impressive
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2003
- Posts
- 27,372
Hmm. Were they written in first person?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Mother?TheeGoatPig said:I get the feeling from rereading his first post, that he was writing his fantasies about his own mother. I also wouldn't be surprised (though this part is pure conjecture) if he used real names.
True enough. And we will grant that parents do have to watch out for razors and drugs and symptoms of serious depression, and trouble. BUT there are consequences to taking this too far; to saying that the kid has "ZERO" right to privacy:Mesachie said:Slick, unless our young hero here is paying his way, he has zero right to privacy. No, I understand. You don't like that. Tough. Parents check their kids rooms out because, well, they love them and care for them and want to be sure everything is alright.
Would you like to invite her to post here?MagicaPractica said:I'm really curious to know how she felt about this. Thinking about how I would feel and wondering how I would react. But, I wouldn't have read his writing in the first place unless I was afraid he was the unibomber. Good Luck Harry. I'm sure you two will work it out.
I think at this point that Harry's Mom would be relieved to find some Playboy mags.Roxanne Appleby said:It is impossible to disagree with a single wise word you've posted here. Except maybe the ones about not taking a second glance at Playboy magazines. All those good articles, you know . . .
You evil person, you! Outting Harry even further!Would you like to invite her to post here?
3113 said:I think at this point that Harry's Mom would be relieved to find some Playboy mags.
You evil person, you! Outting Harry even further!
I suppose it's lucky that he hasn't posted any of those stories yet...er...has he?
This time? So tell us what's new?Roxanne Appleby said:(You are the this time, Jenny Jackson. )
3113 said:True enough. And we will grant that parents do have to watch out for razors and drugs and symptoms of serious depression, and trouble. BUT there are consequences to taking this too far; to saying that the kid has "ZERO" right to privacy:
1) You risk that your kid will never trust you or tell you anything--not while they're in the house or out of it. That they'll find hiding places for things they don't want you to know, and that they won't come to you if they're in trouble. The parent risks, as well, the fact that they're going to get some 18 years to know everything about their kid--but from then on, they're not going to be told squat. Not asked for advise, not informed about medical procedures or problems, not asked for advice on marriage partners, etc.
2) If you give them no privacy, and insist they have no right to it, then they aren't going to feel like it's THEIR home or that this is THEIR family. Why should they? A family needs to respect each others boundries, and a home means that a closed door should be a closed door. The consequences for cavalierly dismissing this are that your kids WILL find their own home, and their own family, one that does respect them and their boundries and they will no longer consider you their family, nor feel welcome or safe under that roof.
3) If this is the way it's going to go, then the parents can't cry "foul" about anything short of the really dangerous stuff. Razors and drugs are one thing--but playboy magazines do not deserve a second glance. Nor does that baby oil, nor do those stories the kid likes to write, even if they are about incest. No freaking out.
Putting it another way--one rule deseves another. You can't just say to the kid, "Zero privacy" but then say, "And I'm going to freak out about anything that I judge as the littlest bit abnormal."
A kid is not your clone. He's a person. With his own needs and interests. So, if you're going to spy on him while he's under your roof, you have to accept that--and think about his interests as equilivant to your own. Personal, individual, and none-of-your business even if you do have a right to look at them.
Personally, I think there is a way to strike a balance, to make sure the kid understands that their privacy ends when the parent thinks there might be trouble or danger--yet assure the kid that they are respected. I think most parents want to feel that their kid will always be willing to come to them in times of need, that they can be open and honest with their parents, feel a part of the family, and are never too skeptical or afraid of judgement when it comes to telling the parent about problems or troubles.
I think that extremes to either side are unrealistic. Go too far either way--don't check up on the kid for fear you're showing distrust--or announce that there's zero privacy for the kid, and you risk some really bad results. I speak from experience here--I've seen the results in going to both extremes and they're not pretty.
Mesachie said:But no one can go through your contribution to literature without a search warrent.
Mesachie said:Sorry, but I disagree, 3113. They can do whatever they want. Not that I would agree with it. I'm just saying that he's a kid living at home. I don't care if he's street legal next month.
If, for whatever reason they find valid, they decide to look in his room, sniff his drawers, or read his papers, they can. Yes, it may put a big damper on things between them. But to pretend they have no right to do that is pretty much dog poo. It may be a tatical disaster. But it is well within their legal oversight.
If mom had found our harry writing an ode to the death of his teacher and fellow students that wandered into the sights of his big shiny gun, do you think this discussion would be taking place? Is someone going to point out the sanctity of literature fantasing about slicing and dicing real people in the neighborhood? How would you know if your kid is writing really righteous stuff or just filling his head with voices without taking a peek?
But, I really don't need to convince anyone of this. It is his problem. And his parent's dilemma. We can all have any position on it we like. If you are raising children, then it is a serious question for you. If you are a juvenile writer residing in your parent's home, do not put too much faith in anyone that attempts to convince you of your rights. Unless they are paying the rent where you live.
Please note that one solution is available in some states: emancipation of a minor. You can petition the courts to emancipate you, harry. Then your parents can't rifle your belongs at will. You can write what and when you please. There are a few drawbacks to emancipation. Nothing you'd find too annoying. You have to move out, pay your own way, and take care of your own problems. Your parents are off the hook. You are on it. But no one can go through your contribution to literature without a search warrent.
When I lived with my parents (oh hell it's almost a decade ago, damn I'm getting old), I kept my porn a) on the computer, b) hidden in an ubiquously names folder and c) password protected. When my dad asked me what that mysterious "docs 3" folder was, I said it contained "diaries and shit" that I didn't want my snot of a kid brother to get at and read or delete out of spite. He left it at that, but I'm sure he knew there was other stuff there too.Mesachie said:Slick, unless our young hero here is paying his way, he has zero right to privacy. No, I understand. You don't like that. Tough. Parents check their kids rooms out because, well, they love them and care for them and want to be sure everything is alright.
hell u must feel really crappy *hugs* darlinharry87 said:At supper this evening my mom was really quiet. I asked her what was up, and she said she'd tell me later. Well, when we were alone I asked her again, and she told me that last night, while I was busy, she had a little 'look round my room and found (and read!) some of the mother-son stories that I have been working on.
I've always left them under some cover papers on my desk without much fear, because I was under the impression that my room was a private area and no one would be around to find them.
I can't begin to describe how awkward things are right now. This story is the absolute truth. I don't think she'll let on to my father, thank goodness; but as to where things go from here...I have no idea.
She shouldn't have been in my room like that! Guys, I need some moral support here.
3113 said:True enough. And we will grant that parents do have to watch out for razors and drugs and symptoms of serious depression, and trouble. BUT there are consequences to taking this too far; to saying that the kid has "ZERO" right to privacy:
1) You risk that your kid will never trust you or tell you anything--not while they're in the house or out of it. That they'll find hiding places for things they don't want you to know, and that they won't come to you if they're in trouble. The parent risks, as well, the fact that they're going to get some 18 years to know everything about their kid--but from then on, they're not going to be told squat. Not asked for advise, not informed about medical procedures or problems, not asked for advice on marriage partners, etc.
2) If you give them no privacy, and insist they have no right to it, then they aren't going to feel like it's THEIR home or that this is THEIR family. Why should they? A family needs to respect each others boundries, and a home means that a closed door should be a closed door. The consequences for cavalierly dismissing this are that your kids WILL find their own home, and their own family, one that does respect them and their boundries and they will no longer consider you their family, nor feel welcome or safe under that roof.
3) If this is the way it's going to go, then the parents can't cry "foul" about anything short of the really dangerous stuff. Razors and drugs are one thing--but playboy magazines do not deserve a second glance. Nor does that baby oil, nor do those stories the kid likes to write, even if they are about incest. No freaking out.
Putting it another way--one rule deseves another. You can't just say to the kid, "Zero privacy" but then say, "And I'm going to freak out about anything that I judge as the littlest bit abnormal."
A kid is not your clone. He's a person. With his own needs and interests. So, if you're going to spy on him while he's under your roof, you have to accept that--and think about his interests as equilivant to your own. Personal, individual, and none-of-your business even if you do have a right to look at them.
Personally, I think there is a way to strike a balance, to make sure the kid understands that their privacy ends when the parent thinks there might be trouble or danger--yet assure the kid that they are respected. I think most parents want to feel that their kid will always be willing to come to them in times of need, that they can be open and honest with their parents, feel a part of the family, and are never too skeptical or afraid of judgement when it comes to telling the parent about problems or troubles.
I think that extremes to either side are unrealistic. Go too far either way--don't check up on the kid for fear you're showing distrust--or announce that there's zero privacy for the kid, and you risk some really bad results. I speak from experience here--I've seen the results in going to both extremes and they're not pretty.
OMG, the potential plot devices for future incest stories just keep piling up in this thread! (And it has nothing to do with Harry.)Rumple Foreskin said:This time? So tell us what's new?
By the way, Harry's horror is NOT a worst case scenario. That would , IMHO, go to a young teenage guy's two older sisters discovering his porn stash, then blackmailing him with the threat of telling their mother.
(Nope, not me. One of the two EVIL sisters told me while laughing at the memory.)
So Harry, it could be worse. Odds are you'll both survive.
Rumple Foreskin
Roxanne Appleby said:To the Darkness: I am virtually certain that you paid me a nice compliment above. Thank you.