Torturing Tanya

How can we miss you if you won't go away!

'very gruesome', sexually violent' Sorry Tony, but I wouldn't read it if jesus Christ wrote it, no matter how good. It's the kind of stuff you've described that helps to numb the mind to sick behaviour. And the kids think it's acceptable because it's in their faces everyday. What this world needs is LESS violence not more, sexual or otherwise, directed at either sex. I might be narrow minded and unenlightened but if I need violence I only have to open my newspaper.

i started reading it and stopped ... it crossed the line for me ... i did find myself wondering if it WAS acceptable ... the point i stopped reading was where the character is being tortured and gains sexual pleasure from the process ... it made me wonder about the writer and the reason for writing it ... i am not for censorship but i did think about all the hoo hah with stormy's barbara ... so i perhaps dont feel it should have been rejected from the site ... we are in charge of what we read and i did make the choice not to read on ... it seemed gratuitous and unpleasant to an uncomfortable degree ... and i consider myself to be a broad minded reader ... i don't suppose it is badly written in particular BUT i did close the page saying ... eeeeugh that is VILE ...

I was very close to not taking it. So far, I have had doubts about a few pieces, but have removed a grand total of three from the site. One who thought quoting all of Carol Ann Duffy's Valentine would be a good way to look like a good poet. One this week who thought that Phil Collins doesn't sue for breach of copyright (quotes from lyrics are one thing, a poem that just writes all of the lyrics from a song another) and one that was, to be honest, just vile. I can't even describe how vile it was, save to say that it would make fans of gross-out comedy movies throw up. It had no redeeming qualities whatsoever. I have had lots that are very close to the mark - usually involving sex and violence towards women. As yet, I haven't seen any one author do more than one of these, which is why I left them on as 18s. Someone who made a habit of it, I would discourage from placing work here. I'm against censorship, and American Psycho is one of my favourite books, so difficult position here, but there clearly is a line out there.

come on melville, break your silence. What's your motivation. Does this raise your drawbridge or are you being 'ironic' (!) Are you in fact a gentle feminist?

I've only skim read these comments and i haven't read the story but from what i can gather. Paul's reasons for writing "torturing tanya" was to cause this uproar because he's an arrogant @!#$ and the more everyone goes on about it the more it feeds his ego. It's either that or he's simply sick minded. Most people are aware that this goes on and just because many people do not dicuss this doesn't make them narrow minded or ignorant. It's just sensitivity to the issues raised by "tanya". Saying that this story is for children is total crap, it also makes you seem irresponsible as a writer. I'm 17 and from what i've seen in the comments i definately know i wouldn't want to read it. I guess it is a story for an aqquired taste and whether it is well written or not isn't really what this whole debate is about. It's about the content and why it was banned from ABC. I think that really they had to right to ban it, because not many people would like to go to prison for someone they don't know especially a cocky stuck up sick minded person like Paul. My message to Paul would be if you really want to have you work on the net then make your own website and put them on there. P.S if you want him to stop being such an @!#$ just forget about him once all the debate about his story goes down he'll realise he's nothing special.

With so many vile thoughts and such profanity available in the "phorum", you might want to consider some kind of filter... and a "mature readers/adults only" warning so 17 year olds like Jenna can't wander in...

It’s a shame this thread has deteriorated into a slanging-match as the issue of censorship is intriguing. With this site and any other medium that presents words or pictures to the public there has to be censorship, just imagine the kind of images that could be easily obtainable if there weren’t. It’s also a fact that what one person sees as objectionable another may not, may even find enticing, but someone has to have the responsibility to decide what is acceptable and what isn’t. In this case ABCTales have opened the issue to let other contributors decided, such a democratic decision is not always available. It’s also a fact that some people like to push at the boundaries, obtaining as much from the argument about their work as the work itself. Film censorship is constantly being tested, there are several films on general release that most people would find completely unacceptable. Fifty years ago a man in a bedroom scene had to have a least one foot constantly on the ground, laughable these days, but are such scenes better now that graphic sex is allowed? Is it true that they are portrayed more realistically? I doubt it! The long-term problem is that the level of censorship is gradually being relaxed as we appear to become desensitised to the horrors of life. But what is driving the desensitisation ? Life or the images? My view is that it’s a downward spiral.

chooselife (which I do!) Your comments are interesting and I agree that we are in a downward spiral... but that brings us to the question of where a line should be drawn... Are we to remain so unrealistic as to have the man keep one foot on the floor? I remember the shows I saw as a child, the sitcoms and such, had the man and woman doing things like reading in bed... never romance... They might have a dozen kids, but you'd never guess HOW that happened! A decade earlier, the man and woman would have had to have SEPERATE beds... Again, I'm sure there are SOME in this world; possibly even members of this site, who live their lives like that... While it seems laughable today that such innocence was the norm (in media at least) we might have gone farther than should be tolerable in a UNREGULATED forum like network television... but the issue that this thread started with was not network television; it was this site and what should be allowed under the auspicies of it's "18" section... It will surprise many to know that I do rate my articles more conservatively than ABC does! Of the articles I currently have posted here; poems, stories, or non-fiction; many are posted with a "lower/younger" rating than I submitted them as... So I wonder what it says that SOME of the things I write are approved for a younger audience than I had intended? (I'm not upset by that, but I am curious... maybe it's the cultural difference?) I agree that we are becoming desensitized to the horrors of the world, but we have proven as a society that the way we "get through" such things is by living it vicariously... be it war, be it murder, be it rape, be it anything... When "Saving Private Ryan" came out, many (US) veterans of WWII were weeping and crying openly as it reopened their old wounds... the pain and suffereing of seeing their comrades in arms ripped to shreds by enemy bullets or grenades... of old cases of "survivors guilt" perhaps because they felt they didn't deserve to survive the carnage... Should we never produce another war epic because of such reactions from those who suffered through war? My own mother has suffered through many surgeries, had polio, lost a large portion of her digestive system to one particular ailment... she can't stand to watch anything dealing with hospitals... should we not allow E.R. on television because she can't deal with it? Jodie Foster has a new movie opening in the next week or two, "Panic Room" it is called... and it involves a woman and her young daughter trapped in a house, inside a "safe-room" that the three home-invaders want access to. I understand it is intense and terrifying in it's depiction of the fear and trauma, especially to the child... should we not allow this movie to be seen because of the pain it might cause to resurface in those who HAVE experienced a hostage situation in a home invasion? Times have changed. When Boris Karloff's "Frankenstein" and Bela Lugosi's "Dracula" were first released in the 1930's, they were rated X! Now they're available as an afternoon matinee on the weekends on local television! One final thought, chooselife, regarding your case of this being a "democratic" decision... that is far from the truth. There is never a democratic decision without a private vote. Once the mud-slinging began, once the story in question began to be (mis)labeled as pornography, those too demure to stand up and fight for right fell silent. Had it been put to a secret vote, in a manner that each member had ONE vote, you would have had a far different outcome... those who use fear and "hot-words" to intimidate would have lost their power. It's why, in America at least, we have a system where you vote in private; nobody knows for sure how anybody votes... unless you were to have a 100% vote; then you'd know how everybody who voted did...

Saving Private Ryan was a bog standard war film with exceptionally graphic scenes. No-one could watch the opening 15 minutes without being greatly affected by it. But the emotion came from the ferocity of the shots (no pun intended) rather than the abject horror of war. A good filmmaker is one that can evoke the emotion without having to resort to such extreme images. However ‘realistic’ the images in the opening 15-minutes were, they were still a cheap trick. Remove the opening and closing scenes and what are you left with? Spielberg is a great filmmaker but this wasn’t a great film, it was just graphic. For pure emotion, watch the shower scene in Schindler’s List. There are many powerful films where the horror/action takes place off screen. We don’t need to see surgery to know what it can mean, we don’t have to have a sex scene to know it’s taken place. We don’t need to see someone shot in the head to realise that his death has been futile. I haven’t read your story that gave rise to this thread so I can’t comment, but maybe you would find it a useful exercise to rewrite it, without the graphic scenes, just to see if you can still evoke the emotional reaction you desire.

I hesitate to extend this debate any further, but it seems to me that a lot of the contributors still haven't really understood what the objection to this particular piece is. It isn't that the piece is too sexually explicit, it isn't really even the descriptions of torture and mutilation, stomach-churning though they are, it's the "message" of the piece, which is that rape, torture and mutilation of women is acceptable because it's what they want at some level and they enjoy it. Now this I think is unacceptable. It's on a par with writing a piece that says the Jews actually liked getting gassed in Bergen Belsen and found it sexually exciting. Or that young children enjoy the attentions of dirty old men. Or that the fox likes getting torn to pieces by the hounds. It violates more than good taste, it violates logic and universal human decency. It encapsulates a lie so great that we should have nothing to do with its propagation. It goes beyond all reasonable limits. Let its author find somewhere else to display it (as indeed he has). There is no reason why ABC Tales has to be a sick-bag for the spewings of every deranged individual with a PC.

It strikes me that anyone should write as they wish. The crime is not in the construction, but in the adoption of the *thing*. I find it repulsive, therefore, I don't read it (if forewarned as in this case), or if it intrudes upon my feelings or emotions negatively. I am not one of those people who believe that we need negative writing to help good writers gain more readers. It's just my opinion, but I adhere to the old philosophy (?) that any publicity is better than none. In this case, if our group of writers repress our need to be heard on this one particular matter, the readership of this piece will wither and die, and so will the sh..ite in it. As usual, just my opinion.

Sirat: I can't believe you actually wrote this: "the "message" of the piece, which is that rape, torture and mutilation of women is acceptable because it's what they want at some level and they enjoy it" ??? I wrote this piece, so I think I would understand the message more than any. Sirat, it is a proven fact that there ARE women who begin to find a fulfillment in such things; women who find a kind of "romantic link" to their attacker, but this was not the case with this story. There WAS reference to how our bodies can betray us... how certain stimulus and certain thoughts can lead us to a level of arousal that goes against what we (or most of us) would want to happen. That's the problem with uneducated individuals thinking they can "interpret" the meaning of a work... they leap blindly to the wrong conclusions. And quite often, what they are protesting is their own, if not concious; at least latent belief... All too often those who label others sick are the sick ones themselves... and trying to shift the attention to something or someone else... It's tantamount to a guy getting busted for soliciting a prostitute blaming the prostitute for prostitution... Or the "conservative Christian" who while denoucing abortion from the pulpit, discreetly sends HIS daughter down for one after she gets prenant out of wedlock... The longer you speak, sir, the more of yourself you expose to the world... I can't wait to hear your next comments!

It seems that to me, the comments on this thread show that people don't get your message as you explain it Paul. Sirat has given his interpretation and you've put it down to uneducated ignorance. Others have seen it in a variety of ways but none so far have got the message you want to put across (as described above) so it would seem that as a piece, it has failed your intentions. If you DID intend it to repulse, stimulate or just generate debate then it would be credited with some success regardless of content but the message described above has not been received so the suggested rewrite might be the answer. There is currently another thread called "Polemic pants" which has evolved into a discussion on art and talent. My point on there applies here. The artist cannot be there to explain the peice to the viewer, nor can they select the audience once the item is in a public domain like this (outside of an age guideline) so surely the talent is in the way we get a message from our minds into everyone else's. That, to me, is the talent of the artist and, by your own admission here, you have failed.

I don't particularly like the piece Paul has written, but I disagree that he has failed. The completion of the piece *as intended* in the success. We don't have to like it or approve of it.

If something is upsetting it should be because we feel sympathy for the sufferer. To simply shock is never enough. The new film 'baise moi' which is said to be shocking is also said to be a very real depiction of women's suffering and is made by women to that end and so the explicit nature is justified and necessary. It has been acclaimed by female critics who see it as a genuine attempt at their perspective. I haven't read the piece in question but a similar issue has recently been resolved on another website where a piece described a horrific scene of child abuse in extreme detail without the justification that such detail requires. The author claimed he was 'sticking a pencil in the eye of the readers and leaving them thinking' he wasn't, he was just a bad writer with a very dirty mind. It was removed from the site once the legal implications for those who run the site as well as those who left comments on the peice were explained.

It is just telling a story. I would say that if the actions in the story were being exalted or advocated in any way the story should be removed. However if it merely tells the story it should be allowed here are many books which graphically describe the most debased and horrific expressions of humanity. To me this story is no more shocking than Dave Pelzer's recount of the abuse he suffered as a child at the hands of his mother.

Thankyou all for your contributions to this important thread. I take it that the general concensus is to leave this story on the site but maybe it should be marked by a large warning (more than the standard 18 symbol) at its head. Would this give it more publicity? Or should we just remove it?

i think an 18 certificate is adequate for this story tony ... like a lot of things which people open and then don't read i think people will make the choice with this one ... i don't think it a good idea to draw any further attention by singling it out as especially vile in content ... i expect people will and have already sought out the story who would probably not have bothered as a consequence of this thread ... but i notice nobody is charging in with a defense of its artistic merit ... it is a tricky thing to start criticising the content of a piece of writing ... i think really we need to confine ourselves to the style and the writing when criticising a piece of work ... the bit i read was not offensively badly written (the first thing that turns me off a piece) and i felt the jumpy point of view was irritating ... i would perhaps like to hear the writer's justification for the piece ... i suspect like steve says it was a raising the drawbridge exercise ... the question of withdrawing it rests with the management i guess ... does it adhere to the guidelines for publication on ABC? ... unless it infringes any of these then i see no justifiable way you can remove it and not open yourselves up to accusations of censorship ...

After a great deal of tortured thinking I have decided to remove this piece from the site. I hate doing it, it goes against so much of my thinking, but in this case I feel that it is appropriate. I have e-mailed the author and informed him of my decision but said that I am willing to listen to representations! Thankyou all for your contributions to this discussion.

Ely: Each site and market has, obviously, different individuals. The piece in question was not written with this market in mind... and in fact, I didn't know anything about this market when I posted it. Quite simply, I was introduced to this site by a friend and chose to post a recent work that had generated good response at other sites I had posted it. There was no dark motive, no desire to offend, no nothing... it was just a bad choice from my files... Had the editorial staff initially declined to post it, I would have come back with something "tamer"... but it was posted and then pulled and, as I have stated many times in these threads, I was asked to come here and defend the piece... It is interesting that the piece that is no longer here is still generating buzz while the several pieces I have posted here remain virtually un-commented on. I have gone back to my files and pulled items that fit the limitations that this site chooses to live by... be it poetry or shorter works of both ficton and non... and yet with no efforts on my part, on a site that is closed and not doing any publicity (writtenbyme.com) the story is being hit still 40 or 50 times a day! Though the controversy was initially unintended on my part, it has proven to boost interest in that story... while the other items I've placed here but not "promoted" are unappreciated... And speaking of promoting, could it be that the whole point of Tony starting this thread was to create a buzz? This has proven to be a quite exciting and long running topic... longer than most of those that pop up on the front page of the phorum... Perhaps my little story was used to elicit the kind of response it has... but not by me! Just a little something to think about... Paul

and I'm about to add to it but I still say the story sucks and serves no useful pupose whatsoever apart from titillating the pervo's. maybe this kind of event is common in the usa but mutilation of women here in the uk is rare and, knowing women fairly well as i do i tend to trust them when they say their bodies would not betray them in the scenario you describe. I tend to agree. i think anyone in that situation would be crapping themselves quite literally. much as they did in the gestapo chambers in WW2. Perhaps you should bring that into your story. it would be far more realistic than the scenes you describe. good luck and be grateful for all the publicity

There's no "might be" about it, my friend... you ARE narrow minded... Regretably, there are people in this world who WILL... for the mere sake of a profit; or maybe just a thrill; do bodily and/or sexual harm to another... Choosing to not read a story is certainly an option; so is sticking your head in the sand... if you think that choosing to not allow a story to be told might in some way prevent some sick person from actually doing such a thing... It also pains me that Tony mentioned the "violence" toward women but failed to mention that the story does have a happy ending in that the intended victim survives and those who sought her death end up victims of their own devices... what I consider a classic "good vs. evil" positive ending. Torturing Tanya deals graphically with a disturbing theme... but also glimpses at the soul; the tortured ones who would perpetrate such a heinous act, and the heart of a mother who's chief concern is for her child and her loved ones over her own safety... It never justifies what is transpiring, but does look at what might produce such behavior in people... I acknowledge that this story is certainly not for everyone... but as you say, you wouldn't read it if Jesus Christ wrote it... well, there are many who choose to not write the one He did write (or inspire)... Maybe they should be allowed to hide if from those who would enjoy it? In black-balling such a work, you show yourself to have the same kind of intolerance that causes books to be banned in our schools because of historical revisionists or the right-wing wacko's who would censor "Harry Potter" because of the witch-craft and the supposed planting in childrens minds that it is alright to "disobey" their parents... As the proud author of what I consider to be (and apparently so does Tony) a fine work, I implore you to not read it if you so choose, but to not join in a "book-burning"... Regards, Paul Mellette

I think, Paul, all authors *feel your pain*. However, in this instance, I believe the decision the site caretakers herein have made, culled a potentially harmful piece. You must assume they did it with malice, or they did it because of concience. I for one do not believe it was done from malice. Lets all live with it, and get on down the road. Remember Paul, your right to swing ends where another's nose begins. You are a wonderful, talented writer. Put is to further use rather than sweat the small stuff.

Responding to Fish and Jude: Thanks for not jumping on the "censorship" bandwagon... To the rest who commented: The idea that what is disturbing to us should not be allowed can be taken to such a place that all we'd ever be allowed to read is a blank piece of paper... because I assure you that what is pleasing to you might just be disturbing to me... What is gruesome to one person might be scary to another; what is vile to one could possibly be erotic to someone else... As writers we certainly invite disaster if we leap at the opportunity to "ban", "remove", or "Censor" the work of a fellow writer... to paraphrase an old analogy; who will be there then to defend YOUR story when they come for it? ***** Those who "wonder about me" can check out my writings at other sites; http://writtenbyme.com/userprofile.php?name=the_white_cloth has the most and as of right now is still accessible... My writings tend to be sacry and erotic or romantic and sexy... short stories and poetry mostly... but damn near everything I write is done so with that special woman I love in mind... including this "disturbing" piece... This story did come with an advisory... if you choose to ignore the warning signs, and read a story you think might be offensive... you deserve to be offended by the story! If you're going to worry about kids "sneaking in" past the "18" sign, then you need to consider not allowing ANY adult materials... Tony has offered to reinstate Torturing Tanya if I make a good argument... I hope I have made it... and I hope those of shallow mind can find some depth within themselves and contact Tony to support the inclusion of my story here... Thanks Paul Mellette

Tess and I once had a discussion about a piece by tan63 which was quite strong - I let it through without any real qualms because I've seen so much good quality work from her and I felt it was more than just exploitative and shocking for sake of it. I have to say that I remember reading this story and remember thinking "well, if it goes through, its definitely an 18" and I remember deciding that in my view, it could go through but I don't remember being struck by it being either particularly great or particularly poor writing. Clearly from what Paul says, there's a sense of morality to it that has been lacking in at least one piece I can think of that is still on the site, featuring violence and sexual unpleasantness to a woman written by someone who seemed far too close to the character whose actions they were describing. Although I think Paul is a bit heavy-handed in arguing his case, I would give a yes to it being on - to be honest, the title does give quite an indication as to what it might contain.

Thank you Andrew! You're right in that the title does make it plain that there just mighe be some... "gasp"... TORTURE involved in this story! ;-) It's one of the reasons I opted for that simple title... so nobody would accuse me of having surprised them... When I originally presented this story in a serialized format, it was slower to build steam... and those who chose to "come along for the ride" were rewarded in the end but each and every episode had a bump or two to thrill them... perhaps I should have kept that serial feel here. In fact, I originally had intended to, because I didn't as yet fully understand the "abc" concept; I was planning to do each "episode" as a letter... Anyway, I've had my say... I'll leave it to the decision makers here if they want to restore "Tanya" to her place... and only comment further in this forum if I am actually addressed... Paul

You are entitled to your opinion of me Paul as I am of you. I didn't make any derogatory statement about you, I just remarked that in my opinion sadistic writing such as I've been led to believe your story is, can lead to the desensitising of society and is therefore undesirable. To use 'revisionism' as a defence is patent bollocks, but then you are aware that sensationalism along with sex and debauchery always finds an audience and sells. I am not a 'book burner' as you suggest, I just don't have the stomach for violence, (I walked out halfway through 'Essex Boys' for the very same reason, in spite of the fact that I had been taken to see it as a 'treat'). In one newspaper yesterday there was a 2 page article about how girls as young as 14/15 are kidnapped and forced into prostitution in the balkans and eventually sent to Britain and other European countries where they are treated as sex slaves. Apparently a police raid closed down several such brothels. This isn't some 'proud writers' flight of sick fantasy but the REAL thing and it makes me vomit. As I said before, if I want sadism and violence i can always read the papers. Are all people who disagree with your views narrowminded and intolerant

Miss issipi, let me address your questions as succ inctly as poss ible... your most pressing seems to be your clos ing comment... "Are all people who disagree with your views narrowminded and intolerant(?)" My answer would be - Probably... if you're not open minded regarding any particular issue then you are obviously narrow/closed minded... You also recounted the newspaper article: "In one newspaper yesterday there was a 2 page article about how girls as young as 14/15 are kidnapped and forced into prostitution in the balkans and eventually sent to Britain and other European countries where they are treated as sex slaves. Apparently a police raid closed down several such brothels." I guess if the news had been posted here at abctales instead of on "abcnews", you'd have voted it off? Does hiding the problem from the public make it go away? Does denying it or ignoring it as an issue make the girls who are the victims any safer? Personally I don't think so... I think that the more of us who are aware that there ARE monsters out there the better and safer a place we can make for those we love and those who choose to remain ignorant of the issues... And my friend; to deride me for using sensationalism... or sex and violence for that matter... to sell a story? Well, if you're not interested in your stories finding a broad audience, I suggest that you might consider keeping a diary instead of investing time and energy at a website for writers... The whole point, as I see it, in venues like this is to share your work with your fellow writers. Can one write darkness and still walk in morality and light? I don't know... Ask Bram Stoker or Mary Shelly... hell, ask Stephen King... he's still around... My most recent published works have taken on characters and situations that have had a dark history and done just the opposite, given them a caring and tender slant... I've recently written a series of stories for AC Comics (a US comic book publisher whose specialty is strong-"good-girl"-female characters... ) I also a few years ago did the final script/draft for a book to benefit the Rape Crisis Centers (specializing in the promoting of "Date Rape Awareness"... and yeah, they signed off on the story... including my revision... But even with a project like that, it took sex and sensationalism to raise money for the worthy cause... go figure... As I said before, I'm not asking you to read my story... although I'm sure you could learn something from it... In fact, I'd probably rather someone with such closed-minded views stayed the hell away from it... but I resent you or anybody else trying to keep somebody who might like the thrills... might like the idea of good triumphing over evil... from enjoying my little arena of free speech... Paul

Having read some of it, and in this particular case, I would vote to keep Paul's story on.. and leave it to the readers to employ self censorship.. which is what we do when we decide not to carry on reading a story.. for whatever reason. However.. ..and this is a question directed at you Paul.. if you were responsible for the totality of the material presented on a site such as this, is there need for any censorship? And if so what criteria would you employ? You have used general'free speech' arguments in your posts and I don't think that is appropriate here or anywhere else come to think of it.. Any absolutist argument is plain silly (IMO).. and so is 'it happens in society thus people ought to know about it'.. for unfortunately, allowing for human history, that excuses anything that you could ever think of' ..More stronger are some of your arguments on the particular merits and themes of your story.. for public writing is a social activity and as a writer you do have responsibilities to your readership.. defined by the current norms in society.. perfectly acceptable that you should try and push them by arguing your individual case.. but they are there for a reason.. otherwise the platform to display your works would not exist in the first place. I would suggest it is even more narrow minded not to consider and think through the likely consequences of ones actions (whatever ones final decision).. Remember that paedophiles, racists etc use 'free speech' arguments too.. would you censor the material they peddle in or not?

Paul! How could I have been so unperceptive? How could I have misread something like: "Mel relished having the control; the bringing even the most terror-stricken, the most disgusted, the most hate-filled woman to the pinnacle of pleasure... " as meaning that women found sexual pleasure in cruelty and torture? Of course. I can see it clearly now. And I am grateful for the Freudian insight that in being revolted by the idea of cutting off bits of a woman's body with a knife, electrocuting her or raping her with some kind of razor-encrusted dildo I am actually revealing dark and shameful secrets of my own psyche. On consideration I can see that is indeed myself who needs the help. As you say though, my insensitivity can be partly forgiven by virtue of my lack of education, having never advanced beyond the Degree of M.A. in Philosophy from the University of London. Had I completed my Ph.D., for which I was registered for some eight years, I am certain that the true depth and subtlety, and feminist subtext (?) of this exemplary piece of literary fiction would have been immediately evident to me. But alas some of us are condemned to content ourselves with the shadows on the wall of the cave. I am returning now to the pages of that far more liberal and enlightened showcase of serious writing Thought Cafe, to strive for some self improvement through the study of your latest fine offering: "Spanking Sandra".

A very interesting debate. Like many others I began to read "Tanya", found it distasteful, and stopped. I don't want to stop other people from reading it, my reason for stopping was just that I found it unpleasant and not very interesting, so that was my choice. But having said that, I do wonder whether ABC should provide a platform for unpleasant or racist or pro-violence or paedophelic or whatever material when the whole Internet is freely available for propagating such material anyway? There are loads of sites for people who want to submit that kind of thing. The point is, there are serious and worthwhile writers using this site who obviously don't want to be associated with this kind of material, and I suspect that the editors don't either, and certainly I don't, so couldn't we politely suggest that its authors display it somewhere else? How is that censorship? This site is owned and run by a particular group of people. Let us suppose (for sake of argument) that the people whose site it is don't want a particular item here for whatever reason. I have no problem with them not including it. It is as if a member of some obscure little political party came to my front door a few days before election day and said "Pleas put one of our posters in your front window". I think it would be perfectly acceptable for me to say: "Sorry, that's MY front window. I don't want your poster there". Absolutely nothing to stop them putting it somewhere else. Nothing whatever to do with censorship.

Great stuff all the way round. Thankyou for your contributions - especially you, Paul! My main concern right now is prosecution under the Obscene Publications Act here in the UK. We are a UK site, hosted in the UK, and therefore have to comply with UK law. The Obscene Publications Act is an amorphous and difficult piece of legislation. I am generally opposed to it and would wish to see it amended substantially and have long campaigned accordingly. My very first piece of writing was published in 'Oz' magazine back in the 60s and you probably all know what happened to them under the Act. I'm seeking legal advice on the piece and, if the lawyers feel it's OK, then will make a decision based on my own feelings. Censorship is NOT my thing - I have years of pushing the boundaries behind me - but I am not willing to go to prison for the sake of Torturing Tanya! Pip pip, Tony

I'll reply in the same mode as you employed Paul. If you believe anybody disagreeing with your views is intolerant and narrow-minded, inferring thay your views couldn't possibly be at fault, then I suggest that it is you who is narrow-minded and not a little arrogant as well. There was no need to reprint parts of my post, I am well aware of the content and I can almost guarantee everybody else here can read. I mentioned it to highlight the fact that stories about real life horror stories are readily available and it is crap for you to claim that you're bringing some kind of enlightenment to the civilised world. Your assumption that you are somehow more aware of these problems than I may be are also rubbish, in my life I've witnessed some of this stuff first hand. As it happens I'm not closeminded about anything, I just feel that the site doesn't benefit from offensive writing, and judging from Tony's remarks about the obscene publications act and serving a prison sentance on behalf of your free speech, that's exactly what it is. Whether or not well known writers have published books on the topics you refer to is also immaterial; their books contain only their writings, and anybody with a modicum of sense would know what they were 'buying' and make their decision accordingly. This site, and others like it, have a multitude of writing and readers, in other words it's a general purpose writers site, not a hardcore place. Perhaps it's you that is in the wrong place! You can rest easy as I have no intention of reading your story. Oh, and lastly, I am not 'your friend', and I also doubt very much that I could learn anything from you. So far good HAS triumphed over evil; your story has been removed!

Good triumphing over evil is a bit strong. So far, I think 1 leg has put the best argument forward. My view on reading it was that it wasn't my cup of tea and had I not been reading it in a professional capacity, I wouldn't have read on (although the first part was actually quite interesting). I thought it would be offensive to some people, but not so offensive that they would have a fit of the vapours or vomit and those who weren't going to like it would know before it turned nasty. If it had gone straight into the violence from para one, it might have been different. I do think that Paul's argument that there can be no restraint on free expression is a fallacy, see 1 legs comments here, and my reply to Miles on another of these threads - there has to be some lines drawn, not least because this site would be closed down if we started publishing obscene or racist material - but even if it were lawful, I for one wouldn't want to be a part of a site that did that. The whole narrow-minded thing - everyone has places where they draw the line - Mississippi doesn't want to read stories involving excessive violence and that is his right - it doesn't mean his narrow-minded. Disagreeing with someone doesn't make you narrow-minded.

Mississippi's not wanting to read the story is in no way narrow minded; his seeking to prevent others from reading it is... it's just another form of forcing his brand of morality onto others... (and for the man from the "humpback" state, I used the term "my friend" because it sounded better than a$$hole... proof that I CAN show restraint in my writing...) As for Tony's "legal questions", I can appreciate and understand that standpoint... the UK is an interesting place in that so many of your customs and styles seem more over-the-top to us Americans and yet there is still the "prim-and-proper" undercurrent... I wonder though, Tony, if you might not have considered the legality before initially allowing "Tanya" to see the light of day... It also might interest you to know that "another UK sight has had no problem whatsoever with the piece, " http://www.thoughtcafe.co.uk " And from a visitors perspective Tony, it appears that you might be the one who stirred the pot, so to speak, as you are the one who started this thread, inviting complaints from the whiners instead of waiting for them to speak up on their own... if they would have... There is always somebody who will jump on a bandwagon... but few who have the courage to go first... One final thought; "friend" mississippi... a man who thinks he has nothing to learn from another tends to prove his need to learn... Regards to all, friend or foe... Paul

The bullshi..te and aroma is starting to thicken here. Why don't we simply say Amen and call it a Mass. David

Sirat: Obviously your major in philosophy came with a minor in sarcasm. And your comparison of "Spanking Sandra" which was written as a favor to a friend and "Torturning Tanya" which delves more deeply into dark evil contiue to prove that you are commenting on things that you have not read. Oh, sure, you've pulled a quote from TT, but anybody with even a GED would not be as ignorant to have read SS and think to link the two, aside from the use of double initials in the title! And any of us can claim to be anything; it's one of the charms and one of the potential horrors of the internet. For all you know, I might be a Bishop or a Cardinal in the Catholic Church; I might be a professor at Harvard; I could even be a senator or congressman! I could claim to have a doctorate in theology or maybe I graduated with honors from UCLA... My point is, tooting your own horn about your supposed accomplishments in life goes about this far () toward impressing me; or, I imagine, anybody who has an IQ of greater than one digit! But... thanks for keeping the thread alive! I was afraid all would be over and I'd have to rely on you %$#&*@'s reading another of my works and commenting on it! It's nice to have a "legacy"... I wonder if you'll ever produce one? Paul

One More Thing, Sirat! Thanks for alerting the world that there IS a "Spanking Sandra" story at the REAL UK writers site! I had made a concious efort to not mention it here since this is proving to be pretty much the kid's forum... I guess, much like Satan, that which you intended for evil, HE will use for good! Thanks for "opening your mouth"... and the eyes of the world! Paul

Oh, shut up will you @!#$!

OK, @!#$ Mellette, firstly I have no wish to stop anybody reading your rubbish, I just don't think it is relevant to this site, secondly there is plenty that I can, and need to learn from others, I just don't think I can learn anything from YOU, except maybe how to write revolting garbage. And lastly, before you criticise this country you would be well advised to take a close look at your own, one of the problems with some Americans is they have an unshakeable belief in their own righteousness, something that very few other nations can see. Having said that, I confess to being very fond of America and virtually all of it's subjects that I have met.

That was 'a.s.s.h.o.l.e' Paul, a word you are probably very familiar with.

Jackie, Jackie, Jackie... you're reading this by choice dude! Keep your cool... enhance your calm... get a grip... And besides, since you KNOW I'm going to reply, you OBVIOUSLY don't want me to shut up... or you'd not tell me to! Yeah, I know a little about psychology too! You'd be surprised, I think, to know just what I do know and what I have done in my life! I'd share a little with you... but I guess I'll "shut up" for now... ;-) Your Friend Paul

Mississippi, I'm getting tired of the old BS about being an American. If you really believe the British are less arrogant or self absorbed you are either a fool or just speaking to hear yourself talk. Everyone in the WORLD I have spoken with have concurred. I have completely agreed with you and all said (see my comments herein) about Paul's piece. But, you know what? He, and you, can have an opinion without it being an American or British opinion. Jesus, man. Get a grip on this sh..ite. Your response is not requested, as it is predictable.

We have moved from the sublime to the ridiculous. Shall we quit the thread now, ladies and gentlemen.

Hey Mississippi... thanks for at least getting my name right... in that regard, you're one-up on Tony (see the FIRST post in this thread!) And yeah, I am used to dealing with a.s.s.h.o.l.e.s., so I recognize one by face, by voice, by superior attitude, or by their writing... and sometimes just by their nationality... ;-) (I think I'd choose (D) for you my "friend"...)

Christ, Paul. Let's ALL get of this *nationality* bullsh..ite. We are starting to sound like the Afghani tribes. Lets just hate each other for our differences of opinion, where it counts, not for one's nationality.

Uh... David, don't you think that Afghani Tribesmen (and woman) might resent THAT comment? Hell man, I don't hate anybody... I'm having too much fun to hate people! Besides, anybody who's EVER studied the Bible knows that the true spirit of God is forgiveness... even Jesus Christ, who my friend Mississippi brought to the party, said that His Father will only forgive those who forgive their brothers... and will never forgive those who won't forgive their brothers... (oh... sorry, don't mean to spoil the party for those who think I'm just some God-forsaken heathenistic spawn of Satan!) ;-) Next?

Good thought. Is He the same God who nuked a couple of big cities? Sodom and some other place, killing a lot of people? Oh, and is he the same God that said to hell with all of us, made it rain for 40 days and 40 nights or something? Which ended up killing EVERYONE except those on the yacht? I don't look for forgiveness anymore. Just a good short story or a satisfying poem. Oh, well. Oh, and I constantly look for a good East Indian Restaurant, which, I'm pleased to report ,results in a good meal weekly. Oh, and SPAWN? I do wish I were young enough to go spawning more frequently, holds such dear memories.

Paul, If this piece is, as you imply, a study of how our physical responses to stimulus, even horrific torture, can defy our conscious wants then it's a good point and worthy of any market. ABCTales would seem to be ideal. These other markets you mention can't be more philosophically able to deal with such issues so what makes them more suitable? I put it to you that this piece is designed to shock and titilate and is primarily eroticism that crosses so many lines it can only be displayed in certain 'markets'. To say it's a serious point, illustrated by appropriately intense detail cannot be true. If it were then you would find a less offensive but just as powerful way to depict the details and we would all be reading and discussing a genuine piece of dramatic writing. WHICH WE ARE NOT. You make the point that this thread has been sustained even in the absence of the piece itself, well people are still discussing Hitler but it doesn't make his actions any more valid. Very little mention of the piece occurs, it's all just people showing disgust and trying to make points to you about censorship. The fact that you enjoy the 'publicity' it seems to be generating only confirms your real objective which is to gain notoriety and shock people.