The Freedom to Publish Dreck

We might err a bit on the adult side here because I'm going to be talking about some adult genres. I'll try to keep it PG-13, but feel free to cover your children's eyes and pop your monocles.

Back in 2013 there was a bit of a stir on Amazon regarding "Monster Erotica" when it was banned despite some books in the genre being available on the Kindle market for over a year. What is Monster Erotica exactly? It is anything that involves hanky-panky between humans and Bigfoot, dinosaurs, minotaur, centaur, Pegasus, ectetera, you get the idea.



No, seriously.

Some of the books manage to get republished on Amazon simply by changing their cover and/or title, which is likely why I managed to find this one. I both agree and disagree with the banning. I agree with it because of simple squick factor, and that you have to draw the line somewhere.

Primarily though? I disagree on the ban.

Is the problem reputation? No. Kindle publishing is quickly being seen as the scum pond of the publishing world (and I feel that goes double with the introduction of profiting off fanfiction via Kindle Worlds) so they're not doing much to clean up their overall reputation.

Are they losing money by stocking monster erotica on their digital shelves? Heck no, they do nothing but profit from all Kindle Books (they get either 70% or 30% depending upon what you gain in royalties) so it is nothing but a gain for them.

Most importantly, I believe that people should be allowed to publish whatever garbage they want. You know why? Because the readers are going to decide what's popular. Christie Sims is apparently the example author for monster erotica and her most popular book only has 66 reviews. Buyers aren't going "Oh good, I've been looking for a new stegosaurus slut book to make my neither regions tingly!"

There goes that monocle again.

They're buying it as a joke, they're buying it for shock factor. When I look up "Monster erotica" in the Books section and see the "Sort by average customer review" this is what I get

Four star and up: 961
Three star and up: 1270
Two star and up: 1415
One star: 1514

Simply put, these books are crap and banning them isn't going to do a lot because no one is deliberately seeking them out in the first place.

Another important factor to consider is what constitutes "Monster" exactly? Anything unnatural? Sure! Well that ban was so easy I get to punch out early!

Except...

Oh.

And...

Hmm.

Also...

Can't forget those sexy witches!

100 years ago vampires would have fallen right in with the rest of the monstrous creatures.

Hawt.

Werewolves are also, technically, monsters. Though you'll notice there tends to be an unspoken rule that a werewolf never gets his sexy on unless he's in human form. Where do angels fall in the category? Zombies? Faeries? Elves? How about we mix a little science fiction in and include robots?

Banning monster erotica is an all-or-nothing deal, and being selective only causes more problems than it solves for a publisher who doesn't believe in a slush pile.

Like anything else being sold in this world, no matter how much advertising is done or even how good or bad it might be, the consumers will decide the ultimate fate.