Comment on misleading cover
ArgumentativeMonotheist@lemmy.world 3 days agoNo, that’s nonsense, things are or aren’t more on the side of virtue than vice and vice versa. If you wanna stand for rape, abuse, coercion, weird age gaps, bestislity, etc. in your literature because it turns you on, that’s you, but it’s depraved. And we all get to speak about it, and you don’t have to agree with what I’m saying.
Vespair@lemmy.zip 3 days ago
Literature seems a safe space to explore taboo and challenging ideas to me. Do you carry this same standard for violence in media? Plenty of books feature grotesque depictions of violence and gore which similarly seeks to titillate, just perhaps not sexually; do you think we should be sounding the alarm on violence in media as well?
ArgumentativeMonotheist@lemmy.world 3 days ago
No ideas are being challenged by these low-brow smut books, come on, it’s just literary porn. Sometimes considering heretical thoughts are the path to enlightenment, but this isn’t relevant when discussing porn, lol. The difference between these books is whether it allows for people to fantasize about unhealthy, morally questionable kinks and maybe even normalizes the things I talked about in the previous post, or not, that’s it. And yes, there’s a limit to everything, I also oppose positively framing pointless non-sexual violence, or just having it in for pleasure/titillation, ofc, who wouldn’t?