13
$\begingroup$

It may be just me, but sometimes a question pops out describing a world that somehow justifies mixing kids and sex in the... "wrong order".

While I think that people should be free to write about whatever they want and they are welcome to ask questions about how sexuality works on their worlds of fiction, it's worth to notice that pedophilia is a really sensitive subject and it can easily make people uneasy.

It bothers me to no end when I find out someone asking a question that, in the small lines, seems to be looking for a way to write some sort of erotica of doubtful taste.

However, I'm not sure if I'm the one being overly sensitive about this, or if those questions I find sometimes really push some buttons on more people.

I would be glad to discipline myself to tolerate this topic more in if I'm on the wrong here, but I want to be sure that the problem is with myself and not with those questions.

It's easier to understand if I cite some examples, so, there are a couple of the ones that made me feel sad/angry/mad/depressed when I read them.

How to make GM/GMO children exceptionally loyal to one another?

The above question wants a way to make children overly loyal to each other, and the question states more or less outright that one of the methods to do so include sex between the kids.

How would modern society react if Mate Or Die was in effect for humans and mating also gave unaging?

This one has a more extreme take on the situation - if your kids don't make sex, they just die. This one imposes the requeriment at the start of the puberty - which would be around 10 years old. It may not be "pedophilia" by some standards, but at least on my country it is.

Does questions like those bother anyone else?

| |
$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ My own question might be kinda related: meta.worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/2412/… $\endgroup$ – Pavel Janicek May 24 '16 at 21:00
  • $\begingroup$ @PavelJanicek í knew í remembered it right. $\endgroup$ – Green May 24 '16 at 21:28
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ This is a very odd question title to read on the community bulletin. $\endgroup$ – ArtOfCode May 26 '16 at 9:47
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ @ArtOfCode I think that's the whole point $\endgroup$ – yobddigi May 26 '16 at 10:11
  • $\begingroup$ I'd just like to say, as I created one of those questions cited; that I am deeply sorry for making you feel upset. I think my use of language was simply ineffective, and my question framing could have been better too. My intent was never as many people assumed, and perhaps should have stated that I assumed sexuality would come into play as a means of bonding as it does normally with teenagers or young adults, just in this hypothetical fiction. The use of "children" was because they are the "children" of whoever creates them. Not specific age reference for sexual activity. My bad :( $\endgroup$ – inappropriateCode May 27 '16 at 10:14
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @inappropriateCode Hey, thanks for the consideration! Just a tip: use the term "offspring" or "sons and daugthers" when refering to the blood relationship between parents and their kids, and "children" for the age group. People around here pay a lot of attention to details, and things like this are more often than not taken literally! $\endgroup$ – T. Sar May 27 '16 at 11:33
  • $\begingroup$ The first example seems to be edited for clarification and no longer applies; the second one just seems like a bad question and not really about pedophilia. $\endgroup$ – TylerH May 27 '16 at 14:21
  • $\begingroup$ @ThalesPereira I'm not sure there's much of a distinction between the two, as while the word children has ambiguity, it is a legitimate use to refer to an adult as being someone's child. It may be more specific to refer to someone as X's daughter, but in this case of gender ambiguity that doesn't make sense. Offspring, to me, sounds more clinical and less human; the offspring of other animals, which is why I didn't use the term. I've edited the question anyway to explicitly clarify this, and hopefully frame it better. Thank you for your feedback. $\endgroup$ – inappropriateCode May 27 '16 at 14:33
  • $\begingroup$ Oh. Hey. One of my questions are here. $\endgroup$ – Malady May 28 '16 at 4:20
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I find both question boring and unrealistic, specially second one. I have notice that live not always, hm so nice maybe, and some tribes survived only because they did all necessary to survive. There was and is lot of dirt in necessity to survive. You may take look how our body works, inside. $\endgroup$ – MolbOrg Jun 25 '16 at 18:45
22
$\begingroup$

I remember a question a while ago along this same question line where "[X] WB topic makes me uncomfortable, what should I do about it?" There's no shortage of topics that [X] could be: violence, incest, rape, mass-murder (a popular one on WB, to be sure), blasphemy, pedophilia, necrophilia, bestiality, etc, etc. I myself have probably written a few questions that make a lot of people uncomfortable such as mass-sterilization, reproductive equality and race relations. Our world contains all these topics, as sad/unfortunate as that may be. Writing stories is a way to grapple with those topics.

I don't have a problem with questions on any of these topics as long as they are conveyed in a dispassionate, clinical tone. Doctors learn to judiciously look at the most private parts of the human body as something to work on, not as a sexual object. I choose to believe that WBers come here with the hope of this kind of dispassionate analysis for their questions. I'm willing to meet them on those terms on the vast majority of topics.

Advocating violence, rape, mass-murder or anything else listed above is completely unacceptable and I would instantly downvote/report/flag any question or answer that did advocate this. Similarly, I don't want to read long graphic descriptions of these sensitive topics. Talking about how to execute 20 million people is one thing. Saying that it's something that should be done in the real world is something completely different.

| |
$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks for your input. I'll give it some thinking about being a bit more dispassionate about it. Still, hard topics are... well, hard for a reason! $\endgroup$ – T. Sar May 24 '16 at 19:21
  • $\begingroup$ @ThalesPereira, I agree. There are some really difficult subjects here that I don't want to read about...so I don't. This question is a good one to ask. $\endgroup$ – Green May 24 '16 at 19:22
  • $\begingroup$ Maybe I'm just afraid of this site, which I love so much, becoming a paradise for erotic tales of doubtful taste... Sigh, I don't really know. Is that a bad thing? $\endgroup$ – T. Sar May 24 '16 at 19:54
  • $\begingroup$ I think the likelihood of that is pretty low...but I appreciate your watchfulness to make sure it doesn't. $\endgroup$ – Green May 24 '16 at 20:33
  • $\begingroup$ @Green That question about killing people was asked by me: meta.worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/q/3394/2071 $\endgroup$ – Pavel Janicek May 24 '16 at 21:28
13
$\begingroup$

In all honesty: No, they don't bother me. What you have to remember is that these questions are about a fictitious world or a (hopefully) fictitious version of Earth. The society in question may be very different from what you are used to, and may even be considered obscene, backwards, or revolting by any number of societies in existence on Earth.

Consider, for example, that there is a tribe that eats their dead. Most societies strongly discourage or entirely ban cannibalism, for various reasons. In truth, though, there's nothing wrong with eating the flesh of deceased humans, so long as you don't eat certain parts, such as the brain, due to lethal diseases.

Throughout Earth's history, females could be married before they reached puberty and could have at least one child before they reached the age of 15. This was a norm of the societies of the time, back when living for 20 years wasn't a guarantee and males were expected to produce heirs to prove their fitness to inherit from their father.

Questions and answers on Worldbuilding (main or meta) should never be construed to imply an endorsement of the concepts presented therein. Try to approach each question on its own (unless it links to other questions, of course) and give each the same consideration. Ultimately, if you don't like a question that is clearly relevant to building a world, ignore it. There's nothing that says you have to click on the question, read the whole post, provide an answer, read existing answers, or comment on the question or answers.

If you are strongly opposed to a question, downvote it. While the hover text for voting indicates the intended purpose of the voting buttons, there's no enforcement mechanism and your vote is ultimately your own.

So, no, they don't bother me. But I'm also a remorseless, dispassionate bastard who delights in tormenting D&D players with societal evils until they run screaming from the room. (And, yes, that has happened; earlier this year, in fact.)

| |
$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ I welcome your viewpoint and I'll give some thought on it. Thanks for expressing it! $\endgroup$ – T. Sar May 24 '16 at 19:17
1
$\begingroup$

They don't. Violence, rape, genocide, torture, pedophilia, racism and many other topics are things that exist, regardless of one's opinion of them. As such, they are topics that are bound to be picked up by authors of different genres.

Some authors may address those issues in a critical or cynical view, others may simply accept them as true and use them to show a crude world, yet others may simply want to make readers uncomfortable for whatever reason, there are also those who may enjoy meddling in these topics, whether it is to analyze them in a cold light or simply because they find them fun or entertaining in some fashion.

The point is, questions and users shouldn't be discriminated or attacked for approaching a subject which may hurt one's own sensitivities. The author may have their reasons for approaching the subject and those reasons are often beyond the scope of the questions asked.

P.S.: as others mentioned, if the user is in some way inciting or advocating undesired behaviours (such as is sex with minors) then it's a whole other problem, and one that should be dealt with.

| |
$\endgroup$

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .