So! What books have you been reading?!

[Joelist]

It's not imagery, it's innuendo. I know that's splitting hairs but they are important hairs to split. Without trying to get too hyperbolic this discussion could be likened to the 1964 Supreme Court debate on pornography. The phrase "I know it when I see it." as spoken by Justice Stewart at the time actually was his dismissal of the material in question as being pornographic. (People often take that quote out of context and use it erroneously.)

So while the book in question is unseemly, creepy and downright crude that doesn't automatically make it pornographic; it doesn't automatically violate the CCPG.

*To be fair I'm not interested in defending this particular book as I find it ridiculous trash, but the underlying abstract question of what is and what isn't pornographic is an interesting topic to examine. I doubt Hugh intended for this to devolve into a study on ethics but nonetheless here we are. His original post makes for a valid and interesting debate on this subject (as long as all parties can be civil and not try to play the game of one upmanship by implying others are perverts by even discussing the topic. )

As someone with an analytical mind it seems like something you'd be interested in JL. Although to be fair I know that this isn't the intellectual hill that I want to die on so I won't blame you for not taking the ball and running with it.

My thought is not that it is imagery but rather the "other content" part of the rule. It may not be literally said type of imagery but the context of the dialog and such is VERY suggestive and with it having the look of a children's book we are in really creepy territory.

 

[Joelist]

Please go reread what I wrote - I agree there is no such imagery. It is the "other content" part where this could fall under.

Also please stop with the personal attacks and mangling of peoples usernames. If you want to discuss things then actually discuss them.

 

[Hugh Jass]

Please go reread what I wrote - I agree there is no such imagery. It is the "other content" part where this could fall under.

Also please stop with the personal attacks and mangling of peoples usernames. If you want to discuss things then actually discuss them.

Wow thats really vague other content can mean whatever you don't like and I guess you don't like very much unless it's clean and wholesome! I bet if you were in charge of tv we would have just two channels. The Glee channel and The Partridge Family channel.

 

[PussyGalore]

My thought is not that it is imagery but rather the "other content" part of the rule. It may not be literally said type of imagery but the context of the dialog and such is VERY suggestive and with it having the look of a children's book we are in really creepy territory.

Fair enough.

I really don't want to research it but I'm pretty sure this book isn't the only one of its kind. I recall hearing about this juvenile trend in "adult humor" spreading a couple years back but it didn't interest me enough to look into it because I don't find this stuff humorous at all. Compared to say The Gashlycrumb Tinies by Edward Gorey this new stuff is about as deep as a puddle when it comes to shocking intelligent humor.

I remember reading The Gashlycrumb Tinies decades ago and still marvel at the disturbing, albeit funny and clever construction of the book replete with rhymes and illustrations. It is now considered a classic. By comparison I don't even remember the name of Hugh's book in this very thread, that's how vapid and low-brow it is. (Sorry Hugh, it's true, the book you recommended is dumber than a box of crayons. ) But out of curiosity, if Hugh's book is too obscene for this forum wouldn't that put Gorey's literary classic about children's violent and disturbing deaths into the same category? ("A is for Amy who fell down the stairs. B is for Basil assaulted by bears.")

Here's the pdf and the wiki:

http://dpworks.net/smilga/gashlycrumb-tinies.pdf

 

[Overmind One]

Please go reread what I wrote - I agree there is no such imagery. It is the "other content" part where this could fall under.

Also please stop with the personal attacks and mangling of peoples usernames. If you want to discuss things then actually discuss them.

Agreed on the nicknames. But Hugh has a point and so does PussyGalore...there is NO imagery in the book at all that is sexually suggestive. The innuendos are so cleverly woven into the children's format of storytelling that no child male or female would even get it. The images in the book don't give it away either. It is done much like SNL might do something like that. And a quick search reveals that this book is not sold in the Children's book sections of where it is sold.

Sometimes, having a nice set of balls is just that.

 

[Hugh Jass]

Fair enough.

I really don't want to research it but I'm pretty sure this book isn't the only one of its kind. I recall hearing about this juvenile trend in "adult humor" spreading a couple years back but it didn't interest me enough to look into it because I don't find this stuff humorous at all. Compared to say The Gashlycrumb Tinies by Edward Gorey this new stuff is about as deep as a puddle when it comes to shocking intelligent humor.

I remember reading The Gashlycrumb Tinies decades ago and still marvel at the disturbing, albeit funny and clever construction of the book replete with rhymes and illustrations. It is now considered a classic. By comparison I don't even remember the name of Hugh's book in this very thread, that's how vapid and low-brow it is. (Sorry Hugh, it's true, the book you recommended is dumber than a box of crayons. ) But out of curiosity, if Hugh's book is too obscene for this forum wouldn't that put Gorey's literary classic about children's violent and disturbing deaths into the same category? ("A is for Amy who fell down the stairs. B is for Basil assaulted by bears.")

Here's the pdf and the wiki:

http://dpworks.net/smilga/gashlycrumb-tinies.pdf

I don't know if your insulting me or agreeing with me or both!

 

[Overmind One]

I don't know if your insulting me or agreeing with me or both!

He is agreeing with you, and he is also pointing out that the book we are talking about with the balls is toilet paper (and he's right). But it IS funny as hell!

 

[YJ02]

That was hilarious - dumb but hilarious.

yeah, i put it in the wrong thread though

 

[PussyGalore]

I don't know if your insulting me or agreeing with me or both!

When I figure it out myself I'll let ya know.

 

[Overmind One]

Back to actual books....

I just bought Book 5 of "The Expanse" for Kindle. It's called Nemesis Games, and I will probably start reading it this evening.

Amazon product

 

[Lord Ba'al]

Back to actual books....

I just bought Book 5 of "The Expanse" for Kindle. It's called Nemesis Games, and I will probably start reading it this evening.

Amazon product

Enjoy!

So far I only have the first book. Kobo not Kindle!!! I have yet to read the first word though.

 

[Joelist]

Agreed on the nicknames. But Hugh has a point and so does PussyGalore...there is NO imagery in the book at all that is sexually suggestive. The innuendos are so cleverly woven into the children's format of storytelling that no child male or female would even get it. The images in the book don't give it away either. It is done much like SNL might do something like that. And a quick search reveals that this book is not sold in the Children's book sections of where it is sold.

Sometimes, having a nice set of balls is just that.

View attachment 34990

Fair enough.

I would note that this episode has shown that the language in the CCPG in this section is kind of vague - which is how we could have two different views both based on the CCPG. I suggest the wording on such content be changed to be less murky (the content part).

 

[Hugh Jass]

May I suggest.

2. Post or transmit sexually explicit images or other content that is determined by Joeline to be offensive to his delicate nature or anything posted by anyone yongjane does not like even if it's not as bad as what yongjane himself posts because he reserves the right to move the goal posts.

 

[Joelist]

Hugh,

Please stop with mangling people's usernames and also with the personal attacks. I have asked you once already.

Also please note I started by saying OM was "fair enough". My point on the CCPG was simple - if two incompatible views on a question can both be supported by the same CCPG wording then that wording may be insufficiently clear.

 

[Overmind One]

May I suggest.

2. Post or transmit sexually explicit images or other content that is determined by Joeline to be offensive to his delicate nature or anything posted by anyone yongjane does not like even if it's not as bad as what yongjane himself posts because he reserves the right to move the goal posts.

This is trolling. You are not allowed to attack, pass judgement on, or harass other members here. Can you perhaps tll us why you chose GateFans to join? Hw did you hear about us and what is your favorite Stargate and Star Trek show? Movies you like? That sort of thing. Your trying to make judgement calls on other members here or snarking their comments is not useful at all, and is not allowed.

 

[Hugh Jass]

This is trolling. You are not allowed to attack, pass judgement on, or harass other members here. Can you perhaps tll us why you chose GateFans to join? Hw did you hear about us and what is your favorite Stargate and Star Trek show? Movies you like? That sort of thing. Your trying to make judgement calls on other members here or snarking their comments is not useful at all, and is not allowed.

What did I do wrong now?

 

[Overmind One]

What did I do wrong now?

This:

May I suggest.

2. Post or transmit sexually explicit images or other content that is determined by Joeline to be offensive to his delicate nature or anything posted by anyone yongjane does not like even if it's not as bad as what yongjane himself posts because he reserves the right to move the goal posts.

Please don't do that.

 

[Hugh Jass]

This:



Please don't do that.

Sorry I dont get what I did wrong was the post misleading or a lie? Did it make someone cry because they cant take a little poking fun you guys make cracks about my posts all the time and I laugh I dont run under my mommy's skirt crying.

 

[Overmind One]

Sorry I dont get what I did wrong was the post misleading or a lie? Did it make someone cry because they cant take a little poking fun you guys make cracks about my posts all the time and I laugh I dont run under my mommy's skirt crying.

I am really trying to be diplomatic here, but you are trying our patience.

 

[Hugh Jass]

I am really trying to be diplomatic here, but you are trying our patience.

didnt answer my question still dont know what I did wrong.