[ SECRET POST #4318 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #4318 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.



__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________


03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.







Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 25 secrets from Secret Submission Post #618.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

I love AO3 and post and read fic on there. I am 99% of the time YKINMK. In fact, I enjoy reading "darker" fics. Hurt-comfort (involving taking care of a person after rape) is my jam.
However, I have come across fics that have disturbed me.
Example one involving a sexual relationship between a twelve year old Loki and a mid-twenties Tony Stark (from what I read in the synopsis. I skimmed the fic because surely this can't be...? and yep it was what i thought it was- a sexual relationship between a child and and adult. I'm probably on a watchlist now for clicking into that trash!). There is YKINMK and then there is 'this is sick, why are people reading this?' (One person in the comments stated how wrong it was and a bunch of people jumped on them.) Also, fuck you writer for doing such a disservice to such awesome characters!
Again, there is YKINMK and the antis do go too far.
At the same time, there has to be a line drawn somewhere.

[(Anonymous)]

So, to bring up two examples already listed in the thread (although I can come up with lots more, as I'm a librarian), do you think stories like It and Lolita should be allowed to be published because they contain underage sex? That story with a child and an adult might very well disturb a lot of people, but how is it different from published works that contain similar things? Are you for book banning? Where is your line as to what is allowed to exist? (Mine is that anything that is fictional / not involving real people is fine, even if I won't read it because it isn't for me.)

[(Anonymous)]

NAYRT - I don't even disagree with you, but it would definitely bolster your argument if you could choose a couple of books where the underage sex isn't obviously framed by the authors as being hella fucked up. I mean, since you're a librarian with lots of examples to choose from and all.

[(Anonymous)]

Ayrt
It's not even anywhere close to "obviously framed by the authors as being hella fucked up" in It though...
But since you asked: Google pedophilia in Piers Anthony books. Also Game of Thrones.

[(Anonymous)]

That was supposed to say Nayrt up there.

[(Anonymous)]

...most people didn't read the Giant Turtle-endorsed middle school orgy to defeat an alien spider-clown and think "relationship goals."

Yours is a special kink.

[(Anonymous)]

steven king even admits these days that he wished he hadn't written it

[(Anonymous)]

No he doesn’t. He’s upset about the controversy around it but he still maintains it was a necessary part of the story. He stands by his decision to write a bunch of 12 year olds running train on the sole girl of the group and doesn’t get why people are up in arms by that and not the multitude of other shit he wrote.

[(Anonymous)]

LOL, you're giving him way too much credit, he pulled the old 'whhhhy are people so upset about sex, not violence?' bit. (That and him calling Dylan Farrow's allegation 'bitchy' doesn't speak highly for him.)

[(Anonymous)]

You are aware that there's a difference/a lot of space between "relationship goals omg hawt" and "obviously framed by the authors as being hella fucked up", yes? Because while not the former, it definitely also wasn't the latter the way it was written.

[(Anonymous)]

I've never read IT. I did, however, leave that movie shipping the entire crew of kids. If I'm going to hell for that, so be it.

[philstar22]

I can't speak to It as I haven't read it. But Lolita is clearly meant to be portraying something very bad. The unreliable narrator trope is so clearly at play. It is pretty clear that by the end you are supposed to hate Humfrey and that as much as he tries to blame everyone but himself, he is a terrible person who has ruined a young girl's life.

[(Anonymous)]

Lolita, yes. IT? No.

[(Anonymous)]

And that's why the book and movies have never been banned or claimed to have endorsed paedophilia! Er, wait...

[(Anonymous)]

'It' absolutely does not frame the underage sex as 'hella fucked up'; King defends it even now, and within the text, it's presented as literally necessary in order to save all the childrens' lives, as well as pleasurable e.g. a fantasy for intended reader, rather than any boner-killing details of what might be a more realistic depiction of a child getting penetrated six times in a row in a sewer of all places (iirc, the girl comes like, three times and at the end reflects on how 'empty' she feels without a dick in her.)

[(Anonymous)]

Except plenty of people have tried, and in some cases succeeded, to get Lolita banned for "endorsing" the underage sex and for making you sympathize with the narrator.

[(Anonymous)]

So you came upon a fic that had an accurate summary, a fic that you knew would disturb you, and you read it anyway?

The line that should have been drawn is you not reading something that would upset you.