating, on caring for, on being responsible for, and i'm literally nauseated. it is my kink completely perverted. it is everything wrong with my world, it is a horrible view of what happens to people like me when they are sick, awful people, and it makes me feel like one of them. i hate that feeling, and so images like this, to me, are revolting.



if nothing else, i must concede that ponderosa has accomplished what a lot of artists strive for: getting people talking and thinking. thoughts? comments? agree/disagree?

Comments

[fodian.livejournal.com]

I think this is a great explanation for why you found Detention Served to be offensive. I've said before that it's hard to have something I like to be labeled despicable, but god knows, I can understand why you do. I've never thought that you shouldn't find it despicable or that you were wrong for doing so.

I think the issue of legality is going to continue to be a sticking point. As you say, the only ones i support banning outright are the ones that are illegal, but I think your interpretation of illegal and LJ/6A's differs.

As they stated to the owner of another banned journal: The comment you are referring to is correct; the content does not meet the legal definition of child pornography. As other, more recent entries in the community explain, however, non-photographic content involving minors in sexual situations which does not contain serious artistic or literary merit is likely in violation of Federal obscenity laws, and is content LiveJournal has chosen not to host. {emphasis mine.}

So. Do you support banning journals that fall under *your* interpretation of what is legal and what is not, or LJ/6A's definition of what is legal and what is not? Mostly, this is why I didn't want to get into a discussion about the legality of the issue. But also, to maybe strip away the high emotions surrounding this particular piece of art, what if, instead, LJ deleted Ponderosa's journal because she was sharing downloads of music? Or providing .avi's of episodes of a television show that she hadn't purchased legally? I'm curious - would you support the deletion of her journal in those cases? Is the law always right?

[winterlive.livejournal.com]

i should point out that i have tried to be careful not to use the word "support". i try instead to use "cannot condemn", which is a fine distinction, but one that i would like to preserve.

i can't condemn lj for acting in accordance with the law (any law, child porn or obscenity or what have you). they're taking steps to preserve not only themselves, but us too. a huge chunk of fandom is hosted on lj. the U.S. government these days (especially for perceived child pornography but certainly for other stuff too) is crazy reactionary, much more likely to just shut down now and ask questions later. should that happen, it'd be a huge blow to all of us.

we do a lot of things that are technically questionable under the law, definitely including music downloads, but i think it falls to us to ensure that we fly under the radar with stuff like that. if we get caught out and suspended, hey, man, we knew the risks.

certainly the law isn't always right, but that's not a subject to be taken up with lj/6A, imo. they're looking out for their own, which happens to include us at the moment.

that's not to say that if fandom decides to migrate, i won't go with 'em. i might. lj has the right to refuse hosting to specific individuals - we have the right to take our patronage elsewhere. and nobody can deny that 6A management's been total twofaced jerkholes about this whole thing.

[fodian.livejournal.com]

You might want to edit your post at the part where you say the only ones i support banning outright are the ones that are illegal. I don't particularly see a distinction, but I understand that you do.

This whole comment raises a lot of the hairs at the back of my neck for me, not particularly because of what you mean, but because things like "falls on us to ensure that we fly under the radar" brings up issues of shame, that what we're doing here should be hidden under the mattress, that we shouldn't get "caught". Because yeah, I believe the stuff that you say in your post about empowerment, about ownership. This is all theoretically speaking, not practically speaking, but that's where I think we keep butting heads. I'm talking about the world as it should be and you're talking about the world as it is. I don't believe for one moment that LJ/6A is looking out for us.

the U.S. government these days (especially for perceived child pornography but certainly for other stuff too) is crazy reactionary, much more likely to just shut down now and ask questions later.

Can you give me some instances of where this is happened?

[stoney321.livejournal.com]

*jumping in with some examples*

A child pornography ring (international) was discovered having roots in Dallas earlier this year and they rounded up about 200 people. It turned out that only 40 or so people were involved in producing and distributing it. Others just had stumbled across a website and pinged the Feds, etc.

Also, in Murphy, Texas (a suburb here) Dateline set up a sting operation to nab a guy on child porno charges. (They have a whole series on this every weekend. Ugh.) The guy was nabbed, thrown in jail, reviled, etc. Turns out that HE was approached by the officer posing as a teen, was given a date, etc. So he was let go on entrapment. The whole town of Murphy is suing NBC for "endangering" their town by potentially luring child molesters to their idyllic town.

[fodian.livejournal.com]

No, you misunderstand me. Winter said, the U.S. government these days (especially for perceived child pornography but certainly for other stuff too) is crazy reactionary, much more likely to just shut down now and ask questions later, indicating in my mind that there were instances where sites had been shut down that were not engaging in actual real-person child pornography but where there were fictional depictions of acts that could be construed as pornographic under the law. To me, she seemed to be insinuting that LJ/6A were acting in accordance to how the U.S. government, or perhaps state or local law enforecement as well, had reacted to situations where drawings such as Ponderosa's were hosted and had shut those sites down.

Certainly there are, unfortunately, many instances where actual child pornographers are caught for soliciting children or disseminating photograhs on line. I live in a town of 53,000 people and we've had three arrests to date this year alone. But that's not what I'm talking about.

[stoney321.livejournal.com]

Gotcha. I was responding to what I thought was a query for where the gov't had shot first and ask questions later, period. (Which of course could go on forever. *g*)

[fodian.livejournal.com]

Considering you live in Texas? *g*

[stoney321.livejournal.com]

Hey, I resemble that remark! :D And we now have a saying in Texas: At least we're not Florida or Utah. Hahaha.

(And I'm of the Ann Richards/Molly Ivins Texan mindset. We exist, we've just been out-voted. =P)

[cityphonelines.livejournal.com]

Stoney? ILU. For serious.

*puts on sekrit Tecksass decoder ring*

[winterlive.livejournal.com]

i've heard of instances, but i can't think of any to reference. i didn't expect to need them in a debate, so i didn't memorize them. :) but you've read this (http://synecdochic.livejournal.com/147625.html), right? lj's failure to self-police could be disastrous.

[fodian.livejournal.com]

I have read synechdochic's post and I found it interesting but I'm also very aware that she's a former LJ employee and as such probably has a vested interest in not burning bridges with her former employers.

If you come across the references again, I'd be really keen to take a look at the evidence. It seems to me that a lot of people are espousing this idea that LJ/6A's actions are perfectly reasonable given the "current climate" and you go so far as to state that their actions are based on corresponding precedent, but I have yet to see anything that indicates that law enforcement, at any level, is targeting or even responding to fictional, explicitly sexual depictions of any kind, including those that involve very young minors.

[traveller.livejournal.com]

I'm talking about the world as it should be and you're talking about the world as it is.

In the world as it should be, I would not have been violently sexually assualted as a child. In the world as it is, I've been carrying around this pain for more than twenty years. In the world as it should be, it's all your Aristotelian ideal where everything awful is just academic and our debates are pure rhetoric. In the world as it is, people like the one who hurt me enjoy pictures like the one I hate. I can't separate the two. Distantly, vaguely, I can see into your world where nobody gets hurt, it's just fiction, no-one looking at it can take it out of context and think or do terrible things, but it's like looking through a telescope with a cloth over the lens.

Your idealism, and your sticking to it, is commendable. I have in my lifetime defended innumerable things that others condemned, in the name of art, in the name of freedom of thought. I sympathise with your position. If life had been different, I might be taking danny's middle road, I might even be taking your road. But on the other side might be someone else who can only see pain and nightmares in that image, and so we circle, and we circle...

The bottom line is that LJ is trying to stay in business. Wherever fen may go and whatever they bring with them will eventually put any business who hosts them in the same position that LJ is in now. We are too many now, we are too visible, for any flying under the radar, and I like it that way. I've said for years that I hope in my lifetime I'll see on a bookstore shelf "Fanfiction Anthology of Year" alongside all the rest. But using our collective power to spam the news post? Not going to change anything. If thousands of people worked actively to change the world to the one you, and yes, I, hope for? Maybe.

[fodian.livejournal.com]

It true that I'm terribly idealistic, but certainly I sympathize with your position as well. I was vague so allow me to explain about the "world as it should be" phrase. I wasn't saying that this picture and pictures like it don't have real consequences, that there aren't people who are hurt by it and that those people don't count. I was thinking about, hmmm...let's pretend that we're in 1911 and we're discussing the issue of women's suffrage. We're bandying back and forth about whether or not women should have the right to vote, why they should have the right to vote, what are the pros and cons and what are the consequences and the repercussions, and then someone comes in and says, "But women *don't* have the right to vote! It's not allowed!" Absolutely, that is the reality of the situation, but it stops the discussion, it cuts off discourse by forcing the participants to stop thinking of how the world should be and might be and could and insisting on how the world *is*. Absolutely, LJ/6A is acting in accordance to their interpretation of the law and absolutely, the letter of the law indicates that Ponderosa's drawing might fall under the description of child pornography.

[an aside here: I hope that we all understand that the letter of the law is this overstated, this restrictive on purpose. That lawmakers strove to ensure that every single permutation of possibilities in the range of child pornography was included into the law to ensure that it was prosecutable. But I don't think for one moment that if we took Ponderosa's drawing into a court of law that it would be deemed illegal.]

But as I was saying, what I've been trying to talk about all along is how I think it's wrong that Ponderosa's journal was deleted. I think it's wrong that women don't have the right to vote. So to have the alleged illegality of the item in question thrust into the discussion is frustrating for me.

Now, having said all that, yes. We live in the world that we live in. The reality of the matter is that Ponderosa's art is no long allowable on LJ. How you and I and Winter or anyone else feels about that is, at the end of the day, purely academic. This is what we face. I'm just trying to do my part to rally against it. That's all.

[winterlive.livejournal.com]

you are so brave and good that i can't even.

[winterlive.livejournal.com]

edited!

i don't think that lj is sitting in their offices going, oh, man, i don't want to censor our wee fandom members, god knows they've been good to us and we ought to be good to them in order to be morally good people. what i do think they're doing is protecting their own asses. and for the moment, that includes our asses, so i can't condemn.

when it comes to flying under the radar, i see it as less hiding one's shame and more protecting oneself. you're entitled to find anything hot that you want to, but you're not entitled to have that kink fed. responsibility is on you to ensure that you have a safe space where that can happen.

and that's exactly why i'd never report any member of fandom for something fictional they made that i found offensive, illegal or not. i'm protecting my own safe space by not drawing attention. i'm well aware my fandoms - RPS, incest - that fanfiction itself doesn't skirt the edges of what's legal, what's morally acceptable to society at large. i'm not ashamed of what i find hot, but i'm aware that if i broadcast it, i'm inviting unwanted attention.

that make sense?

[fodian.livejournal.com]

I understand what you're saying. We'll just have to agree to disagree on each of these points.

[kira-k.livejournal.com]

I'm sorry for butting in but could you give me a link to the LJ statement, you're qouting here? Please?

[fodian.livejournal.com]

Sure thing. Here you go. (http://stormcloude.livejournal.com/353361.html)

Please be advised that I had c&p'd the text from my flist, and was under the impression that this person's journal had been banned. However, the exchange was evidently about Ponderosa. The text is how the LJ Abuse Team responded when asked for clarification, since the piece that her journal was deleted for did not actually involve minors.

[mona1347.livejournal.com]

I respect you a lot for obviously having thought through this a great deal. I also totally respect your stance, which is based on your experience and clearly articulated. *nods*

Re: the whole clusterfuck, I have yet to form a hard and fast opinion.

[winterlive.livejournal.com]

thanks, presh.

i support you getting bunches of info before you decide!! i am hugely NOT a fan of arbitrary/summary judgment before the facts are in, so, yis, good for you. many kudos.

[zillah975]

I'm confused. In your previous post, you said you can't fault LJ for banning the image in question because it's illegal, but in this one, you say you can see the value in it. But if it has artistic value, then it isn't illegal. Have I misunderstood what you're saying?

I haven't actually seen the image, but I understand being disgusted by something. As you point out here, though, that doesn't make it without merit, and works with merit aren't legally obscene, and thus aren't illegal. So LJ was banning on offensiveness, or out of fear that someone else wouldn't think it has merit. Totally their right to do it - also my right to think it's a load of horse puckey.

[winterlive.livejournal.com]

whether the image falls into the realm of obscenity law or child pornography law is debatable. i'm not a lawyer, but synecdochic is, and she says it way better than me. for an educated discussion of the legal ins and outs of this, check her out.

as i said to fod above, i think that we as creators and purveyors of stuff that's potentially legally/morally questionable need to take some responsibility here. lj has a moral responsibility to cover their own asses, and they'll try to give us as much leeway as they can because it'll encourage us to stay and that satisfies their bottom line. but it's to us to help them do that, to create our own safe space.

let me just make clear, though, that i think that 6A has been fucktards about this whole thing b/c we have asked them for clarification of the TOS and they have definitively stated, "yes, this will be allowed" and then gone ahead and banned it anyway. so. fucktards.

but according to what's on paper, i can't fault them. i would consider moving, if there were a better solution available, but so far there isn't.

clearer?

[stormcloude]

i'm not a lawyer, but synecdochic is,

Could you give me a reference for that. I was under the assumption that she was a tech. (and I know her alternate identity as former corporate employee.)

[winterlive.livejournal.com]

i can't, actually. i heard it somewhere. regardless, she does cite the bit of legislation she quotes, which i will c&p for you here:

In the eyes of the United States government (http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sec_18_00001466---A000-.html), "child pornography" is defined as -- elisions and boldface mine -- "a visual depiction of any kind, including a drawing, cartoon, sculpture, or painting, that [...] depicts an image that is, or appears to be,of a minor engaging in graphic bestiality, sadistic or masochisticabuse, or sexual intercourse, including genital-genital, oral-genital,anal-genital, or oral-anal, whether between persons of the same oropposite sex [...] It is not a required element of any offense under this section that the minor depicted actually exist."

[cityphonelines.livejournal.com]

Your paragraph regarding the distinctions/representations of the subjects, wherein Harry is focal and bright, yet Snape is dark and foreboding?

Makes me love your brain more than usual.

Your feelings on abuse fic are why I tend to not read sub/Dom fic, even though power play is something that's always been very much a part of my RL sexual relationships. I think the point of a sub/Dom relationship gets lost in the kink. It's almost always shown in a way where the sub is less than the Dom. *shakes head* I hate that.

Mine is almost the inverse of your squick. As someone who is dominate in life, but submissive sexually, I identify with (in this case) Harry. I don't like seeing myself as a blushing child. It gives me a knee jerk feeling of someone seeing the representation of my kink as infantile (not literally, but you know what I mean) and I hate seeing the character in the dominate position as a threating/menacing figure./TMI rambling

[winterlive.livejournal.com]

hardly TMI, angel. that's what we're here for.

i understand your view, man. it's just as legitimate as any of ours and i think you're awesomecakes for being able to articulate it so clearly. good on you. <333

[(Anonymous)]

thoughts? comments? agree/disagree?

I hope I make some sense with this. It's hard to explain fully because I can't even say for sure why I do find some abuse fics and art hot. But in any case...

As a gay man I can't say what it means to be a woman as you addressed in your first point though I can say that I've had my share of homophobic people trying to victimize me as well as calls for empowerment.

I'd like to address your other point though. I'm definitely not here to tell you that you can't feel the way you do but I wanted to share my view on it just to give another perspective. I'm a switch though I tend to lean towards Dom more. That said, I don't really identify with either Harry or Snape in that picture. I feel sympathy for Harry and anger towards Snape but not identification. Being a Dom is about all of the things you said above, especially trust, caring, and respect, which Snape is not following here. Being a sub is about still having a lot of power even in the submissive role and trust neither of which Harry has here. I think of “Dom/sub” art/fic and “rape/abuse/torture” art/fic as very different things. So I guess it just doesn’t come to my mind to look at this pic and think it relates to anyone who is in the Dom role (or those in the sub role for that matter). To me, any Dom that doesn't follow those guidelines talked about above (trust, care, respect, etc) isn't a true Dom. Instead they are abusive people who may be pretending to be Doms because they're trying to take advantage of those who do want to try out a true sub role or else they’re falsely using the term to try and make excuses for their actions. Some, like Snape in the picture this was based on, wouldn’t even try to use those role terms because they fully own up to the fact that they are abuser/victim not Dom/sub. While these people may be "dominant" in the literal definition of the word, they aren't true Doms. So when I look at this pic, I don't see it as an example of my world or my Dom kink being perverted because I don't see it as Dom/sub. I see it as an abusive teacher, specifically Snape, who is taking advantage of his position of power over a student, specifically Harry. I say “specifically” because to me the fact that it’s Snape/Harry and not based on a real life teacher/student relationship is also important to me.

Now all that said, I do also enjoy and read abuse fics ranging from pretty mild to extremely dark (which have includes many different age ranges too). I've had different reactions depending on the art/fanfic. Some I've found hot and I can't even really say exactly why. Though I still don’t really identify with anyone in them because I’m more content with being a voyeur in those cases. Some I've found fascinating because of the dynamics and emotional reactions involved as well as any consequences depending on what the art and/or fic covers. I had this Snape/Harry picture saved as well as the fanfic it was based on because I found both interesting and well done. Again it’s a case where I don’t really identify with anyone in them because not only am I more comfortable with being a voyeur but I also find it more interesting in terms of how my favorite characters will react to these situations not so much how I would if I were in their places. While some of my favorite characters are also ones I can at least partly identify with, in these kinds of abuse fics (rape, molestation, torture, etc) it’s not about me identifying with their reactions but rather viewing/reading what happens and trying to understand how it affects them and how they’re going to move on. With fanart that doesn’t get to go into all the specifics like a fanfic can, I’ll use the visual to help me think about how the character feels and would likely react both in the situation and afterwards. It opens up a whole new way of looking into the character for me and even understanding not only them but the issues this kind of fic/art bring up.

I’m only speaking for myself of course (as well as some others that I’ve talked about these things with in the past), but those things are part of the reason I read and enjoy these pictures and fanfics and why I don’t view it as anything negative (and why the Dom/sub comparison doesn't work for me).

-Daniel

[winterlive.livejournal.com]

in the post i drew a comparison between abusers and dominants - that both of them get off on power. i wasn't trying to equate them at all. like you said, an abuser is not a dominant, and vice versa. to my view, an abuser is a corruption of the good thing that a dominant is, with responsibility and caring excised and only the fear and power left.

your explanation of why you enjoy the abuse fics, though, makes perfect sense and is definitely appreciated and helpful.

may i ask, do you find abuse images or stories titillating? are the acts of abuse themselves erotic to you, or does the eroticism come from the healing that comes after?

[winterlive.livejournal.com]

well, i agree with everything you're saying here. i suppose what i was most interested in when making the post was a discussion of why we find these things *erotic*, specifically. what feelings to they arouse in you, why do you get off on them?