underage sex stories.

I'm also admittedly confused because I thought the blue ribbon at the top of Lit's pages meant they support free speech? Are topics like rape and underage sex against the law, or is it just a personal preferance for the site owners to keep such material off their site? It's a sincere question; I am genuinely curious.

Free speech within limitations sounds like an oxy-moron to me, but if they are just trying to follow certain laws, I suppose it is understandable. Either way, it is their site and I respect their right to run things as they see fit. Maybe they just don't want to see the backlash if they did allow more controversial material?

(Edit: My queries have since been answered. Thanks Laurel.)

sincerely_helene said:

I'm also admittedly confused because I thought the blue ribbon at the top of Lit's pages meant they support free speech? Are topics like rape and underage sex against the law, or is it just a personal preferance for the site owners to keep such material off their site? It's a sincere question; I am genuinely curious.

Click to expand...

The age limit on Lit is a personal choice of the owners. In part, it is based on the potential future legal hassles over such content, but it's primarily a personal preference.

There is no current legal ban on any topic in stories and several supreme court precedents that the constitution gives you the right to write about anything. However, the current political climate is such that those precedents and lack of legal restrictions could change at any time.

On the other hand, the right of free speech does not mean the right to be published and the owners of this site have chosen not to publish certain topics -- without infinging on the author's rights to write about those topics and/or seek to publish them elsewhere.

Weird Harold said:

The age limit on Lit is a personal choice of the owners. In part, it is based on the potential future legal hassles over such content, but it's primarily a personal preference.

There is no current legal ban on any topic in stories and several supreme court precedents that the constitution gives you the right to write about anything. However, the current political climate is such that those precedents and lack of legal restrictions could change at any time.

On the other hand, the right of free speech does not mean the right to be published and the owners of this site have chosen not to publish certain topics -- without infinging on the author's rights to write about those topics and/or seek to publish them elsewhere.

Click to expand...

Thanks, Harold.

Weird Harold said:

The age limit on Lit is a personal choice of the owners. In part, it is based on the potential future legal hassles over such content, but it's primarily a personal preference.

There is no current legal ban on any topic in stories and several supreme court precedents that the constitution gives you the right to write about anything. However, the current political climate is such that those precedents and lack of legal restrictions could change at any time.

On the other hand, the right of free speech does not mean the right to be published and the owners of this site have chosen not to publish certain topics -- without infinging on the author's rights to write about those topics and/or seek to publish them elsewhere.

Click to expand...

word. there's always asstr or others which is why i'm not complaining too much.

"Mental" maturity is mostly a matter of training and expectations and children who are rasied with the expectation of cting mature by age fifteen or sixteen, usually meet society's expectations.

Click to expand...

I beg to differ. Teenagers that have pressure to act adult, and to be mature, mentally so even, do NOT turn out to be mature, necessarily. It doesn't work that way. Thinking that you're mature just because you can talk about certain things and you're behaving reasonably responsibly does not mean you're 'mature'. I think that realising your shortcomings, and knowing who you are gives you a certain inner balance, which manifests as maturity. Most teenagers aren't like this.

They may be responsible, but that has nothing whatsoever to do with maturity. A girl I knew when I was in high school was the most responsible person in the world for her age. Did homework, cooked, cleaned up, she even looked old. Nobody thought she was teenaged at all. But really getting to know her.. she was really immature, but because everybody expected her to act responsibly (partly because of family situation, partly because she looked older than she was) she did. But behaving responsibly (which might appear to be maturity) is different from mental maturity.

Of course, there's the chance that treating somebody like they're older might encourage them to behave more maturely, but it's not always the case.

And what I said were conclusions that I came to on my own without the effect of propaganda.

Marsipanne said:

I beg to differ. Teenagers that have pressure to act adult, and to be mature, mentally so even, do NOT turn out to be mature, necessarily. It doesn't work that way. Thinking that you're mature just because you can talk about certain things and you're behaving reasonably responsibly does not mean you're 'mature'. I think that realising your shortcomings, and knowing who you are gives you a certain inner balance, which manifests as maturity. Most teenagers aren't like this.
...
And what I said were conclusions that I came to on my own without the effect of propaganda.

Click to expand...

I think we have a different definition of maturity. By your definition, I know very few people under the age of thirty who are mature -- should we therefore raise the age of consent ot thirty?

As for whether you were affected by "progaganda" or not, you express the same conclusions that go against the preponderance of human history as the "propagandists" do.

As I said before, I've lived through the latter stages of the change in society's perception of when childhood ends and seen the difference that removing the "pressure to act adult," (in your words) has had on the development of maturity.

"Living up to expectations" does work both ways -- teenagers don't act mature, or gain any actual maturity, when they're treated as children, expected to act like children, and sheltered from any possible exposure to any experience that might foster maturity.

However, I'm not talking about "pressure to act adult," I'm talking about training people to be mature by letting experience things at their own pace and guiding them through the rough spots. Only experience can truly build maturity and the current philosophy of protecting children from the harsh realities of the real world until they're magically "adult" at some arbitrary age isn't working.

There are still a good number of parents who fulfill their responsibility to train their children to be adults and teach them to find that inner balance you mentioned as soon as they can.

There are far more parents, IMHO, that don't understand that responsibility and for 17 years and 364 days swaddle their children in cotton to protect them from reality and when their children reach that magical age of 18 remove all controls completely.

It's not surprising to me that when a significant number of teenagers aren't trained to be adult don't act like adults when they reach the magical age of majority that the philosphers who advocate "protecting children" point to them and say, "see we told you teenagers aren't mature." Of course they're not mature if they've never been given the chance to ACT mature and learn the difference between "acting" and "being."

I would agree with #2, mostly for the same reasons as Perdita mentioned. I personally don't like having my hands tied with regard to how I'm going to tell a story. I could write it to cater to the guidelines, but that would be less fun for me. However, in making that arrogant choice, I might be disqualifying it for posting here or keeping some people from reading it. But that's my choice, just as how this site is run is Laurel's choice.

Weird Harold, I agree, I think our definitions about maturity are different. It's why I mentioned in my first post that some people don't ever mature.

Maybe it comes to this: just say, there are two children. One child learns that he/she shouldn't stick his/her hand in a flame because he/she burnt her finger once by doing so. As a result, he/she is scarred, but the lesson is well learned. Another child learns by sticking a piece of paper in the flame, sees it burn, feels the heat and hypothesises that putting his/her hand there will hurt, and therefore doesn't. The lesson is perhaps less deeply ingrained, but it is still learnt. What I was trying to say originally was that I think that teenagers don't need to stick their hands in the fire to know that it burns. There are other ways to learn about sex other than to do it, and have regrets.

But you know what, parenting must be so stressful.. do you let nature take its course and do what you feel instinctively is right? Or do you read lots of how-to books and mould your child using special tricks? It's hard to trust your instincts completely, and you might go wrong with the how-to book thing and you might inadvertantly do something that is bad for your child. I don't have any children, but even now I'm worrying about this.. gah!

Marsipanne said:

Maybe it comes to this: just say, there are two children. One child learns that he/she shouldn't stick his/her hand in a flame because he/she burnt her finger once by doing so. ... Another child learns by sticking a piece of paper in the flame, ... What I was trying to say originally was that I think that teenagers don't need to stick their hands in the fire to know that it burns. There are other ways to learn about sex other than to do it, and have regrets.

Click to expand...

I don't think I've ever said that the only way to learn about sex (or anything else) is to do it. But if the parents treat Sex (or violence, or fiscal responsibility, or anything else) as something to hide and/or ignore the only option left for many children is to experiment.

Too many children aren't given the "paper to stick in the flame" and have only their hand to learn about fire. Similarly, too many children aren't given any information about human sexuality -- or even sexual development -- and have only their hormones and equally clueless peers to guide them through the maturation process.

But you know what, parenting must be so stressful.. do you let nature take its course and do what you feel instinctively is right? Or do you read lots of how-to books and mould your child using special tricks? It's hard to trust your instincts completely, and you might go wrong with the how-to book thing and you might inadvertantly do something that is bad for your child. I don't have any children, but even now I'm worrying about this.. gah!

Click to expand...

Good parenting is actually very simple if you remember three basic rules:

1: Know your child; listen to them and observe them so you can teach them in a way that they will learn best.

2: Never make an idle threat to a child; i.e. be consistent in both praise and punishment, establish rules and limitation and stick to them.

3: "Do as I say, not as I do" never works; Your example and actions are what will teach your child the most, especially in the earliest years when words are mostly just sounds.

Dr Benjamin Spock and his successors are probably the worst thing that has ever happened to parenting. There is a lot of good information available about parenting, but accepting any one approach and applying it to all children is just begging for disaster.

Every parent makes mistakes because children are a constant surprise and seldom do what parents expect. The trick is to not let the mistakes, or fear of mistakes, keep you from being a parent. Kids are a lot tougher and smarter than most people give them credit for.

I didn't mean to suggest you said that, just clarifying what I said originally, because I think what I wrote was a bit convoluted and confusing.

I think something else that's important is to change the way you treat the child in accordance to their growth and their self-image. Keeping up to date and being astute is pretty vital, or so I imagine.

Marsipanne said:

I think something else that's important is to change the way you treat the child in accordance to their growth and their self-image. Keeping up to date and being astute is pretty vital, or so I imagine.

Click to expand...

That's true, but it's part of Rule #1: "know your child."

Children change every day of their lives (actually all people change every day until they die of old age.) If you don't pay attention to them you lose track of the changes very quickly -- the cute baby spitting up on her fancy dress just before the photographer takes the picture isn't the same person as the teenager in a formal gown posing for prom pictures with her boyfriend. nor is the teenager the same person as the young woman a father has to hand off to her new husband at her wedding.

All the arguing... nooooooo!

Think of the children.

Hey Joe. You can talk!

I voted the second option, like most other people it would seem. I actually wrote a brief account of my own first time experience, it was (I like to think) erotic, but not graphic and my first sexual encounter did not include intercourse. I did not submit the story because it just didn't seem to work when I applied the age limit rule of 18, we were 15 to almost 17. Also, I am led to believe that generally stories without a heavy sexual content tend to get hammered in the ratings, correct me if this is wrong.

I also accept that this is Laurel's site and therefore the choice, personal, legal or whatever, is down to her and I respect that.


Sandy

sandmartin,

It's not so much that non-erotic stories get slammed in the scores. It's more that they get much lower reader numbers, and a lower vote/reader ratio. My highest score is for a Romance story that has virtually no sex in it at all.

Anal and Incest stories seem to get the most readers and votes, Loving Wives seem to attract the most vitriol, and Poetry seems to get the most public comments.

But I think a well-written anything will usually get a positive response, so feel free to contribute to any category you feel like writing.

Thinking back to my first real girlfriend, complete with our clumsy and fun sex life, I am always turned on by it.

We were both underage.

I can't make an ethical judgement on it, I don't have enough to go on, but I can say that right or wrong... its a bit of a turn-on.

bloodsimple said:

sandmartin,

It's not so much that non-erotic stories get slammed in the scores. It's more that they get much lower reader numbers, and a lower vote/reader ratio. My highest score is for a Romance story that has virtually no sex in it at all.

Anal and Incest stories seem to get the most readers and votes, Loving Wives seem to attract the most vitriol, and Poetry seems to get the most public comments.

But I think a well-written anything will usually get a positive response, so feel free to contribute to any category you feel like writing.

Click to expand...

Thank you for the confidence boost. My problem is not so much that the story, true as it is, is not erotic, whenever I reflect upon it I really think of it as a very personal and most erotic event. There was a group of us and it was more a case of you show me yours and I'll show you mine, although a little less consensual than that. I had never seen a boy naked prior to that experience and the main constraint on the story is that we were all under 18, which is the site rule. I really enjoy good plausible stories and I feel my own account would lose it's punch by moving our ages up to 18, but... I'll give it some serious thought...

Sandy

With commendations to thread starter Killallhippies and excellent comments by WeirdHarold and Sincerely_Helene....

I did not cast a vote as my position would be no limitations at all.

This is not to do with Literotica or any site that has rules and regulations. It is rather a general position that I feel to be of some importance to all who write and read.

Before it slips my mind, someone said that Pornography is literature that stimulates sexual desire...or something like that, I disagree.

Pornography is that which cheapens and demeans sexual behavior. There is a vast difference between Romance, Erotica and Pornography. Just had to get that said.

Back to censorship.

By what right does anyone from the Catholic Pope on down to radical fundamentalists, by what right do they impose restrictions of what might be written or read by anyone?

Nature has provided the species with a very intense drive to procreate. It does not magically appear at age 18, 16, 12 or even 10, we are born with it.

Babies fondle their genitals as soon as they can find them with their pudgy little hands. "I'll show mine if you will show me yours..." begins at four or five or even before.

Incest, rape, every bad thing that can happen, does happen. To ignore it, to not write about it, to not be permitted to read about it is an abridgement not only of the freedom of expression, but it keeps many in ignorance who might read and learn.

The thing that most writers seem to ignore on this thread, is the implied right of 'someone' to restrict, regulate, or censor the thoughts of another. I give no one that right.

We all know and accept the limits, 'shouting fire in a crowded theatre...' and that is understandable and acceptable.

Writers and artists far back into history have fought for the right to express their thoughts in whatever form or manner they wish. I submit that those writers on this thread that advocate an age restriction on writing and reading do a great disservice to art and to the concept of the freedom of expression.

I am somewhat disappointed to see so many willing to be censored.

As an illustration of the importance of being free to express oneself, I offer two of my posted stories of underaged sex, incest and rape.

Those stories have been posted for the better part of a year and I hope that by calling attention to them, they are not deleted.

But I do feel that one should back up ones assertions from time to time.

Both are in the Novel, Billy....chapter of Maria, chapter of Cindy and even Molly, although it was not explicit.

Underage sexual activity is a fact, it should be fiction, formed in such a way as to be helpful and informative at best, but if it is only for stimulation then so what?

As writers we should not limit ourselves to what is 'legally' acceptable. We should push those limits and expand our influence so as to be a beneficial force in the expression of uncommon ideas.



amicus

I voted for #2. Age appropriate exploration by protagonists of a similar age – not a problem for me.

But, raping babies is a problem. A huge problem. There is a difference--an enormous difference--in child sexual abuse/pedophilia and "underage sex". By implication, with "underage sex" both partners are "underage" and the sex is consensual. You wouldn't call rape "overage sex" when the partners are 18 or older – rape is rape and doesn't become "underage sex" just because the victim is under a certain age.

Yui

Yui, you are repeating the mistake made throughout the first part of this thread.

But, raping babies is a problem. A huge problem.

Indeed it is. So is raping anyone.

Killing kids is a problem.

Dropping napalm on families is a huge problem.

----

But it is WRITING (posting, dessiminating, etc.) about certain topics, that we are discussing.

One simply can't get from
"X is a problem" to
"There should be no writing about X." (i.e., writing about X should be suppressed, censured, etc.)

Cumbaby said:

It is difficult to compose a convicing father/daughter incest story with the girl being eighteen.

In real life girls are deflowered by their fathers at a much earlier age?

Click to expand...

In real life, not everyone fucks their family.

As someone who has a few stories with underage characters (obviously not here) I voted for number two. In fact the first story I did involved a seventeen year old girl and a nineteen year old guy. I generally don't go for an age gap of more than five years, of course. With the exception of one story where there was centuries worth of age gap, but that's what happens when you involve demons.
Now, I've got my reasons. For one, it's amazingly naive and unrealistic to believe teenagers don't have sex. I knew of girls who were having sex at 12 (like say my own sister, with a man ten years older than her). I am also 19, making me a lot closer in age to 16 and 17 than many here. I find writing about 17-year-olds far less icky than writing about 30-year-olds. Of course, the older I get the more that shifts, but I can't expect to grow up all at once. And as I said, no big age gaps...no 45-year-old men getting it on with 14-year-old girls.
The thing is, you can spout off about children or pedophila all you want. Fact of the matter is, once a girl starts getting her period, biologically she is a woman. And girls who are 12 very often don't look it. Believe me, I remember. When I was 14 I had a friend who looked like she was twenty. I have always thought of pedophiles as people who lust after undeveloped bodies. So while I think a 45-year-old man getting off on seventeen year old sex is skeevy, I don't think of it as pedophila. As long as I'm not expected to get involved in any way, shape or form, live and let live.