quote:

---

Also, while this is a workshop for writers age 18 and older, it is open to readers of all ages. For that reason, if you want feedback on something that is potentially offensive or PG-13 or worse, please indicate that in the post and don't put such material in the 13 lines.

---

This is what is says on the opening page of this forum.
Melanie

If it were me, I'd not post it and go instead with a synopsis, or if that itself is too graphic, just a request for readers for a story featuring juvenile but (presumably) legal sex.

(BTW intimacy in the first 13 never works for me. I want to build trust in the author and liking for the characters, or at least some of them, before any intimate details. Without, I'm wondering why I need to know and preferring not to.)

Probably in appropriate to actually post, but giving a toned down synopsis and asking for readers is fine. I would be willing to read if this is not a slasher bloody gore and so on.

I have not and will not watch Saw, Freddy, Jason and the like .

TL

Why don't we just stay within the charter we all agree to, that Melanie referred to? It would be easy to take the 13 lines and crits offline to e-mail, and just post an inoffensive synopsis and request for readers.

Or do we not want to welcome minors to Hatrack?

(And the test of PG 13 is not whether we think kids will have seen such material. It's fairly well-defined and this piece is most defintitely not PG 13 because PG 13 movies do not feature erections. http://www.mpaa.org/FlmRat_Ratings.asp

The first 13 was not R-rated, not even close to X-rated (and no one come back with triple X 'cause that doesn't really exist anymore, and we all know what we're talking about when we say X-rated), and I would hazard a guess that "t***" and "b****" were what caused the 'nanny' to flag the thread (site). If some of you think that first 13 was R-rated, or worse, you really do have to get out more. Or, not, since our culture is quite different than it was 20, or even 10 years ago.

HOWEVER...as TaleSpinner said, the argument isn't that kids have seen this stuff before, but that this site has guidelines which we should adhere to. (I hope ending sentences with prepositions isn't one of those guidelines, either.)

Bent Tree actually did a lot of us a favor by posting those 13 lines. We now have a benchmark as to the guidelines this community favors. Whether one agrees with the community's stance of the rating for the first 13 that Bent Tree posted (which I clearly do not), does not matter. These are the rules.

Although, as a sensible man who always avoids hot topics and religious discussion for the sake of maintaining those sensibilities, I do feel I have to defend myself a bit here.

First, I was being overly cautious in labeling this R. On screen it would but if it were a spoken dialogue in a movie it would be PG-13. I simply offered the stronger warning because there is actually cursing in the rest of the story. Also I didn't want to offend those with sensibilities to the subject matter.

Which leads me to my second point. The material I posted was adequately labeled. One would not stumble upon it and find offence. One would have to bypass a fence or two--the ones that say 'No trespassing. Don't eat my cabbage'-- in order to make the coleslaw so-to-speak. I feel like the only reason there has been issue is because I first offered this for discussion on this thread. A thread which sat completely empty for an entire day before I went ahead and posted my lines.

By no means whatsoever have I taken offence agaist anyone posting in either thread. I totally appreciate all of your comments, and I don't feel attacked by anyone or anything said. I just wanted to make a brief point about censorship. As writers, I just assumed that we would rally against it. I understand the importance of maintaining the integrity of this site, but I must admit, it is a site that wouldn't be as useful to me if I cannot offer the first thirteen of a story, which I intend to submit to a pro-rate mag many of you have submitted to, and recieve review from peers. There are other password protected sites which I have found to be inadequate for my needs, but I suppose I could have to reconsider those options in the future if this is a major issue here. Because I cannot guarantee I will not meet a character, whom might be uncooth. I am not sure where they come from, but sometimes there voices compell me to wtite about them no matter how crude and candid they may be.

But let me reitterate the fact that I am not personally offended by anyone or anything said so far. Nor did I openly intend to offend anyone by anything I said or posted. I suppose if it escalates to that level, I will simply edit all my previous posts to:

Putting an R warning on an R rated posting isn't in accord with the policy, which says, "Also, while this is a workshop for writers age 18 and older, it is open to readers of all ages. For that reason, if you want feedback on something that is potentially offensive or PG-13 or worse, please indicate that in the post and don't put such material in the 13 lines."

To respect the sensibilities of the society we live in, whether or not we think it's right, we've agreed to limit ourselves to PG13 here because we'd like not to discourage youngsters from joining in. That rating system is one that respects the right of parents to control what their kids do or do not see. Whether or not it's right to do so, whether it's effective, whether they see such stuff on the internet anyway, whether we need to get out more, is beside the point. We agreed that, despite its failings, it's the system we'll use to rate stuff.

Now sometimes, people will want to write stuff that's R rated or beyond. Hatrack does not say you're unwelcome; just, please, take it to an e-mail discussion. No censorship. (If you feel that's still too censorious, then why not request a private discussion forum for R rated material which, like the Literary Boot Camps, is password-protected for reading as well as writing?)

The rating system is driven by the content, not the use of individual words, because words and their meaning are not context-independent. (That's one reason content filtering software can get it wrong.) The scene in question describes sex, graphically, and that surely makes it R at least, if not NC 17. With slick camera work and deleting almost all the dialogue one might make it PG13 I suppose in movie format, but it would be, um, hard. In text, as it stands, R. (Or do I really need to get out? Do PG 13 movies these days feature erections on screen?)

So the first question for us is, do we rate material on the words and whether they get past censorious software like Net Nanny, or do we rate it on content compared to the PG 13 standard?. (If we say it's content -- and we do -- then there are very many R rated pieces in our F&F area, not because they feature graphic sex, but graphic violence. However, for reasons I have never understood, graphic sex always gets people going, so to speak.)

Assuming it's content, where do we draw the line? In the piece that was posted, I assume all the participants were of legal age. Would Hatrack accept first 13s where one participant is not of legal age? Or one is being raped, graphically described in a manner which avoids 'f' words? Or what about a first 13 which posits a virtual reality world that's like Grand Theft Auto except the MC kidnaps half-naked under-age girls and justifies it by saying to herself that they aren't real so it's okay?

And if we're going to allow graphic sex in first 13s, are we prepared to discuss possible POV violations when, e.g., in close third, MC sees something that ought to be impossible from where he's at? (Unless he's a very bendy alien, of course.)

I don't mind, because I'm far less offended by sex than violence. But in terms of setting precedents, I'm not sure this piece is an example of where Hatrack wants to go. In view of the complications above, I think it's easier for Hatrack to stick to the PG 13 guideline and request such material to be discussed off-line. (And if we were logical, we'd take the most graphic of the violence off-line too.)

Unless everyone's bursting to write erotica ... ?

I'm apparently in the minority on this so I'll go along with what everyone says concerning those 13. Bent Tree took the 13 down, and we can all forget about this. Until it happens again.

Part of the reason it'll happen again is that, as Unwritten reminded us, this is a writer's workshop open to those 18 and older, BUT we're supposed to keep stuff PG-13 in case it's "potentially offensive".

I have no idea what "potentially offensive" is. Quite frankly, as my ex-wife pointed out, everytime I open my mouth I'm going to say something potentially offensive. But what are 13 year old's doing on a writer's workshop that is only open to writers 18 and older? Assuming we're checking everyone's credentials at the door, which we're not, it's like allowing people under 21 at the bar.

But, as I said, the community has spoken, and I'm willing to go along with that for the moment.

I am against censorship, and yet there are many things I don't allow in my house--words that we don't say, movies we don't watch, books we don't read (*gasp!*). There are things I would defend someone's right to say, but would ask them not to say in my house. When my kids bring friends over, they don't always understand my rules, nor do their parents. (I remember one heated discussion with my sister-in-law when my son was four about how I could justify letting him watch Star Wars and when I had banned Shrek. She still doesn't get it. But, I digress...)

My point is, this site has OSC's name on it--he might not be here much, but it is his site, and he should get to dictate the rules. We wouldn't be here at all if we didn't agree with him on at least some issues.

I need to say that I wasn't thinking about you at all when I wrote this, Bent Tree. I was just thinking about censorship and the way my kid's friends just roll their eyes at me, but how that doesn't mean I don't make the rules. And the kind way debhoag had of warning me before I read something that she knew would give me nightmares. And the infantile way I had to dash right down to the F&F section and read something that Bent Tree had warned me about.

I'm just so impressed with the caliber of people on this site, and the way we help each other, and look out for each other. We're very cool.
Melanie

Why is it ok to watch Star Wars and not Shrek? You can reply via email if you like.

(I am not looking to start a debate. I'm not even going to reply if you decide to answer--other than a thank you. I would also ask that no one reply back, either. I'm just honestly curious.)

I haven't said anything till now because I haven't had much of a chance. I was grateful to see that Scott had taken the 13 Lines down, though, even though it probably only qualifies as particularly vulgar and crude PG-13.

What I need to decide now is whether or not to ask Andromoidus to take down his rant post in the Grist for the Mill area, which is also quite vulgar.

I prefer not to cut people's posts when they don't violate the 13-line rule, because I hope people will remember what they agreed to when they registered (as TaleSpinner has reminded us).

What a lot to live up to.