Underage

[stella123]

I can't find the words to say on how angry I am,they let people post incest slave stoires and I seen about a woman being burned but there won't let underage storys for some reason and if there say it's not right well soo isn't everyother story

 

[bronzeage]

Take a deep breath and count to 10.

There are plenty of sites which cater to your particular tastes, so please don't feel the situation is hopeless.

The underage sex rule is arbitrary. It is set by the people who own this place and face the risk of fine or imprisonment if a law is violated.

 

[driphoney]

If you feel a story has slipped through the cracks, you can always report it. The site owners will check take a closer look.

They own the site, they get to make the rules.

 

[oggbashan]

Stories including underage sex attract criticism from watchdog groups, particularly in the US where this site is based.

There are other sites that will allow them. This site doesn't.

Og

 

[sr71plt]

It isn't just the site owners' liability we're talking about here. When a site goes under watch dog scrutiny, they start tracing back on the contributor's accounts. You want to be put on some sort of community watch list because some other Yahoo posted underage stories to the same site you post stories within the given limits?

 

[Zeb_Carter]

Uh, I didn't write that story, I cut and pasted it from your computer when you brought it into the my shop to be fixed. I just thought I'd do you a favor and post it here.

 

[Boxlicker101]

I can't find the words to say on how angry I am,they let people post incest slave stoires and I seen about a woman being burned but there won't let underage storys for some reason and if there say it's not right well soo isn't everyother story

Nothing like a rant for somebody's first post. Besides incest, they allow violent BDSM and abduction and enslavement and sex with unicorns.

 

[Zeb_Carter]

Nothing like a rant for somebody's first post. Besides incest, they allow violent BDSM and abduction and enslavement and sex with unicorns.

And don't forget those creatures with tentacles.

 

[sheoakmax]

Interesting Debate

The problem is the legal status and intent. We can’t be involved in all the paedophile debate and the like if we want to be serious writers of adult erotic literature.
I was working on a story (its half finished) about a father who was having sex with his daughter at 16 to 18, with the narrative presenting the girl as highly sexual and loving to please her father. The only reason the character within the narrative goes to jail is that the authorities charge him, not his daughter, or his wife.
It’s a good story close to reality here in Australia. But there lies the problem, the law here is very strict, therefore unless I change the characters age, I can never make it public.
And then again when dealing with under age narratives we could be asked about the intended audience.

 

[Scotsman69]

I understand why this site has rules, and I stick within them in the stories I post here.

The reality however is that in many parts of the world the age of consent is lower than 18. In the UK and much of Europe it is 16, and I believe that in some countries (Sweden?) it is lower.

If whichever US authorities that enforce the under-18 rule are so vigilant, I presume Nabokov's 'Lolita' isn't available for sale in the USA?

 

[oggbashan]

I understand why this site has rules, and I stick within them in the stories I post here.

The reality however is that in many parts of the world the age of consent is lower than 18. In the UK and much of Europe it is 16, and I believe that in some countries (Sweden?) it is lower.

If whichever US authorities that enforce the under-18 rule are so vigilant, I presume Nabokov's 'Lolita' isn't available for sale in the USA?

It's not so much the authorities as the self-righteous moral guardians.

They could make life very difficult indeed for this site if it was seen to be promoting under-18 sex.

'Lolita' is assumed to be literature. If it were to be published in the US now, it might not be permitted.

Og

 

[Liar]

The reality however is that in many parts of the world the age of consent is lower than 18. In the UK and much of Europe it is 16, and I believe that in some countries (Sweden?) it is lower.

As well as meny places in the United States.

But that's not the point. The legal point is that porn with people under 18 is considerd child pornography. And there's a legal grey area considering fictional porn with characters that are under 18 too. People have been convicted of peddling pedo material only by publishing stories or cartoons.

 

[3113]

The reality however is that in many parts of the world the age of consent is lower than 18. In the UK and much of Europe it is 16, and I believe that in some countries (Sweden?) it is lower.

As well as meny places in the United States.

But remember, this site allows writers to have characters saying "I lost my virginity at sixteen" or "I was experimenting in high school" or "I was molested as a child" or "I was living in London and, having reached my majority at sixteen, went off to live with my then boyfriend..." Lit is actually fine with stories acknowledging that many learn about sex at a younger age and/or that some places have a younger age of legal consent and these can be mentioned.

What you CANNOT do is write up a detailed, erotic scene of that event. This site wants you to go against the writerly rules of "show don't tell" in that instance. You can't show it and you can't elaborate in the telling. You can, however, mention it. The site doesn't ask you to deny reality, per se, if that reality is important to the story.

So, if the story is about meeting the erotic sexual love of your life at 18, you can certainly mention that you (or your character) has been sexually active since age sixteen. If the story is about meeting the erotic sexual love of your life at 16 or your first time at age 13, then you're out of luck. You won't be able to post that story here on Lit.

 

[lovecraft68]

Nevermind targeting age have u seen some of the non consent stories?

I couldn't agree more. I mean if they feel the gae thing is wrong fine its their site. I simply changed the age of my chacters to make it work. However lets talk about nonconsent. I mean a story like maybe a girl can't pay the rent and the landlord says take careof me and I'll let it slide. and maybe the girls hesitant and doesn't want to but does it anyway. okay thats fine it's still her choice and she is not being hurt. but there are brutal rape stories on this site and it is disturbing. I mean I am not judging the readers or writers I mean I write incest stories. But out right rape is a disturbing subject. I am not a prude and enjoy some good S&M here and there but once again the slave has a CHOICE being gang raped along the side of a road (I won't give the name of the story) it was the most brutal thing I have read it was not a turn on. I just wonder how the site thinks this is healthy? I mean if cops search your house and find rape material on your computer or in books and mags you are in trouble deep my friends. Anyway just my thought on things

 

[sr71plt]

At the end of the day, it's a private site. The site owners every right (and power) to choose what they will and what they won't permit to be published here.

 

[Boxlicker101]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scotsman69
The reality however is that in many parts of the world the age of consent is lower than 18. In the UK and much of Europe it is 16, and I believe that in some countries (Sweden?) it is lower.

As well as meny places in the United States.

But that's not the point. The legal point is that porn with people under 18 is considerd child pornography. And there's a legal grey area considering fictional porn with characters that are under 18 too. People have been convicted of peddling pedo material only by publishing stories or cartoons.

I'm not sure, but I believe a written story of a person under the age of 18 having sex is still legal in the US, although there are people trying to make such stories illegal as kiddie porn. I think that would include Lolita.

However, videos or pics that include a person under 18 are illegal all over the US. In some states, the age of consent is under 18 but owning a photo of a person under 18 having sex would be illegal. It seems rather weird, but if I were in Michigan, for example, it would be legal for me to fuck a 16 year old girl. However, if I had a nude photo of her, that would be illegal, even in that state.

 

[bronzeage]

The general problem with rules is the more specific and tailored they are, the easier it is to evade them.

Regulating nuances and "special cases" will consume all your time.

In most cases, an absolute ban is the only thing which works.

 

[Boxlicker101]

But remember, this site allows writers to have characters saying "I lost my virginity at sixteen" or "I was experimenting in high school" or "I was molested as a child" or "I was living in London and, having reached my majority at sixteen, went off to live with my then boyfriend..." Lit is actually fine with stories acknowledging that many learn about sex at a younger age and/or that some places have a younger age of legal consent and these can be mentioned.

What you CANNOT do is write up a detailed, erotic scene of that event. This site wants you to go against the writerly rules of "show don't tell" in that instance. You can't show it and you can't elaborate in the telling. You can, however, mention it. The site doesn't ask you to deny reality, per se, if that reality is important to the story.

So, if the story is about meeting the erotic sexual love of your life at 18, you can certainly mention that you (or your character) has been sexually active since age sixteen. If the story is about meeting the erotic sexual love of your life at 16 or your first time at age 13, then you're out of luck. You won't be able to post that story here on Lit.

The underage sex doesn't even have to be erotic. I have one story that includes the least erotic sex scene I have ever written, more funny than erotic, about a man and his wife. At first, keeping with the overall theme of the story, I had her 16 years old. Lit. wouldn't accept it, so I changed her age to 18.

 

[Scotsman69]

Legality has many quirks

I'm very happy to stick by the Lit rules though.

I greatly appreciate this site. It has enabled me to find an audience much larger than my CW classes, and I hope in consequence, to hone my writing skills.

I'm deeply grateful to Lit for allowing me to do that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scotsman69
The reality however is that in many parts of the world the age of consent is lower than 18. In the UK and much of Europe it is 16, and I believe that in some countries (Sweden?) it is lower.




I'm not sure, but I believe a written story of a person under the age of 18 having sex is still legal in the US, although there are people trying to make such stories illegal as kiddie porn. I think that would include Lolita.

However, videos or pics that include a person under 18 are illegal all over the US. In some states, the age of consent is under 18 but owning a photo of a person under 18 having sex would be illegal. It seems rather weird, but if I were in Michigan, for example, it would be legal for me to fuck a 16 year old girl. However, if I had a nude photo of her, that would be illegal, even in that state.

 

[Liar]

I'm not sure, but I believe a written story of a person under the age of 18 having sex is still legal in the US, although there are people trying to make such stories illegal as kiddie porn. I think that would include Lolita.

Not entirely. The legality is muddy, varied´s from state to state and court precedents are dangling on the edge.

I think the most common inepretation is that if it's a story involving kids having sex that is intended as porn/erotica, in other words to sexually excite the reader, , then it's lewd, unseedly, and forbidden.

But a work of fiction that had kids fucking can be about something else, or not intended to give the reader a boner, and then it's deemed as not porn, and goes free.

Take the movie Juno. It starts with two kids fucking. (featuring adult actors playing two kids fucking) But it's about teen pregnancy.

 

[xssve]

The relevant statute in the US was originally the CPPA, or The Child Pornography Prevention Act of 1996 - that was struck down Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition, but Congress went ahead and passed another law against child pornography anyway, the The PROTECT Act of 2003 which:

Prohibits computer-generated child pornography when "(B) such visual depiction is a computer image or computer-generated image that is, or appears virtually indistinguishable from that of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct; (as amended by 1466A for Section 2256(8)(B) of title 18, United States Code).

Prohibits drawings, sculptures, and pictures of such drawings and sculptures depicting minors in actions or situations that meet the Miller test of being obscene, OR are engaged in sex acts that are deemed to meet the same obscene condition. The law does not explicitly state that images of fictional beings who appear to be under 18 engaged in sexual acts that are not deemed to be obscene are rendered illegal in and of their own condition (illustration of sex of fictional minors).

And it has a catch-all clause, the "pandering provision" which confers criminal liability on anyone who knowingly

advertises, promotes, presents, distributes, or solicits through the mails, or in interstate or foreign commerce by any means, including by computer, any material or purported material in a manner that reflects the belief, or that is intended to cause another to believe, that the material or purported material is, or contains (i) an obscene visual depiction of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct; or (ii) a visual depiction of an actual minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct.​

This one went back to SCOTUS who upheld it, contradicting their previous precedent in Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition.

In short, any depiction of underage sex is still illegal in every state, by federal law.

Wikipedia: Legal status of cartoon pornography depicting minors

This deals with cartoon pornography, but it could presumably be extended to cover any fictional representation as per the pandering clause.

 

[Boxlicker101]

The relevant statute in the US was originally the CPPA, or The Child Pornography Prevention Act of 1996 - that was struck down Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition, but Congress went ahead and passed another law against child pornography anyway, the The PROTECT Act of 2003 which:

Prohibits computer-generated child pornography when "(B) such visual depiction is a computer image or computer-generated image that is, or appears virtually indistinguishable from that of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct; (as amended by 1466A for Section 2256(8)(B) of title 18, United States Code).

Prohibits drawings, sculptures, and pictures of such drawings and sculptures depicting minors in actions or situations that meet the Miller test of being obscene, OR are engaged in sex acts that are deemed to meet the same obscene condition. The law does not explicitly state that images of fictional beings who appear to be under 18 engaged in sexual acts that are not deemed to be obscene are rendered illegal in and of their own condition (illustration of sex of fictional minors).

And it has a catch-all clause, the "pandering provision" which confers criminal liability on anyone who knowingly

advertises, promotes, presents, distributes, or solicits through the mails, or in interstate or foreign commerce by any means, including by computer, any material or purported material in a manner that reflects the belief, or that is intended to cause another to believe, that the material or purported material is, or contains (i) an obscene visual depiction of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct; or (ii) a visual depiction of an actual minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct.​

This one went back to SCOTUS who upheld it, contradicting their previous precedent in Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition.

In short, any depiction of underage sex is still illegal in every state, by federal law.

Wikipedia: Legal status of cartoon pornography depicting minors

This deals with cartoon pornography, but it could presumably be extended to cover any fictional representation as per the pandering clause.

Originally, the justification for outlawing pictures or films, etc. of minors was that a minor was actually being used, and that was illegal. From there they went to making even drawings illegal, although nobody was being harmed or exploited or mistreated in any way. I'm quite sure the bluenoses are trying now to go after written smut involving children, and from there to any works involving adults.

A long time ago, I saw a porno movie that started with a guy seducing someone who was described as a fifteen year old school girl, but was obviously an adult. That would probably be illegal now. I also saw some of the early Traci Lords movies, and I know they are illegal now.

 

[Kikori]

The only reason you could get annoyed at the underage rule is if a story is denied due to characters not explicitly being specified as legal. Or possibly no pre-eighteen masturbation.

 

[sr71plt]

The only reason you could get annoyed at the underage rule is if a story is denied due to characters not explicitly being specified as legal. Or possibly no pre-eighteen masturbation.

Well, no, not really. You can get annoyed because sexual activity does start before age 18, and thus is a natural theme for erotica; because in most historical-period work it's ridiculous for your characters not to be sexually active before age 18; and because mainstream fiction doesn't have this sort of barrier. So, there's every reason and right to be annoyed. It's just a limitation that the writer has to work within to post stories here. Realizing and accepting you can't do it is a different animal from being annoyed about not being able to do it.

 

[Boxlicker101]

The only reason you could get annoyed at the underage rule is if a story is denied due to characters not explicitly being specified as legal. Or possibly no pre-eighteen masturbation.

That's not entirely true. In the story of mine I mentioned a while ago, I wanted the girl to be 16 when she was pushed into marriage with the man her parents chose for her. He was 50, and a deacon in their church. They would have quite a bit of authority over her, and it would fit with their religion. At 18, it's a lot less likely she would have allowed herself to be pressured into the marriage, and a 16 year old bride would fit better with their barefoot and pregnant philosophy.

As I said, the description of her deflowering two weeks after the wedding night was the least erotic or smutty description of sex I have ever written. The groom waited until she was at her most fertile time, because their church felt the only reason for sex was reproduction.

ETA: We do have another limitation, and I even wrote a poem about it:

LIMITATIONS WE WRITERS ACCEPT

We can't write of sex between humans and dogs,
Or humans with wombats, giraffes or with frogs.

But we can write plenty of cats fucking cats,
Or couplings of horses or kangaroo rats.

I never have done it for nobody cares
To read of the mating of Kodiak bears.

But if someone wanted to write about beasties
That went about breeding with different species.

Then Laurel and Manu would probably say
"You can write it but no one will read anyway."