Instead of readers nominating non-erotic stories for Clitorides awards because they feel the stories deserve to be recognised somehow, wouldn't it be better if there was a separate set of awards for non-erotic stories, perhaps by categories matching SOL's genres. IMO they shouldn't be restricted to 'no sex' stories, but sex should only be a sideline to the principal themes.
And yes, I realise it would mean Lazeez needing to clone himself.
AJ
It would also allow finestories and scifistories to participate in the awards.
And that's tricky because Lazeez doesn't want anything from Finestories pointing back to SOL. It's against the FS all ages access policy. It could only work if the awards are not advertised on FS but can be accessed from the awards page and not back.
Why not simply have a Clit type award for FS & Scifistories?
There is nothing to stop any SoL author from posting a non-sex story on FS so as to participate.
Oh, and although the award would be similar to the clit awards, best not call it the G-spot awards...
:)
Why not simply have a Clit type award for FS & Scifistories?
Possible of course but Awnlee suggested non-erotic awards for SOL, not separate awards for FS and SFS. The readership for those two sites is much smaller than it is for SOL so it would be much harder to get nominees and votes.
Like SoL SciFi allows sex stories, so anyone posting on SciFi can also nominate for the Clits, they can also post on SoL if they want.
Also no sex stories on SciFi can be posted on FS as well.
I suspect the best way to manage this request would be to have a set of awards for No Sex stories accessed through FS and those on Sol or ScFi who want to enter can also post their story on FS. All problems solved and extra stories on FS to help expand it.
All problems solved
Not really, IMO. There are some excellent stories on SOL that contain a sex scene or two, but as demanded by the plot rather than for the sake of eroticism.
AJ
Not really, IMO. There are some excellent stories on SOL that contain a sex scene or two, but as demanded by the plot rather than for the sake of eroticism.
sex scenes mean they qualify for the clits
sex scenes mean they qualify for the clits
I disagree. IMO the clits should be targeted at erotic fiction. A thriller novel with a couple of sex scenes shouldn't count as erotica.
AJ
IMO the clits should be targeted at erotic fiction.
That's your opinion, what actually matters is the official rules of the awards.
what actually matters is the official rules of the awards.
The rules are vague. In one place the FAQ says 'sex story', in another it says 'erotic sex story'. The only defining bit rules out no-sex stories.
AJ
The rules are vague. In one place the FAQ says 'sex story', in another it says 'erotic sex story'. The only defining bit rules out no-sex stories.
So then EB was correct.
So then EB was correct.
I don't think you can claim that since the site's home page heading says 'The Clitorides Awards for the Best in Written Erotica'.
AJ
I don't think you can claim that since the site's home page heading says 'The Clitorides Awards for the Best in Written Erotica'.
Again, in my opinion, the only thing that matters is the actual rules for nominations, everything else is sales puffery. If the only thing out of bounds is no sex stories then EB is correct.
EB said
sex scenes mean they qualify for the clits
That depends on whether the sex scenes are enough to justify the story being called a sex story, let alone an erotic sex story. That isn't specified, but I would hope most readers can differentiate between a thriller with a sex scene and a sex story.
If Lazeez manages to clone himself, perhaps he could spend some time making the rules more specific.
AJ
That isn't specified, but I would hope most readers can differentiate between a thriller with a sex scene and a sex story.
I guess I can't. "High School Massacre" is a mystery/thriller. But there are sex scenes so I classified it on Bookapy as Erotica. I didn't want to surprise an anti-sex reader by not listing it as erotica.
I guess I can't. "High School Massacre" is a mystery/thriller. But there are sex scenes so I classified it on Bookapy as Erotica.
I haven't read it yet so I can't comment, and I probably wouldn't anyway. But I was thinking about the stories I've read updates of today and trying to decide whether I'd call them erotica or not. And for a few of them it was harder than I expected.
AJ
A thriller novel with a couple of sex scenes shouldn't count as erotica.
Merriam-Webster's definition of erotic is:
1: of, devoted to, or tending to arouse sexual love or desire
erotic art
2: strongly marked or affected by sexual desire
Other dictionaries provide similar definitions and of the ones I read, erotic is about feelings, not physical sex.
Therefore, it is possible to write an erotic story without sex scenes (No Sex).
Hence this thread.
As a matter of interest, can you remember the rules from before Lazeez took over?
AJ
As a matter of interest, can you remember the rules from before Lazeez took over?
No, as I was never interested in them back then. I do remember when Lazeez took them over because no one was managing them any more that he set them up to operate on the very same rules as existed before he took over, but I don't know if he's changed any rules since then.
I remember that one of Gina Marie Wylie's stories won a Clitoride, she was rather caustic about that because it was a "No Sex" story.
It may possibly have been the original "Tangent" or maybe "Hannah Sawyer" - both were completed in 2006, her stories before that were very-much-sex-indeed.
It may possibly have been the original "Tangent" or maybe "Hannah Sawyer"
2006 1st place "Best Gay/Lesbian/Gender Bending story 2006" - "Hannah Sawyer"
2006 3rd place "Best Erotic Science Fiction Story 2006" - "Hannah Sawyer"
ETA typo fix
At the bottom of the comment box:
allowed HTML tags: < i > < b > < a > < em > < strong > < blockquote >
That's it on the forum.
he set them up to operate on the very same rules as existed before he took over
Yes, I seem to have found the same rules on various ASSTR pages, although from a quick glance they always seemed to specify 'erotic sex story'.
And in discursive description elsewhere it mentions that it is assumed 'the story will have some erotic or sexual appeal'.
AJ
I disagree. IMO the clits should be targeted at erotic fiction. A thriller novel with a couple of sex scenes shouldn't count as erotica.
I think a better way to look at is that whilst some stories with little erotic or sexual content are allowed, they are in no way the benchmark upon which qualifying content is judged.
Lazeez's apparent judgement to be 'inclusive' of those stories is better for both writers and readers than a strict adherence to the 'rules'.
Any awards system aimed at purely non-sex stories is another matter entirely and should not affect the clitorides at all.
Lazeez's apparent judgement to be 'inclusive' of those stories is better for both writers and readers than a strict adherence to the 'rules'.
I'm not so sure. Say, for example, James Patterson posted one of his Alex Cross novels on the internet. IIRC, most of them have one or two sex scenes. And no disrespect intended to authors on SOL and other qualifying sites, James Patterson's stories are a cut above most of them. And yet, would it really serve an erotic fiction award scheme if one of them won?
AJ
I'm not so sure. Say, for example, James Patterson posted one of his Alex Cross novels on the internet.
Ok, lets say he did. That does not automatically mean his story would be nominated and if it was there is no guarantee his story would receive the most votes.
So whilst it is certainly possible to imagine examples to support your opinion, the more outlandish the theoretical example don't help you.
There is after all no guarantee that there are enough SoL voters who like James Patterson's work. Especially since past experience shows that voters reasons for their votes vary a great deal.
Would he even allow his story to be included, given that losing to an amateur scribblier might just go viral?
the more outlandish the theoretical example
I don't want to name specific SOL authors, so I tried to think of a example most people might have heard of.
AJ
James Patterson's stories are a cut above most of them
Don't forget for the last 20 years, James Patterson hassn't actually written most of his stories. He comes up with the plot and the idea, puts them down, and one of his professional co-authors writes the book. Not a bad gig if you're an idea man.
Other than Devon, I don't think any of us on here are professional authors.
Other than Devon, I don't think any of us on here are professional authors.
I would call anyone who sells their work a professional author (which I'm not). That includes every author who has sold a book on Bookapy. But others may think that definition too Olympian.
AJ
I would call anyone who sells their work a professional author
For me to call someone a professional author, book sales would have to be a primary source of income.
To me, saying someone is a professional X necessarily says that X is how they make their living.
For me to call someone a professional author, book sales would have to be a primary source of income.
Then the Actor's Guild is filled with a lot of non-professionals. And most traditionally published authors would also be not professionals since most can't live on their royalties alone.
And most traditionally published authors would also be not professionals since most can't live on their royalties alone.
It doesn't have to be their only source of income but it does have to be a major source.
If the royalty income is so small that it isn't making a significant contribution to putting food on the table, then no, they aren't professional authors.
If the royalty income is so small that it isn't making a significant contribution to putting food on the table, then no, they aren't professional authors.
If those authors were making the same royalty percentage self-published authors make, they'd be putting food on the table.
ETA: But then many would not consider them "professionals" because they are self-publishing. LOL
ETA: But then many would not consider them "professionals" because they are self-publishing. LOL
That's a whole different conversation. What is, and what isn't a professional. There are a multitude of so called professions that require a second job to make ends meet. Which is why many couples both work. Someone can consider themselves fortunate if they can make it with no added support from a spouse or second job.
I don't personally judge something as a profession solely on its ability to put food on the table. I consider myself a professional engineer, but have supplemented my income working metal most of my life. Either welding, machining or inspection thereof.
If the royalty income is so small that it isn't making a significant contribution to putting food on the table, then no, they aren't professional authors.
That's why I consider myself a semi-professional poker player, for example. I typically rack up around $15,000 per year in winnings, but I offset that with about $5,000 in losses, for a net of about $10,000. I'm not one of those guys you see on TV that sit down and play cash games with $250,000 on the table.
At the same time, I consider myself a professional Realtor, since that IS what I do to earn a living, and I've certainly put in the more than 10,000 hours needed to be considered a professional. (Sales is sales, when you get down to it.) But I also don't bring in the majority of our household income. I'm on pace to gross about $60,000 this year from sales, which is still considerably less than my wife's income as Director of Nursing of an Assisted Living facility.
I'm not one of those guys you see on TV that sit down and play cash games with $250,000 on the table.
From what I've seen, most of the poker tournaments you see on TV are not cash games. They are prize tournaments where everyone buys in and gets a fixed number of chips then the prize money gets divided up between the last X players still in the game, with most of it going to the last player in, who ends up with all the chips.
From what I've seen, most of the poker tournaments you see on TV are not cash games. They are prize tournaments where everyone buys in and gets a fixed number of chips then the prize money gets divided up between the last X players still in the game, with most of it going to the last player in, who ends up with all the chips.
Congratulations, you just explained regular tournaments, including the WSOP. I wasn't talking about those, was I?
I was talking about 'Poker After Dark' or 'The Big Game' or the other shows, which ARE cash games. Where you'd see Texas Dolly, or Barry Greenstein, or Phil Ivey, or Phil Hellmouth (I know, that's not his name, but he's a jackass when he loses) - sitting at a table, literally with wrapped stacked of hundred dollar bills in front of them.
For me to call someone a professional author, book sales would have to be a primary source of income.
That's one way of stomping on the aspirations of a budding author who's just sold their first story and is running round the block naked shouting, "I'm a professional writer." ;-)
AJ
That's one way of stomping on the aspirations of a budding author who's just sold their first story and is running round the block naked shouting, "I'm a professional writer." ;-)
Sometimes the truth isn't what you want to hear, but would you rather be lied to?
As stomping goes DS's reply hardly registers, especially considering the response from the magistrate when you plead not guilty to public indecency due to being a published author…
He'll probably throw the book at you..!!
:)
Receiving money for a story is definitely regarded as a step up in status among my covidnating writers' group.
AJ
He comes up with the plot and the idea, puts them down, and one of his professional co-authors writes the book.
I think he writes a detailed outline. At least he's now giving credit to the authors doing the writing. I think in the beginning they were ghost writers not getting credit.
I've read one James Patterson novel. Hated it.
Other than Devon, I don't think any of us on here are professional authors.
depends on how you define professional - when I was still working for the government I got paid to write thousands of reports - I don't count that as being a professional author, but I was being paid to write.
Other than Devon, I don't think any of us on here are professional authors.
Quite a few of us sell our books. Doesn't that make those who do professional authors?
Quite a few of us sell our books. Doesn't that make those who do professional authors?
It depends on how you define professional.
For me, it doesn't have to be your sole source of income, but it would have to make up a significant portion of your total income.
For me, it doesn't have to be your sole source of income, but it would have to make up a significant portion of your total income.
I've been pondering that comment. I don't agree.
My grandson is a professional baseball player. He's in Triple-A. Has an agent and a MLB contract. What they pay him doesn't cover his expenses. It's my granddaughter's salary that pays the bills.
My grandson is a professional baseball player. He's in Triple-A. Has an agent and a MLB contract. What they pay him doesn't cover his expenses. It's my granddaughter's salary that pays the bills.
But does his income pay a good (or significant) portion of the bills? Triple-A players make a minimum of $13,000 per year, which certainly isn't enough for a married couple to live on. But he also has six months of the year to do something else, too. So he's a professional level player, and he does make a contribution to the total gross family income.
So he's a professional level player, and he does make a contribution to the total gross family income.
Actually, at the end of the season he's in debt (credit card debt) because his expenses are greater than his income. I was responding to DS's comment that to be a professional it has to make up a significant portion of his income. A significant portion of his income comes during the off season, not from being a professional baseball player.
Actually, at the end of the season he's in debt (credit card debt) because his expenses are greater than his income.
I've not really been paying attention but… WTF…?
So a man spends six months of the year playing a game and it ends up costing him money every year.
That isn't a profession, that is a hobby which he continues to pursue at the expense of his family.
That isn't a profession, that is a hobby
No, that is a profession. A few years back he was about to be called up to the majors when he needed Tommy John surgery. I believe the minimum salary for the majors is around $600,000/yr.
For many professions, such as baseball and actors and authors, it's the big ticket that they hope to get that keeps them going and sacrificing. But until they get it, if they ever do, they are still professionals.
Merriam-Webster has several definitions, but this one caught my eye:
participating for gain or livelihood in an activity or field of endeavor often engaged in by amateurs
"Gain or livelihood." Gain simply means to make money doing it. "Often engaged in by amateurs" means anyone can do it, such as play a baseball game in your local park with your friends or even compete against other teams, but not for monetary gain. And then there's the "semi-pro." Those people are still professionals (get paid) but not with the same status.
So it's the same with authors. There are many authors on SOL that do not write for monetary gain (amateurs). But some do (professionals).
Are all of those who write for monetary gain professional authors? One could argue that if their product is not of professional quality, then they are not professionals. Or if they don't run their writing/publishing as a business, they are not professionals. Or one could simply say that if they get paid for their work they are professionals. That used to be the difference between amateurs and professionals in sports. Monetary gain.
"Gain or livelihood." Gain simply means to make money doing it.
Okay, but:
Actually, at the end of the season he's in debt (credit card debt) because his expenses are greater than his income.
You've said that your grandson is taking a net loss on playing triple-A baseball. That's not a gain.
You've said that your grandson is taking a net loss on playing triple-A baseball. That's not a gain.
In economic terms, gain is profit. But I believe gain also means to gain something, like money for his time.
In economic terms, gain is profit. But I believe gain also means to gain something, like money for his time.
Gain is acquiring something, be it money or experience or whatever.
If you end up in debit at the end of each season then it is not a gain, you got paid less than your costs of participating.
A professional is commonly described as earning a living from their profession. A professional person could be someone who has completed the necessary study and passed the required exams that recognise his professional qualification, even if he does not choose to do so.
You used actors as examples. Aspiring actors who wait tables between auditions are not professional actors, they are aspiring actors.
Then we come to authors, who you claim are professionals if they get paid for a story. There are undoubtedly thousands of people who have written something and got paid for it, but to claim that receiving a few hundred dollars a year for writing makes them a professional… No.
So whilst I wish your grandson the best, I cannot conceive that he is currently a professional since he does not yet earn enough from playing to actually cover his expenses for playing. Even semi-pro is stretching it.
That aside it says a lot about his team and sport that the pay is so dire. They must be aware and obviously don't care. Shame on them.
If you end up in debt at the end of each season then it is not a gain, you got paid less than your costs of participating.
This assumes that gain is only monetary in nature. It would imply, for example, that a degree is a loss-making exercise, even if you don't have to borrow money to obtain it.
You can gain experience, skills, enjoyment, or just about anything, in addition to money.
In the case of playing in the minor leagues, you gain experience and hone your skills for the purposes of improving your chances of making it to The Show. A monetary loss does not mean no gain.
This assumes that gain is only monetary in nature. It would imply, for example, that a degree is a loss-making exercise, even if you don't have to borrow money to obtain it.
If you had bothered to read the sentence directly prior to the one you quoted you could have saved yourself a pointless post.
Of course gain can be in the form of experience, but the claim was made that doing so qualified as being professional, which is plainly not the case.
Gaining a degree IS a loss making exercise..!! Ask just about any degree student about student debt. Of course gaining a degree enhances FUTURE earning potential, but again, a law student isn't a professional lawyer.
If you had bothered to read the sentence directly prior to the one you quoted you could have saved yourself a pointless post.
Except you basically took back your statement, which is what I was responding to. You wrote:
So whilst I wish your grandson the best, I cannot conceive that he is currently a professional since he does not yet earn enough from playing to actually cover his expenses for playing. Even semi-pro is stretching it.
Minor league baseball players are NOT amateurs - they are professionals. It's a hierarchy of professional leagues that compete at levels below Major League Baseball and help prepare players to join major league teams.
It's similar to the hierarchy in ice hockey or English football. Not being in the Premier League or Championship does not make you not a professional footballer (soccer player). Not being in the NHL does not make you not a professional hockey player.
Not being in the Premier League or Championship does not make you not a professional footballer (soccer player).
Even in the National League (Fifth and Sixth tiers of English football), some of the clubs have full-time professional players.
AJ
That used to be the difference between amateurs and professionals in sports.
It still is in some sports. Although I don't understand the advantages of being an amateur golfer and refusing prize money.
AJ
Although I don't understand the advantages of being an amateur golfer and refusing prize money.
When Phil Mickelson won his first PGA tournament he was an amateur and declined the prize money. If he had taken it he couldn't be on his college team anymore. That was important to him.
Although I don't understand the advantages of being an amateur golfer and refusing prize money
In 'A True History Book Two', when Cal wins the golfing event, he can't take any of the prize money because that could affect his NCAA eligibility for playing football.
They JUST changed some of the NCAA rules within the last month, and I'm not sure what they are now. But back then, if you won money, even from an unrelated sport, you could jeopardize your ability to play in the NCAA.
But back then, if you won money, even from an unrelated sport, you could jeopardize your ability to play in the NCAA.
Worse, if a non-family member helped your child with expenses, that could wreck their eligibility. My son investigated NCAA hockey and the restrictions on what he could accept, even as gifts from family friends, were pretty outrageous.
I think the 'problem' is that over time more and more stories got posted and nominated with less sex than 'much sex' or 'stroke story'. Not a problem in my opinion since the awards are "for the Best in Written Erotica" and almost every story on SOL has at least a minimum of erotica. Even the 'no sex' stories often have a hint of erotica in it.
What could be considered a problem is that Finestories can't refer to the Clitorides Awards to keep it valid for all ages, thus excluding the FS readership and nominations.
Wait a second; aren't the Clitorides specifically for erotica. Non-erotic stories should be disqualified automatically.
Wait a second; aren't the Clitorides specifically for erotica. Non-erotic stories should be disqualified automatically.
Non-erotica should be disqualified but I think you are reading 'erotica' as 'sex'. The best erotica stories often only hint at physical sex which should not disqualify them. Even no-sex stories on SOL often have some erotica in them.