Literotica censorship

[LdyHoneybee]

Wow, that must have made your bones hurt!

 

[KeithD]

But something happened to get that story rejected and then pulled. Possibly a company with previous history of chasing in here? Because, as I've said before, I have a certain large chain store in one of my stories. The sex takes place in the store. How is that any different from whatever was happening in oggbashan's story? If write sex happening in the store it's okay, but if a character uses telekinetic powers to fuck a giant with the store that's bad?

Somebody complained for some reason, legally erroneous--or irrelevant, I think, as a company's lawyer would tell the company that it's both iffy and not cost-effective to try to take action against a Literotica story--and Laurel knee-jerked took it down. Literotica seems to do that--knee-jerk taking questioned stories down without notifying the author or making much of an effort to check the claim out. Companies don't come looking for violations on Literotica, where authors are hard to find, don't have deep pockets, and the liability on suing is very iffy anyway--and costly to the company. I think you can take this advice to the bank. It was just pulled because of whatever Laurel thought about it in the moment, which isn't couched much in legality. The Web site itself flaunts copyright left and right.

 

[KeithD]

But a simple letter or email would be enough to get the story pulled.

I'll bet you my first born (who is a senior researcher making big bucks) that the company--or any other company on any other Literotica story--didn't send a letter or an e-mail to Literotica on the use of their company name in a Literotica story.

 

[SimonDoom]

Somebody complained for some reason, legally erroneous--or irrelevant, I think, as a company's lawyer would tell the company that it's both iffy and not cost-effective to try to take action against a Literotica story--and Laurel knee-jerked took it down. Literotica seems to do that--knee-jerk taking questioned stories down without notifying the author or making much of an effort to check the claim out. Companies don't come looking for violations on Literotica, where authors are hard to find, don't have deep pockets, and the liability on suing is very iffy anyway--and costly to the company. I think you can take this advice to the bank. It was just pulled because of whatever Laurel thought about it in the moment, which isn't couched much in legality. The Web site itself flaunts copyright left and right.

The Site isn't going to tell us, but this is likely correct. The Site is managed by 2 people and it has no choice but to make split-second decisions on limited information. I doubt very much that the copyright owner or its lawyer complained. It's much more likely that a Lit reader made a complaint or perhaps Laurel randomly noticed something and made a decision. Nobody makes money here so it's unlikely that the publishing industry is paying much attention.

I haven't seen any evidence that Literotica engages in something that could plausibly be called "censorship." It has a few content rules, and sometimes it applies those content rules in ways that are puzzling or inconsistent, and the rules themselves are somewhat opaque, but that's not censorship. I've had stories rejected initially on two occasions, and on both occasions, I persuaded the Site to change its initial rejection with a polite message.

 

[purvis2]

Well, they're have been times and places where it's illegal for anyone except married, straight couples to have sex. Even today, in Saudi Arabia or Afghanistan, among others...

An interesting legal point-say two sixteen year olds have sex. Not illegal in Western countries. But if they film it, it's child porn and very illegal...

None of which is relevant to the policies that web sites adopt. I have to say that high school was the most miserable, boring time in my life and I suspect that was true for many others. So my interest in writing about is ZERO.

Well, except in movies the sixteen year olds would be played by 29 year olds and be completely legal.

 

[tenyari]

That is weird. It has never been illegal for two minors to have sex,

I have literally worked on a case where a registered sex offender was trying to his status removed from his record, where the crime had been getting caught at age 17 having sex with his likewise 17 year old girlfriend (they had dated all through high school), when the two decided to give each other their virginity on prom night. Her parents caught them. I interned with his attorney some years later when he was in his 20s and trying to get 'offender status as a rapist' removed from his record. One of the conditions to be eligible to get it removed was that even as adults he and the now woman were never allowed to see each other again.

Granted that case was so weird most of us, even the DA; were trying to figure out WTF we were doing in there... like, how had this ever even been a conviction originally. But there it was.

 

[SimonDoom]

I have literally worked on a case where a registered sex offender was trying to his status removed from his record, where the crime had been getting caught at age 17 having sex with his likewise 17 year old girlfriend (they had dated all through high school), when the two decided to give each other their virginity on prom night. Her parents caught them. I interned with his attorney some years later when he was in his 20s and trying to get 'offender status as a rapist' removed from his record. One of the conditions to be eligible to get it removed was that even as adults he and the now woman were never allowed to see each other again.

Granted that case was so weird most of us, even the DA; were trying to figure out WTF we were doing in there... like, how had this ever even been a conviction originally. But there it was.

It's a good reminder that laws are enforced by humans, and humans are flawed, and they make stupid decisions, all the time. We have to be careful about what are laws are, because human stupidity is a constant of human experience.

Here's one of my many problems with this: If 2 17-year-olds have sex with one another, and it's consensual, then how can there be rape? Have they both raped each other? The notion that the male has raped the female is based on the sexist idea that sex is something that a man does to a woman. That's a horrible and false and antiquated idea. Shouldn't she have been convicted as well?

 

[Kumquatqueen]

Here's one of my many problems with this: If 2 17-year-olds have sex with one another, and it's consensual, then how can there be rape? Have they both raped each other? The notion that the male has raped the female is based on the sexist idea that sex is something that a man does to a woman. That's a horrible and false and antiquated idea. Shouldn't she have been convicted as well?

Depends how rape is defined in law. In England&Wales, rape requires penetration of an orifice - used to be just vagina/anus, now mouth also counts, and penetration by object was also added in 2003 (huge review of the Sexual Offences Act). But anything a woman does to a man, except for penetration with an object, can't be rape. There are now sexual offences of equal weight she could be convicted of, but there's still a crowd whinging that it's not fair.

Before the age of consent laws were equalised and various homophobic clauses struck out, there were a lot of men on the Sexual Offences Register for consensual adult sex. The fact that a hotel room was defined as a 'public place' enabled a lot of that (mm sex was decriminalised over 21 only in private...)

 

[LdyHoneybee]

I have literally worked on a case where a registered sex offender was trying to his status removed from his record, where the crime had been getting caught at age 17 having sex with his likewise 17 year old girlfriend (they had dated all through high school), when the two decided to give each other their virginity on prom night. Her parents caught them. I interned with his attorney some years later when he was in his 20s and trying to get 'offender status as a rapist' removed from his record. One of the conditions to be eligible to get it removed was that even as adults he and the now woman were never allowed to see each other again.

Granted that case was so weird most of us, even the DA; were trying to figure out WTF we were doing in there... like, how had this ever even been a conviction originally. But there it was.

Astonishing!

 

[tenyari]

Here's one of my many problems with this: If 2 17-year-olds have sex with one another, and it's consensual, then how can there be rape? Have they both raped each other? The notion that the male has raped the female is based on the sexist idea that sex is something that a man does to a woman. That's a horrible and false and antiquated idea. Shouldn't she have been convicted as well?

Statutory rape - that's sex with a minor female in most places. At least as of a decade ago when I was working with this case, that included California.

It's gender specific status has been upheld on the notion that females get pregnant but males do not.

The sex-offender registry however, just noted the guy as a convicted rapist. In fact he was actually lucky it didn't say statutory rapist because then the average person would think he was a convicted podophile - which, technically, he was... for having sex with his girlfriend of 3 years that was the same age as him.

These two were seniors in high school, so while 17, they were also likely very close to being 18, just adding to the absurdity of the situation.

To note: she was white, he was asian, her parents were racist and had been trying to break them up for years, and the county he was convicted in has a long history of 'justice issues' with it's non-white population.

 

[ElectricBlue]

To note: she was white, he was asian, her parents were racist and had been trying to break them up for years, and the county he was convicted in has a long history of 'justice issues' with it's non-white population.

Figured as much from your earlier post - my immediate thought was, her parents had wealthier lawyers. But what assholes to their daughter! That's horrendous, that parents could be that dysfunctional.

 

[LdyHoneybee]

Statutory rape - that's sex with a minor female in most places. At least as of a decade ago when I was working with this case, that included California.

It's gender specific status has been upheld on the notion that females get pregnant but males do not.

The sex-offender registry however, just noted the guy as a convicted rapist. In fact he was actually lucky it didn't say statutory rapist because then the average person would think he was a convicted podophile - which, technically, he was... for having sex with his girlfriend of 3 years that was the same age as him.

These two were seniors in high school, so while 17, they were also likely very close to being 18, just adding to the absurdity of the situation.

To note: she was white, he was asian, her parents were racist and had been trying to break them up for years, and the county he was convicted in has a long history of 'justice issues' with it's non-white population.

I am not sure but I think that “statutory” rape is a legal adult having sex with a “consenting” minor. It rests on the assumption that a minor does not have the independent maturity to truly consent. If it is not “consenting,” I believe it is child molestation, pederasty, or just rape. But don’t quote me.

 

[LdyHoneybee]

I am not sure but I think that “statutory” rape is a legal adult having sex with a “consenting” minor. It rests on the assumption that a minor does not have the independent maturity to truly consent. If it is not “consenting,” I believe it is child molestation, pederasty, or just rape. But don’t quote me.

There have been cases of adult women and minor guys so I think it goes both ways.

 

[tenyari]

Figured as much from your earlier post - my immediate thought was, her parents had wealthier lawyers. But what assholes to their daughter! That's horrendous, that parents could be that dysfunctional.

Judicial discretion plays a huge role in these things. That particular county has been under-going rapid demographics changes since... maybe the 1990s. Including in the white population. The folks who used to run around in white sheets have mostly left to be replaced by more educated whites and often South Asians (India). But judges and DAs seem to be the slowest parts of the system to change over.

I suspect... that if the same case had happened one county over, the judge would have handed out the minimum possible sentence, and tried to scold the DA to using 'age of consent' laws as a way to get around the acceptance of inter-racial couples. Probably even if the same case happened today in that county.

It's just an example where - if the writing on the law says something, and most people interpret that reasonably, a bad actor can interpret it a lot more harshly if no one steps in to stop them.

My grandmother tried a similar tactic in the 1960s against my father - but she tried to do it in San Francisco so the judge told her to F-off. Then in a case of poetic justice she found her birth mother some years later and discovered she was a bit like Meghan Markle (although by that point my grandmother had flipped her tune on race and become this crazy old lady with a house full of world travelers and guys in drag).

 

[txblush]

All of the discussions about Literotica’s underage policy reminds me of the first time a VE suggested I write a disclaimer to my novel when I first became a member here. My thought… if it’s under the right genre with a blurb then that should be enough of a disclaimer.

The line I crossed with the VE was when I included a diaper fetish. We parted ways and I still write age play stories because there is an audience for Daddy/little girl subgenre that’s about adults who enjoy the nurturing dynamic of safe, sane, and consensual sexual activities. I’m not responsible for a reader’s misinterpretation of the genre. And the owners of the website didn’t have a problem with the novel I wrote about a female character called babygirl. A metaphor for an inexperienced submissive.

I researched the sites rules, the genre/subgenre before I ever posted my novel because 1) I wanted to know if there was an audience for the erotica I enjoy writing and 2) I was nervous and didn't want to offend.

Edited for one more thought. The need to vent about the unfairness of a rule is natural. It's part of the growing up process.

 

[SimonDoom]

All of the discussions about Literotica’s underage policy reminds me of the first time a VE suggested I write a disclaimer to my novel when I first became a member here. My thought… if it’s under the right genre with a blurb then that should be enough of a disclaimer.

The line I crossed with the VE was when I included a diaper fetish. We parted ways and I still write age play stories because there is an audience for Daddy/little girl subgenre that’s about adults who enjoy the nurturing dynamic of safe, sane, and consensual sexual activities. I’m not responsible for a reader’s misinterpretation of the genre. And the owners of the website didn’t have a problem with the novel I wrote about a female character called babygirl. A metaphor for an inexperienced submissive.

I researched the sites rules, the genre/subgenre before I ever posted my novel because 1) I wanted to know if there was an audience for the erotica I enjoy writing and 2) I was nervous and didn't want to offend.

Edited for one more thought. The need to vent about the unfairness of a rule is natural. It's part of the growing up process.

There are over 2000 stories at Literotica that feature "diaper" in the text or title. There are 236 stories that feature it as a tag. So there seems to be an audience, and many authors have found a way to publish stories that pass muster under the site's rules.

As far as I can tell, though, many of these are not Daddy/little girl play stories.

I think where you may have a problem is with Daddy/little girl play. I seem to recall having read something, somewhere that this might run afoul of the underage rule even if at the outset you make it clear the characters are over 18, because despite the characters nominally being over 18 you may nevertheless be appealing to something that the site owners don't want to appeal to. I suspect that if you are clear enough about the characters being over 18 and ALSO make it clear during the narration of the story that this is fantasy play only, and that they act like adults at times, that it can be OK. But it might be a close call.

 

[txblush]

There are over 2000 stories at Literotica that feature "diaper" in the text or title. There are 236 stories that feature it as a tag. So there seems to be an audience, and many authors have found a way to publish stories that pass muster under the site's rules.

As far as I can tell, though, many of these are not Daddy/little girl play stories.

I think where you may have a problem is with Daddy/little girl play. I seem to recall having read something, somewhere that this might run afoul of the underage rule even if at the outset you make it clear the characters are over 18, because despite the characters nominally being over 18 you may nevertheless be appealing to something that the site owners don't want to appeal to. I suspect that if you are clear enough about the characters being over 18 and ALSO make it clear during the narration of the story that this is fantasy play only, and that they act like adults at times, that it can be OK. But it might be a close call.

The story was accepted without any rejection notices back in 2007. I wrote Laurel to have the novel removed a few years later. The latter chapters were a mess (grammatically) after the VE bailed on me. I can laugh about his decision not to work with me now. But it wasn't funny back then.

The original story I posted is still in tact but there are 22 edited versions of it. I finally gave up trying to tell the one story I thought I had in me after I had the story critiqued by a paid professional editor. The bottom line of her critique was revise, revise, revise.

I have the talent. I've learned a few skills along the way. I'm not a natural storyteller. I've been thinking about revising my novel and posting it here again, because I received a few H's and positive feedback that I've kept to remind myself I did what I set out to do back then. I found an audience for my style of erotic writing.

Nowadays I'm trying to become a part of the community here on Author's Hangout to pay it forward by helping another writer. It was my offer to help him that led me out of into the wilderness of the forums.

By the way Simon I favored one of your stories. It was a well written depiction of the genre.

 

[SimonDoom]

By the way Simon I favored one of your stories. It was a well written depiction of the genre.

Thanks! Which one? I looked but couldn't find which one it was you chose.

 

[txblush]

Thanks! Which one? I looked but couldn't find which one it was you chose.

Exposing Lisa. I loved it!

 

[SimonDoom]

Exposing Lisa. I loved it!

Thanks. I had a lot of fun with that story, and I'm glad you liked it.

 

[txblush]

Thanks. I had a lot of fun with that story, and I'm glad you liked it.

It showed that you had a lot of fun with writing it.

To have fun doing what you love is the point of writing erotica as far as I'm concerned.

You're welcome, Simon.

 

[PastMaster]

I don't know about Literotica, but a lot of places have a pretty straightforward "complaint threshold" -- if some established number of complaints come in, they take it down, regardless of whether there is a legitimate complaint or not. The point being, if it's bothering enough people then it's better to err on the side of caution than trying to be Solomon with the letter of the law.

Especially with a site like this... obviously, there are plenty of people who would object to the whole premise of literotica, but those aren't going to be the ones griping about some story or another.

If enough smut fiends find it offensive, then maybe better to call it a day and retire that story.

I can imagine how disappointing it is, or even enraging! To have a story that people have been enjoying get taken down would make me pretty mad. And I might even leave in a huff or something. But I'd also have to admit that running a free site like this, basically as a labor of love, the owners would be optimizing for their own safety and efficient use of time.

And then you are succumbing to the cancel culture - it doesnt matter if the story doesnt break the rules - it can be taken down purely because enough people complain. How bad is that???
How much power are you giving to a group of individuals who find that if they group together and spend a little time, they can dictate what is or isnt published whether it breaches the rules or not!!!

It is easy enough to create multiple accounts on here. so how easy would it be for one person, or a small number to completely destroy an author that they have had a disagreement with , but putting in multiple complants about every story he or she posts.

Site moderators have a duty to look at complaints and see if they are valid. If they are - then it is right that the story be deleted. If not they should do two things, they should reject the complaint, and also keep a record of the complainent. If that person builds up a history of spurious complaints then they should themselves be removed from the site.

Our society is beginning to be run not by those who have the wherewithall, but by the mob that shouts loudest - as orwell said 'four legs good - two legs bad," became "Four legs good - two legs better"

 

[AlinaX]

In the UK, the mob that shouts the loudest is, unfortunately, those who have the wherewithall, and they're the ones always pretending to have been cancelled. They literally won't shut up about how unfair it is that people dare to criticise them.

 

[KeithD]

And then you are succumbing to the cancel culture - it doesnt matter if the story doesnt break the rules - it can be taken down purely because enough people complain. How bad is that???

I think you can relax and deflate. I don't think Literotica does this.

 

[PastMaster]

I think you can relax and deflate. I don't think Literotica does this.

I am perfectly relaxed.
I was refuting a point, made by rowanwrites that it was okay to remove a post, not because it breached any rules , but because the mob said so.
We are apparently back in the pitchfork and torch era...