YABookgate

[Grayback]

a black-skinned indigenous Taiwanese

Yeah, so Taiwan also had indigenous people before the Chinese settled there. But they have brown/bronze skin like the South East Asian/other Austronesian (Austronesian actually came from Taiwan), so I don't know where this black skinned shit came from

Not exactly black-skinned. Very much a normal skin tone in Asia. It’s more the cut of their face that is different from a Han Chinese.

Unless Kuang made the character that way just to do the "Progressive reimagining" thing (like making Anne Boleyn black), I think that this coloring might actually come from anime.

Because characters in anime and manga are usually simple line drawings with a restrictive art style, artists don't have a lot of options for giving them differentiating features that would indicate their ethnicity (like "the cut of their face," as @Drive-by Farts put it). It's even harder to differentiate groups when the differences are small. So skin color was used in older anime (stuff that was made with just the Japanese audience in mind, not the whole world) to indicate differences between other seemingly-similar Asian ethnic groups in a way that doesn't really make sense to the rest of us.
If there's an ethnic group that's generally regarded by the Japanese as being "tan," then the character would often be made super tan or outright dark brown, even if the ethnic group's skin isn't anywhere near that dark in real life. It's a lot like how Irish and Scottish people are stereotypically thought of as being redheads, so any Irish / Scottish character in a cartoon will almost always be given exaggerated flame-orange hair.
I'm the furthest thing from an anime expert, so I'm sure I'm missing some part of this. I just remember a bunch of instances of black people getting excited, thinking that they'd finally found a black anime character, only to be told that the character is actually just supposed to be Okinawan or something.

I'd guess that Kuang combined the two: she knew about / grew up watching anime using that technique, and it gave her the excuse to darken random characters to include more "diversity."

 

[Flexo]

Indie writers on the right have a seemingly widespread distaste for sex scenes that borders on the Puritanical (if they happen to be religious, it is Puritanical). I say this as someone who's otherwise simpatico with most of these writers, and it's a frustrating trend.

As someone who remembers the sudden sex scene in Dune 5....

Sometimes that may be for the best. Keep the smut on literotica and just do some tasteful hinting on the bookshelves. (though yes, sometimes they can be SO coy about it, you wonder if any sex actually happened)

 

[Old King Koaleamos]

I just remember a bunch of instances of black people getting excited, thinking that they'd finally found a black anime character, only to be told that the character is actually just supposed to be Okinawan or something.

This actually happens a ton in anime and redditor/hood weebs get mad as hell that someone isn't actually black.

I've been in online spaces that will ban you if you suggest that the bunny girl with a dark tan from Boku no Hero Academia isn't a nigger.

 

[Kari Kamiya]

If someone is saying that reading smut books has an unavoidable physiological effect on you which is basically equivalent to doing drugs, then, yeah, I'd like to hear some reasons to go along with that.

Y'know, I've been seeing merch (stickers mostly, but still) out in the wild of women proudly declaring they read smut, like that's the only thing they're consuming whenever they pick up a book. It's so strange that someone has to label themselves that way and let the whole world know about it when women typically read books in the comfort of their own home or quietly in a library and who the fuck cares what you read, right? Why should you feel inclined (entitled) to be praised and told you're so "stunning and brave" to read sex scenes?

"Smut" as a word is one of the many instances of how the definition has been changed over the years even though it's remained relatively unchanged over the centuries.

1828:


Merriam-Webster Now:



It is always used in the definition of "obscenity" when talking about literature, though whenever you hear it now, it just means something like "gratuitous sexual content", or "sex that has no bearing on the plot". Sometime in the past couple of generations, as critics became more critical of narrative flow and character development/motive, not every instance of sex has been considered smut, and for sure not every sex scene took up literal pages or chapters (though it's hilarious to think that if a chapter is of nothing but a sex scene(s) then surely it must be plot-relevant).

But for sure many of the smut we've been seeing trend off of TikTok and breaking the "spice meter" has been the very definition of "obscene". And women are acting like giggling schoolgirls over it while men are going "Wait what the fuck is this?" Which sure, you could claim is hypocritical of men to say because if they could just see the minotaur milking or werewolf knotting played out visually, they may still be able to crank one out over it, but would all men, or only those who're already regularly consuming degenerate porn?

Second Story may have flawed arguments when you dig into her videos, sure, yet there were definitely signs that women for some reason just really wanted to read sex scenes quality be damned ever since 50 Shades flew off the shelves, or even before. Although in that regard, I don't remember any book prior to E.L. James being marketed/astroturfed with such controversy. I'm actually curious about this and my husband and I had talked about this briefly not long ago, can anyone give an example of a book from before 2010 that was being so openly marketed as genuine must-see-to-be-believed smut and it generated actual sales?

Also I would frequent fanfiction circles a lot until relatively recently, and even just ten years ago it really and truly just boiled down to this:


And angst, too, but definitely angsty smut was the holy grail.

And this is just online, why wouldn't it also be true for published novels?

i was agreeing with you, the nerve of some people to imply that pornography affects the brain in any way is completely beyond the pale

>never posted here before now

Holy coomer stench Batman, do you just search up keywords for all kinds of porn on the Farms to defend your addiction?

EDIT: For some reason I used the wrong word there lol.

 

[Waffle Iron]

see the minotaur milking or werewolf knotting played out visually

We call those furries and we hate them.

while men are going "Wait what the fuck is this?"

Men are framed as the degenerate coomers that are the only ones indulging in fucked up shit, and now they find out women have some coven of femcoomer furries in their midst as well.

 

[Sinner's Sandwich]

Men are framed as the degenerate coomers

Because statistically they are.

 

[Waffle Iron]

Because statistically they are.

"Despite being 13% of the coomer population, women are consuming 53% of all minotaur milking porn"

 

[Mola Ram]

As someone who remembers the sudden sex scene in Dune 5....

Sometimes that may be for the best. Keep the smut on literotica and just do some tasteful hinting on the bookshelves. (though yes, sometimes they can be SO coy about it, you wonder if any sex actually happened)

The Killbot makes a good point, as usual.

But I have a terrible contrarian streak, and when I see someone prissily declaim that "no sex scene has ever been important to a story," it gets my dander up. There's a ton of awful smut out there, and a sex scene is one of the easiest tools to misuse for simple titillation and prurience, and a badly written sex scene is a garbage fire on wheels ... but it's just such a sweeping, dismissive statement (not even an argument, really) that I instinctively reject it. It also feels almost like a corollary to wokeness: writers willing to let a story suffer because they have some agenda that takes precedence.

Or maybe I just like pickin fights with my own side; I can be an ornery old priest.

 

[Flexo]

"no sex scene has ever been important to a story,"

One word rebuttal: terminator.

 

[Mola Ram]

One word rebuttal: terminator.

Ya know, Fry shtupping his own grandmother probably qualifies, too.

 

[UnsufficentBoobage]

I've been seeing merch (stickers mostly, but still) out in the wild of women proudly declaring they read smut, like that's the only thing they're consuming whenever they pick up a book. It's so strange that someone has to label themselves that way and let the whole world know about it when women typically read books in the comfort of their own home or quietly in a library and who the fuck cares what you read, right? Why should you feel inclined (entitled) to be praised and told you're so "stunning and brave" to read sex scenes?

I see pins of that shit among regular "look at me imma reader" ones (which are one of 3 genres of pins I do not buy, but Aliexpress suggests based on "ur female right", along with misandry and "look at me imma movie watcher", latter grouped with horrors).

I saw one reimagining the book snatching scene from "Beauty and the Beast" where Gaston asks "What is that?" and Belle answers "Smut". It refuses to search, but I saw some cursed shit searching (stickers are even worse, but they come in assorted packs too huge to screen)

 

[Sinner's Sandwich]

I bet Audra Winter identified as tranny to avoid criticism. Booktube & Booktok is woke as fuck so all she needs to do now is scream "Transphobia!" and cry about her marginalization and oppression. She probably can even scam people out of their money again.

 

[Elite Kipchak]

I bet Audra Winter identified as tranny to avoid criticism. Booktube & Booktok is woke as fuck so all she needs to do now is scream "Transphobia!" and cry about her marginalization and oppression. She probably can even scam people out of their money again.

looking over her site and her "team" it's shocking that she even caught as much criticism to begin with with how many pronouns are there. are these fascist critics aware that they are literally committing genocide right now?

 

[Heinrich Maneuver]

Audra is on tumblr now at Milowinterwrites as well, with multiple posts in the 'age of scorpius' tag gently asking her to stay off tumblr for her own mental health/good. and no way is this dyke actually transitioning, it's so obviously to avoid criticism and never release this book she was boolied over
'cyberstalked'. lmfao. this is SO 'big wolf predator im hte soft little prey' metaphor girl stereotype on tumblr oof the edge.

 

[Kari Kamiya]

It refuses to search, but I saw some cursed shit searching (stickers are even worse, but they come in assorted packs too huge to screen)

Holy fucking shit, I have no words.

 

[stupid frog]

I saw one reimagining the book snatching scene from "Beauty and the Beast" where Gaston asks "What is that?" and Belle answers "Smut". It refuses to search,

Stickers...

 

[Grayback]

women proudly declaring they read smut, like that's the only thing they're consuming whenever they pick up a book. It's so strange that someone has to label themselves that way and let the whole world know about it

This is "shout your abortion" but for women who aren't having sex.
Transgressing your sacred norms as hard as possible and making sure that you know it is the point. But they're not going to be able to explain why they do it beyond "something something liberation."

 

[UnsufficentBoobage]

Stickers

Oh god. The pin was second one, but a bit diffirent, it was one of these stylised to have no faces (idk why)

 

[Super Mario Brothers]

After further review, both videos are pretty bad. I've given up on trying to say which of them is worse.
It seems that Second Story has worse arguments but better motives, and that Nimbus / Cloud Parade has the reverse. But even that, I'm unsure of.

TL;DR -
1. Second Story's video makes a bunch of assertions about sex in literature, how it affects readers, and why it's there, but she doesn't really support anything that she says, and she makes few real arguments (instead of just "assertions"). It seems that she simply opposes the spread of sex in books, but is unsure of how to actually attack it—so she just throws theories at you about how pernicious it all is, about how these books manipulate and desensitize you, and you're powerless to resist these effects unless you reject smut outright. She spends a lot of time finding new ways to repeat herself, but she also contradicts herself a fair bit, makes liberal use of strawmen, and dishonestly misrepresents things. Throughout her complaints, she also just seems frustrated with normies for having lowbrow normie tastes—but that's just an unavoidable fact of reality.

2. Nimbus's response touches on a few of the problems with Second Story's video, and is mostly correct about those problems. But she spends a lot of time nitpicking at technicalities, making mistakes of her own in the process, and attacking things that aren't actually present in Second Story's original video—largely missing the substance of the video (which is where all of the stuff worth attacking is!). Nimbus also has a few cartoonish Leftoid moments throughout her presentation, which were what initially made me think that her response was worse than it actually is. It is trite and incomplete, self-indulgent at times, even petty and bitter—but it's not entirely wrong.

I was going to add a comment that Nimbus at least points out that Second Story doesn't back herself up with sources, but was too tired. This level of autistic detail could be its own response video, I haven't even finished it yet.

I see pins of that shit among regular "look at me imma reader" ones (which are one of 3 genres of pins I do not buy, but Aliexpress suggests based on "ur female right", along with misandry and "look at me imma movie watcher", latter grouped with horrors).

I saw one reimagining the book snatching scene from "Beauty and the Beast" where Gaston asks "What is that?" and Belle answers "Smut". It refuses to search, but I saw some cursed shit searching (stickers are even worse, but they come in assorted packs too huge to screen)

Stickers...

View attachment 8200484 View attachment 8200485

Oh... I've found one of these without looking for it. It was at a book sale with a bookmark of Jesus saying "Are you reading smut?" or something like that... Wasn't exactly displayed in a super obvious place but yeah... Mostly felt annoyed more than anything else.

 

[stupid frog]

Oh god. The pin was second one, but a bit diffirent, it was one of these stylised to have no faces (idk why)

Trying to skip copyright laws, I bet.

at a book sale with a bookmark of Jesus saying "Are you reading smut?"

what the fuck