Underage stories, a cautionary tale

[LiverpoolMaster]

"Inarguable" in the sense that that nobody's offered an argument to support the assertion?

I'm not going to dig through state-by-state AoC histories, but as far as I know the English progression I discussed is fairly standard: historically AoC thresholds were around the early teens, increasing in the last ~ 150 years as religious influence waned. That doesn't seem very compatible with the notion that they're a hangover/relic from more religious ages.



That they do, but compared to the 17th century - when Puritans literally ran the English government, when offences such as sodomy and blasphemy were punishable by law, yada yada - it's pretty clear that their influence has, in fact, vastly declined. Exhibit A: the fact that sites like this are permitted to exist.



Because nobody can be of that ilk while they're alive, or for quite some time after.

Shakespeare had his points; in particular, he was an excellent coiner of new words and turns of phrase. But his position as the One True God of the English canon has more to do with fortunate timing and with people's need for icons (preferably safely long-dead icons who aren't about to develop any inconvenient political opinions) than with exceptional talent. Einstein is the Designated Smart Guy, MLK Jr. is the Designated Anti-Racism Guy (but only quoted very selectively), and Shakespeare is the Designated Writing Guy. It's hard to read through his plays without spotting any number of failings that would be criticised in a modern playwright. He's overly dependent on deus ex machina, on people being too dim to recognise the love of their life in the flimsiest of disguises (I have a pet theory that Shakespeare might have been at least a little face-blind), and various other such failings.

If 21st Century Bill had managed to become famous again... yes, no doubt he would get criticism for writing about an under-age relationship. Not to mention for the racism, antisemitism, misogyny, and shaky history. But there's a long way between "criticism" and "likely thrown in jail", which is the assertion I was responding to.



I hear Louis C.K. has a new show.

1. Not susceptible of being countered.
2. I repeat the case: Puritan influence may have declined... its po-faced legacy lingers on. Rocket science it really ain't...
3. Show me kindly where I claimed that Shakespeare was either perfect or "the greatest ever". And my point was concerned with celebrity in general, not how long it takes to be conferred.
4. Louis who?

I suspect I've come up against a case of arguing for the sake of arguing and rampant last wordism. I don't play catch with that particular ball.

 

[Bramblethorn]

1. Not susceptible of being countered.

Nonsense. The simplest counter is to note that nobody's actually offered evidence for that assertion; that which can be asserted without evidence can be rejected without evidence.

The next simplest is to note that it's very frequently religious groups trying to undermine AoC laws. For a recent example, here's a Tennessee Republican trying to remove the minimum age for marriage altogether, on "religious freedom" grounds: https://whnt.com/news/a-get-out-of-...-age-requirements-for-marriages-in-tennessee/

2. I repeat the case: Puritan influence may have declined...

Good of you to concede "may have", but this really isn't an area of meaningful doubt. It has decreased since the age when Puritans directly ruled the country; not as much as any of us might like, but claiming Mary Whitehouse and her ilk as being on a level with Oliver Cromwell seems more like hyperbole than a serious argument.

its po-faced legacy lingers on.

You're shifting the goalposts; nobody here has said otherwise. But asserting that AoC laws are part of that legacy is counterfactual.

3. Show me kindly where I claimed that Shakespeare was either perfect or "the greatest ever".

And once again, you're arguing against an assertion that nobody made. But before we wander off on that tangent, let's resolve the earlier point: do you agree that the suggestion that a modern-day Shakespeare would have been "thrown in jail" for his writing is hyperbolic? You didn't respond to that part.

And my point was concerned with celebrity in general, not how long it takes to be conferred.
4. Louis who?

If you want to discuss how society reacts to celebrities' sins, it's a name you probably ought to be familiar with, and very easily googled. Failing that, feel free to substitute Woody Allen, Roman Polanski, or others of that ilk.

 

[Louetta]

Ok, so the rule on Literotica now is 'nothing under age 18'. Suppose for a moment that the 'site' relented and agreed to accept 'nothing under 17' as the lower limit. So then there would be long forum discussions about rights and legalities. Then suppose the site agreed to 'nothing under 16'. More discussions.... and where will it end? There has to be a boundary somewhere or this site and others like it would get shut down.

The (mentioning a competing site violates the rules here). site has a minimum of 16. I thought it might be fun to post some "underage" stuff there, like my own defloweration. Then I chickened. Even if it were allowed there I thought I might possibly get into legal trouble. But the main reason I didn't is that I thought if it came to light, people I know would think badly of me for writing about underage stuff.

 

[Louetta]

...Lots of stuff deleted...

For the many people who talk about puberty changes in their characters, I imagine there is some nostalgia aspect about growing up and coming to terms with sexuality, having more energy to pursue this, everything being new, etc. The writer and reader base of Lit tends to run older (can't take this correlation any further than that without making too many assumptions).

I would very much like to write about experiences I had when underage. Not like me getting boned at 14 or something, but sharing a kiss with the captain of the football team, or my first heartbreak, or getting caught by guys while skinny dipping. Too bad I can't do it. No reliable way to triage that kind of stuff, I suppose.

 

[FluffMeatsStory]

I stick to nonfiction texts.

And yet you are here on Lit. Something is a little off there.

I started this thread, not about what is legal, nor even what the policy should be.
Lit can set it however they want, and we need to observe it to be posted.

My complaint was the opacity of learning what the policy was.
If I cannot know the policy, how can I be sure I am okay?
Quibbling about 'does it pass' for edge cases is expected.

 

[Bramblethorn]

And yet you are here on Lit. Something is a little off there.

I started this thread, not about what is legal, nor even what the policy should be.
Lit can set it however they want, and we need to observe it to be posted.

My complaint was the opacity of learning what the policy was.
If I cannot know the policy, how can I be sure I am okay?
Quibbling about 'does it pass' for edge cases is expected.

The documentation could do with a lot of improvement, no argument there.

 

[Salacious_Scribe]

The **** site has a minimum of 16. I thought it might be fun to post some "underage" stuff there, like my own defloweration. Then I chickened. Even if it were allowed there I thought I might possibly get into legal trouble. But the main reason I didn't is that I thought if it came to light, people I know would think badly of me for writing about underage stuff.

FYI mentioning a competing site violates the rules here.

Courts have ruled fictional creative content including underage stuff is legal and protected speech as long as no child was harmed. How you ferl about it, or are percieved is another matter.

 

[windar]

I would very much like to write about experiences I had when underage. Not like me getting boned at 14 or something, but sharing a kiss with the captain of the football team, or my first heartbreak, or getting caught by guys while skinny dipping. Too bad I can't do it. No reliable way to triage that kind of stuff, I suppose.

The fact that you can't do that HERE, doesn't mean that you can't do it. Mainstream fiction is full of such stories, even with some level of explicitness. Nor would anyone think less of you for writing it. Very few people would be offended by a story of two 16 year olds experimenting. Now a 40 year old with a 16 year old might offend some, but I'm not sure that a goal of never offending anyone is what a writer ought to have. Vladimir Nabokov wrote "Lolita" and is highly regarded by most critics.

 

[_Lynn_]

This is true for the story side of things, but I think spartan509 was talking about a forum discussion. I have seen mods discouraging discussion of under-age sex in that context.

If I had to guess, I think the distinction might be about a story that's mostly about grown-up sexuality, with brief mention of under-age sex as part of a character's background, vs. a forum post/discussion where under-age sex is a major part of the content.

You're correct. If a poster has details about underage sex on a forum, it's pretty much the same as putting it in a story they submit. The words are out there for anyone to read.

 

[Bramblethorn]

Courts have ruled fictional creative content including underage stuff is legal and protected speech as long as no child was harmed.

It's not quite that simple. As discussed earlier in this thread, there have been two recent cases where people went to jail on US federal obscenity charges for hosting/distributing text fiction.

The First Amendment gives a good deal of protection to fiction but it doesn't protect material that fits the definition of "obscenity" even if no real person was harmed in the creation of that material.

 

[Louetta]

......

Courts have ruled fictional creative content including underage stuff is legal and protected speech as long as no child was harmed.................

"Fictional" creative content. So does that mean that if I write about my own defloweration at 16 with a person my own age it is not legal because it is not a fiction? That cannot be true.

 

[Louetta]

(mentioning a competing site violates the rules here)

I humbly apologize for violating a rule. Did not know.

 

[Amisit__Scintilla]

In my latest story that went live today after at least a week of resubmitting and waiting for publication.

I had spoken about a brother and sister sharing the 'I will show you mine if you show me yours" experience when they were like 14, it was meant to be an innocent exchange and nothing sexual about it. When I was a lot younger, I had this experience with my next door neighbour and we were 13 and 11 at the time.

Times have changed and so have laws over time, we just have to assume that despite the age of consent varies around the world but on here, we must assume that no one has ever had any sexual experience below the age of 18.

They need to protect themselves and all of us, so for that I had no issue amending my work.

 

[KeithD]

I

I had spoken about a brother and sister sharing the 'I will show you mine if you show me yours" experience when they were like 14, it was meant to be an innocent exchange and nothing sexual about it.

I laughed at the claim that there is nothing sexual about "show me yours and i'll show you mine" play.

 

[Amisit__Scintilla]

I laughed at the claim that there is nothing sexual about "show me yours and i'll show you mine" play.

at 11, sex and sexuality was not a thing for me anyway. I had shown mine but they just giggled and ran off. But hey, think what you like guru.

 

[Louetta]

at 11, sex and sexuality was not a thing for me anyway. I had shown mine but they just giggled and ran off. But hey, think what you like guru.

I agree. If we're talking about actually getting boned, I didn't have any interest at all at 11. Sliding down the bannister was fun though.

 

[KeithD]

at 11, sex and sexuality was not a thing for me anyway. I had shown mine but they just giggled and ran off. But hey, think what you like guru.

But then neither you nor I do the selection for this Web site. Sexual activity is sex at any age.

 

[Louetta]

But then neither you nor I do the selection for this Web site. Sexual activity is sex at any age.

If you think children doing something, like playing doctor, is the same as adults doing it, there's something strange about how your mind works.

 

[KeithD]

If you think children doing something, like playing doctor, is the same as adults doing it, there's something strange about how your mind works.

You missed the part about neither you nor I doing the selection--and therefore the judgment on this issue--at this Web site. All of these efforts to get around the Web site policies have become beyond tedious. Yes, children comparing genitals in a story is fodder for readers looking for such underage as a source for arousal. That's not your call.

 

[Louetta]

...Snip...All of these efforts to get around the Web site policies have become beyond tedious....Snip....

You may find them tedious, but some authors find them necessary to make legitimate story points. E.g. my German girl finding it odd that little girls wear tops on American beaches miles from any population centers. Trying to find a way to get that into my story is to me a worthwhile exercise. And as long as the editors get to review how I try to manage it I don't see a problem.

 

[Salacious_Scribe]

"Fictional" creative content. So does that mean that if I write about my own defloweration at 16 with a person my own age it is not legal because it is not a fiction? That cannot be true.

Two 16 year olds is legal. Writing it is legal. I was reffering to an 18+ person with someone that can't vote. If you write a Lolita type story that really happened (Think Joey Buttafuco & Amy Fisher) in graphic detail that would be illegal. But if you write a fictional account that is not illegal.

 

[Salacious_Scribe]

I humbly apologize for violating a rule. Did not know.

I'm not the lit police. Just wanted to give you a heads up.

 

[KeithD]

The issue for posting to Literotic is solely the criteria for posting to Literotica. Discussing what is legal to either write or do has no relevance to posting a story at Literotica.

 

[Todger65]

The issue for posting to Literotic is solely the criteria for posting to Literotica. Discussing what is legal to either write or do has no relevance to posting a story at Literotica.

I fully agree with this. The bottom line is, if it isn’t acceptable to the site owner/story moderator, it won’t get published. If you don’t agree or like it then there’s are a few sites around, without going to the dark web, that will publish more or less anything.

 

[Whanmore]

Personally One of the reasons I was attracted to this site was because of their strict policy. I'm in Indiana and the AoC here is 16 (see Teanna Trump and Lance Stephenson) but Sites likes these attract a certain type of crowd and its good on the Webmasters to try and not condone. Sites like (i wont mention their name but you know it) the Blue and Yellow one are riddles with pedophiles and personally I don't want to be a party to that. Look at the situation with Pornhub and Tumblr . I commend These mods for not tolerating that kind of abuse and behavior. We can all enjoy sex with boundaries. Even if it means stifling a bit of creativity i think it's an ok trade if it means your wont be contributing to child traffickers