I Think This Is Unfair.

[TadOverdon]

BTW, age of consent is 16 in 31 of the 50 states in my country. The rule at Lit is specific and unchallengable and the cutoff is chosen, presumably, for some good reason. But there's no reason to get the discussion of it confused with some debate about whether high school students who are having sex in the real world are "underage." That's arbitrary based on your zip code.

 

[KeithD]

BTW, age of consent is 16 in 31 of the 50 states in my country. The rule here is specific and unchallengable and the cutoff is chosen, presumably, for some good reason. But there's no reason to get the discussion of it confused with some debate about whether high school students who are having sex in the real world are "underage." That's arbitrary based on your zip code.

Well, bless your little heart.

(You had no need to be snotty, but you were anyway, weren't you?)

 

[Lifestyle66]

Did I mention the tediousness of the constant posting on this issue?

And here you are ... still posting to it.

Did it ever occur to you that if you get in such repetitive arguments with multiple people on these forums, look for the only common factor in all: You.

 

[KeithD]

And here you are ... still posting to it.

Did it ever occur to you that if you get in such repetitive arguments with multiple people on these forums, look for the only common factor in all: You.

In the present cases, no. I think I have been posting to the issues, and I've been getting shit back. One would almost think this was a homophobic discussion board.

 

[TadOverdon]

Nm...

 

[TadOverdon]

Bless your heart.

Well, bless your little heart.

Plagiarist.

 

[windar]

BTW, age of consent is 16 in 31 of the 50 states in my country. The rule at Lit is specific and unchallengable and the cutoff is chosen, presumably, for some good reason. But there's no reason to get the discussion of it confused with some debate about whether high school students who are having sex in the real world are "underage." That's arbitrary based on your zip code.

There's a wrinkle in that. A 16 year old can have sex in many places as you note, but if the act is filmed, even by the 16 year old, that is child porn. Whether or not that makes sense, that is the law. Now, a written story is not a film and you could certainly mount a vigorous First Amendment defense, but most sites, probably wisely, simply choose not to go there.

 

[TadOverdon]

There's a wrinkle in that. A 16 year old can have sex in many places as you note, but if the act is filmed, even by the 16 year old, that is child porn.

I'm sure that's true.

I'm not so sure, from what I've seen, that the injunction is anywhere near so widely observedl online where written or illustrated porn fiction is concerned.

 

[windar]

I'm sure that's true.

I'm not so sure, from what I've seen, that the injunction is anywhere near universal online where written or illustrated porn fiction is concerned.

Nothing is universal except death and taxes, and some manage to avoid the latter. I have stories on sites that allow just about anything EXCEPT underage.

 

[TxRad]

I see the usual "Dead Horse beating" Thread came late this month. We almost got through the first week without it showing up.

18 years old is the rule. Take it or leave it or at least take it up with the only one who has a say. Laurel.

 

[Lifestyle66]

In the present cases, no. I think I have been posting to the issues, and I've been getting shit back. One would almost think this was a homophobic discussion board.

Interesting ... you relate disagreements about what constitutes a self-publishing site, standards of self-publishing, and rejections over supposed references to underaged sex ... with such disagreements between you and several different people as somehow equated to all of them having homophobia.

And YOU don't see a problem with that concept?

 

[NotWise]

I see the usual "Dead Horse beating" Thread came late this month. We almost got through the first week without it showing up.

18 years old is the rule. Take it or leave it or at least take it up with the only one who has a say. Laurel.

Just keep in mind that it isn't the OP who's beating the dead horse. yamucha seemed pretty settled with the answers in the first few posts. The horse-beating is being done by people who should know better.

 

[KeithD]

Interesting ... you relate disagreements about what constitutes a self-publishing site, standards of self-publishing, and rejections over supposed references to underaged sex ... with such disagreements between you and several different people as somehow equated to all of them having homophobia.

And YOU don't see a problem with that concept?

I see the problem with you, yes, and the positions you shove based on being here actively for about ten minutes with near zero experience in story submission. And who again is it who is pushing argumentation and personal attack?

And I am absolutely correct that having stories posted at Literotica is NOT self-publishing.

 

[TxRad]

Just keep in mind that it isn't the OP who's beating the dead horse. yamucha seemed pretty settled with the answers in the first few posts. The horse-beating is being done by people who should know better.

And this is different from normal how?

The only thing missing so far is the group to try and show him how to sidestep the rule.

 

[Lifestyle66]

...

And I am absolutely correct that having stories posted at Literotica is NOT self-publishing.

And because I (and others) disagree with you, we are homophobic???

Really!

And you STILL don't see any disconnect from reality with your position?

 

[TxRad]

And because I (and others) disagree with you, we are homophobic???

Really!

And you STILL don't see any disconnect from reality with your position?

And you still don't see the difference in discussion and being argumentative.

 

[LAHomedog]

Nope. I have never had to rewrite or resubmit anything. Maybe because most of my characters are fairly obviously or explicitly past 18.

Lots of stories around here that dance right at the edge of that age limit, with "all characters are over 18" slapped at the beginning. I'm sure a lot of the readers are familiar with the no under 18 rule as well, so they have probably learned to ignore the mentions of 18th birthdays when reading a story involving high schools and hot teachers.

I was being rhetorical. Cut me a break.

 

[Bramblethorn]

For most who lost their virginity in junior high school, insisting that community college is the same is WHAT? .

Not sure that's accurate. Junior high typically ends around age 15, right?

Per Sexual Activity and Contraceptive Use Among Teenagers in the United States, 2011–2015, only about a quarter of US 16-year-olds had ever had sex. The ones who lost their virginity in junior high are rarer than the ones who were still virgins at 20.

Not that this has much bearing on site policy.

 

[TadOverdon]

The ones who lost their virginity in junior high are rarer than the ones who were still virgins at 20.

Not that this has much bearing on site policy.

Sounds about right, for younger people, anyway. Any stats on the Boomers? They seem to have been frisky critters.