Remove This Story

[lovecraft68]

Oh, here we go, its the last word game again, because you just have to have it.

Go ahead pilot, say something else you think is clever, stick your thumb in your mouth, stomp your feet and then go tell whoever it is that actually talks to you in the real world how you won yet another internet argument.

 

[frontlinecaster]

Oh, here we go, its the last word game again, because you just have to have it.

Go ahead pilot, say something else you think is clever, stick your thumb in your mouth, stomp your feet and then go tell whoever it is that actually talks to you in the real world how you won yet another internet argument.

God, will you two just fuck already and get it over with. Watching this flirting play out in every thread is just getting old.

 

[lovecraft68]

God, will you two just fuck already and get it over with. Watching this flirting play out in every thread is just getting old.

Look, if you're jealous, just say so. There's enough of me to go around

 

[Learin]

H'mm that makes all those critics who put Lolita into their 100 best English Language Novels, a bunch of Pedophiles. Have you told them? Nah thought not.

And you call yourself an interlectual thinker.

Lolita won its recognition for the Literary aspect (mentioned it just in case you already knew). There was nothing Literary about the story in question.

 

[Sammael Bard]

Stories need conflict. If a sexual encounter has conflict built into it via the breaking of a taboo, then it's appealing on two levels: One, it's sex, and two, it creates tension and drama. Some of the most popular and enduring conventions in pornography are about having sex with someone who, for one reason or another, you should not be: sex with your boss, sex with your best friend's significant other, sex with a complete stranger you just met, etc.

An incest story breaks a major taboo and so generates a significant amount of dramatic conflict. It's a conflict anyone can relate to, because we all operate under the jurisdiction of that particular taboo. Some taboos are necessarily narrow in their appeal: To dig a BDSM story, you have to find BDSM appealing, for example. But most incest stories feature fairly routine pornographic exploits that are made taboo simply by the context. It's not that incest is more appealing than everything else, it's that a lot of everything else has more narrow appeal.

And I suppose if you're of a Freudian bent you might entertain the idea that such stories provide catharsis for subconscious desires. But I don't think that's a necessary conclusion: Most people enjoy war movies, but very few people would enjoy actually going to war. What's gratifying about entertainment is usually not the subject matter itself but rather what that subject allows us to feel.

I like this little post, although it's not from this thread, but a thread long ago in the SDC forum. Kinda puts a rest to all the debates regarding what should be and what shouldn't be.

 

[DeYaKen]

Its called justification of their own kinks.

No It's called defending freedom of expression

But if that is their kink, they are welcome to it(as long as they are not practicing it) The point here is this story blatantly violated two of lits rules and shouldn't have been posted here so people were upset and now everyone that is upset is a hypocrite who is against literature, freedom of speech or whatever else.

You really must learn to read what others say before you criticise them. People are upset at the hysteria and the name calling, not the fact that the story was taken down for breaking the rules.

I know rape is a heavy fantasy for both men and women. Fine, but if one can get off to a child being raped that's another matter and you're a sick fuck, period, by anyone's definition of the word and the word pedophile certainly fits.

Oh dear, it seems that you need some basic concepts explained to you.

1) Fiction : It's not true, didn't happen, the author made it up. Agatha Christie was not a serial killer, H.G.Wells was not a time traveller, Thomas Harris was not a Cannibal and Iain McKewan did not fuck his sister. They made it all up.

2) People can admire the authors ability to craft a story without liking or agreeing with the content. The wasp factory was a very uncomfortable read but the characters jumped off the page at you making it a superb book. I can't speak for you but other people can read stories without "getting off on them."

To brand anyone who admired a story featuring underage sex as a pedophile is exactly the same as branding lovers of crime novels as criminals, people who loved the silence of the lambs as cannibals and anyone who admired The story of O as either a sadist or a masochist.

 

[Sammael Bard]

No It's called defending freedom of expression



You really must learn to read what others say before you criticise them. People are upset at the hysteria and the name calling, not the fact that the story was taken down for breaking the rules.



Oh dear, it seems that you need some basic concepts explained to you.

1) Fiction : It's not true, didn't happen, the author made it up. Agatha Christie was not a serial killer, H.G.Wells was not a time traveller, Thomas Harris was not a Cannibal and Iain McKewan did not fuck his sister. They made it all up.

2) People can admire the authors ability to craft a story without liking or agreeing with the content. The wasp factory was a very uncomfortable read but the characters jumped off the page at you making it a superb book. I can't speak for you but other people can read stories without "getting off on them."

To brand anyone who admired a story featuring underage sex as a pedophile is exactly the same as branding lovers of crime novels as criminals, people who loved the silence of the lambs as cannibals and anyone who admired The story of O as either a sadist or a masochist.

You don't seem to understand the difference between what is titillating and what is art. I've seen the story and I don't think it was "art".

 

[DeYaKen]

You don't seem to understand the difference between what is titillating and what is art. I've seen the story and I don't think it was "art".

You have me at a disadvantage, I was not able to read the story. However, your opinion that it was not art does not excuse the personal attacks on the author and anyone that liked it.
For all I know it may have been an excellent example of a writer getting inside the head of the protagonists.

Who are we to judge other people's motivations?

 

[DarkPleasures]

Look, if you're jealous, just say so. There's enough of me to go around

You sure?

 

[Magnetron]

It was written to sexually stimulate adults who are in anticipation of being sexually stimulated as they read sex stories at a website meant for adults only.

Actions speak louder than words.

It's as if the THIS IS HIGHLY INAPPROPRIATE switch in the author's brain was turned off when he submitted it.

 

[DeYaKen]

Listen, there recently has been a case of how some powerful people have abused children sexually. Police didn't want to act because they were filthy rich, but when they did, shit hit the fan.

Now, if you have a man posting an under-age rape story in this atmosphere, people are going to burn him down and rip his ass apart.


I'm not against expression of speech, but titillating stories like these is like asking the people to stone you. Authors writing in Nonconsent face this, and so do the ones writing in Incest/Taboo and Loving Wives. People are going to resort to personal attacks when they have the added benefits of being an anonymous, so the best that the author can do is to defend himself and/or ignore them.

Yes and we have had people killed and persecuted because they were wrongly dubbed as pedophiles. We had a pediatrician's house burned down because the ignorant mob thought that it was another word for pedo. We had a man with learning difficulties beaten to death, and set on fire, because he liked to talk to children (they were on his level) Are you saying that a few newspaper headlines excuses that? Your argument seems to be that mass hysteria excuses mass hysteria. It doesn't.

It is because of the perception of the word pedophile that we shouldn't bandy it about willy nilly yet here you are defending people who do just that.

That is my final word on the subject Thank you all for a good story idea (not for lit since It won't be even remotely sexual)

 

[Zeb_Carter]

If it swims like a duck, quackes like duck and it writes like a duck, it must be a duck or an AFLC spokes duck.

While, the current law in America allows the written word to portray the abuse of children and allow the depiction in cartoon from of that abuse, the evilness in the mind of a person who does this to titillate others must be taken into consideration.

Is the author who writes a single scene of underage sex in a full length novel evil? I don't know.

Is the author who write a complete story revolving around underage sex and molestation evil? Same answer, I don't know.

But I can bet there is some sickness there to even want to write a story like that. At least that's my opinion.

Now, that being said...

While the law allows such, this site does not. This site is privately owned and has a set of rules in place. That those rules are arbitrarily enforced is neither here nor there. How, what ,who and when they are enforced is up to the owners. Yes this can lead to inconsistencies and some stories being posted that shouldn't, but that is why there is a report button.

The story was reported and taken down. The author disagreed and complained, his/her prerogative. If the author wants to post that story so people can read it, there are other forums to do that.

Is the author a pedophile? I haven't the faintest idea.

Personally, I would never read or write about the rape of a child no matter what others would like to think or believe. And those that do, well they are protected by the law, but that law doesn't give them the right to post it here.

 

[lovecraft68]

If the author wrote the rape as a horrific event, it would have been different. It still would have violated the under age sex rule, but wouldn't have been seen in such a poor light.

For example if the girl was upset telling the story of the rape and the person she was telling it to was properly appalled and upset for this girl, it would have been different.

But when the adult became aroused by a girl talking about how she was raped at 11 it became rape for titillation and also at that point became kiddie porn.

An eleven year old is not even a sexually developed woman, she is a child.

Hence this story smacked of pedophilia. Is the author a pedo? I would say most likely not, they are usually not this damn blatant, but apparently he thought people would be sexually aroused by it or he would not have made the character sexually aroused.

That's where it really crosses the line and as far as what is legal/illegal and what happens in the real world this is lit, its where this discussion is being held and its about the sites rules.

The story broke the sites rules and it did so blatantly and deserved to be reported and deleted. I am not sure what is so hard to understand about that.

 

[Sammael Bard]

Yes and we have had people killed and persecuted because they were wrongly dubbed as pedophiles. We had a pediatrician's house burned down because the ignorant mob thought that it was another word for pedo. We had a man with learning difficulties beaten to death, and set on fire, because he liked to talk to children (they were on his level) Are you saying that a few newspaper headlines excuses that? Your argument seems to be that mass hysteria excuses mass hysteria. It doesn't.

It is because of the perception of the word pedophile that we shouldn't bandy it about willy nilly yet here you are defending people who do just that.

That is my final word on the subject Thank you all for a good story idea (not for lit since It won't be even remotely sexual)

Meh...totally out of context for which you have a penchant for.

The men were Celebs, and they weren't wrongly accused. So the first para is totally out of context. You should know why people don't promote Child Erotica because there are scientific reasons behind it. And I don't think people should even express something that they don't want the mass to imagine, because out there in the masses not everyone is on the same intellectual level as us.


And If you want to write Child Erotica, you don't need to justify yourself, because hey! You got a keyboard so you can write about it.

The people who read the stories and get off it aren't to blame either because they've got a sexual organ which needs to be appeased. So it doesn't matter whether it's a child, or an animal or god-knows-whatever-it-is.

And we can't even call them Paedophile, because then it will be a personal attack, right?

Freedom to do whatever you want, I think.

NO, we're sooo wrong when we say that we shouldn't include a minor in sexual activity when he's/she's not even mature to participate yet. And of course, they'll lubricate themselves automatically, even though it's neigh impossible to do that biologically.

Hey, why stop at 11? Go way below 11 and take toddlers into consideration, because of course, you've got the freedom to express.


Hope you pelt out a best seller someday by doing that.

 

[Devilius]

Gotta love it when some people pop in Lolita to defend Paedophile works.

I love this debate.

Child Porn, the sex trade in general exploiting young girls, disgusts me, nauseates me and what ever methods to eliminate child prostitution and exploitation that are necessary have my full support.

Every time this discussion appears, I get tagged a pedophile by those who seem to be certain that 18 is the proper age limit. MTV has a running series, 16 and Pregnant, that I have not watched, but why cable or satellite television can address the subject and the world of publishing cannot, remains a mystery to me.

I am not under the impression that your right wing or Christian groups are the bad guys here but I am no quite sure where the fault lies. There have been tremendous societal changes over the past half century, and writers should be at the forefront, as they always have been, in pushing the envelope of the acceptable. It is disappointing to me that the under 18 age LAW seems to be carved in stone and unassailable.

I would think that routine, married sex, would be a boring topic to write about, which is why 'key clubs', wife swapping stories and such had a flurry a few years ago.

Perhaps I am alone in my assessment that the current restrictions are unrealistic and should be changed and that censorship, especially for the written word, is never an acceptable tool of social manipulation.

I covered high school sports, both boys and girls, for over two years and in case anyone doesn't know it, those kids are sexually active and they are not shy about it. I have also been a member of a poetry group for almost ten years and reading the stories and poems by these young writers is an eye opening experience.

I have been fighting censorship since my run-in with the Catholic Church and their Prohitibed Boioks list, in the 1960's which has finally been removed and I would like to think that part of that change was a result of the publicity I gave it, at least in the area my broadcasts were heard.

Just why 'incest' has become a focal point of recent, is also a matter of speculation, but I think the attempts to ban, prohibit and censor the topic should be fought by any and all writers as a matter of self preservation.

If they are successful at banning that category, what is next?

Here's the kickass reply:

Well, in the interest of the New Bipartisanship D) I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you have some legitimate literary interest in the topic of under-18 sex that goes beyond the merely prurient. But most people (for good or ill) aren't you, and for most people the appeal of sex with a juvenile is simply a cheap prurient gimmick, and I have no doubt that, were the age barrier done away with, most of the resulting stories we'd see would be age-exploitative, with the ages quickly plummeting until they reached pedophile territory, whereupon the baby-fuckers would have a field day.

I'm not defending the over-18 rule. But I am defending the right of Literotica to defend itself against the moral and legal pragmatics of 2011 America. Setting 18 as the cut-off is annoyingly arbitrary, and probably it should be lowered to 16, or maybe 15. Or 14. Or 12... Or at least provisions should be made for stories in which the lovers are roughly the same age, give or take--what?--2 years? 4? 5? 10? Very slippery slope down here.

But the reason you--or anyone who defends under-18 sex--get branded a pedophile while TV or Shakespeare gets a by is because of the literary vs. pornographic approach. 16 and Pregnant and Romeo and Juliet don't dwell on the graphic details of the act of underage sex, whereas underage porn is about nothing else. Literature is about the meaning and implications of experience, while porn is about arousing and titillating us. Literature explains, porn exploits.

The same analysis illustrates the speciousness of the incest-vs.-murder argument that claims that incest porn is just fantasy and therefore no different than the fantasy murders that fill mystery stories. It's a false analogy, because very few murder mysteries examine the act of murder in the graphic and descriptive detail with which incest stories look at the act of intra-family sex.

All porn is propaganda in that it lies and distorts and presents an idealized picture of the sexual experience. Everyone's beautiful and handsomely endowed; orgasms are mind-blowing and simultaneous; no one ever farts or has to pee in the middle of a session. But just like political propaganda, when porn takes its idealizations too far it generates disbelief, derision, and backlash, and age-exploitative sex and incest always seem to go too far, ignoring all the emotional and psychological implications of these acts. That's what offends people.

The way to get around the under-18 or incest ban is therefore simple: treat the subject seriously rather than pornographically and submit it to a mainstream publisher.

Someone should ask that DeYaKen to memorise this thing.

 

[Carnal_Flower]

I didn't know this thread went on and on. I'm late to commenting but this really hits the nail on the head.

I DID read the whole story (gag) and LC is exactly right. After the father's faux-horror, it launches right into endless descriptions of her porn star body, 6 inch heels, tiny skirts etc. She is totally eroticized from the rape. She's described as "childlike but a sex kitten." The whole thing is not about her, it's about the father/author writing his ultimate sex toy fantasy. The "rape" just prepares the way for him. The supposed psychological damage she suffers really just makes her more vulnerable to the Dad. It's HIS fantasy being acted out.

Arrow could have avoided a lot of accusations by being a BIT more realistic about an "11" year old rape. Give us a break. He chose the age after all. If he doesn't represent sex at ELEVEN as an utter horror then there's some serious pedo crap going on.

If the author wrote the rape as a horrific event, it would have been different. It still would have violated the under age sex rule, but wouldn't have been seen in such a poor light.

For example if the girl was upset telling the story of the rape and the person she was telling it to was properly appalled and upset for this girl, it would have been different.

But when the adult became aroused by a girl talking about how she was raped at 11 it became rape for titillation and also at that point became kiddie porn.

An eleven year old is not even a sexually developed woman, she is a child.

Hence this story smacked of pedophilia. Is the author a pedo? I would say most likely not, they are usually not this damn blatant, but apparently he thought people would be sexually aroused by it or he would not have made the character sexually aroused.

That's where it really crosses the line and as far as what is legal/illegal and what happens in the real world this is lit, its where this discussion is being held and its about the sites rules.

The story broke the sites rules and it did so blatantly and deserved to be reported and deleted. I am not sure what is so hard to understand about that.

 

[sr71plt]

For the record, it didn't go on and on--at least before your last post. It had ended five days ago.

 

[Magnetron]

I didn't know this thread went on and on. I'm late to commenting but this really hits the nail on the head.

I DID read the whole story (gag) and LC is exactly right. After the father's faux-horror, it launches right into endless descriptions of her porn star body, 6 inch heels, tiny skirts etc. She is totally eroticized from the rape. She's described as "childlike but a sex kitten." The whole thing is not about her, it's about the father/author writing his ultimate sex toy fantasy. The "rape" just prepares the way for him. The supposed psychological damage she suffers really just makes her more vulnerable to the Dad. It's HIS fantasy being acted out.

Arrow could have avoided a lot of accusations by being a BIT more realistic about an "11" year old rape. Give us a break. He chose the age after all. If he doesn't represent sex at ELEVEN as an utter horror then there's some serious pedo crap going on.

I did not read it, but I'll take your word for it.

I've had several poems rejected that were later accepted after resubmitting with a note attached explaining there was no necrophelia in this or any underage people in that. An erotic poem is easily consumed and you can't sneak in content that breaks the rules by burying it under a heap of text. The supposed necrophelia one was even submitted in the Non-Erotic category and there was no sex or any physical contact whatsoever between the characters.

I can rationalize something briefly mentioned in few words being overlooked in a poem to which an unintended conclusion can be jumped to.

Something this extensive that literally is impossible to take out of context?

Boggles the noggin.

 

[lovecraft68]

I did not read it, but I'll take your word for it.

I've had several poems rejected that were later accepted after resubmitting with a note attached explaining there was no necrophelia in this or any underage people in that. An erotic poem is easily consumed and you can't sneak in content that breaks the rules by burying it under a heap of text. The supposed necrophelia one was even submitted in the Non-Erotic category and there was no sex or any physical contact whatsoever between the characters.

I can rationalize something briefly mentioned in few words being overlooked in a poem to which an unintended conclusion can be jumped to.

Something this extensive that literally is impossible to take out of context?

Boggles the noggin.

That's the difference, if you wrote something that could be misunderstood or taken out of context that's one thing.

This thing was so blatant I find myself wondering if the author was really aware of the rules here. He certainly was not trying to be clever or subtle.

Anyway its gone. Just goes to show what the screening process isn't here though because as I said, this was not being hidden at all.

 

[neci]

 

[Neverlander]

...totally out of context for which you have a penchant for.

I don't think people should even express something that they don't want the mass to imagine, because out there in the masses not everyone is on the same intellectual level as us.

Oh my. And evidently as members of such a select, elevated group we needn't be bound by the same rules of grammar that apply to the masses.

 

[Sammael Bard]

Oh my. And evidently as members of such a select, elevated group we needn't be bound by the same rules of grammar that apply to the masses.

Hmmm... I take back all of my words I had said earlier in this debate. I got carried away and let my emotions get the better of me.

I'm not comfortable or even remotely agree with people promoting child erotica.But, I guess, as long as something isn't against the rules of the respective government, Authors are free to write anything they wish.

I'm not an authority to judge anyone.

 

[lovecraft68]

Hmmm... I take back all of my words I had said earlier in this debate. I got carried away and let my emotions get the better of me.

I'm not comfortable or even remotely agree with people promoting child erotica.But, I guess, as long as something isn't against the rules of the respective government, Authors are free to write anything they wish.

I'm not an authority to judge anyone.

By law and in theory, yes. And in fiction....if Stephen King wrote about an 11 year old being raped then someone getting turned on by it? It would be a best seller but that is mainstream fiction and would be part of a bigger story.

In erotica its taken in a different context, fairly or not.

If you want to sell anything in the market underage cannot be used and if you want to do it for free....you can't do it here which I'm glad about.

a couple of 16 year olds I am not adverse to, but problem is the age would just keep going lower until we have ten year olds....

imagine the non con and incest section here if there was no under age rule

hundreds of stories of fathers and their thirteen year old daughters (so real life incest, you know molestation) and the non con section? story after story of biker gangs gang raping twelve year old catholic school girls. Even GM...forty year old guys seducing(molesting) very young boys, and worse than the stories? The readers who would show up here saying how hot it is....

Lit would become asstr.

 

[DarkPleasures]

...Lit would become asstr.

Anything but that!

 

[MSTarot]

but that is mainstream fiction and would be part of a bigger story.

In erotica its taken in a different context, fairly or not.

My take on this is it's the mind of the person judging the mind set of the readers of erotica.

A person reading , say Stephen King is seen as a different type of reader than someone reading erotica.

And it doesn't just stop at erotica.

The person reading a horror novel, the person reading a fantasy novel, or let say a romance novel are all seen as different types of people even though you can have someone that likes to read all three.

It's the guy who, as an adult, still collects comic books must obviously still live at home in his parents basement.

And erotica reader are just as obviously all sexual perverts.

It's all stereotyping.



And for my two cents worth even if the site allowed young teen stories I wouldn't write them. I will dance with that 18 limit when I have to in order to get the story I want told, the way I want it told, but I wont step over it.

Sex with a child isn't about sex. It's about power and the destruction of innocence.

Not like the site doesn't have enough of that type story already but there is no reason to include children.

MST