I never win things, but I need to try for this one, lol.
Goodreads refugee finding a new home. thebookgeek.co.uk
I never win things, but I need to try for this one, lol.
First Jeff Bezos with Amazon and now Michael Tamblyn and his Kobo (and Otis, but he hasn't got round to deletions for sex books yet. I'm sure that his boss, Bezos, will soon have him up to speed on that though).
I was reading this and thought to myself, "what kind of church does Michael Tamblyn go to?"
Censorship. Censorship. Censorship. Why this new Puritanism? Porn rape fantasies and sex with girls of legal age (just) is such a huge industry. No one has to like it to see that a) it is completely legal because no one puts that kind of money at risk and b) no one is forcing people to watch it, vast numbers of people just really, really like viewing it. And perhaps couples like rp'ing it a bit too. But they can't read it any more because according to Bezos and Tamblyn (and Chandler), Censorship is a lovely thing.
Tamblyn says writers can write it but,
"All I can say is that if your dream is to publish “barely legal” erotica or exploitative rape fantasies, distribution is probably going to be a struggle for you."
Out the window goes John Fowles' The Collector, which is a very dark book on definitely-illegal rape and kidnap fantasies. A brilliant 5-star read. What about Steig Larsson's Girl with the Dragon Tattoo? (With its genius pay-back scene). Then there is Shades of Grey itself, not well-written, but pretty much an exploitative fantasy, and enjoyed by many.
What about the classic, Fanny Hill? Exploitative sex fantasies were very popular in Victoria times, but generally at some point in the book it becomes a jolly good romp enjoyed by all. Would that go or does the 'romp' element make it ok? Ann Rice (writing as A.N. Roquelaure) with her pre-Interview with a Vampire trilogy, the Claiming of Sleeping Beauty, a mega-seller, that is nothing but exploitative and violent (mostly spanking and rape) sex fantasies? Will they pull Ira Levin's The Stepford Wives? Are we to read nothing but Disney princes kissing the beautiful girl amid sparkles and rippling music?
Why is wrong with violent sex fantasies? They are fantasies, not real. I suppose reporting on the Yorkshire Ripper with all his rapes, hammer attacks, mutilations and murders will be ok, because it really happened. Writing about rape for titillation will have to be couched in terms of reportage not fantasy.
But it will still be ok to publish books containing child abuse, violent out-of-control people, torture scenes, terrible murders, cannibalism, beating up, trafficking and enslaving women and anything else anyone damn well pleases, so long as it doesn't cross Tamblyn's sexual no-no line. Violence good! Sex bad :-(
I wonder what church he goes to?
I'm sure we all remember, or have heard of (for the younger set lol), the woman who sued over the hot coffee. I'd never heard the real story before this video, and now that I have, I feel bad about my disdain. My mother was severely burned over most of her body when she was a kid, and I can't imagine going through that kind of trauma and then having millions of people hate you for it. That poor woman.
Was traveling all day yesterday and only now am catching up (I still have a lot of dashboard and GR stuff to check on) - so I only just now saw the Salon piece. From the details in Miller's article it's obvious that she's been paying attention and did her research. And I mentally said "yay Ceridwen" at all of her quotes. (I'm a fangrl for her use of data and graphs. I've always admired quantitative research, probably because I tried very hard to be a stats nerd in grad school and found it can be an endless type of work. Apparently I'm a more qualitative-research type.)
Most of you have already seen this, so I've left the quotes behind the page break. Bolded parts aren't in the original - I was pleased to see those points being made. The following is only a part of the entire article.
WEDNESDAY, OCT 23, 2013
When Amazon bought Goodreads it got a community of passionate readers, not all of whom want to follow the new rules
by Laura Miller
So I've entered a contest... I normally don't bother, but it's a contest to win $3,000 of new furniture, and we've NEVER had new furniture. The contest won't start till the 4th but some genius friend of mine suggested I see if you lovelies would vote for me when the time comes. ^_^
"An important post about the way Amazon is redefining the literary landscape. It's not just reviewers who are concerned--as an author this worries me deeply, even though Amazon is the largest retailer of my books." --Mike Mullin, author of ASHFALL
Amazon, GrAmazon, is redefinining our experience of literature! Amazon has evaded having to pay tax and comply with labour laws in many countries, in many US states. Now it is getting around the various laws that protect free speech in order to define what people may or may not read purely for the sake of making Even More Money. America is a capitalist country, Amazon is only 'living the dream' and taking it to the extreme of that cliche, power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely. The power of the monopoly.
We all know that book lovers love discussing books and sharing their reading experiences. We're opening discussion rooms on BookLikes where you can create reading groups, book clubs and set up discussions about books you enjoyed.
This is the first version of groups, we'll be constantly improving and releasing new additional features so stay tuned :)
Discussion rooms are added on the top of the page next to Explore, Giveaways, Daily Deals, Goodies and Friends.
Brandi here, I didn't write the blurb down below, but I'm the same way, so it fits.
I'm straight (and an ally), so I don't feel right entering these giveaways. I feel like there are enough straight stories out there - the market is saturated with it - and I'd prefer it if someone QUILTBAG entered in my stead - someone who's questioning their sexuality, or comfortable in its non-mainstreamness.
We need more stories like these because QUILTBAG peeps aren't invisible.
I am writing with tears in my eyes. This girl has the gift of oration. Or something I can't explain.
Every time she talks I can't help but hold my breath.
Part of it is the issue of Women's Rights which is important to me as it should be to any woman no matter which country she lives in. Another part is her story of speaking up and being shot for it.
I've been sort of absent lately and I'm trying to get back in the swing of things. I'm still furious with gr, and I've got a ton of school stuff still to do - why is it taking so long to get into a groove omg - and I've got a massive headache.
I did manage to read a bit though amazingly; I read Bold Tricks, but was horribly disappointed. :/ Before that one I read Dangerous Girls, and was blown away! That book is all kinds of awesome!
Yesterday Goodreads threw the first punch, simultaneously insulting their users' intelligence. They announced BookLikes was responsible for reviews deleted that were not targeted as part of their new policy. And yet, in Kara's following comments, she admits there is also a bug deleting reviews.
(Click to see the thread in which these posts were made)
As I mentioned in an earlier post, my husband is a programmer. He works for an international company with a high bar for its IT staff.
I ran GR's latest nonsense--their claim that Booklikes is causing Goodreads content to be deleted--past him, and the verdict is that this is actually probably GR's fault. More than likely is has to do with flaws in their API code that are more like security holes than features. Other sites should never be able to delete GR user content. The fact that it may have somehow happened indicates that the blame lies with Goodreads, and they're trying to use Booklikes as a scapegoat.
Reblogged from - http://moonlightlibrary.booklikes.com/post/575559/post
What the actual fuck? SERIOUSLY WHAT THE FUCK?
NOTE - I unconnected Booklikes and Goodreads when I found my BL updates were going to GR on different editions of the book. The only book I removed from BL were my 'bba' books because I couldn't have exclusive shelves at the time. My books are still on my GR list.
Hmmm so the logic of this, to me anyway, reads thusly...
"all of our popular reviewers are going to booklikes because we royally fucked them. I have an idea, lets delete some if their shit and then blame booklikes and maybe they'll forget we are censoring them and they'll come back to us and love us again."
"Fucking brilliant Steve, I fail to see any flaws in that idea whatsoever"
(Brandi here) I'm so completely sick of GR's bullshit.
Goodreads need to sort their bullshit one way or another.
"Sometimes however, as in many social sites, some Followers don’t really want to stay connected, they want you to follow them back and share their not book related content. Recently we've received feedback from you and we’ve noticed this situation on BookLikes, you wrote to us that you feel uncomfy knowing that some not-book-interested blog is following you. We want you to feel comfy, safe and sound on BookLikes so we decided to let you decide who should follow your blog. Once you enter Followers site (clickFriends tab) and point to a given person, you’ll see a tiny round “block” icon. When you click on it, you'll block a given blog, it stops following you and will no longer see your posts on Dashboard (the blog will disappear form Followers tab when you refresh).