Fanfics with slash & sex...I don't get it

[Haggridd <jkusalavagemd@yahoo.com>]

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "ER <ression at h...>" 
<ression at h...> wrote:

I think that "queer as john" has missed some of the points you make 
in your post, and has done so with a soupcon of vitrio himself. 
Unfortunately, I am not facile enough with cutting pasting to include 
excerpts from "queer as john's" reply to your post.  If I 
misrepresent anything, I trust that it will be called to the 
attention of one and all.

In reading your post, I find two instances of the word "nonsense".  
Neither of those is an attack on slash.  The first is a 
characterization of your own argument in response to Heidi, a nice 
self-deprecatory touch which was totally wasted on some.  I repeat 
the excerpt below:
> 
> 
> 
> "Heiditandy" wrote - 
> 
> >Look, if we required warnings for books, so the reader didn't have 
> to risk seeing anything upsetting, would we have this for Goblet of 
> Fire?
> 
> >one scene takes place in graveyard, underage character is tied to 
> tombstone and subjected to bloodletting,
> 
> Well, being tied to a gravestone is a whole lot better than being 
> super-glued or stapled to a gravestone. And, as I'm sure we all 
know, 
> the doctor always says "keep still and it won't hurt", so being 
> immobile is probably a good thing in this case. If I'd been MC-ing 
> the graveyard gig, I'd have used a Shatter Charm on his legs. That 
> would slow the little blighter down and make wand-duelling 
scenarios 
> a lot less likely. You can't fault JK's kindness.
> 
> >a spider is killed
> 
> A common bathroom scenario, despite earnest female entreaties for 
> clemency. Would that it weren't, but they're the very devil to 
catch 
> (spiders that is).
> 
> > four characters are made unconscious and tied to a rock under a 
lake
> 
> If one _has_ to be popped into a lake for an hour or so, being 
> unconscious is a jolly good state to be in. And if they hadn't been 
> tied to the rocks then, heavens, they might have gone a-bob-bob-
> bobbing off to goodness knows where. Probably have bumped into the 
> giant squid or something equally horrid. Again, you see, JK is 
being 
> as merciful as possible.
> 
> >some alcoholic beverages mentioned and consumed (off page) by 
horses
> 
> As the saying goes, you can lead a horse to water but you can't 
make 
> him drink. Little alternative therefore (coffee generally not 
> considered suitable for temperamental quadrupeds)
> 
> What is this nonsense leading up to? 

As you can see, this refers to ER's comments.  The following portion 
of her argument state my opininion in a far more eloquent and 
compelling way than I was able to in my previous posts.  It is that 
the fanfics should follow the spirit of the original story (Thank 
you, ER!).  It is for this reason that slash should carry content 
labels.  Having read the original stories, one has certain 
expectation that deserve to be honored.  It is not an attack on the 
legitimacy of homosexuality to feel this way, or to state that 
opinion, nor does it make one a homophobe.  The out-of-proportion 
attack mode response leads this writer at least to say to 
himself "methinks the lady doth protest too much."

My view is that one should warn 
> about the things that are _likely_ to upset or offend the 
_majority_ 
> and, rightly or wrongly, quite a lot of people get upset by 
> descriptions of homosexual sex. Thus IMHO it makes sense for slash 
> stories to carry a prominent warning, but "normal" stories need 
not.  
> Under age-sex may offend, so it too should be pointed out. Pairings 
> that parents would object to (teacher/pupil) should be trailed. 
Then 
> those that want to read such stories can read them and those that 
> don't can avoid them.
> 
> I'd also go further and say that FanFics should follow the spirit 
of 
> the original story (it doesn't matter if it's not what would happen 
> in real-life, the story is the thing). JK's books are designed to 
be 
> read by children and I think the "violence" is pantomime stuff. 
Maybe 
> upsetting to very young children, but otherwise just part of a 
fairly 
> gentle story. Cedric was killed (very cleanly and painlessly as far 
> as the reader is concerned), but big deal. Who cared about him? If 
JK 
> had given (say) Ron his ticket to the next-great-adventure the 
story 
> might be considered a little darker. But what did we know about 
> Cedric? What little we did know was (I suspect) popped into GoF 
just 
> to make him slightly less of a minor-character when he did get 
killed.
>

The second instance of "nonsense" referred to the "Tom Brown's School 
Days" kind of antics that people imagine went on in an English public 
school.  I include this excerpt of ER's post below for your 
inspection.  Again, I cannot see how one can construe this as an 
attack on homosexuality, unless any comment not uttered by a gay 
person is autonmatically so construed.
 
> I suspect many parents would like their children to go to a school 
> like Hogwarts. The pupils are all very well behaved (pranks and 
high-
> spirits are not bad behaviour), they are polite to the teachers, 
flog 
> dutifully through their homework (though it's obviously very 
> interesting homework) and the teachers seem to take good care of 
> their charges and push them academically. Even Snape tried his best 
> to stop Harry falling off his broom (Snapettes may cheer now). 
Board 
> and lodgings seem more than adequate. There doesn't seem to be any 
> sustained bullying - such contretemps as we see are mainly one-on-
one 
> and not sustained or grinding like real bullying. It's all very 
> pleasant and has a faint England-in-the-1950s feel to it. Just an 
> intriguing bit of hokum (if that's the word I want), a little like 
> the films of the 40s and 50s - total nonsense, but a good way to 
> while away an hour or two. It's certainly got me hooked and I shall 
> give a small cheer when Book-V turns up! 
> 
> Anyway, I think that HP FanFics that deviate markedly from this 
norm 
> should also carry a warning - "this ain't what you think it's going 
> to be"! I've no objection to people writing non-canon stuff, but I 
> feel they ought to be polite enough to point it out. In this, I 
> suspect, I side with Diana et al, though I'm not going to let 
counter-
> practice stop me getting a good night's sleep :))
>

I think the above comment reinforces that this is by no means a 
crusade on ER's part, but rather her two knuts in what is supposed to 
be a civil discussion.

Haggridd
(Who has disabled his signature for the moment until ER comes up with 
one of hers.) 
> 
> ER - who notes that people keep noting things after their 
signatures.