Joat42 wrote:cthia wrote:My "fantasies" are disturbing to a denizen hailing from a sexually open society that is Sweden? Awww, yet you never quite acted all grown up.
I have a suggestion for you, find a Sesame Street forum.
1. This is not a fanfic-forum, and rfc has himself said that he doesn't want to see any fanfic here. Imagine if someone searches for his name and YOUR post containing sexual innuendos and fantasies shows up in the results. Do you really think rfc would be happy about that, especially if someone starts asking him questions about what's going on here?
2. The administrators of the site CAN fall afoul of the COPPA act if someone thinks what you write is harmful for children and files a complaint; and trust me, there are some real puritans out there that'll happily do that. Do you think somehow it's okay to inflict that risk on this forum and rfc?
3. A sexually open society doesn't mean it's okay to dump whatever sexual innuendos you like into a public forum or debate.
The above should be blindingly obvious to anyone, but apparently not to you.
This is the last time I'm going to entertain this nonsense. Any further ruminations of this kind will get you placed on my personal ban list. Not that you care, but more as a forewarning of why you aren't being responded to -- which indicates a bit more courtesy and respect given to you than in return. This is the last time I'll attempt to have a mature conversation with you. And no, I'm not trying to get you to change your core values, but to get you to realize that I am also entitled to my own.
Attempting to stifle my opinions and feelings toward a character with rude, immature statements like "Keep your disturbing fantasies to yourself," is the kind of immature tone created by posters I spoke of earlier. I will not tolerate that kind of behaviour. If I crave that kind of exchange, I can locate the politics forum. You are entitled to your opinion of characters and their actions, as well as I am entitled to my own. If you truly feel that way, then you should report my posts to the moderator, and you should do it across the board and not just with me. Tlb is incorrect that the notion of Kuzak being somewhere on the ship banging is deprecated. I came across it for the first time in the last month. It was not stepped on at all, by anyone. And it shouldn't have been. Only when I make a "sexual innuendo" is it frowned upon. Which leads me to the very certain possibility that it is all out of some childish vendetta against me. My guess would paint the Beowulf-Karma thread as the source. That thread alone made many enemies. Shrug.
Tlb also says the notion is of a minority. Dunno where he gets his stats on that. I'll assume he polled everyone.
At any rate, let's wrap this up, for the last time . . .
The book states that Kuzak acted out of kindness for a friend; indeed, it is what the book tries to portray. I accept and acknowledge that fact. And I agree with it, for the most part. Kuzak acted out of a kindness for Hamish.
However!
Kuzak DID NOT act out of any kindness towards Emily (and incidentally happens to be what the thread is about). That is my problem with Kuzak, as I stated upstream. But alas, people will assimilate what they will, regardless of what I write, a recurring mistake emanating from a reading impediment or some latent grudge, or from preconceived notions about me because I dare to speak what I see as truths; truths which are oftentimes divergent from the collective concensus on the forum. I don't jump off of bridges or board busses heading in a certain direction just because the masses do.
In America, there is a thing called Freedom of Speech. And I am entitled to my opinions and common sense.
All around the world, especially in America (certainly as witnessed on this forum) there are varied opinions about prostitution, legal or otherwise. Many neighborhoods frown on -- even legalized forms of -- prostitution in their backyards. They feel that these kinds of services would lead to the breakup of marriages, because spouses would be one of the biggest customers. Instead of . . .
1. Non married clients who have a problem securing a sexual partner for whatever reason.
2. Non married clients who are too busy in their professional life to have a normal relationship. (See Jessica Chastain in the wonderful movie, Miss Sloane. One of my favorites. Everytime my sister recommends a movie to me, she nails it.)
3. A young client having his/her first sexual encounter, perhaps as a gift.
4. Married spouses who have the consent of their significant other. Or semi-open marriages. Again, I don't recall Hamish getting pre-authorization from Emily.
5. Etc.
IN MY ENTITLED OPINION, that is where Kuzak screwed the pooch. Many professional courtesans refuse to entertain married spouses. Others don't have that same measure of "values" and simply guarantee anonymity instead, by being discrete or also as an alternative. Sleeping with someone in your own office, or circle of colleagues or friends, IS NOT being discrete. When Hamish slept with Kuzak, there is a very significant line that he crossed. Being a naval officer as well, makes Kuzak "one of the girls" at Hamish's "place of employment," placing her off limits. A professional courtesan who truly engages in professional encounters where further contact is unlikely until "next time" is one thing. But Kuzak getting to interact with Hamish as a colleague is quite another. Emily deserved better than that. If anyone can't see the huge difference between a sexual encounter with a professional stranger who is completely removed from the client's social circles, as opposed to a colleague that one may see frequently, is absurd. And, I WILL NOT keep that opinion to myself, just because YOU don't like it.
It is the same shortsighted, twisted mindset which is responsible for driving one of the main reasons many spouses don't want those types of businesses in their neighborhoods. Just because the girl next door becomes/is a registered courtesan DOES NOT make it okay for that courtesan to sleep with the neighbor's husband. Especially when she knows her client's marital status, and also knows the wife, as Kuzak damn well knew Emily. Everyone in the Star Kingdom knows Emily. IMO, that is what makes Kuzak a trollop, hiding behind her legal license and status. IMO.
What Kuzak should have done was referred Hamish to someone who was NOT in the Navy, a line that should not have been crossed! IF, and, ONLY IF, she couldn't do the RIGHT thing, IN MY HUMBLE OPINION, and consider the pain that Hamish's decision would inflict on one of the most beloved women in the Star Kingdom who has already suffered aplenty, and told him EXACTLY where else he could SHOVE it, if he wasn't man enough to discuss the notion with his beloved wife, first. Why wasn't that an option, if he loved her? If she was as strong as all of you portray. Would it have hurt Emily? Of course it would have. Though I'd hazard a guess and bet the farm it wouldn't have hurt her nearly as much as hearing it from a scandal manufactured by the tabloids or from that wholeass of a cretin, High Ridge. And, it just might have endeared Hamish to Emily even more, showing her just how much he truly loved and cared about her to consider her feelings enough to get prior authorization. It could have turned out to be a very tender moment.
I understand that Kuzak represents a convenience for Hamish. Colleagues at any place of employment are convenient as well, even if ill advised. My mother always taught me to "Never shit where you lay." The fact that Kuzak was convenient for Hamish won't lessen the pain inflicted upon Emily, his wife.
It is odd that nobody seems to want to consider the fact that textev does confirm that Emily WAS INDEED, HURT. Finding out your spouse slept with a professional stranger is one thing, but finding out he/she is sleeping with a colleague and both are fond of each other is quite the bull in the china shop.
On to the other battered fish awaiting the pan . . .
Personally, I have absolutely nothing against professional courtesans, or legalized prostitution as I've stated in other threads. I welcome legalized prostitution, because I personally think it would greatly reduce sexually transmitted diseases, as well as prevent many needless deaths. And it would consider the desperation of women, oftentimes single struggling mother's, who are simply trying to put food on the table.
BUT!
Registered courtesans ARE NOT absolved of their responsibility to the community, moral or otherwise. If they cannot determine what it truly means to be discrete, or if they willingly choose to abandon morality and respect towards the other spouse, then they should NOT be a courtesan selling sex or discreteness. Many will argue, "What do you expect from someone who chooses to sell sex?" That isn't fair to someone who is truly professional and discrete, and it gives the disgruntled spouses towards the profession cause.
The other fish . . .
My assimilation of your included post by RFC is talking about the publishing of fanfic for profit. Book discussions, at least loosely, fall under the protection of the Fair Use Act. And certainly would on this forum since the author himself created the forum to discuss his work. That is not to say that someone should attempt to circumvent those wishes by brilliant means, but I hardly think that's what I try to do. And since I am the person in cthia's head, I can assure you, it isn't. I have woven a piece of fabric in David's universe, which comprises some eight to ten thousand words revolving around Honor and Michelle as undergrads. My friends love it (though their taste is sometimes questionable). I wouldn't dare publish it here on the forum, and probably won't publish it elsewhere, despite the prodding.
Lastly, the question of what I think the author would think of any sexual discussions of sexual subject matter found in his books, well, you'd have to ask him. I won't discount the possibility that he'd be dismayed, considering his reaction to discussing that damn grav lance. But I can hope, that he'd not be upset as long as it is done tastefully. I don't think, think, he'd be upset that I considered Kuzak a trollop as part of a joke, even if it bears some resemblance or not to how I actually feel about her or any woman who chooses such a profession as a hobby or as a living. But, then, to be fair, Kuzak could have been hurting for money.
And if she wasn't hurting for money, and yet still chose to become a professional on the side, is her business. And it is my choice, and right, to consider her a trollop, if indeed I do.
I will NOT be relieved of my opinions, religion, or freedom of speech.
****** *
Respectful rebuttals and disagreements are welcome. Otherwise, my personal ban list is a real possibility. My time is limited, and my patience grows weary.
Late edits to placate the grammar police and to wrestle with my spellchecker who seems to be a woman scorned.
.
