![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Things are aardvark in a food mixer insane at the moment. I will update properly and answer comments in due course I promise.
During the meanwhile all UK flavoured people rejoice for Lo! The Texan Bar has returned to us. Verily have I missed its chewy goodness and I rejoice that I shall once again have the chance to lose a filling while munching on it's chocolatey goodness.
Oh and Darth Rich sent me another great bit of animation which I thought I'd share. It actually reminds me of my own response to post on particular subjects in fandom. Infact I could really use that as an icon for whenever I read any of the following:
1. Any description of a character's eyes which utilizes the words "jade", "orbs" "greens", "tawny", "golden" "pools", "amethyst", "moss coloured", "chocolate", "mahogany" etc etc: - Please just stop. I get that they have eyes. I get that their eyes are pretty. Now shush.
2. The assumption that being a bottom and/or submissive is a character flaw and makes you weak. Usually accompanied by the argument that writing [insert character name here] as a bottom and/or submissive is feminisation of that character and grossly OOC:- Usually spouted by people with little or no actual knowledge or experience of D/s or power exchange play. One of these days I shall write a learned response about how a preference for vanilla sex clearly indicates a repressed sexual preference for necrophilia, low self esteem as well as a delusional view of equality in relationships.
3. [insert pairing of choice] is the only possible and acceptable pairing. Any other pairing is immoral, wrong and gross character abuse: - Stop justifying your choice in porn. No one cares.
4. BDSM is abusive, unnatural and immature. All dominants are evil sadists: - I'm still at a loss as to how people can make comments like this and then be surprised when I am offended? Please also see response to Point 2.
5. [insert fandom of choice] was so much better back in the day when [insert name of various well known writers who left the fandom 2 years ago] were writing. This goes hand in hand with the 'I remember when it was all zines/mailing lists/hand carved stone tablets and I hate this move to [insert latest fandom medium]' conversation: - Just kill me now. Seriously.
6. I don't read slash for the sex:- Bzuh! No really? What do you read it for then? The relationship? But isn't that just sex with a prettier wrapper and less squelching noises? The close friendship between two men? Um, isn't that gen fic? I dunno, maybe I'm just not intellectual enough to grasp all the layered meanings behind it all..
7. Gorilla rape stories and lactating men:- I am scarred emotionally for life. Nuff said.
*grins*
And on that note I leave to go watch Whisper of The Heart
During the meanwhile all UK flavoured people rejoice for Lo! The Texan Bar has returned to us. Verily have I missed its chewy goodness and I rejoice that I shall once again have the chance to lose a filling while munching on it's chocolatey goodness.
Oh and Darth Rich sent me another great bit of animation which I thought I'd share. It actually reminds me of my own response to post on particular subjects in fandom. Infact I could really use that as an icon for whenever I read any of the following:
1. Any description of a character's eyes which utilizes the words "jade", "orbs" "greens", "tawny", "golden" "pools", "amethyst", "moss coloured", "chocolate", "mahogany" etc etc: - Please just stop. I get that they have eyes. I get that their eyes are pretty. Now shush.
2. The assumption that being a bottom and/or submissive is a character flaw and makes you weak. Usually accompanied by the argument that writing [insert character name here] as a bottom and/or submissive is feminisation of that character and grossly OOC:- Usually spouted by people with little or no actual knowledge or experience of D/s or power exchange play. One of these days I shall write a learned response about how a preference for vanilla sex clearly indicates a repressed sexual preference for necrophilia, low self esteem as well as a delusional view of equality in relationships.
3. [insert pairing of choice] is the only possible and acceptable pairing. Any other pairing is immoral, wrong and gross character abuse: - Stop justifying your choice in porn. No one cares.
4. BDSM is abusive, unnatural and immature. All dominants are evil sadists: - I'm still at a loss as to how people can make comments like this and then be surprised when I am offended? Please also see response to Point 2.
5. [insert fandom of choice] was so much better back in the day when [insert name of various well known writers who left the fandom 2 years ago] were writing. This goes hand in hand with the 'I remember when it was all zines/mailing lists/hand carved stone tablets and I hate this move to [insert latest fandom medium]' conversation: - Just kill me now. Seriously.
6. I don't read slash for the sex:- Bzuh! No really? What do you read it for then? The relationship? But isn't that just sex with a prettier wrapper and less squelching noises? The close friendship between two men? Um, isn't that gen fic? I dunno, maybe I'm just not intellectual enough to grasp all the layered meanings behind it all..
7. Gorilla rape stories and lactating men:- I am scarred emotionally for life. Nuff said.
*grins*
And on that note I leave to go watch Whisper of The Heart
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
From:
Re: You see..
But slash means that there has to be more to the relationship than just friendship, whether we see it, whether it's just a wish, or we get the full down and dirty details. If people say they want slash but don't want to accept the sexual side (potential or realised) or the relationship, then they're just fucked in the head. That's different from saying that actually reading the sexual stuff is not particularly interesting - a lot of time, it's not because it takes talent to make sex sexy, and a lot of otherwise good writers just don't have that skill.
I'm with turned_earth - I rate stories as gen if they are suitable for general audiences. That is determined by the level of offensive content, explicit sex or violence, or possibly, adult themes. Having homosexuals/bisexuals in a story, in a relationship to the forefront or otherwise of a story, does not in itself make it not gen (or adult) regardless of moronic archivists across fandoms. But if a story includes explicit sex, regardless of the genders of the boffers/boffees, then it's an adult story. If the boffers and boffees are the same gender, then it's adult slash.
From:
Re: You see..
Well I don't, so Ner! *sticks tongue out* I think we will have to agree to disagree on that one.
I'm with turned_earth - I rate stories as gen if they are suitable for general audiences. That is determined by the level of offensive content, explicit sex or violence, or possibly, adult themes.
You see I thought turned_earth was saying that she disliked the fact that gen has come to mean something without sex or squick or whatever. I always view the definition of gen as 'any story which does not have as its focus a particular sexual relationship'. The content such as violence or explicitness is defined by the rating. Thus an explicit torture fic would X or NC-17 rated gen.
I like your definitions though and under that scheme I can see how you can have gen slash. I would refer to it as G or GA rated slash though. This has opened an interesting sideline on labels for fic though. Cool Beans :)