- Reviews & Essays
- The Responsibility of Free Speech
Note: You can change font size, font face, and turn on dark mode by clicking the "A" icon tab in the Story Info Box.
You can temporarily switch back to a Classic Literotica® experience during our ongoing public Beta testing. Please consider leaving feedback on issues you experience or suggest improvements.
Click hereFree speech does not mean the right to scream "Fire!' in a crowded movie theater. The matter has been decided in courts of law and in the court of public opinion. [It comes under the doctrine of reckless endangerment.] In both arenas, the backers of unlimited free speech have lost.
Free speech does not mean the right to physically threaten someone. Again, the matter has been decided in courts of law and in the court of public opinion. In both arenas, the backers of unlimited free speech have lost.
Similarly, there are several other items where the individual right of free speech is subject to limitations. The items include sexual harassment, information protected under government security rules, information protected under private security rules [e.g. confidentiality agreements,] slander and certain uses of obscenity.
Most reasonable people accept the above stated limitations on free speech for obvious reasons. If a person attempts to exercise 'free speech rights' where no such rights have been determined to exist, then that person does not help free speech and, in fact, undermines the rights of others to have free speech rights.
It is obvious that an individual who deliberately causes others to lose free speech rights is wrong both morally and practically.
If free speech is to remain as a right, responsible individuals need to exercise care in the use of free speech.
If an individual tries to publish a Literotica story involving the violent rape of a five-year-old girl by an adult male, then that individual is a danger to the entire Literotica community. Such child pornography is not a permitted use of free speech. It does no good to argue that such a story should be allowed, courts of law have decided otherwise in many, many cases. In such a case, the would be author is endangering not only his/her free speech rights, but also the free speech rights of authors everywhere.
On the other hand, responsible exercise of free speech gives authors defensible examples to use as arguments against censorship. People are going to seek out and read erotic literature and they have been doing so for literally thousands of years. Thus, erotic literature that obeys the laws limiting free speech is a positive force for an organization such as Literotica.
There is nothing the opponents of free speech like better than a good example of a case of free speech run wild. Such a case can be shown to a court or even to the general public and cited as a reason why censorship is needed. Going 'outside the lines' when the lines have already been decided in courts of law is not just useless, it is damaging to the concept of free speech.
If an author writes a story where a character in a story uses profanity to a degree that one would expect of a person of the type being described, it is probably a good and defensible use of profanity. In fact, the use of profanity by characters has been steadily expanded over the years by people writing good stories where the characters used the profanity such characters would be likely to use in real life. However, if the characters in a story simply scream profanity at one another, such use has been determined by courts of law not to be protected free speech and does harm to those who want free speech.
If an author can write a towering work of literature where a 16-year-old girl has sex with an adult male and the sex and the age of the character are organic to the story, then such a story is risky, but might expand free speech rights. If a simple 'stroke' story involves the same 16-year-old girl sex with an adult male, then that story will hurt free speech rights. There is no imaginable story where a six-year-old girl has sex with an adult male where that story will do anything except hurt free speech rights.
In general, a real literary masterpiece allows certain ideas to be expressed under free speech where the ideas can expand free speech. Run of the mill stuff is much more likely to impede, rather than expand free speech.
Certain areas of erotica, while not specifically illegal under current court decisions, may be considered very high risk areas. Things like torture, sex with four footed animals, 'golden showers,' and physical violence are examples of high risk areas.
Again, If an author can write a towering work of literature using certain of the high risk items, perhaps the risk is justified by the possible expansion of free speech right. However, a very pedestrian high risk story will very likely harm free speech, rather than help free speech.
In summary, the responsible individual needs to consider not only his/her free speech rights, but also the free speech rights of others who write stories on the edge of what is currently permissible. The erotica genre is currently on the edge.
If an individual thinks he/she has written a true masterpiece that may expand the limits of free speech, well and good. However, since the author is risking the free speech rights of others, the 'masterpiece' should be thoroughly reviewed by people with expertise in the area. Only after a very substantial majority of the people involved agree that the work is indeed a masterpiece and the risk is worthwhile should the work be attempted to be published.
A responsible individual does not risk the free speech rights of others to try to expand his/her own free speech rights without a careful, informed review of the situation beforehand.
- COMMENTS
UltraDramaticalmost 19 years agoGotta say, I've read much more compelling essays before. This one smacks of a junior in high school trying to put everything into a paper that his teacher is requiring without really understanding why he's doing so. That's not to say that you don't make some valid points; however, the style is very choppy, the structure is bullet-point style rather than outlined, and there are too many indefinites scattered throughout. There is some definite potential though, so keep writing -- concise written communication comes with time and practice.
R. Richardalmost 19 years agoAuthorI have always favored the expansion of the boundaries of free speech by quality writing. I feel the Black Shanglan's "Will" is that.
Exactly what is quality writing? Each person might have a different definition. However, quality writing needs a real plot and a character(s) that people want to follow because of a points of view or lifestyle.
A story about 16-year-old girl who strolls nude into a party saying only "wanna fuck?" does not really have a point of view or a lifestyle outside of gangbang sex. Perhaps a story about a 16-year-old girl who lives in a historic setting where girls and boys were routinely married in their early teens and had sex well before 16-years-old might be a story that would expand the limits of free speech.
angelicminxalmost 19 years ago...that we are all entitled to our opinion?
Black Shanglan's "Will" pushes the boundaries set forth by Lit, but I am thankful that Shanglan had the courage to submit it. It is a true masterpiece and deserves to be recognized as such. I believe in other hands it would have been squashed and the world would never know of Shanglan's utter skill in depicting a societal taboo with eloquence.
Thank you for sharing your opinion! ~Minx
neonlytealmost 19 years agoRR - I confess to being slightly surprised for the approach you have adopted but none the less interested by your perspective on the issue.
In a sense you are trying to establish criteria based upon moving goalposts and that is unlikely to work, the legal system prefers absolutes or at the very least degrees of absolute held to be reasonable 'to the man on the Clapham omnibus'.
Using Literotica as a platform to underpin an arguement is prone to difficulty - it is a singular medium with a clear line drawn in the sand. I'm not sure, for example, Lit. could publish Paulo Coelho's recent novel 'Eleven Minutes' widely available and on open display in bookstores. It follows the life of a young girl into prostitution with graphic content, including 'underage (in Lit. terms) masturbation', though this is likely the very point you are trying to make in expanding FS boundaries through 'quality' writing - if only someone could decided 'quality'.
Good luck, an interesting perspective.
thehumpmanalmost 19 years agoI think as the times have changed, so has our moral fiber. Let me elaborate on this, a couple hundred years ago if one was to write a novel of an adult man having a sexual relationship with a sixteen year old girl it would not be as frowned upon as it is today. As we have changed as a society so must our interpetation of free speech. Now if someone was to write a story on raping a child with all the children that have victimized by sexual predators is not acceptable in this day and age.
Is it someones right to be able to right about such a subject? That is a tough question, as a parent I would not feel comfortable living next door to person who writes stories about raping children. Whether they are a figment of ones imagination or a fantasy they may want to act out one day.
The author of this piece makes us draw a fine line of what constitutes freedom and what could make a person a danger to society. That is one thing I prefer over this story site compared to some of the others. This site as far as I know has no stories that allow the author or the reader to indulge in fantasies they may not exactly be in good taste for today's society.
Well this could go on forever, it has for a couple hundred years in the American court system. I support freedom of speech, yet one should use it responsibly.
Anonymousalmost 19 years agoThe last comment, "A responsible individual does not risk the free speech rights of others to try to expand his/her own free speech rights without a careful, informed review of the situation beforehand." I'm not sure I agree with it at all. The whole premise doesn't make sense in the real world of free speech, maybe here on Lit, but outside of it. You're advocating the suppression of free speech with a statement like that.
rudystahrmanalmost 19 years agoI agree mostly with your opening statements and also agree that 'free speech' is not 'free'. There must be a constant vigilance, maintained by those who know their language, its roots and meanings, and more important, a comprhensive knowledge of correct grammer, and Spelling.
When to make paragraphs, when to use commas, and the correct use of 'to, too, two'.
But as far as the point of your essay, we must edit in the court of this public's opinion, whether to tolerate such stories; I say 'NO'. Track him down and put him in jail for child pornography.
I have read some stories here at Lit.com, that I don't agree with the premise put forward, and I usually say so, in a note to the author.
So keep thinking and commenting, Please!!
Thank You for your thoughts.
Rudy
R. Richardalmost 19 years agoAuthorI have written my opinion on my concept of responsible free speech. If you wish to 1 bomb my opinion, you are attempting to abridge my right of free speech. Think about it.
I have been accused of being factually wrong. However the wrong facts I am accused of using have not been identified.
I do not attempt to tell others what to think. I do state that thoughtless use of free speech can harm, rather than help the use of free speech. Laurel and Manu of the Literotica site agree with me as they will not permit certain uses of free speech where, in their opinion said use might harm Literotica.
I have no complaint with well thought out and creative uses of free speech that may push back the boundaries for the use of others [I am most definitely one of the others here].
I will stand by my statement that a story about a rape of a six year old child by an adult male will only harm free speech. If you have a counter example, please cite same.
The fact that it is illegal to cry "Fire!" in a crowded movie theater is not banned by the Constitution, true. However the matter has been decided by the courts and has been found illegal.
