pippychick

Hello Annie Angel,

As one of the moderators, I am very sorry you feel this way about AFF, and that you find the Terms of Service too restrictive to continue posting here. As you are aware from previous correspondence, AFF does not allow Fanmake/Read the Book stories, and does not allow author's notes in the place of chapters.

The Terms of Service have been carefully put together to ensure the best protection is in place for authors, readers, the site administrators, and last but not least the original creators (without whom we would not have fanfiction).

This site is closely monitored and moderated to ensure adherence to those Terms of Service for the benefit of everyone.

If at some point in the future you feel able to abide by those few simple guidelines, then I hope you will post here again.

Thank you,

Dafdes

Hello Annie Angel,

As one of the moderators, I am very sorry you feel this way about AFF, and that you find the Terms of Service too restrictive to continue posting here. As you are aware from previous correspondence, AFF does not allow Fanmake/Read the Book stories, and does not allow author's notes in the place of chapters.

The Terms of Service have been carefully put together to ensure the best protection is in place for authors, readers, the site administrators, and last but not least the original creators (without whom we would not have fanfiction).

This site is closely monitored and moderated to ensure adherence to those Terms of Service for the benefit of everyone.

If at some point in the future you feel able to abide by those few simple guidelines, then I hope you will post here again.

Thank you,

Dafdes

She's actually over 18. The issue was and is that we do NOT allow the type of fiction she wants to post. Where the bulk of it is script and/or book data, and NOT original content. I'm sorry, but we can't allow it. You were emailed multiple times as to why. You insisted on reposting the story, even when you KNEW that we do not allow this sort of thing.
For others reading this, the type of story is what is often referred to as "fan make", meaning the user takes the script from a show (tv, movie, cartoon, whatever), uses it wholesale as the story, and calls it his or her own. Sorry people, posting it with your user name doesn't make it yours, when it can be clearly shown to be the script of something.
You were lucky I didn't delete you outright for plagiarism.

First of all, kiddo, you need to be 18 to use this site, which I'm assuming you're not, given how inarticulate your rant is. That is rule number one, and when broken will have your story deleted without notice.
Also, if you plagiarize stories, you get deleted, pronto.
Second of all, the amazing staff on this site works tirelessly to keep this place up and running for us, without pay and in their own time. That is, they all volunteer their time, in between taking care of themselves, their families, their real life shit and real life work.
And just so you know, much of the staff here have been working with computers since they first appeared on the public market, which was probably before you were even born, so the argument that they don't know what they're doing is just laughable.
That being said, they do not monitor content, nor quality (or lack there of) of the work that is posted here.
The only reason they hide stories is when people can't use the tags properly, or other rules about posting, such as excessively long author notes. When stories do not comply with the rules, the staff starts by putting a review on the story, asking for the problem to be fixed, and if that is not met, then they hide the story, and send you an email, stating what needs to be fixed. If you do not fix it, yes, then eventually, the story gets deleted.
So, sweetie, if your story has been deleted, then maybe you should take a breath and consider what you did wrong, instead of putting up a poorly written, angry rant, accusing the staff here of shit that is so untrue that it's utterly laughable.
And maybe you should just wait until you turn 18, and then try again?
And also, this site is completely unaffiliated with any other fan fiction site out there. This is a completely independent site.
One, very happy customer.
(and sorry, DG, I just couldn't leave it. I'm ok with it if you delete this. )
EDIT: oh, and by the way, I just checked out your AO3 site, and FanFiction.net sites… the links you provided work fine. Both of your stories are still up on AFF, so I really don't see what your problem is.

Aww...

"Things were going great until I got her back to my quarters and found her planet's people have a pussy like a Buddha's Hand. Captain James T Kirk signing off."
"Captain's Log Addendum: Armpit. That is all."

lol...
And then... I looked further up this thread. Blackadder erotica!
Erm... slight thread hijack...
/thread hijack
Sorry about that.

lol...
And then... I looked further up this thread. Blackadder erotica!
Erm... slight thread hijack...
/thread hijack
Sorry about that.

I would disagree that his personal style makes Stephen King a poor writer. By adhering to an overly rigid structure for literature, you run the risk of sacrificing creativity for form. While form has a place in things like sonnets and waka, one of my absolute favorite writers, Samuel R Delany, tossed the style book out the window when he wrote some of his most amazing works. "Dhalgren" can still leave me breathless, and "Stars in My Pocket Like Grains of Sand" is sheer gorgeousness.
On the other hand, the relentless predictability of Barbara Cartlandt is what gave romance writing such a bad name.

What an arrogant statement!
You do realise that DG doesn't get paid, don't you? I mean... this isn't a business.
Lazy? Lazy would mean no AFF at all. The archive exists because DG devotes a huge amount of personal time and effort so that we all have somewhere to post our stories, and to read those of others.

Not to mention those of us who volunteer our time to try and moderate this site, to make sure it's viable.
Unless you're willing to put a considerable amount of money or time where your very big mouth is, then you can feel free to go get stuffed.

What an arrogant statement!
You do realise that DG doesn't get paid, don't you? I mean... this isn't a business.
Lazy? Lazy would mean no AFF at all. The archive exists because DG devotes a huge amount of personal time and effort so that we all have somewhere to post our stories, and to read those of others.

What an arrogant statement!
You do realise that DG doesn't get paid, don't you? I mean... this isn't a business.
Lazy? Lazy would mean no AFF at all. The archive exists because DG devotes a huge amount of personal time and effort so that we all have somewhere to post our stories, and to read those of others.

What an arrogant statement!
You do realise that DG doesn't get paid, don't you? I mean... this isn't a business.
Lazy? Lazy would mean no AFF at all. The archive exists because DG devotes a huge amount of personal time and effort so that we all have somewhere to post our stories, and to read those of others.

So, for the past couple of weeks my data feeds have been blowing up with the latest fiasco in the greater realm of Science Fiction and Fantasy fandoms, in this case whether or not Johnathon Ross was a good choice for hosting the Hugos, which basically boiled down to whether or not you thought a late night comedian has the ability to tune his act to his particular audience or whether you thought that Ross was going to re-enact Macfarlane's hosting of the Oscars and spend his entire time on stage making offensive jokes at the expense of the nominees and winners. This only a few months after the SFWA got up in arms over whether or not it is impolitic for its editorial staff to mention that someone they knew looked good in a swimsuit, Just How Exactly Offensive Is That Fur Bikini On the Cover? (Picture a psychologist holding up a paper cut out, asking, “Have you had it up to here? What about here? A little higher? A little lower? Why, yes, I did do my doctoral thesis on Freud, how could you tell?”) and not-really-arguing over who is responsible for preventing sexual harassment at conventions. (As far as I could tell the argument was between people screaming, “Sexual harassment is bad!” on one side, and people on the other side getting slammed for saying, “No shit, and that's why it is the convention's responsibility to police itself, could we go back to figuring out why people are getting screwed in their contracts?”)
If that seems like an odd intro for what amounts to an opinion on criticism, understand that there's a common theme behind all the complaints being filed – representation. The argument goes that if there were more feminist heroes, more feminist storylines, more feminism in general, that all these problems would go away, or at least be forced into such a narrow space that the offenders would become more a sort of historical curiosity, as if their actions and beliefs were the sort of thing one might see posted on a plaque in a museum exhibit on ancient superstitions, right next to the bits about frogs being spontaneously generated from mud and cats being servants of the devil.
As authors, our job is to keep these sort of things in mind as we craft our characters. Problem is, I don't think its a viable strategy, at least not in and of itself, because the same people advocating this strategy are the same people sabotaging it.
Let's go back to the titular Frenchman for a moment. At some point in the 1960s Roland Barthe got up on his soapbox and pronounced the Author had died. According to Barthe no matter who the writer was, what their background knowledge of the materials, or what their intent with the narrative, the meaning of the text lay solely in the hands of the reader. Critics around the world rejoiced as they discovered a power over their texts that really wasn't all that new but gave them something to debate about endlessly, and gleefully spread this message to the masses, where it quickly became entangled with everything else being flung down from the ivory towers of academia. Nor was it any coincidence that it quickly got adopted by the various civil rights and social equality movements that were undergoing their own renaissance at the time. People now had the ability to decide for themselves whether or not a work fit their individual ideology.
So now let's bring it back to feminism. What is feminism? Well, to paraphrase Anne Bishop, “She's a feminist, dear, so anything she does is feminist.”
No? Not helpful? Well, that's sort of the point. Feminism isn't any one thing, but a collection of ideals that individuals and groups are striving to bring about. There are a few solid, concrete objectives such as equal rates of pay, but those are few and far between. Most objectives are broad, such as access to medical care. You can get general agreement that womens health is a thing and that it needs to be handled properly, but try to decide what “handled properly” means and you'll start seeing factions form around different solutions. From there everything sort of tail spins as people decide what feminism means for them...and that anyone who disagrees therefore can't be feminist. That's where a lot of problems will start for you as an author. We live in a world where the general mentality is that if you do not agree with someone wholeheartedly, that if you do not march in lock step with them and do everything exactly the way they want it done, then you are not simply someone who disagrees with them but someone who is Other, and the Other is the Enemy of Progress, and the Enemy must be defeated At All Cost.
Take, for example, the two characters of Barbara Everette and Janea from John Ringo's Special Circumstances series. The first is a soccer-mom-turned-demon slayer. Master of half a dozen schools of martial arts and is good with a gun. When the big, burly FBI agents run into trouble, they run to her for help. Sic her on anything supernatural, and you know who is going to walk away the winner. Oh...she's a devout Christian who doesn't support abortion? True feminists support abortion! Not a feminist character!
Ok, well, Janea then! Asatru warrior, called to do battle. High Priestess of Freya, wields a mean battle axe, and almost as powerful as Barb. And hey, no problem with abortion! Oh...she's a high priced stripper/call girl? Never mind the fact she is the priestess of a fertility goddess! She only serves to fulfill the sexual desire of men! Not a feminist character!
Is your character a nurturing mother and housewife juggling seven kids and a crack pot inventor husband? Well, obviously she should be more modern and be making her way through the workplace! Not a feminist character! Is your character an engineer who finds herself doing battle with creatures out of nightmares in claustrophobic spaces? Well, she doesn't act womanly enough, so not a feminist character! Are you writing a top tier forensic anthropologist? Well, better hope you didn't give her a minor social impairment or otherwise she, too, won't be a feminist character! You could write about a high powered corporate executive who is also a single mother trying to juggle a girlfriend with her presidential campaign and still not end up with a feminist character because she put cream in her coffee when real women take it black.
Oh, and don't be surprised if real world associations come back to frag your feminism. Prime example is Baen books. Baen has a reputation for being “that publisher”, as in they publish a bunch of rather politically outspoken authors including a bunch who don't so much lean to the right as they have to built fortified bunkers from which they can take all comers. So it isn't unusual to see someone like David Weber openly criticized for his lack female and colored characters. This despite:
- His best known series stars an Asian/Irish/Hispanic woman.
-The most powerful nation in those books is led by a Queen who is black.
-The second most powerful nation is also led by a woman.
-The primary spin off series stars a black woman.
And that is just the primary-major characters. Going through the full cast would take multiple pages, just like the appendixes attached to the back end of most of his books. And Weber isn't even that politically outspoken. But since he shares a publisher with Larry Correia (author of the Grimnoir Chronicles, which co-stars a teenage Oakie girl in 1930s magical America) Tom Kratman (Amazon Legion, State of Disobedience, which features a woman governor of Texas running a revolution) and John Ringo (Special Circumstances, Black Tide Rising, Troy Rising post-Live Free or Die all of which center on female leads) he gets lumped in with that bunch of thuggish devotees to the hetero white man. This isn't a problem limited to Baen, though. If you support someone who says the wrong things or who has an alternative viewpoint, then be prepared to take a bit of collateral damage.
So what does this mean to you, the socially conscious aspiring author? Well, basically you're fucked. On the other hand, you were going to be fucked anyway, because trying to please everyone at all times is a futile task. Even Frozen got slammed as being, alternately, anti-feminist or not feminist enough because of something Anna or Elsa did that someone somewhere didn't like. Trying to write the “perfect” feminist character according to the Social Justice Warrior types is like trying to follow the directions of a hundred different chefs, each speaking their own language, half of whom have religious objections to some of the ingredients, half of whom are allergic to some of the ingredients, and half of whom just don't like the taste of the rest of the ingredients. And if you think that is too many halves, they don't.
What you should do is write strong characters, regardless of type. Don't be afraid to kill of a woman because you are afraid of being accused of stuffing people into fridges, just make sure their death has actual meaning and they don't go out like a chump. Don't be afraid to write a spiteful bitch if that is what the character calls for, just make sure that all your women aren't spiteful bitches and keep in mind that while everyone has flaws, they also usually have a redeeming quality or two. Don't be afraid to lock the princess up in the tower, just make sure she isn't doing so passively. She doesn't need to be running around judo chopping guards in the back of the neck while scaling sheer stone cliffs by her fingernails, but ask yourself, “If I was a prisoner in her position, how would I go about making myself the biggest pain in the ass possible?” Don't ask people what they want to see; instead watch them, and then model your characters off their behaviors.
I'll end by noting this isn't a problem limited solely to feminism and the desires of its adherents, but applies in general to most topics of identity. As authors, we have no control over the experiences and demands of our readers. On the other hand, and arrogant this may sound, they are coming to us for entertainment. They can no more force us to write outside of our capabilities than we can force them to read what we write, and while we should always be challenging ourselves as creators we should not let that be used as an excuse to be blindly led down paths we would not be able to navigate ourselves. A good story demands diversity simply because the world is a diverse place, but trying to follow a checklist to get there results in a bland, cookie cutter product identical to everything else following that same checklist. Instead simply accept that there will be people unhappy with the worlds you create, acknowledge their arguments where appropriate, and continue to delight those who enjoy what you write.

Well, I got the following (I've edited out the ones that make me want to uninstall my word processing software): Charles Dickens H P Lovecraft (2) Stephen King (3) Leo Tolstoy J R R Tolkien Douglas Adams Vladimir Nabokov J D Salinger Gertrude Stein Then I was curious, so I fired up my Kindle app, and found out the following: Stephen King writes like H P Lovecraft H P Lovecraft writes like Mary Shelley But, disturbingly, my favourite of the moment had an astonishing result...
The Marquis de Sade writes like Jonathan Swift....
As if my fan fiction wasn't enough, two people are now restless in their respective graves.

Hi SirGeneralSir,
From the part you’ve written it does strike me that the girls are all a bit… well, unresponsive to say they’re in a hyper-aroused state. Just because they’re unconscious, it doesn’t follow that they’re inert. Details count.
Describe their breathing, how it sounds. Is it stuttering? Do they occasionally sigh or gasp? Perhaps make nonsense sounds?
Are they shivering, or maybe trembling? Do they react to anything? Touch? Noise? Standard response to things like light in the eyes? Is there any REM to mention?
Are they physically hot? Can the attendees feel it radiating off them? Are they sweating, and if so, does it have any specific scent, something redolent of arousal?
There are so many ways to describe these girls, even unconscious, that will enhance the experience for the reader and make it clear what is being witnessed.
And, not to confuse you further, but in regard to the wet panties bit… if the girls are wet, and highly aroused, regardless of the fact they’re unconscious, then they may well be experiencing orgasm (in which case some of the above will definitely apply). If I was writing a scene like this, I’d be considering a good description of female ejaculation. Yes, it does exist.
And… lastly, how does viewing the girls affect the medical personnel? I mean, a well-constructed paragraph or two about a doctor trying to maintain some semblance of professional conduct in the face of something like this would be good. From what you’ve said, these girls are trying to attract ‘mates’ aren’t they? If so, then asleep they may be, but they should have real presence in this scene, enough to garner a response in the witnesses, even if it’s not acted upon.
dafdes

Hi again,
I thought I would just use this space to keep some of my thoughts on the story, and on Sade and Coulmier, because I can see the end, and it’s not pretty. It’s more or less a lot of opinionated tl;dr, but I can’t help it. This is what happens when I have to read a lot in order to research a story.
I’ve written an essay on Sade and Coulmier, and who they were really, and to be fair the Quills film doesn’t do either of them any justice at all. I’m not going to reproduce that essay here, but it’s worth noting I have a lot of respect for the real Coulmier and I think it needs to be said.
The inmates of Charenton Asylum were encouraged to be creative. He encouraged Sade to write. They had a theatre, and dinner parties, and most likely a million other little things that promoted mental well-being and stability. All this, in the middle of the eighteenth century. Coulmier was a man so far in advance of his time it beggars belief. He was usurped at Charenton by Royer-Collard, for political reasons, but he and Sade remained friends right up until the Marquis’ death.
Coulmier also had disabilities of his own, and while Quills might have employed Joaquin Phoenix to portray him, the real man is referred to in at least one historical source as a hunchback dwarf, which makes his pioneering approach to treatment in the field of mental health all the more admirable. There’s evidence Sade felt that same admiration for him having struggled to overcome his own difficulties, and then to help others.
As for Sade, I’ve already mentioned in one of my story’s author notes that he had a four year relationship with a laundry lass at Charenton before his death. Her name was Magdeleine. I know what a lot of people say about his writing, even those who’ve read it. So many people claim he had a poor attitude towards women, but I don’t believe that, and I’ve read the worst of it.
He spent so long in prison, and he seems to have had an unusually high sex drive. All of that enforced isolation and celibacy (especially when he was younger, in the Bastille) must have made him a little mad. Honestly, there’s no wonder some of his ideas were so dark. But, had he not been incarcerated, then he might never have written anything of note, and he’d have passed into history, famous only for evading the guillotine during the Terror.
I don’t see sexism in his work – I see feminism. When he urges his characters and readers to sexual freedom, he doesn’t stop with the men. Today women aren’t free like that, and I kind of think we should be. Regardless, to return to Magdeleine for a final thought. One of the last useful things Sade did was teach her, a common laundress, to read and write. A man who hated women wouldn’t have done that.
Having read his essay to novel writers, I’m not sure he would have approved of fanfiction. But erotic fiction written by women, including and probably especially slash – he’d have got a real kick out of knowing about that.
There end my useless ramblings.
dafdes

Fox, lioness... aaand I'm out.

The Doctor would regret the offer.
First, I'd make sure I had a tent and a placard. Then, I'd coolly inform him that I don't want anything to do with any of the future daleky time war idiocy, and I'd insist instead that we spend a weekend at Woodstock, followed by the opportunity to march in the civil rights movement and hear Dr King's "I have a dream..." speech.
Then, after that, go back a bit further and meet the Earl of Rochester, John Wilmot, preferably before the syphilis. I'd probably insist on Harkness accomanying us there as bait.
Oh, he'd regret asking me all right...