Quantcast Old Writing vs. New Writing - Page 4 - The Writer's Block
Refresh the page...
forums KidPub Home

Go Back   The Writer's Block > Writing > Story Ideas
 FAQ Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old 01-03-2017, 06:36 PM
Zelda Zelda is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: spaceship
Posts: 966
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by july3girl View Post
guys look: if she doesn't want to write gay characters, who are you to stop her? re has said that she's not homophobic, she doesn't *hate* gay people, she's just uncomfortable writing them, just as she's uncomfortable writing characters who have sex before they are married. people have different comfort zones, and if she wants to stay in hers, who the hell are you to stop her?

take me for example: i don't like writing about modern characters in different parts of the world (specifically third world countries) because i don't want to screw it up and end up with a weird skewed idea of an area i don't have experience living in. i know that these people in these countries exist and their stories should be told, but there is surely someone better suited to do that. i have a line that i don't want to cross, so i don't. why is re's case any different?

i know that there are members of the lgbtq community on this site (a lot, actually) but she isn't being offensive. she isn't calling you names or saying that you are wrong and don't deserve to be here, because of course you do. she just doesn't want to write gay characters.

though personally i disagree with re's philosophy, it's HERS and she can do whatever she wants with HER writing.

we all have our own comfort zones. why should hers be any different just because it stems from her faith?
thank you :0)
__________________
Little boy inside my chest
Breathe some life into my bones
I've been lost and wandering
Down and out and missing home


(So beat a little louder now
I can't hear you anymore)
-Barns Courntey
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 01-03-2017, 06:37 PM
Jesse Jesse is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: a place tantalizingly close to home
Posts: 5,700
Send a message via Skype™ to Jesse
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by july3girl View Post
guys look: if she doesn't want to write gay characters, who are you to stop her? re has said that she's not homophobic, she doesn't *hate* gay people, she's just uncomfortable writing them, just as she's uncomfortable writing characters who have sex before they are married. people have different comfort zones, and if she wants to stay in hers, who the hell are you to stop her?

take me for example: i don't like writing about modern characters in different parts of the world (specifically third world countries) because i don't want to screw it up and end up with a weird skewed idea of an area i don't have experience living in. i know that these people in these countries exist and their stories should be told, but there is surely someone better suited to do that. i have a line that i don't want to cross, so i don't. why is re's case any different?

i know that there are members of the lgbtq community on this site (a lot, actually) but she isn't being offensive. she isn't calling you names or saying that you are wrong and don't deserve to be here, because of course you do. she just doesn't want to write gay characters.

though personally i disagree with re's philosophy, it's HERS and she can do whatever she wants with HER writing.

we all have our own comfort zones. why should hers be any different just because it stems from her faith?
I'm not offended at all :^) I respect Re and hope she doesn't alter her faith just to appease me lol
My point had more to do with writing. I don't care whether she is for or against homosexuality, but I was challenging the way that she has to make all her characters in congruence with her religion, which doesn't seem terribly realistic.

I mean it more of a discussion rather than anything political, I promise =)
__________________
ďIf you choose to be invisible, itís a superpower; if itís forced upon you, itís a plight. The same goes for being visible.Ē - Kathryn Schulz, Sight Unseen
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 01-03-2017, 06:41 PM
Jesse Jesse is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: a place tantalizingly close to home
Posts: 5,700
Send a message via Skype™ to Jesse
Default

actually nevermind I'll exit myself out
__________________
ďIf you choose to be invisible, itís a superpower; if itís forced upon you, itís a plight. The same goes for being visible.Ē - Kathryn Schulz, Sight Unseen
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 01-03-2017, 06:44 PM
Zelda Zelda is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: spaceship
Posts: 966
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jesse View Post
Aren't you intentionally writing characters to have Christian values? they're all straight and believe in chastity.

How can you have flawed characters if they don't sin?
No, no I am not. Not all of my characters are straight. And not all of them believe in chastity, I simply keep them out of situations where they would have to specifically choose to be chaste.

I think I explained the flaw thing in my most recent reply to Silvermoon.
__________________
Little boy inside my chest
Breathe some life into my bones
I've been lost and wandering
Down and out and missing home


(So beat a little louder now
I can't hear you anymore)
-Barns Courntey
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 01-03-2017, 06:46 PM
july3girl july3girl is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: In a computer doing mountains of homework
Posts: 790
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jesse View Post
I'm not offended at all :^) I respect Re and hope she doesn't alter her faith just to appease me lol
My point had more to do with writing. I don't care whether she is for or against homosexuality, but I was challenging the way that she has to make all her characters in congruence with her religion, which doesn't seem terribly realistic.

I mean it more of a discussion rather than anything political, I promise =)
nah you're cool jesse i was more addressing silvermoon then you.
__________________
death doesn't discriminate
between the sinners and the saints

it takes and it takes and it takes
-leslie odom jr and lin manuel miranda, "wait for it," hamilton
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 01-03-2017, 06:49 PM
Zelda Zelda is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: spaceship
Posts: 966
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jesse View Post
I'm not offended at all :^) I respect Re and hope she doesn't alter her faith just to appease me lol
My point had more to do with writing. I don't care whether she is for or against homosexuality, but I was challenging the way that she has to make all her characters in congruence with her religion, which doesn't seem terribly realistic.

I mean it more of a discussion rather than anything political, I promise =)
I appreciate the challenge, though i think this is one thing that i may stay fairly firm on.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jesse View Post
actually nevermind I'll exit myself out
*polite wave*
__________________
Little boy inside my chest
Breathe some life into my bones
I've been lost and wandering
Down and out and missing home


(So beat a little louder now
I can't hear you anymore)
-Barns Courntey
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 01-03-2017, 08:57 PM
SilverMoon SilverMoon is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: palmetto state
Posts: 11,003
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by july3girl View Post
guys look: if she doesn't want to write gay characters, who are you to stop her? re has said that she's not homophobic, she doesn't *hate* gay people, she's just uncomfortable writing them, just as she's uncomfortable writing characters who have sex before they are married. people have different comfort zones, and if she wants to stay in hers, who the hell are you to stop her?

take me for example: i don't like writing about modern characters in different parts of the world (specifically third world countries) because i don't want to screw it up and end up with a weird skewed idea of an area i don't have experience living in. i know that these people in these countries exist and their stories should be told, but there is surely someone better suited to do that. i have a line that i don't want to cross, so i don't. why is re's case any different?

i know that there are members of the lgbtq community on this site (a lot, actually) but she isn't being offensive. she isn't calling you names or saying that you are wrong and don't deserve to be here, because of course you do. she just doesn't want to write gay characters.

though personally i disagree with re's philosophy, it's HERS and she can do whatever she wants with HER writing.

we all have our own comfort zones. why should hers be any different just because it stems from her faith?
oh, don't you dare make me out to be the bad guy, hon. (I am, but not for that reason. Don't mix them up.) First of all, you are making an assumption that I am saying Re HAS to write gay characters. Sure, fine, whatever, I'm used to people making decisions based on feelings and faith. I'm not discounting it.

What it comes down to is Re says the reason for that is "homosexuality is a sin", which HELLA rubs me the wrong way.

However, I don't mean to offend Re by this and I'm not saying she's a terrible person for her religion or philosophy. It isn't an attack, merely a challenge. Because the context of "homosexuality is a sin" is il~lo~gi~cal.

Homosexuality is NOT in the same class as lying cheaters, or the un-chaste (the latter of which I don't believe in, but can respect). It is nonsensical to me how someone can believe that, somehow, homosexuality is IMMORAL in a way that heterosexuality is not. THIS is what bothers me. I acknowledge that Re would not hate someone for being gay, and that she is allowed to not write about gay characters, and that her views coming from her faith does not make them invalid (though I cannot have faith even in myself or other humans, so how should I have it in a higher power?). In fact, I think faith is admirable so long as you are not unreasonable.

To me, saying that homosexuality is considered immoral so she won't include it in her work is like saying being black is considered immoral so she won't include it in her work, not like saying premarital sex is considered immoral, or cheating, or something.

To me, saying that homosexuality is considered immoral is like saying it is immoral to be born with red hair, or green eyes, or with dark skin, or with a certain personality profile. The only things that make sense to count as sexually immoral are premarital sex (which, again, I don't agree with but can respect), adultery or other cheating (bitch be tryna talk down to me by telling me what adultery means?? like? that's just another English vocabulary word? I'm not THAT stupid lmfao I know what adultery is. I get that it probably wasn't meant as rude though.), rape (which I get not being in the Bible because women were just property back then), etc. NOT your sexual orientation. If heterosexuality isn't a sin, then why is homosexuality?

*Side note: my autocorrect keeps trying to change Re to are, so sorry if you see that anyway.
__________________
this and this and this
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 01-03-2017, 09:53 PM
Zelda Zelda is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: spaceship
Posts: 966
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SilverMoon View Post
oh, don't you dare make me out to be the bad guy, hon. (I am, but not for that reason. Don't mix them up.) First of all, you are making an assumption that I am saying Re HAS to write gay characters. Sure, fine, whatever, I'm used to people making decisions based on feelings and faith. I'm not discounting it.

What it comes down to is Re says the reason for that is "homosexuality is a sin", which HELLA rubs me the wrong way.

However, I don't mean to offend Re by this and I'm not saying she's a terrible person for her religion or philosophy. It isn't an attack, merely a challenge. Because the context of "homosexuality is a sin" is il~lo~gi~cal.

Homosexuality is NOT in the same class as lying cheaters, or the un-chaste (the latter of which I don't believe in, but can respect). It is nonsensical to me how someone can believe that, somehow, homosexuality is IMMORAL in a way that heterosexuality is not. THIS is what bothers me. I acknowledge that Re would not hate someone for being gay, and that she is allowed to not write about gay characters, and that her views coming from her faith does not make them invalid (though I cannot have faith even in myself or other humans, so how should I have it in a higher power?). In fact, I think faith is admirable so long as you are not unreasonable.

To me, saying that homosexuality is considered immoral so she won't include it in her work is like saying being black is considered immoral so she won't include it in her work, not like saying premarital sex is considered immoral, or cheating, or something.

To me, saying that homosexuality is considered immoral is like saying it is immoral to be born with red hair, or green eyes, or with dark skin, or with a certain personality profile. The only things that make sense to count as sexually immoral are premarital sex (which, again, I don't agree with but can respect), adultery or other cheating (bitch be tryna talk down to me by telling me what adultery means?? like? that's just another English vocabulary word? I'm not THAT stupid lmfao I know what adultery is. I get that it probably wasn't meant as rude though.), rape (which I get not being in the Bible because women were just property back then), etc. NOT your sexual orientation. If heterosexuality isn't a sin, then why is homosexuality?

*Side note: my autocorrect keeps trying to change Re to are, so sorry if you see that anyway.
It's not any more illogical than the idea that love isn't a choice.

Sorry if you thought I was trying to talk down to you with the whole adultery definition..? That word used to confuse me whenever it came up and I wasn't sure if it was a commonplace word outside of church.

Pretty sure rape is in the bible as a sin, tbh married men weren't even allowed to look at other women and want them without that being considered sinful so...

And if my parameters for excluding homosexuality bother you, then i'm sorry? but i've already had the same arguments you're throwing at me with my head and this is the conclusion i've come to? anyways...I did already say i'd look into homoromanticism, so if it really bugs you that much then hey, i could say there's a chance for homoromantic characters in the future i guess.
__________________
Little boy inside my chest
Breathe some life into my bones
I've been lost and wandering
Down and out and missing home


(So beat a little louder now
I can't hear you anymore)
-Barns Courntey
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 01-03-2017, 10:29 PM
SilverMoon SilverMoon is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: palmetto state
Posts: 11,003
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zelda View Post
It's not any more illogical than the idea that love isn't a choice.

Sorry if you thought I was trying to talk down to you with the whole adultery definition..? That word used to confuse me whenever it came up and I wasn't sure if it was a commonplace word outside of church.

Pretty sure rape is in the bible as a sin, tbh married men weren't even allowed to look at other women and want them without that being considered sinful so...

And if my parameters for excluding homosexuality bother you, then i'm sorry? but i've already had the same arguments you're throwing at me with my head and this is the conclusion i've come to? anyways...I did already say i'd look into homoromanticism, so if it really bugs you that much then hey, i could say there's a chance for homoromantic characters in the future i guess.
I'm not attacking you, merely expressing my opinion. Agree to disagree~
No it's fine. I know you didn't mean to be condescending.
Love isn't a choice though? It's a chemical reaction in the brain that responds to stimuli. Or at least, that's my definition bc I'm 10000% more cynical than a fifteen yo w a good life should be but ay lmao
__________________
this and this and this
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 01-04-2017, 05:26 PM
Zelda Zelda is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: spaceship
Posts: 966
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SilverMoon View Post
I'm not attacking you, merely expressing my opinion. Agree to disagree~
No it's fine. I know you didn't mean to be condescending.
Love isn't a choice though? It's a chemical reaction in the brain that responds to stimuli. Or at least, that's my definition bc I'm 10000% more cynical than a fifteen yo w a good life should be but ay lmao
Lol ye, i got u, it's chill, agree to disagree indeed^_^
that is an interesting definition, but then wouldn't the stimuli eventually stop taking effect, like how painkillers stop working as your body becomes accustomed to them? So at some point or another you would have to choose to keep loving someone despite the lack of chemical production.

Side note: the whole 'we have chemistry' cliche line just became a hell of a lot clearer to me,,
__________________
Little boy inside my chest
Breathe some life into my bones
I've been lost and wandering
Down and out and missing home


(So beat a little louder now
I can't hear you anymore)
-Barns Courntey
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:17 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.