Why Seal the Section?

Cosmo made a big deal about the sealed section in its July issue, which was apparently "so hot, they made us seal it" -- according to the copy on the cover. I long ago learned not to get too excited about Cosmo's sex tips and articles, since they typically amount to "touch him on the penis:"



Not to mention that their idea of kinky is usually along the lines of bringing an ice cube to bed.

But I got curious about the sealed section. Who are "they?" Was there really some sort of legal requirement to seal the section? (Or was it a requirement passed down by an editor?)

The section turned out to be a set of articles and infographics on the penis. One in particular caught my eye and seriously undermined the claim that the section had to be sealed. That article discussed which term should be used to refer to the penis, mostly by weighing the merits of "dick" vs. "cock," and including a bunch of improbable foreign slang terms. But Cosmo didn't say "dick" or "cock" at all -- if they had, I suppose I might have understood the sealing. Instead, they said, "the d-word" and "the c-word," just as they do in this web post about the section.

I sat there way too long racking my brain, trying to figure out one thing that might require sealing. I saw no vulgar language, no images more risque than those in an underwear catalog, and no erotica. The section included one comedic essay a dude wrote about his penis and a bunch of research and infographics (of varied provenance) that I hope didn't require sealing, because they seemed mostly scientific. It covered ground similar to what I consider basic sex education, though with more fun presentation.

I was left hoping this sealing thing was just a gimmick, not a real requirement. If some legal or financial authority truly made Cosmo seal the section, then the state of sex education in the United States is even sadder than I feared.

Are Watersports the Odd Fetish Out?

If you've looked much at erotica publisher's guidelines, you're very familiar with the common list of squicks: scat, bestiality, necrophilia, watersports, noncon, pedophilia, etc. Some of that list is there for legality (pedophilia, for example), some for reputation (the publisher doesn't want to have a bunch of extreme, seamy stuff clogging up its erotic romance titles), and some is there, perhaps, because it doesn't sell well (maybe I'm projecting my own feelings, but I don't think there's a huge market for scat). By all means, publishers should differentiate their brands and publish what they're comfortable publishing. But I was really struck by a comment on watersports in a guest blog by Slave Nano posted at Erotica for All.

Slave Nano is discussing the editing process for what sounds like a pretty extreme bdsm novel, Adventures in Fetishland (a book with some inspiration from Alice in Wonderland):

Adventures in Fetishland has scenes of corporal punishment, nipple torture, cock and ball torture, electrical play, medical play, use of sounds, strap-on-play, cling film mummification, breath play and an attempted anal rape scene. So, you can see, it isn’t exactly for the faint hearted! But, one of the scenes I had to edit was a comic one involving Kim, the main character, pissing in a tea pot! I just have trouble grappling with how all that other extreme stuff was acceptable but a funny scene at a fetish hatter’s tea party involving pee had to be axed.

I take that point. The aversion to pee sounds silly in the context Slave Nano lists. That definitely got me thinking.

On the other hand, I wonder how salable watersports writing is. Does the publisher have any stats on that? My personal reaction might support the publisher's decision. I like some extreme stuff, and when I read the list of what is in the book, I get a little excited. Maybe a lot excited. Watersports, on the other hand, is icky to me a lot of the time -- I have read some writing about it that I liked, but it's often a negative in a piece of writing I otherwise love.

I think it's worth examining the reasons for avoiding certain subjects, and, every now and then, experimenting with pushing a boundary or two. If you're ready to push a boundary now, Slave Nano's post includes an unexpurgated version of the pee scene he had to cut from the finished book, and it is in fact quite funny.

On Self-Censorship

Author Giselle Renarde interviewed me for her blog, Donuts and Desires, on self-censorship and other issues around being a writer:

I definitely self-censor. I had to dip my toes into erotica bit by bit — I am a deeply kinky person, but it was hard for me to reveal that as a writer. I would be reading extreme blood play lesbian BDSM, and then publish a vanilla story about a straight married couple. I have started to get into more of my true kinks recently, but I have to say that what has been happening with PayPal and censorship on book-selling sites has had a chilling effect on me.

Read the full interview here.

As an added note, I'm really disturbed by what's been happening recently -- books getting pulled from sites without explanation. Read Giselle Renarde's description of her experience with the sudden disappearance of Elementary, My Dear Kathryn, a lesbian anal fetish e-book. You can still pick the book up from the publisher.