Kick the dog

I am new to this site.
I do not understand the fascination with: snuff & extreme sadism (2) body modification as in the sci fi stories that give women 12" waists and 78 DDDD boobs (3) school age kids and/or bordering on pedophilia.
I have read stories in which women are crucified to death, tortured graphically, and a class on torture and snuff. The writing has varied from moderate to good, but the content ... I have written about pain and pleasure, and in the real world, about death & murder & senseless violence (it never is), but these stories are violent for its own sake.
perhaps the authors' urges would be better satisfied by going out and kicking the dog?

Kicking a dog? Now that is sick! Meanwhile perfectly sane people will enjoy reading theirs and other's extreme fantasies. Vivre la difference!

Fox,

Welcome to the site! Now, we all are here because of our kinks, some like it soft, some like it hot and some … well, that is why we do have codes here, and what does not tickle your fancy – feel free to skip! As for kicking the dog, I truly hope you did not mean that seriously – because, fantasizing about violence, writing and reading about it is totally acceptable and healthy; physically abusing any defenseless creature (without its consent of course) is sick and sadistic.

Anyway, I’m sure you will find stories to your liking here or on some other site – enjoy!

As a dog owner and animal lover, I was using the phrase "kick the dog" metaphorically. I also appreciate different strokes for different folks. I do wonder about the level of mysogeny which appears in some of these works, however. And yes, RedEva, there are many many good stories (and a few bad ones too) in this fine collective. Otherwise I would not offer my own works here.
:)

Never meant to offend you :) - it must be language thing (English not being my first language – I quite often misinterpret the phrases).

*Mental note to self – check Fox’s stories*

After discussing it with my dog, he asked me to assure you that neither he nor I has been offended.
I offer a (shameless) plug for my stories: "You've Got Male", "The Chains" and "Ho!" all posted within the last two weeks. I have about a dozen more still to come.
Feedback is especially welcome - I wish to improve my craft.

ps. the dog says, forget the feedback, send him cookies.

Comrade Fox,
You seem like a sensible bloke, rationale and witty. I also think perhaps relatively young. I opine the latter because you open with "I can't understand...". Well, I don't pretend to understand everyone's tastes myself but know that this is all fiction and for many a catharsis to write it and for many others a catharsis to read it. Seriously lad, I've lived on every continent (except Anarctica and that's just a waste of the planet's space) and have seen and sampled all that I can imagine--Sachmo sang, "It's a Wonderful World" and indeed he was right--if it does not harm, so be it. My stories are simply demons exiting--better here than among the population of the Republic of Texas. It's funny I suppose, I am participating in a local clinical study and underwent a mental evaluation--the doc was excited about my excellent outlook on life. I have to admit, she is a babe and I was trying to be charming :) Perhaps I'll do her...anyway, all that being said, I offer to each his own. I've quit rating stories for just that reason--may not be my taste so why slam somebody?

So welcome aboard mate--be nice to redeva, she's a sweetie.
Cheers,
Boxer

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Fox
I am new to this site.
I do not understand the fascination with: snuff & extreme sadism (2) body modification as in the sci fi stories that give women 12" waists and 78 DDDD boobs (3) school age kids and/or bordering on pedophilia.
I have read stories in which women are crucified to death, tortured graphically, and a class on torture and snuff. The writing has varied from moderate to good, but the content ... I have written about pain and pleasure, and in the real world, about death & murder & senseless violence (it never is), but these stories are violent for its own sake.
perhaps the authors' urges would be better satisfied by going out and kicking the dog?

---

* turning the cupboards upside down and deciding to bake some fresh, home made dog biscuits * glad that dog is not offended – hehe. Did send the feedback already *wink* even thought I could not say much more and give more kudos than others (most of the others, anyway) already did. Excited about reading more stories.

*********************************

*waves to Bruce* careful there Sire – I know you’ve got stamina, but…. All those ladies, they gona exhaust you!

Heh heh, I just figured out that I posted my reply as a new thread. Doh!
So much for being sensible!

To clarify, my concern is born from the knowledge that if man can conceive it, the odds are pretty good someone will try it. Hence my concern with the snuff stuff. Here in Canada, we have examples in Paul Bernardo and Karla Homolka, and the truth of what they did is worse than fiction: rape, torture and snuff of three teenagers, including Karla's sister.

I am not arguing for governmental censorship, but I believe the writer has a responsibility too. I may write about BDSM, and it is not always consensual, but I will not write about pedophilia, bestiality, torture & snuff, especially for the sake of someone's titillation.

That's perfectly fine mate--write what you wish and read what you wish--here it's freedom of speech and if Jefferson was correct, that's a right of the individual so even Canadians an read and write what they wish (sorry, couldn't help it). However, titilation is what this is all about me thinks. If a reader is not titilated, what's the point? Might as well watch Barbara Walters--NOP titilation there.

When I was a young lad, I watched Superman on TV and read comic books--at no time did I think I could fly and try to do so. I've seen the Matrix and listened to Helter Skelter--at no time did I try to kill anybody as a result of being exposed to fiction. Those who do act and deprive others of life and/or liberty with those fictional accounts as the impetus for their actions are, simply and crudely put, scum and should be treated to a dose of their own medicine--and eye-for-an-eye if you will.

So, I will write for titilation--about whatever nonsense I feel and if anybody cares to read it -- great. More power to you as well.
Cheers and many beers,
Boxer

Quote:

---

I am not arguing for governmental censorship, but I believe the writer has a responsibility too. I may write about BDSM, and it is not always consensual, but I will not write about pedophilia, bestiality, torture & snuff, especially for the sake of someone's titillation. [/B]

---

i believe that long ago, much before this web site or written word, there were people who enjoyed torturing others and taking life. Some times that was lawful and consented to by general public for different reasons (war, witch hunts...) some time those individuals did it and were prosecuted for it. As much as there is some truth to the old saying “Opportunity makes the thief” we all have free will and ground rules/morals if you will to know difference between what might titillate and what is just plain insane.

So here it goes to all authors that made me wet! and those that made it so deliciously decadently like Fox!

Hmmm, beer, titillation, wet females and even cookies for the dog.

Gotta like this place.

Thanks for the exchange - enuff said on my part!

Deliciously decadent ... I like that. Nicest thing anybody's said to me in a long time!

- Fox

ps. BruceBoxer, To defend national pride, Superman was created by a Canadian. And book banning seems to be a favourite sport in many of the southern states: Huck Finn, To Kill a Mockingbird, Grapes of Wrath, all have been banned at one time or another ... even the Dixie Chicks have been censured! (Which may not be such a bad thing, IMHO)

Ah, the religious right in the U.S. South--fuck 'em all, the short and the fat and the tall. Recently I had a letter to the editor published here in San Antonio condeming zelot Muslims AND Christians--damn reactionaries...and redeva, you seem to be on the boards a lot lately--things must have calmed down at the office...perhaps you're even getting stripped and licked lots lately? (try to say that fast 10 times...stripped and licked lots latelystripped and licked lots latelystripped and licked lots lately...

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Fox
[
ps. BruceBoxer, To defend national pride, Superman was created by a Canadian. And book banning seems to be a favourite sport in many of the southern states: Huck Finn, To Kill a Mockingbird, Grapes of Wrath, all have been banned at one time or another ... even the Dixie Chicks have been censured! (Which may not be such a bad thing, IMHO) [/B]

---

Religion has nothing to do with any book being banned or removed from schools in the south. Huckleberry Finn, Tom Sawyer and To Kill a Mockingbird were taken out of school libraries for one reason:


Racism


In Tom Sawyer and Huckleberry Finn, the black man is Called "Nigger Jim." In To Kill a Mockingbird and others, people of color are referred to as niggers.

So, in an effort to not offend anyone, the books were removed from public school's shelves. I had always thought it was nationwide, though, not just in the south. I guess I was wrong.

So, while I am not a racist, I would like to give a big personal yippie to all the people that are so concerned about offending people that our children cannot read the classics anymore. What's next? Taking Julius Caesar and other Shakespearean woks off the shelves because of violence, sexuality, homosexuality or prejudice against other nations? Should we start taking books off shelves unless all the characters are politically correct stories about single-racial characters?

Thanks a bunch to the "activists." You sure are making the world a better place for all of us.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by BDSM_Tourguide
[B][COLOR=firebrick][FONT=century gothic]

Religion has nothing to do with any book being banned or removed from schools in the south. Huckleberry Finn, Tom Sawyer and To Kill a Mockingbird were taken out of school libraries for one reason:


Racism


In Tom Sawyer and Huckleberry Finn, the black man is Called "Nigger Jim." In To Kill a Mockingbird and others, people of color are referred to as niggers.

So, in an effort to not offend anyone, the books were removed from public school's shelves.
===================
I apologize to anyone who might be offended by my quoting these words; but in an article about censorship, it would hardly be right for me to censoring someone else.

I respectfully disagree, Tourguide. You make it sound as if book-banning only began in the relative recent times of political correctness. In actuality, any number of books have been banned for religious/moral/political reasons, by conservative school boards and town councils beginning with our Puritan forefathers and continuing on up to the present day.

Just a few of the classics that have been banned at one time or another include "The Grapes of Wrath" "Ulysses" "The Catcher in the Rye"; "Lady Chatterley's Lover" "Tropic of Cancer" -- one could name dozens.

Huckleberry Finn and To Kill a Mockingbird were occasionally banned in the south in the days before political correctness simply for advancing the notion of racial equality -- that honest and loyal Jim was a far better human being than Pap, the King and the Duke. That Tom Robinson was a far, far better man than the poor white trash Ewells who concocted the allegation of rape against him.

Poe, Thoreau, Darwin, Marx, Lenin, Freud -- all have been swept from library shelves at one time or another by the thought control folks who were trying to protect us from pernicious ideas and thoughts. Thomas Paine -- the man who gave us such lines as "These are the times that try men's souls" has been banned on occasion -- for being an atheist.

I do, however acknowledge that the pendulum has swung in the other direction in recent years -- on same campuses spokesmen for right-wing causes have been shouted down. And that is equally abhorrent. As is trying to sugar-coat the past by bowdlerizing Mark Twain.

I'm almost an ACLU-type believer in freedom of speech, but I can think of one famous example in which the title of a famous book was changed -- and for the better - because of fear of giving offense.

Many people in this country are familiar with the famous Agatha Christie mystery "And Then There Were None". At least that is the title under which it is usually seen in the US. In Britain (and in some films) it is usually published/described as "Ten Little Indians." But the original UK title (referring I think to some figurines, which disappeared one by one as the mysterious killings mounted) was "Ten Little Niggers". Apparently at that time (1940-ish, I think), in Britain that expression could still be used in polite society.

Fortunately her American publishers altered the title here.

Boccaccio

... that censorship isn't a new concept. The point I was making was that in our enlightened world, in our First Amendment driven civilization, we still must ban book based upon racial wording.

The thing is: The words used in Ulysses were accepted back then. The words used in Shakespeare were acceptable for their time. The words used by Sam Clemens (Mark Twain) were accepted in their time. It is only the later generations that censored them for their word content.

Now, if you want to get into the details of certain other types of censorship, say for political reason, rather than racial ones, then we can bring up Socrates, Plato, Curie and other such names.

However, the works of Plato, Aristotle and the like are now widely renowned and our scientists are building our society upon them today.

My words are not intended to offend. They are merely examples of how the books were written. If anyone does get offended by my examples, then perhaps you need to look at your own self-image and your own security and address your own issues.

Book banning and book burning is a time honoured tradition amongst those who would impose their beliefs upon others. One of the first acts of a tyrant is to burn and ban books. Solzhenitsyn is an outspoken critic of the former Soviet government - to reduce his impact, they started with house arrest then exile. The Bible Belt - coincidentally where Dubya Bush draws his support - is a frequent harbinger of "ban the book" and racial / religious intolerance. Christians burned the library of Alexandria in the 780s because it contained the heretical papyus scrolls of ancient Egypt - and the secrets of that fabulous civilzation were lost for a thousand years. The Emperor Chin executed writers who did not tell stories his way. The English version is Harry Potter and the Wizard's Stone - the PC North American is "Harry Potter and The Philosopher's Stone" so as not to alarm the 'Moral Majority'.

Back to my original point. As a writer, I have the ability to express my personal views, desires and interests in a way that can be mass disseminated and accepted. This does not automatically give me the right to promolgate torture and snuff, child abuse or even kicking the dog purely for their own sake.

As a human, do I not have a responsibility to recognize that while literature and art may 'push the limits' of conventional society, (and indeed have a responsibility to do so), there are nevertheless boundaries beyond which great care must be exercised? I think so.

You make an impressive arguement, Fox. Not being as well educated as you are, I'm going to have to fall back on my own experience (always dangerous, since a sample size of one is useless).

I began playing the AD&D Role Playing Game back in 1978 and, not too long after that, newspapers and magazines began carrying stories about D&D being satanic and leading to teen suicide. There was (of course, as always) talk of banning the game in the interests of protecting children. Fortunately, nothing was accomplished and by the mid-80's the furor had died down.

Subsequent to that, it was established that, during a two year period in the early 80's, there had been two million people playing D&D on a regular basis, of whom only ten killed themselves during that time, which is vastly below the number that chance would have predicted and, predictibly, led to the counter-arguement that playing D&D gave children something so fascinating to do that they had no interest in killing themselves (or, probably, time in which to do so!).

A similar phenomena occured with "men's magazines" (in this case Playboy, Penthouse and Hustler). Studies showed that most convicted rapists read one or more of those magazines regularly, so it was concluded that "soft porn" inflamed men to commit sexual assaults. Later studies that reversed the question discovered that subscribers to those three magazines were less likely to be convicted rapists than non-subscribers. (Note the change of wording from "regular readers" to "subscribers".) This strengthened the argument that soft porn (or any porn) provided a cathartic outlet for sexual aggression and was, therefore, a societal 'good'.

It is my opinion that the truth in these matters lies elsewhere. It's entirely possible that people who play RPGs are inherently more emotionally stable (and thus less prone to suicide) than the societal average. It's also possible that people who are rapists (or potential rapists) are attracted to hard porn more than to soft porn. Alternatively, if feminists are correct that rape is a crime of violence, rather than a sex crime, it may be that rapists are biased against sex magazines in general.

I feel the same is probably true of torture and snuff stories (and, in a different sense, of pedophilia stories). I doubt if anyone would read one those stories and become a sex murderer, though I wouldn't doubt for a moment that someone who had already made that decision would troll for 'better' ideas on how to do it. (In the case of pedophilia stories, I wouldn't be surprised to learn that exposure to such increased the rate of recidivism, but I would still not believe that it was a root cause.)

I hope Fox won't be offended by this, but his arguement reminds me of a common gimmick used in bad porn. That of putting a 'frigid' or otherwise resisting woman in a room full of nudie magazines with a VCR playing porn films 24 hours a day and having her come out a nymphomaniac (or, at least, much more receptive) after a couple of weeks. Maybe I'm naive, or maybe I have greater faith in human nature, but I simply can't accept that people will do bad things without having a predisposition to do those things (which is why I don't believe that it's possible for someone to be "entrapped" into committing a criminal act, but that's a different argument that I'll save for my Father!).

Hey Curtis,

No offense taken although the dog wants to be paid off with cookies.

Your discourse reminds me of Ted Bundy - he said porn magazines led him to be a serial killer, in hope of getting off death row. You're right, the typical rapist, etc., will have a predisposition to these things. Leopold and Loeb, Ng, Daumler, etc..

It is the atypical that concerns me: the individual with a 14 year old intelligence level that watches a TV show about snuffing the homeless, who then goes out and douses someone with gasoline; the dough heads that try to do stunts they see in movies,

That said, I still don't understand the appeal of snuff stories, torture vignettes that are not part of a larger work, nor do I understand the appeal to the sci fi body remodification that creates women with 78 DDDD mammaries.

You're right about the 14-year-old mentality. At that age "copy-catting" is very big.

I'm also with you on the body modifications. Anything larger than a 34B seems like a waste of tissue to me. And what's the deal with modifying women to make them skeletal? I like slender/athletic women, but if you can see ribs when they lift their arms over their head(s), they've gone too far. A nice, thin layer of fat makes them more pleasant to hold.

Let's see if that brings out a rebuttal from the female element. (I think I hear agp Millie right now.)

To each his own! dear Curtis, and even before Millie gets to you I here by raise the voice for all the big, bigger, larger-than-life breast sized ladies. More the merrier – salivating on the sheer thought of amount of punishment, torture and/or embarrassment large mammaries, maybe tied to be enhanced, beautifully pierced with long protruding nipples in the tight see through shirt ….. (gone to the bed to attend to those arousing thoughts)

I could hear the tick tick tick of the clock as i walked over to the bound girl. A very beautiful young woman, indeed, was my thought as I admired her form.
Gently, I ran my hands over her shoulders, down her chest, carefully avoiding her breasts, enjoying the way she squirmed at the touch.
I decided what I would do first.
Mistress Brandy thoughtfully had placed rope in a convenient location. Selecting a very long length of white cotton, I looped it in half, and passed it through the ring in jo-anne’s leather collar. Working quickly, for I was working against the clock, I wrapped her sumptuous white breasts in rope, squeezing them in a web of cotton. I smiled to see her brown nipples grow hard at the pressure, the pink flesh of her succulent orbs growing purple at the constrction.
Knotting the rope between jo-anne’s breasts, I dropped the long loose ends to the floor. Her breasts jiggled as the cotton fell, wringing a moan from the girl.
I reached down and touched her - she was pleasantly wet. She was obviously enjoying herself already! I tasted her juice on my fingers, then ran my wet fingers around her red lips. She opened her mouth and sucked the nectar from my skin.
At that moment, I wished she were mine.
Stepping close to her, so close I could feel her body heat, I ran the cotton rope between her legs, reaching behind her to pull it up the crack of her ass.
She moaned and thrust her hips forward against me. If I had not been wearing my pants, I would have been so tempted to slip my cock inside her!
Pulling on the rope, I looped it about her waist, knotting it at the small of her back. I stepped around behind her, first to finish tieing her, and second to admire her ass.
The collar had a ring at the back too, so I knotted the rope off to it, then ran my hands over her round, hard ass - apparently, the lady works out regularly, was my thought.
I gave that ass a smack with my bare hand. The delightful slapping crack! sound of my flesh against her flesh resounded in the room. I rubbed the cheek, and then smacked the other. She jumped in her bondage in a most delightful way, the ropes cutting in on her tender flesh, causing her to moan.

Eva's going to bed without me, again.

*sigh*

The story of my life!

mmmmmm

Did I mention how much I like the way you write? And, yeah, size does not seem to matter (at least not this time)

Thank you Fox

***************************

Curtis,

Sorry bud – that IS life (rotten as is sometimes)

Some people just LOVE It extreme.

Yeah, Were all oddballs, thats what makes up our community. Im sure each one of us is just a little bit different, Im one of the few people that would love necrofelia (sp?), many of my friends/partners frown upon me for that. I learned to keep it to myself, but this is a open message board.

Kicking a dog is just wrong, but if you kicked my dog it would most likely rip your leg off (It weighs almost as much as me!).