this post was submitted on 21 May 2026
403 points (99.3% liked)

Greentext

8510 readers
393 users here now

This is a place to share greentexts and witness the confounding life of Anon. If you're new to the Greentext community, think of it as a sort of zoo with Anon as the main attraction.

Be warned:

If you find yourself getting angry (or god forbid, agreeing) with something Anon has said, you might be doing it wrong.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] goldteeth@lemmy.dbzer0.com 227 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (5 children)

Hey now, let's be clear. Stephen King did not have the clown defeated by a bunch of outcast youths gangbanging in a sewer. That's just patently incorrect. Every single part. No, he had the ancient terror disguised as a clown temporarily banished by summoning an ancient turtle from the dawn of time and engaging It in a battle of wills. Completely different and, in fact, perfectly reasonable. Anyone that's actually read the book knows the outcast youth sewer gangbang happens after that and actually has no bearing on the plot whatsoever. Stephen King's not some freak writing a book where the entire plot hinges on a bunch of traumatized kids screwing each other to save the world, no; he's a perfectly normal guy writing about a bunch of traumatized kids screwing each other for no reason at all. Bet you feel real silly now, huh?

[–] SomethingBurger@jlai.lu 170 points 2 months ago (1 children)

What the fuck are you on about? Nothing you said is remotely true, this is a gross misinterpretation of the events depicted in the book.

It's not a gangbang, it's a train. They go one after the other.

[–] massive_bereavement@fedia.io 49 points 2 months ago (2 children)

I thought that in order to be a train they should be connected to each other.

[–] lemming741@lemmy.world 32 points 2 months ago (1 children)
[–] Jankatarch@lemmy.world 12 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (2 children)

There is an old painting about this. Tho they are adults.Gay ottoman erotica from 1700s where everyone forms a circular chain with their dicks and ass

(Tuhfet Ul-Mulk by Shayk Al-Misri, 1773)

(This is illustrated version of the Turkish translation from 1400s and there is an older, Arabic version from 1300s according to carbon-dating)

[–] schipelblorp@sh.itjust.works 9 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Add a one-line explanation of what this file represents.

Surprised nobody's volunteered to write the English caption yet.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] snoons@lemmy.ca 5 points 2 months ago (2 children)

How the hell is that related? Those lads were merely showing a circle can be made with numerous stiff rods, a precursor to calculus. It has nothing to do with ancient terrors, god-like turtles or traumatized children having a gangbang in a sewer after killing what they thought was a supernatural clown. For shame!

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] mnemonicmonkeys@sh.itjust.works 11 points 2 months ago (1 children)

That's the "train position" you're referring to. It's different from "running a train".

Why? I don't know.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] gurty@lemmy.world 48 points 2 months ago

And this was the stuff he got published. I’d dread to read his drafts and unreleased material from that era.

[–] abbadon420@sh.itjust.works 20 points 2 months ago (4 children)

Was there not some time traveling component? Like their future selves had to find each other again and come back ti their childhoods. I thought that was what made the "children having sex" part not as triggering as it sounds,because they were actually adults. Mind you, it's been years since I read the book. I might be misremembering things.

[–] finallymadeanaccount@lemmy.world 43 points 2 months ago

So ... adult-minds having sex with children's bodies?

That makes it worse!

[–] paranoia@feddit.dk 15 points 2 months ago

No, it is even more bizarre. They have sex because the group is lost in the sewer and apparently this makes them know where they are, somehow, so they can leave, which they then do. It adds literally nothing to the plot, apart from really shoddy symbolism of growing up.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Honytawk@discuss.tchncs.de 17 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

I remember it being for the need to destroy their innocence or something

[–] JustinTheGM@ttrpg.network 14 points 2 months ago (1 children)

It was actually closer to needing to restore the power of friendship

[–] RamenJunkie@midwest.social 14 points 2 months ago

Couldn't they just like... go minigolfing or something?

[–] unemployedclaquer@sopuli.xyz 7 points 2 months ago (1 children)
[–] goldteeth@lemmy.dbzer0.com 33 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)
[–] unemployedclaquer@sopuli.xyz 9 points 2 months ago

My ex went on to get a PhD in English with Stephen king as a specific area of interest and I'm glad I don't know exactly the email to send what you said, well it would be super awkward and probably misunderstood

[–] Nangijala@feddit.dk 49 points 2 months ago (3 children)

I went into IT with an open mind and was prepared for that scene. Kept thinking that it probably made a lot of sense since many King fans had said it had a very beautiful reason behind it.

Then I get to it. And it's just stupid. Genuinely stupid.

The kids are scared of forgetting each other, because that is the power of IT. It makes people forget as they grow up.

So they want to do something meaningful to remember each other. And Bev is like: y'all can fuck me.

And I am over here like: how are the boys supposed to remember each other if they only fuck you? If that scene was supposed to make a lick of sense, the kids would have an orgy with each other and not just the boys lining up to have sex with one girl.

I can go along with weird and uncomfortable ideas in books if they make sense. In this case, it made no sense. But people either seem to defend it because they just go along with the premise or they defend King because he was high or some shit.

I'm not defending bad storytelling. IT has a lot of cool concepts in it and no one can write about small communities like King can, but I'm not gonna pretend like the kids having sex is some clever narrative device. It's very, very stupid.

I also think the Turtle is goofy af.

[–] TheSlad@sh.itjust.works 31 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Tbh if my first time was a train of my bros all with the same chick, i'd probably remember them for a very long time even without a proper orgy. Though i'd probably remember them all for helping to defeat an eldritch sewer fiend anyways.

Still sounds like a stupid thing to put in a horror story about teenagers though..

[–] jballs@sh.itjust.works 12 points 2 months ago (2 children)

What makes it bad is they're not teenagers. They're 11 year olds.

[–] RamenJunkie@midwest.social 8 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

"How could we remeber each other forever?"

"Oh I know, lets all do a childhood trauma!"

[–] TheSlad@sh.itjust.works 6 points 2 months ago

😑 i thought they were like 14 or something....it makes even less sense now

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] slickgoat@lemmy.world 21 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Cocaine is a hell of a drug...

[–] steeznson@lemmy.world 8 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Washed down with some Listerine according to his On Writing autobio

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] urheber@discuss.tchncs.de 13 points 2 months ago (3 children)
[–] ComfortableRaspberry@feddit.org 73 points 2 months ago (1 children)

There is a scene in the book "It" where the only girl in the friend group decides to have sex with all the others to bring them back together. Down in the sewers.

[–] RamenJunkie@midwest.social 8 points 2 months ago

Also, this friend group is all children. Not teenages of age, or even teenagers of questionable age, children.

[–] kibblebits@quokk.au 28 points 2 months ago (34 children)

The book has child porn in it. A group fuck where they all fuck the girl.

Not joking.

[–] Zetta@mander.xyz 7 points 2 months ago (3 children)

Today I learned everyone with a copy of the book 'It' is in possession of CSAM, and amazon and Barnes and noble are actively and criminally distributing the same material.

Words have meaning.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (33 replies)
[–] burgermeister@sh.itjust.works 12 points 2 months ago (2 children)

The kids defeated the clown by fucking

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] paranoia@feddit.dk 12 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

I went in knowing nothing about the book other than there was a supernatural clown in it. When I read that scene I had to stop, then go online to find an explanation of what the fuck I just read (to be fair, I was also pretty confused by the denouement in general) and how it is related to the plot. I was absolutely baffled by the amount of people saying they thought it was fine to have, some people even said it was a good allegory for leaving childhood.

[–] imetators@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 2 months ago

some people even said it was a good allegory for leaving childhood.

It is an allegory. But that is a certainly not a good one and should be not a choice to be used as one.

[–] samus12345@sh.itjust.works 11 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (2 children)

"And you thought I was fucked up? I didn't have anything to do with that! I just eat children!"

[–] M0oP0o@mander.xyz 9 points 2 months ago

Oh come on use the original.

(also maybe don't do child gang bangs in your books, its a bit weird)

load more comments
view more: next ›