The Absolute Degeneracy of Modern Writing

When I started this channel, it was largely because I had been noticing a broad decline in storytelling in general and literature in particular. A decline

that began a lot longer ago than most people think. And my aim has always been to help, in so far as I am able, to remind writers of the true fundamentals of storytelling and to hopefully elevate their craft into something that isn't

beholdened to current market trends nor controlled by the fleeting tastes of book talk or Bookstagram or whatever. However, I've been noticing that there are a lot more aspects that have been contributing to the decline of

literature besides just a lack of understanding regarding the fundamentals. Today, I would like to focus on one of the most glaring issues plaguing modern publishing.

Something you hear a lot is that women have come to dominate the literary world more and more. We'll look closer at those numbers later, but for now, I think we can all agree that female writers have achieved fame and success comparable to a lot of their male predecessors and contemporaries. But the

female writing, which is most often presented as proof of this, is things like this. Despite the fact that there have always existed things like this,

like this. Despite the fact that there have always existed things like this, I'm personally of the opinion that the literary world is so rife with corruption and ideologies that any observation along these lines is

meaningless. Generally, across the board, it isn't really men or women who

meaningless. Generally, across the board, it isn't really men or women who dominate the literary world. It's ideologies and popular trends in social politics, whatever those might be at a given time. Historically, a lot, not

all, but a lot of the most widely celebrated female writers, especially within the 20th and 21st centuries, have been at the bleeding edge of social and political progressivism. To my mind, this makes it less about being a woman

political progressivism. To my mind, this makes it less about being a woman and more about being an acolyte of a particular ideology. Like I said, though, not always, just most of the time. Nevertheless, it is somewhat true

that right now women somewhat dominate the publishing industry. First of all, some housekeeping.

Apparently, I will be punished in some mysterious way if I use a certain word in my videos. This word has four letters, starts with a P, ends with an N, and there's also an O and an R in there, too. So, for the course of this

video, I'll have to refer to it differently. I'm going to use adult entertainment or adult videos or explicit videos. I don't know. None of these words quite have the same meaning,

explicit videos. I don't know. None of these words quite have the same meaning, but you and I both know what we're talking about here, so let's just make do. All right, to start with, let's just push aside any conversation about taste.

do. All right, to start with, let's just push aside any conversation about taste.

This is not going to be a video about what I like or don't like to read. What

I am offering you in this video is not my opinion or my reading preference. It

is facts. And the first thing we need to established is that all this so-called romance fiction and most if not all of the current women's literature out there is a not women's literature. It's

as a woman, the most common defense I hear for romance fiction, especially the romance fiction that is so prevalent today, is that it is literature for women. Whenever anyone tries to express some concern about these genres or the

women. Whenever anyone tries to express some concern about these genres or the nature of their content, that person is immediately condemned for being anti-woman or anti-women's literature. The idea being that these types of books

are not just popular among women, but that they define womanhood. And to be opposed to them in any way is to be opposed to women. Women, such as myself, who are critical of these books, are often said to be suffering from

internalized misogyny. The reality about all this is that it isn't a question of

internalized misogyny. The reality about all this is that it isn't a question of woman versus anti-woman or even woman versus man. The issue here is probably one of the oldest ones in existence. It's the normalization of explicit adult

entertainment. whether it's women or men who are trying to do that is pretty

entertainment. whether it's women or men who are trying to do that is pretty irrelevant because the number one reason anyone has ever tried to normalize this kind of, you know, explicit content is money. But I'm getting a little ahead of

myself. First of all, we need to establish this fact very, very clearly.

myself. First of all, we need to establish this fact very, very clearly.

Women's literature is not, you know, just some randomly horny trend in the book industry. In that sense, outside of a handful of odd entries here and there,

book industry. In that sense, outside of a handful of odd entries here and there, women's literature doesn't exist. Women haven't taken over the literary world. A

four-letter word starting with P, has taken over the literary world. Barnes &

Noble and every other major and independent book seller, especially all those new romance bookshops, have now just become another kind of adult entertainment store. And no, that's not a good thing. Now, I know what you might

entertainment store. And no, that's not a good thing. Now, I know what you might be thinking. This is not XX adult entertainment. This is. You are actually

be thinking. This is not XX adult entertainment. This is. You are actually incorrect. For a man, average man, I don't know. Reading an explicit

incorrect. For a man, average man, I don't know. Reading an explicit depiction of a sex act might not really get the job done. Men typically tend to gravitate towards seeing the act on the screen in one form or another. Women

have always on average preferred to read it, even if some do end up hooked on the filmed version. The female mind has pretty much the same reaction, generally

filmed version. The female mind has pretty much the same reaction, generally speaking, to the written version. In fact, written erotic content tends to have even more of an impact on the minds of women than filmed erotic content.

Why? Because men and women engage with media in fundamentally different ways.

When it comes to a adult entertainment, your simple straightforward two people banging video isn't really going to do much of anything for a woman. Generally

speaking, there have been numerous studies done regarding female sexuality or the differences between male and female arousal. And generally across the board, they'll tell you that women require what is sometimes called mental mapping to be sexually aroused. That is, there needs to be more story and more

opportunity for her to feel empathy. That's just how it is for a woman.

Empathy is a huge factor for women in all aspects of their lives, but yes, especially when it comes to erotic media. With written explicit content as opposed to your typical material found on um The Hub, it's a lot easier for the

woman to imagine herself as the female in the scene. In addition, as I said, women require an emotional element to their um erotic content that is almost impossible in the simple filmed scenes that can so easily do it for men.

Typically, that is to say, watching Mrs. Smith banging the mailman while her husband is at work is plenty for most men. But a woman will want to know the whole story. She'll want this sexual tension that builds up between Mrs.

whole story. She'll want this sexual tension that builds up between Mrs. Smith and the mailman over several encounters, the dangerous possibility that her husband might come home any minute. The explicit fact that the mailman chose her over all the other housewives on the street, and so on and

so on. A woman would also prefer some kind of story to bind it all together.

so on. A woman would also prefer some kind of story to bind it all together.

That's just how women are. If you put explicit sex scenes into a novel length story, it's going to hit a woman's mind in much the same way the top video on the hub hits a guy. As I said, that's just how women are. A lot of men might hear this and be a little dubious. And in fact, I found that a lot of men,

while they might raise their eyebrows a little at just how explicit women's books have become in recent years, they won't really go as far as to categorize them the same way as, you know, the kind of thing you'd find on the Hub. Male

writers certainly find such classification baffling. But let me break down how this works for women. If you look at your average popular romanty book, those books that have dominated book sales for a few years now and which are among the worst offenders when it comes to wildly explicit content, the

explicit scenes coincide with the story to some degree. Now, the authors of these stories will tell you that these sex scenes are there for narrative purposes. They serve either plot development or character development. I

purposes. They serve either plot development or character development. I

don't think that's necessarily true, but let's go with it. Keep in mind what I said about how women engage with erotic content versus how men do. Let's take

Sarah J. asked, for example, I shouldn't have to tell you who she is and why she's relevant to this conversation, but if you don't know, let me just say that she's the woman responsible for the series of books commonly referred to as skilled writers such as Mass understand how the story shape of all aspects of

storytelling affects reader engagement. We've talked about this before on this channel. Stories and even their individual components must have a story

channel. Stories and even their individual components must have a story shape. That is at least one character trying to achieve a goal with some kind

shape. That is at least one character trying to achieve a goal with some kind of opposition to that goal culminating in a mini climax in which the character achieves success or failure or some unexpected thing happens. That's a story

shape. Mass is actually pretty good at using this story shape to create fairly

shape. Mass is actually pretty good at using this story shape to create fairly well-paced if highly formulaic stories that really draw the reader in. I mean,

anyone can write smut, but not everyone can sell millions of copies worldwide.

Whether or not her stories are good stories, I don't. The point is, she understands how the thing works. But then she applies the same story shape to her sex scenes. Of course, I shouldn't have to tell you how sex scenes

themselves have a story shape. She has stated in many interviews that she endeavors to make sure her sex is plot relevant. A big way she does that is to have the erotic scenes take place at the comedown immediately after a major plot

mini climax. This incorporates the emotional release of the narrative with

mini climax. This incorporates the emotional release of the narrative with the sexual release of the erotic scene. She stated that she often tries to make the significant sex scenes such as that two or three-day sex marathon occur at

the close of equally significant plot arcs. This is ideal for the female brain which already seeks a story shape even in sexually explicit content. But from a reader engagement plus female adult entertainment perspective, this means that Mass has doubly hooked her female readers. The story and the extremely

explicit content have become inextricably linked, and the explicit aspects have been delivered via the story in precisely the most ideal way necessary to capture the infatuation of the female reader. Another interesting

thing to note, if you're not yet sold on the fact that all of this so-called women's lit is little more than, you know, four-letter word starts with P, have a look at how much women's fiction has become subject to categorization norms that you don't see outside like The Hub or fanfiction, which has become

just another form of debotched adult entertainment. Sure, yeah, okay, fanfiction that isn't smut does theoretically exist, I guess. But that's

like saying there are non-explicit only fans creators within those spheres. The

common term used for this categorization is a narrative one or even a literary one. Trope. People talk about tropes all the time. Tropes are fine. There's

one. Trope. People talk about tropes all the time. Tropes are fine. There's

nothing wrong with them. They're a common tool for literary analysis. A

little reductive, a little ridiculously overutilized, but benign in themselves.

But the important factor to note here is this. When it comes to women's arousal, they need far more specific things than men do. So, a woman's sexual entertainment tastes will always be a thousand times more specific than a

man's. So, when a woman seeks out a new book, she'll look for specific cocktails

man's. So, when a woman seeks out a new book, she'll look for specific cocktails of tropes for that thing she needs to feed her specific hungers or I guess thirsts. A quick perusal of the book recommendation section of the romance

thirsts. A quick perusal of the book recommendation section of the romance book subreddit will destroy any remaining illusions you might have had that these books are about anything other than sexual arousal. Just take a moment and look at some of these. Can you honestly say that this attitude

towards women's fiction has to do with anything other than sex? I spent a little time while I was researching this subject talking to women and reading the accounts of women who were struggling with the addiction to hardcore content.

A solid 90 to 95% of them started with erotic fiction or or smut as they often called it and fanfiction. A few stated that they didn't really ever get into videos often because videos couldn't feed their precise needs. Several

mentioned that they had quit the video content only to fall back on erotic fiction and had happily arrived at the realization that there was functionally no difference between the two. I read an account from one woman who noted that she preferred written smut because within books and fanfiction she was able

to find things that would have been illegal in video form. So that's nice. I

learned too that there was a worryingly large subset of these women, some as young as 17, whose taste became so depraved so quickly that they were now

suffering from something called POC. I'll let you look that one up yourself.

Several women and teenagers remarked that they wish they had never started reading erotic fiction when they were younger as they believed it had destroyed their lives. The thing is, just as with people's taste in hardcore video subg genres, these tastes, these hungers will intensify over time. The

same mechanic is at play as you see in men who have to constantly seek harder and harder filmed content in order to even be aroused. For that reason, more and more women's fiction has been including very, very dark material. Be

it disturbing age gaps, torture, abuse, even rape. Women don't start out wanting fantasy fiction. That's something that happens over time as they become

fantasy fiction. That's something that happens over time as they become desensitized to more mainstream content. I don't know how many videos and reviews I've seen by very young teenage girls who say the explicit sex in Sarah J.

Mass's books is very mediocre and vanilla. That would be because they're already desensitized and crave harder content. Honestly though, by now I should have convinced you that these books are merely mass-roduced hardcore adult entertainment and that their readership consumes them in much the

same way one would consume any other form of, you know, four-letter word starts with P. And that the result of that consumption, especially on a large enough scale and on a long enough timeline, is pretty much the same as any other form of hardcore entertainment addiction. So, let's move on. Now, let's

assume that you can get someone to concede that yes, this is all, you know, a written form of the same kind of crap you'd find on the hub. At that point, what happens is someone will insist that this is somehow the ethical type of adult entertainment. We'll get to that. Or they'll start trying to argue that

adult entertainment. We'll get to that. Or they'll start trying to argue that this kind of written explicit content has positive effects. I've heard all these arguments. I've heard people say that the heavy amount of sex in these

these arguments. I've heard people say that the heavy amount of sex in these books create some kind of sex positive environment for female empowerment.

I've heard people say that books like these increase readers empathy. I've

also, as I've said, been told that objecting to literature like this is inherently anti-women. First of all, let's talk about empathy and the

inherently anti-women. First of all, let's talk about empathy and the chemical reaction romance novels have on the female brain. There are so few studies that have been done on adult film's impact on women and almost zero studies that have been done on erotic literature's impact on women. This is

one of the most criminally underststudied areas in human existence.

Something I hear all the time is that romance novels increase the reader's empathy. I I doubt it's that simple, but let's say it is. Women are empathetic by

empathy. I I doubt it's that simple, but let's say it is. Women are empathetic by default. That is not something that romance literature gives women. It

default. That is not something that romance literature gives women. It

heightens it certainly, but as in all emotions, a heightened state of anything is usually very bad. Heightened empathy reduces a person's logical response and cognitive reasoning. It makes it difficult to regulate the emotional

cognitive reasoning. It makes it difficult to regulate the emotional response with reason. Heightened states of empathy have been found to contribute to pain, depression, anxiety, emotional overinvolvement burnout vicarious trauma, and post-traumatic stress disorder. I mean, right out of the gate,

this fact, the fact that romance books heighten empathy and readers is proof that despite the intentions of the writers, these books arouse readers, whether they want to be aroused or not, which is an unsettling thought all by itself. So, imagine you're a young woman and you're reading a steamy romance in

itself. So, imagine you're a young woman and you're reading a steamy romance in which the main female character is being mistreated in some way by the male character, and this female character feels arousal at this mistreatment.

Written well, this arousal on the part of the female character will trigger empathetic arousal in the female reader. A young, inexperienced woman will then be troubled, trying to understand why she's feeling aroused by what is

borderline abusive behavior. However, the story will continue in this vein until the man and woman are living happily ever after. The moment of joy at the end is the emotional climax that is cessential for a woman to fully enjoy an

erotic romance. And no, I'm not saying women are super weak or something like

erotic romance. And no, I'm not saying women are super weak or something like that, but I think we can all agree that strong emotions are exhausting, no matter who you are. And women are more prone to feel emotions strongly. An

empathetic response to a romance book will result in an emotional roller coaster designed specifically to ins snare the tastes of women in such a way that their emotional involvement in a story will tend to be more intensive than a man's on average. Add to that the sexual infatuation triggered by the

addictive erotic release of the extremely explicit scenes, which also takes a toll on the mind, whether you enjoy these scenes or not, especially if you do. I don't really understand why more people aren't aware of how

you do. I don't really understand why more people aren't aware of how intensely bad these books are for women's minds. I don't I don't really read romance, smutty, or otherwise, but I did read quite a few of these books when I was trying to understand the genre better. And something that really

surprised me was how huge of an emotional impact they had on me. Despite

the fact that I didn't care about these characters and despite the fact that they were all mostly happy endings and everything else, I was legitimately depressed during the few weeks when I was reading these books. I was having trouble focusing on my work. I was having trouble sleeping. I was even

having trouble eating. And I couldn't figure out what was wrong until it dawned on me that my mind was basically being ripped around a female specific roller coaster that was designed to trigger the most extreme emotional and

chemical reaction in my mind short of actually doing drugs. Interestingly, the

reaction I experienced was the same reaction men talk about when they watch filmed explicit content. The depression, the difficulty focusing, the lethargy.

Women who are addicted to this sexually explicit fiction don't even realize that they're literally addicted to, you know, adult entertainment. Without exception,

men who are addicted to watching explicit content are viewed as bad. I

shouldn't have to tell anyone watching this video how bad that is for the mind.

It just happens that all the language surrounding this accepted fact says men's minds, how bad it is for men, how much damage it does to men. There have

been countless studies done on the negative impact watching this stuff has on men's physical health and mental health, on their relationships, friendships, professional lives, and on their character. But basically, zero such studies have been done on women. Part of this is because most researchers

won't acknowledge that women's addiction to erotic fiction is in any way comparable to a man's addiction to filmed erotic media. Part of it is because there's so much feminist armor packed around women's erotica that even if a woman were to watch the hub 10 hours a day, she would still somehow be

protected by the fact that she's like empowering herself or, I don't know, exploring her sexuality. For social political reasons, most people won't touch that with a 10-ft pole. When it comes to men, this kind of content is known to have an enormous negative impact on their daily lives. Therefore,

there are countless resources out there to help men kick that habit and restore sanity to their lives. There's also a lot of shame among men. Men will mock other men for their addiction to this stuff, but for women, nothing. There are

no resources to help women kick their addiction to erotic literature, at least none that I could find. And any woman who feels shame when reading this stuff is said to be suffering from internalized misogyny and is advised to focus on overcoming the stigma by, you know, reading more of these books. Other

women will help her in this endeavor. To this end, there are romance book clubs with completely expected names in which the pursuit of women's fiction can be enjoyed without shame. I read one account from a young woman who said that

when she realized she was addicted, she sought help from a therapist who treated the matter as if it was nothing serious at all. No different from like a chocolate addiction. addiction to, pardon me, appreciation of erotic

chocolate addiction. addiction to, pardon me, appreciation of erotic literature is presented to women as female empowerment and whatever various other hot words are part of the current feminist lexicon. If a woman were to express discomfort with the proliferation and increasing intensity

of sexually explicit material in women's fiction, she is painted as an enemy, a prude, or my personal favorite, a slave to the patriarchy. They'll say it allows women to explore their sexuality in a safe space. I'm pretty sure you could

also say that men on the hub are exploring their sexuality in a safe space. I don't know. To which women will often argue, well, that kind of content,

space. I don't know. To which women will often argue, well, that kind of content, the stuff on the Hub is unethical. But that erotic literature, if they even concede that it's the same kind of content, is somehow ethical. Meaning

that I'm assuming no actors or actresses were harmed in its making. Be that as it may, the making of the explicit content is a separate issue from its consumption. I'm sure you could find an ethical and environmentally friendly way

consumption. I'm sure you could find an ethical and environmentally friendly way to make heroin wouldn't make it a good thing for me to consume it. A lot of people these days talk about how social bias prevented women from enjoying romance literature. Well, now the social moral landscape has shifted again. If

romance literature. Well, now the social moral landscape has shifted again. If

you're a woman and you're not a proud champion of smut, then you're the enemy of women. In general, though, I think the so-called social bias surrounding

of women. In general, though, I think the so-called social bias surrounding romance novels isn't much different from the bias surrounding all commercial fiction. I also don't think that's done that much to stop women from mass-

fiction. I also don't think that's done that much to stop women from mass- consuming romance novels. Champions of romance novels will present the acceptance of smut as crucial to female empowerment and independence. This is

categorically false. And in fact, I think I've shown how the opposite is true. But women will nevertheless be banished from female society by other

true. But women will nevertheless be banished from female society by other women if they dare to disagree. Men typically who watch hardcore stuff or who are addicted to it are ashamed of it. Women who are addicted to reading,

as they call it, smut, are supposed to be proud of it. None of these women will allow any talk of shame. But here's the thing. Shame is not a bad thing. Shame

is how our brains tell us we're doing something that will harm us. If we feel shame eating that fourth slice of triple chocolate cake in one sitting, that's our brain telling us that this is bad for our health. If we feel shame because we haven't exercised in over 6 months, that's our brain telling us that we need

physical exercise of some kind. If we feel shame when we take in hardcore explicit material, that's our brain telling us that this is going to harm us in some way and we need to stop. This is our brain trying to save us. Eventually,

anyone can be desensitized to shame, but the effort to desensitize women to shame has been a lot more intensive than it has been for men because historically, women have led the charge against indecent or sexually explicit material.

So, shame in women cuts into hardcore film producers and women's lit publishers bottom line. Removing shame from women's minds doesn't just prevent them from bullying hardcore erotica production out of the mainstream. It

mobilizes 50% of the spending force of the book market to obsessively consume something that is dangerously addictive. This is a huge reason why it's becoming increasingly common for harder and harder content in books to be made available to a younger and younger audience, especially a young female

audience. You see incredibly steamy makeout scenes in books marketed to

audience. You see incredibly steamy makeout scenes in books marketed to 12-year-old girls. Caravl, for example, has two prolonged passages that read

12-year-old girls. Caravl, for example, has two prolonged passages that read like weird handfetish scenes. This isn't some kind of accidental slip of the pen.

This is intentional. Famously, Sarah J. Mass only allowed her book to be marketed to a YA audience if they didn't cut out any of the explicit material.

Slap a feminist female empowerment sticker on the thing and you've got social moral armor no one is willing to touch, not even other women. Something I

hear a lot is that this is all the result of women taking over literature.

I I I definitely see the point, but I was curious if that was true. So, I, you know, took to the internet. The percentage of female authors as of 2019, which was the most recent number I could find, any further statistics were likely

behind this mother of all paygates, was 50.5%, which was also fairly steady from 2010 to 2019. The percentage of female editors as of 2021 was 67%. Funnily

enough, that's not that big of an increase from 2010 when the number was 64%. The percentage of female literary agents as of 2021 was 58%. Which is

64%. The percentage of female literary agents as of 2021 was 58%. Which is

actually a decline from 2010 when the number was 64%. So that's people. Now what about the books that are actually being read? Let's look at the New York Times bestseller list for the last 4 and 1/2 years. In 2020, out of 34 bestselling

authors, 16 were women. In 2021, 21 out of 37 were women. In 2022, 12 out of 22 were women. In 2023, 11 out of 24. In 2024, 17 out of 32, and so far in 2025,

were women. In 2023, 11 out of 24. In 2024, 17 out of 32, and so far in 2025, it's been about 8 out of 13. The point of all these numbers is to say

that statistically women don't dominate the literary world. That said, in many ways, the numbers here don't quite represent the reality. No matter what the numbers say for bestsellers, if you actually look at the list, you can see

that romance, especially smutty romance and romantic, dominate huge blocks of the calendar. And a lot of these female writers have female agents. And

the calendar. And a lot of these female writers have female agents. And

obviously readers of these books will be predominantly female. So women might not quite statistically dominate the literary world, but the literary world nevertheless seems to have taken a very particular female leaning. I take issue

with my own phrasing here a little. I would say that there are definitely other types of female writers working today. But the idea that this is somehow an example of typically female writing or a typically female writer is

something I find incredibly frustrating and just a little bit insulting. But

here's the thing. This fact, the fact that women dominate the literary industry is not what created this problem. This problem has existed for a long time. What problem am I talking about? Call it what you want, but let's

long time. What problem am I talking about? Call it what you want, but let's just say it's the widespread and constantly increasing reliance on explicitly sexual content to sell books, at least in part. You know, this novel

is seductive and compelling or a meditation on the erotic or an erotic black comedy or a tour to force of erotic realism or a book in which seduction beats suspense. And these are not recent books. Some of these were

published over 20 or 30 years ago. It's there visually, too. You know, like the naked woman on the cover of Jaws, this cover of Windmills of the Gods, or the old pulpy covers of Sword and Sorcery paperbacks. The thing is, a lot of these

books that had these blurbs and these terrible covers usually had very limited sex in the books. And when it did appear, it kind of just came out of nowhere. The reality is, however, that no matter what the writers thought, the

nowhere. The reality is, however, that no matter what the writers thought, the publishers knew that a little sprinkling of sex would let them mention it in the publicity, and that would boost sales. After a few generations cycle through this system, using sex to sell an otherwise mediocre or even terrible book

is not even something that's questioned. For that matter, using sex to sell an excellent book isn't even questioned. Eventually, you reach a point where sex is the main point of the book. What I'm trying to say here is that the current

year situation did not arise entirely out of thin air. Like the second women started to dominate literature, everything became smut. I would concede that everything has become women centric smut or you could say smut written for

women by women. But this issue, this almost virulent proliferation of smut as it were in literature has been a thing for a long time. The main difference is that previously some books were written by men and some by women. On top of

that, the overall quality used to be higher, so the sex didn't really stand out, nor were the publishers leaning as heavily on the explicit content to sell the books. Given that the books and the authors were generally of a higher

the books. Given that the books and the authors were generally of a higher quality in and of themselves, I can't read the minds of the women who wrote articles like these ones, but I'd guess that a major complaint a lot of these

women really had when it came right down to it was that the sex written by the men didn't really appeal to them. Is the issue that the sex isn't universally appealing? Or is the issue that sex as a selling point for fiction has become one

appealing? Or is the issue that sex as a selling point for fiction has become one of the most important aspects of the reading experience? And if that's true, why is that? I've read so many essays and articles and quotes written by men

and women over the years who talk like sex is literally a mandatory element of fiction. Whether it's a writer talking about how books without sex are

fiction. Whether it's a writer talking about how books without sex are insincere, or Philip Pullman who apparently can't figure out where elf babies come from unless he can read an explicit account of the moment of conception. Things like this are so incredibly silly to me. I'm tempted to

conception. Things like this are so incredibly silly to me. I'm tempted to make a joke about Philip Pullman being unable to comprehend where the people he sees on the street come from unless he watched the act of conception with his own eyes. But but there's no way he's that stupid. I mean that sincerely.

own eyes. But but there's no way he's that stupid. I mean that sincerely.

There's no way. In which case, the only other explanation is that he's just trying to make an excuse for how badly he wants there to be lots of sex in books for him to both read and write. In in that sense, one could argue that as

ludicrous and worrying as it is that women are becoming so obsessed with the smut in their fiction, at least they're not pretending that they're in it for anything else. So many writers have repeated the same nonsensical argument

anything else. So many writers have repeated the same nonsensical argument that because sex is a natural part of the human condition, failing to include it in your novel would make it unrealistic or disingenuous. What

strikes me the most about this argument is the lack of self-awareness. Bowel

movements are also a natural part of the human condition, but I don't see people using bowel movement scenes to sell books. I also don't see that many bowel movements in romantic. For that matter, childbirth is also a natural part of the human condition. And while that's a bit more likely to make it into a novel than

human condition. And while that's a bit more likely to make it into a novel than a bowel movement, it also doesn't get championed the way sex does. Gosh, I

wonder why that is. Listen, I'm not saying sex is bad and you can't put it in your book. I don't really care. What I am saying is that this ludicrous argument that books without sex are somehow bad is intolerably false. These

people fail to recognize that they just sound like a writer or a reader who's mad because they didn't get to read a super poetic description of boobs in this spy thriller. I'm sorry, but it just comes across like that guy who's mad because there are too many articles in this month's Playboy. Or that fan

girl who's upset because her favorite idol's outfit didn't reveal enough leg.

Like at a certain point, you've got to stop and ask yourself, "Wait, why is the sex scene so important to me? Why does it matter how round this random female character's boobs are? Why does this author feel the need to describe what this guy's hands taste like?" If you put so much emphasis on using sex to sell

books, then a huge chunk of people who buy the books will expect sex. Every

time the cycle repeats, the amount of sex increases and the level of quality decreases. If this cycle repeats enough times, everyone stops noticing how

decreases. If this cycle repeats enough times, everyone stops noticing how important the sex has become to the whole process. They also stop noticing how low the overall quality of the books has become. If the reader is expecting a little sex and the publishers can add a little more to make the book stand out

from the crowd and so on and so on until we get to and and so on. But I mean, sex has become increasingly centric in literature for the last century, going as far back as the likes of Lady Shatterly's Lover and James Joyce's Ulyses and even further

back to Fanny Hill and let's not forget our boy the marquee. Of course, these older examples tended to get themselves a tiny bit banned, while Lady Shadow's lover and Ulyses both tried to make some kind of ironically righteous first

amendment case for erotica being a super important form of art or whatever. But

again, who do you suppose benefited from the legalization of explicit content in books, human society or publishers? The debate about whether or not wildly explicit material is protected by the American First Amendment has been

renewed in recent years. But I do find it interesting that those who argue the strongest for it are making a shocking amount of money. The main issue I'm trying to make here is twofold. One, sex on the level we see in books like this

and this has actually been normal for a long time. Not just in bodice rippers, but in highbrow award-winning literature. So much so that when this issue took off and I started seeing people everywhere complaining or at

least expressing alarm at romantic, while I didn't disagree, I completely agree. I was still pretty surprised. Hadn't we as a reading society decided

agree. I was still pretty surprised. Hadn't we as a reading society decided decades ago that we were all apparently perfectly fine with insane amounts of sexual obsession in our fiction? I'm pretty sure we had. The second issue I want to mention is that even though the female aspect of this whole thing has a

very distinctive look to it, men have also been writing piles of smut-esque literature for just as long. As I said at the beginning, I don't find this to be a women in literature problem. I look at this as a smut in literature problem,

for lack of a better term. I think it's worth noting that highbrow literature has always had more sex in it while commercial fiction has tended to have less. I think a big reason that this has become such a major issue that so many

less. I think a big reason that this has become such a major issue that so many people are noticing is that the commercial fiction is now just as smutty and explicit as highbrow literature has been for a long time. The other day I was reading a book by Paul Auster. This guy is a novelist novelist. One of the

respected literary giants of his generation. legitimately a good writer, or I should say a good put togetherer of words and sentences, if you will. Not 20

pages into this book and his character was constantly examining his genitals.

He was imagining what any random woman looked like naked the minute he met her.

And every character, male and female, had to make sure their sexual habits and tastes were on the page within the course of the first meeting. This is the kind of thing that was much more common in books, especially literary fiction written by men. something you could almost call ambient explicitness or even

sometimes ambient perversion. It was there always on almost every page no matter what the book was about. I personally find this kind of writing tasteless and baffling. But I do think that we as a society became desensitized

to it. Now women reading explicit fiction or fiction with extremely

to it. Now women reading explicit fiction or fiction with extremely explicit elements are also becoming increasingly desensitized. That's why

you can look up things like spice meters. Do you want a book to, you know, read one-handed or do you just want to read a story? Well, the spice is going to be there regardless, but here you can at least gauge the quantity based on the

specific level of desensitization you've reached. Men have been putting tasteless and excessive sex in books for a long time. Just because women are the ones writing it doesn't mean it's not also tasteless. And it also doesn't mean that many male writers aren't just as obsessed with sex. I didn't really like

the books I read in school because there was never any magic, but there was really like not enough kissing for me. >> I'm saying where are the giant snakes?

Where are the scantily clad women? >> Anyone who has tried to read a book off the shelf in Barnes & Noble in the last 5 years does not need to be told that the quality of Western literature is in decline. This is true across the board, and there are a million factors that have contributed to this. But like it or

not, sex is one of them. The more you let sex sell the story, the less concerned you'll be with the quality of the story. Sex sells, as we all know. It

sells so well that if you want, you can ignore most everything else. The bodice

rippers of the past and the romantic genre now and their shocking success has proven that. If the sex is explicit enough, tantalizing enough, controversial enough, nothing else

proven that. If the sex is explicit enough, tantalizing enough, controversial enough, nothing else matters. If you put a stack of books on the table and tell people the ones with

matters. If you put a stack of books on the table and tell people the ones with the purple covers have lots of sex, the unfortunate reality is that those are the ones that will sell out first. The industry knows this. It's hard work to

find good writers. It's hard work to write a good novel. Hard work to edit it well and then market it. Putting really explicit sex in the book means that the story doesn't have to be that great. It means you can cut all the other corners.

It means people won't really be paying attention to the pros or the grammar. It

means that all you'll have to do is slap a blurb on the cover that says something like summer's steamiest read and you're golden. Although, of course, because of the nature of human beings interaction with explicit content, the sex you put in your stories in order to sell them will necessarily have to be more and

more extreme. Of course, this doesn't mean that every book that has ever had

more extreme. Of course, this doesn't mean that every book that has ever had explicit sex in it has been otherwise bad. Quite the contrary, sex often seems to have been shoehorned into otherwise good books. But one does wonder if all

this literally acceptable sex perhaps paved the way for a world of this and this and this. Is smut only reprehensible if it's badly written? Is

it only reprehensible if it's on the bestseller list? Or is all this a symptom of a much much larger social disease that has been degrading our culture for a very very long time? The reality is that sex is 100% optional.

And even then, there are times when the story might benefit from skipping the sex. And also, this bears repeating. There's literally never a good enough

sex. And also, this bears repeating. There's literally never a good enough plot reason to describe every single action, motion, and sensation of a sex scene. There just isn't. Does that mean all sex and fiction is bad? No, of

scene. There just isn't. Does that mean all sex and fiction is bad? No, of

course not. Does that mean that all books that have sex in them are bad?

Again, of course not. But unlike some authors who seem to believe that a book can't exist without explicit content, I am of the mind that certain things are better handled with restraint. As I said before, the largest group of people who have worked so tirelessly to normalize the consumption of erotic media are

people whose sole motivation is profit. They do not care about female empowerment. They don't even care about female health. They just care about

empowerment. They don't even care about female health. They just care about female money. So, I think it might be time for females to wake up. But while

female money. So, I think it might be time for females to wake up. But while

women are waking up, maybe it wouldn't be the worst thing for the gents to also take stock. I hesitate to tell people what to do to fix this. It's easy to

take stock. I hesitate to tell people what to do to fix this. It's easy to talk about the problem. Well, maybe not easy, but not difficult in the same way.

You know, that old thing that was everywhere a few years ago. You know,

you have two wolves fighting inside you and the one that wins is the one that you feed. We all have so much inside us. Impulses to good and to bad. pulls to be

you feed. We all have so much inside us. Impulses to good and to bad. pulls to be selfish, pulls to be courageous or deviant or compassionate or lazy. And

whatever we feed daytoday is what we become. If we feed the impulse to obsess over sex, that's what we will become. And on a long enough timeline, we'll become a perverted sex addict. The same goes for society. Maybe things in

literature are the way they are because we've been feeding perversion for too long. Now there are no other strong hungers. no hunger for powerful

long. Now there are no other strong hungers. no hunger for powerful storytelling, for aspirational heroes, for nuanced characters, beautiful pros, and so on. It's like society has become the monkey that pushes the pleasure button instead of the food button until it dies. Maybe we should consider

starving that particular hunger and see what happens. As always, thank you so much for watching.

[Music]