Forum: Author Hangout

common sex acts like oral sex

the odd act, ignore, if a frequent core plot aspect include. I look at it this way, if it's less than 5% of the total story I doubt you need the tag unless it's a major squick item.

Now I'm wondering about tags about specific, common sex acts like oral sex.

Yep, I would only include oral or anal sex if it's a significant part of the story.

Now I'm wondering about tags about specific, common sex acts like oral sex. I'm assuming most stories that have sex in them will have oral. So perhaps I'll only include that if I write a story where that's a focus or I go into great detail.

I've noted before that many tags have specific connotations. You don't include racial tags unless it's a stereotypical sexual relationship (ex: a white woman with a roomful of BBM). If you have a black or Asian character, I wouldn't bother tagging it. The same is true for oral. If you have no other sex in a tale about teenage explorations, then "oral" is descriptive, but if you've got dozens of other tags, it adds nothing.

Likewise, the incest specific tags (mother, father, daughter and son) are only meaningful if someone is looking for incest stories, but unless the entire story is specifically father/daughter, then I'd leave it off--"incest" is sufficient for incest fans to find it, or for those squicked by incest to avoid it.

The biggest problem with tag multiplication is when sex stories try to add new situations and new characters every chapter. As the encounters increase, so do the number of largely meaningless tags. I mean, who really cares whether there's a brief foot-fetish scene in chapter 78 but nowhere else in the story? If there's a watersport or diaper scene in the same chapter, those are major squicks, so you'd still tag it anyway.

However, for many stories, the tag multiplication simply isn't necessary. My 6 book "Catalyst" series was huge in chapters and word count, but had very few tags because the included sex was--for the most part--very generic, it simply wasn't a major factor in the story.

@Switch

what is a universal squick code?

("NoSex")?

What if you write a story with a humorous scene. Imagine a guy getting drunk and passing out on the sidewalk. He's sleeping, leaning on a fire hydrant. Along comes a dog that does what dogs do when they see a fire hydrant. He lifts his leg and pees -- on the passed out guy.

Would that be watersports?

As I just mentioned, no, because the peeing isn't sexual in nature. Likewise, a story about a new family where the father changes the baby for the first time would not be labeled "scat". Sure, plenty of people find poop disgusting, but that's a humorous element, not a major sexual squick.

@D.S.

No particular reason you can't combine bestiality and watersports, In fact I can think of a couple of stories that do.

I agree. Since it's a sexual element, I'd include it. Again, for many tags, they're only meaningful if the reference is sexual, otherwise they're not. Who cares if a story has a brother and sister unless they're having incestuous sex? In that case, you can casually mention they're related in the story description, but otherwise the tags are meaningless to the story.

Tags should be used for the complete story.

In general I agree, however, if you have anything in the story that's a major squick, it needs to be coded right up front, and not added later or just mentioned at the start of a chapter. Readers get mega pissed off when they invest time in a story and get suddenly hit with a major squick. When that happens they not only toss the story, they tend to toss the author and not read anything by them while telling everyone they know the person writes rubbish.

The easily offended will find something to be offended about and the perpetually pissed off will find something that pisses them off no matter what you do or don't do.

true, but you should take a reasonable effort to not offend or piss off people.

there's one story I liked reading, but around chapter 30 the author suddenly included an extra long chapter with lots of extreme BDSM and snuff in it. It wasn't coded at the start, and was totally unexpected. I stopped reading it and haven't read anything of his since. Yes, he did add the code when he uploaded the chapter, but when you have a story bookmarked you go direct to teh chapter, not the front page with the code. It became another reason not to read a story until it's finished posting.

good be the way I have it bookmarked, it takes me to the last chapter read and I simply hit the link to the next chapter.

Which really just makes that chapter filler to bump up the word count.

While I don't expect (or want) every chapter to be of great significance to the story as a whole, I do expect them to have some relevance otherwise what's the point in reading it, or the point in even writing it

No, what it means is that, skipping part of a subplot won't disrupt the rest of the story. True, they won't be able to follow that particular subplot though.

But this brings up a sore point for me: this whole notion of SOL authors dumping unnecessary details just to reach some magical word count. The only word limit on SOL is the 500 mb needed for (pseudo) Premier Membership, and while that is a motivator for authors, is doesn't drive every author on SOL to add drivel.

I think we're (the SOL community at large) confusing amateur authors inability to edit their work with some nefarious attempt to 'trick' readers. If you don't like long stories, then simply stick to short stories.

In my own case, I started out writing long stories (20+ chapters of 4000 to 10,000 words each), which I admitted were 'meandering', as that was my preferred writing style. However, over the years I got fed up with continual complaints about 'slow passages', or subplots that individuals disliked for some particular reason. As a result, I changed my style, dramatically cut my word counts, and now everyone is complaining that my stories aren't as long.

Get this point through your pointy little head: Stories are as long as they need to be! There are a few exceptions, like the one writer who included what the characters ate for every meal and recounted every time a character took a shit, but those are the exceptions. Don't confuse awkward story construction with schemes to somehow defraud readers, as it makes you sound profoundly paranoid (as if the entire universe only exists to personally rip you off).

Not every element in a story has equal weight. Some items can be skipped, but if you skip over an entire chapter because you're overly sensitive, then expect to be lost! That's the penalty of Not Reading the story as written. But don't start lecturing me about adding 'fluff' to my stories.

Ernest, you too can go screw yourself if you think I'm only adding text to my stories to 'cheat' readers into reading a few extra words per chapter. If you don't like my stories, then simply don't read them. But every section of my stories are there for a reason. However, I've had many readers over the years who refuse to read some aspect of my stories, and then bitch that they "don't make any sense".

If you skip sections of a story, then you might as well not read the story. However, that's got to be weighed against those who enjoy a story, but are personally offended by some minor aspect of the story.

What I'm offering is a simple compromise. Rather than saying "Screw you, either read this offensive bit, or leave," I'm suggesting you simply list which segments might squick readers so they can choose whether to read it or not. But don't turn around and lambast me for writing unnecessary filler because a few wingnuts are easily offended!

** Flame Off **

(Sorry about that, but I'm just getting sick of readers bitching about minor details, and then when an author tries to adapt to the suggestions, they then attack them for listening. Either offer honest advice, and deal with the fallout, or shut the hell up!!!!!)

Ernest, you too can go screw yourself if you think I'm only adding text to my stories to 'cheat' readers into reading a few extra words per chapter. If you don't like my stories, then simply don't read them. But every section of my stories are there for a reason. However, I've had many readers over the years who refuse to read some aspect of my stories, and then bitch that they "don't make any sense".

First, I don't know what damn story you're talking about, so it's not a comment on any specific story or how it's written, and thus not a specific attack. I was addressing the concept under discussion, not commenting on a specific story or author.

What I did say was: If the story can make sense after skipping the chapter, then the chapter has no place in the story at all, so it's a waste of space. Which is quite clearly a generic statement that means: if it doesn't add to the story it isn't needed - kind of like Chekhov's Gun, why have it there if it does nothing for the story. If that is the case, then it doesn't belong. If it's important to the story, then it belongs. What it comes down to, after that, is giving the reader, or potential reader, the proper warning and when you give it.

For a major squick a warning at the start of the chapter is definitely not enough warning, it needs to be right up front as a tag or in the story blurb. If you mess up the warning, don't be surprised if you get 1 bomb votes and people stop reading your stuff and complain about what you write.

Edit to add: BTW, my comment you seem to take an exception to was in response to a comment by CW, not you. So I'm kind of at a lost as to why you're angry at me.

You're lost all right, but not in the way you think.

Sorry, I was misreading the way the quote attribution was and thought the response i last responded to was from Grant, My apologies all around. I'm too lazy to enter an edit, so this will havee to do.

For a major squick a warning at the start of the chapter is definitely not enough warning, it needs to be right up front as a tag or in the story blurb. If you mess up the warning, don't be surprised if you get 1 bomb votes and people stop reading your stuff and complain about what you write.

I agree, major squicks need to be announced upfront. I was referring to a minor story element that offers a serious squick, but only as a small element in a single chapter of a long story. In that case, I wouldn't necessarily mark it in the story tags (since it's not representative of the overall story), but I would flag it within the story as a warning to anyone who's particularly turned off by their personal squicks. (I'm thinking of one particular 100+ chapter story which had a single Mb episode, years ago, which turned it from a wildly successful story into a moderately successful one.

My point was: readers should NOT skip over necessary story elements, but authors need to be aware that many will, for whatever reason. My comment was simply that we shouldn't penalize readers for their personal opinions (squicks), but allow them to enjoy the story while bypassing which passages may be offensive.

If a story features a gay character, incest or snuff elements, those should always be properly coded, but for the exceptional single episodes, I'd make and exception. Clearly I hold a minority view on this topic.

As for my rant, I took offense at the suggestion that anything that someone may not want to read is, by definition, not worth including in a story. Some people simply can't read about rape encounters, no matter how essential it is to the overall plot.

Newbie authors often haven't yet wrestled with how to tell their stories (i.e. what to include and what to dump), but to accuse me of boosting my word count to interjecting fluff into my stories simply because 1 or 2 of my readers has an issue with a single element is going above and beyond the pale. I was addressing specific issues, not discussing weaknesses with my personal writing style, and I feel like you personally attacked me for it, when all I was doing was expressing an alternative approach to the problem.

I do NOT recommend that anyone skip portions of a story they dislike, if you do, you really shouldn't be reading the story, but there are exceptions where someone may enjoy the story, but can't deal with specific elements.

My "Love and Family During the Great Death" is a great example. During that story, I killed off most of the main characters in the story. About a third of readers couldn't finish the story, yet they gave it great reviews and read the two sequels because they loved the characters (both those who survived and those who didn't). But it shows how readers can choose to bypass painful story elements and still enjoy an otherwise painful story experience.

Were those deaths 'immaterial' to the story? Absolutely NOT! I'd rather burn the entire series rather than publish the story without including those passages, but I understand when individual readers choose not to read them. That's a personal choice. I'm just thankful those readers did not give up on either me as an author, or on the series due to those select issues. But accusing me of being a shit writer because I suggest a compromise approach is simply playing dirty!

What's more, this suggestion (that I jettison anything that anyone might not choose to read as being 'unnecessary' to the plot strikes a nerve in me because I've changed my entire writing style to placate many of my writers, only to them subsequently blame me for following their advice. Thus your inadvertent comments struck a little too close to the bone in this case.

Switch, in this one case, I listened to my readers because they had a valid point about my stories (i.e. their uneven pacing and my need to pare down the essential story), thus I've struggled to change how I construct stories. But I'm resentful when I'm attacked for trying to become a better writer, especially if those attacks come from those who suggested the changes in the first place!

Switch, in this one case, I listened to my readers because they had a valid point about my stories (i.e. their uneven pacing and my need to pare down the essential story), thus I've struggled to change how I construct stories.

No argument from me there. As I said, I learn from good feedback. I was once told I rushed the ending of a story. I did, so I'm cognizant of that when I'm writing new stories. What I meant was I don't change a story because of feedback. My standard answer is, "That's the story I wrote." Of course I finish a story before any of it is posted so I don't let readers guide me to where the story is going.

But I'm resentful when I'm attacked for trying to become a better writer, especially if those attacks come from those who suggested the changes in the first place!

I don't remember his name, but I was enjoying stories written by him. Then in his blog or somewhere, he announced he was going to do more "show don't tell." So maybe he got feedback that he was telling too much (don't know). Anyway, I stopped reading his stories. In every couple of paragraphs, a character was sighing. He didn't do "show don't tell" very well. So what if one of his readers told him he told too much and when he tried to show, doing it wrong, that reader told him so? Would he have been upset or learn from it?

So get this point through your pointy little head: none of this (or what I posted earlier that you got all worked up and abusive over) has been a commentary on your stories. Just responses to posts you made.

I never assumed it was directed at me, I just took offense when you started spouting the standard Checkov's Gun nonsense (which was designed for Stage productions back before movies became popular) in response to my alternate suggestion about how to handle minor squicks (minor in terms of story impact).

I was suggesting that an author doesn't always need to label everything upfront if it will only discourage readers from picking up a story in the first place. Thus if a "MM" label will frighten away the majority of readers, but it's only dealt with in a small portion of a single chapter, I'd advise you avoid listing it upfront, instead offering a chapter-heading warning. That's an individual choice, and I would hardly recommend it for everyone, but for some stories, it might make more sense.

Then again, I woke up on the wrong side of my bed (again), so that had something to do with it as well. :(

I had never heard of it until it was mentioned by Ernest after your initial response to his & my posts.

Checkov's Gun is an old issue in writing, first written by the famous Russian playwright, Aton Checkov. In it he suggests that an author never mentions something (like a guy over the mantel) unless it'll be used at some point in the future. Despite not even applying to fiction, it frequently gets quoted in author discussions (including many here) as an 'absolute law' in fiction (i.e. avoid it at your own expense). However, it flies in the face of multiple author tools, like employing false leads to disguise where the story is leading, red herrings or subplots that don't directly influence the main plot (as well as simply providing background on characters so you get to know them better, say by detailing their interests that help define them--like hunting).

Given that contentious background, I frequently take exception whenever someone mentions not including anything which isn't directly tied to the main plotline. I view Checkov's Gun as a vast oversimplification which produces weak and largely unsatisfying writing.

Sorry to the rest of you for dredging up that background material once again.

it frequently gets quoted in author discussions (including many here) as an 'absolute law' in fiction

I'm not sure anything brought up here is as an "absolute law." Show don't tell doesn't mean never tell. Don't use adverbs doesn't mean never use adverbs. Use active rather than passive voice doesn't mean never use passive voice. And so on.

Chekhov's Gun is the same, especially if you're intentionally trying to mislead the reader. And if I remember correctly, he didn't state it as a law. He mentioned it in a letter to a friend.

I'm not sure anything brought up here is as an "absolute law." Show don't tell doesn't mean never tell. Don't use adverbs doesn't mean never use adverbs. Use active rather than passive voice doesn't mean never use passive voice. And so on.

I used the phrase "absolute law" to highlight the way a few individuals present the argument (i.e. you should never present anything which isn't a part of the story). That's where I drew the parallel. The chides about my 'including anything which might be skipped by some reader proving that the material should be dumped from the story because it's not central to the plot.

I was trying to highlight why it was a fallacious argument, rather than stating that Checkov's Gun is a "universal law" in writing fiction.

(like a guy over the mantel)

A gun over the mantel is a common event, but a guy over the mantel is big news. chuckle, chuckle, chuckle.

I'll third that idea about not mentioning actions that only show up in a single chapter. Rather than convince hundreds of readers to bypass the entire story (say because you have a minor reference to MM), I think you'd do better by simply inserting a blurb at the beginning of the chapter ("This contains XXX. If this bothers, then just skip this chapter as it doesn't impact the rest of the story.")

If the story can make sense after skipping the chapter, then the chapter has no place in the story at all, so it's a waste of space. If the item is only very minor, then it can be mentioned in the story blurb or the foreword about it being minor. Failure to mention a common squick item right up front at the start is justification for readers to trash the story and the author.