The moment of truth

[Bramblethorn]

That, right there, is enough to get the rejection - plus you have a thirteen year old girl, which is an immediate red flag for the site editor. An immediate flag.

You need to forget about the "reality" in your writing, and either lose the child or get her so far away from the action... no, I'd write her out completely, because in Literotica world, sixteen year olds might just exist with a one-liner, tops, but a thirteen year old, never. Not with sex in the house.

You can argue till the cows come home, but it is all irrelevant - Laurel's site, her rules. We have all learned this, and it's not hard - NO sexual activity even remotely involving minors. Not by proximity, not by suggestion, not by logic, not by veracity, not by law, just NOT.

I think you're overstating this a bit.

There are plenty of stories on this site which mention minors. I have one that starts in a classroom full of seven-year-olds, another that mentions a fourteen-year-old who's just come out to her mum as lesbian, and later in the same story I mention that one of the characters got pregnant at fifteen - which certainly suggests sexual activity involving a minor. None of those encountered any difficulty with moderation, although I tried to pre-empt that with an author's note to the effect of "this story has kids in it but they're not involved in the sex".

A new author mentioning a teenager without that kind of note is likely to get bounced, because Laurel skims and errs on the side of caution. But we've seen cases before where people resubmitted without changing the story, just adding a note to clarify the nature of the content, and then got waved through.

Here's a story from another author that made it through moderation, with a child showing up immediately after his mother has had sex with Hoary the Horny Snowman:

Slowly the boy climbed the stairs, his heart in his throat. When he reached the top he noticed light coming around the edges of the closed door to his mother's room. He again heard her giggle followed by a sound he couldn't identify.

"Mom! Is that you?" he called out.

"Tommy! What the hell...just wait there a minute young man."

He heard the sounds of movement for a time and then the door opened a crack. Jill stood in her robe with her long, dark hair hanging down and disheveled and she looked sweaty in spite of the cold temperature in the house.

...

"Why yes Tommy and thank you for asking. You're a good friend. The truth is I've never felt better and I owe it all to your mother. She's quite a talented lady."

Tommy missed the meaningful glances they exchanged and Jill's face reddened further but he did notice something strange.

"Hoary, what is that big lump under the covers?" he asked while pointing his finger in the direction of a sizable bulge located a little below the quilt centered between Hoary's legs.

"Okay Tommy, you can talk to Hoary later," Jill said interjecting herself before things got out of hand. "First things first. Since you feel free to travel between here and Mrs. Quimby's on your own I want you to go back there and get your stuff together. I'll call her and let her know I'm home. Later after dinner we can talk about Hoary. Now give me a kiss goodbye."

When she bent to kiss the boy he couldn't help but noticing there was something on the skin of her chest between the edges of her robe.

"Mom, did you spill something on yourself?" he asked.

Jill laughed nervously before replying.

If anything, that seems considerably more risque than the scene Rosie described. (I don't recall how old Tommy is, but I'm pretty sure he's well under thirteen.)

 

[RosieVelvet]

Here a scenario for you. U.S. court. Someone files charges against Lit for underage porn.
___________________________________________
Prosecution lawyer: Is there a 13 year old in this story?

The only answer is yes. It is not yes, but...

Is there sex in this story?

Yes again. There is no room for explanation.
____________________________________________

Do you see where this is going? Laurel is trying to cover her own ass and ours also since we do the writing around here.

With all due respect, the United States is a foreign country to which I owe no allegiance and I am not bound by its laws. Otherwise I'd be in real trouble!

Also that's advocates for you. Bring on the juge d'instruction I say. Hey, I could rewrite in French and send it to a French erotica site!

(Please not tongue firmly in cheek here, don't bother explaining all the stuff abvout contract and the location of servers)

 

[KeithD]

A point, I think, is that it depends on Laurel's "what I think today" call and is not hard edged. When a story is challenged (it's too bad the site calls it a rejection, because it's more of a query based on the supposition of a scan, not a read) and the writer thinks they are in bounds, the next step is to work it out with Laurel directly, not come and dump their ire on the discussion board in a "what, again?" biweekly thread shoved in front of other users who can't do a damn thing about it.

 

[KeithD]

With all due respect, the United States is a foreign country to which I owe no allegiance and I am not bound by its laws. Otherwise I'd be in real trouble!

You do continue making my point about leading with the chin, you know. This Web site is U.S. based. Being posted here puts that posting under U.S. law. It's looking more and more like, yes, you need to go someplace else with your attitude.

 

[TarnishedPenny]

‘Pon my honour, I’ve never had a problem using proper spelling. What amazes me is how them Yanks get away with distorting the Queen’s English...

Rosie, t’ain’t nothin’ personal, hon. Keep in mind the sheer volume of stories submitted. Laurel has to skim how many per day? She must bounce many just on the mere hint of, say, underage involvement (which does include witnessing any sexual act). If you are 100% sure, then I would suggest that you just resubmit, with a note in the proper box on the submission form explaining why.

 

[RosieVelvet]

‘Pon my honour, I’ve never had a problem using proper spelling. What amazes me is how them Yanks get away with distorting the Queen’s English...

Rosie, t’ain’t nothin’ personal, hon. Keep in mind the sheer volume of stories submitted. Laurel has to skim how many per day? She must bounce many just on the mere hint of, say, underage involvement (which does include witnessing any sexual act). If you are 100% sure, then I would suggest that you just resubmit, with a note in the proper box on the submission form explaining why.

At the moment I think I feel more annoyed about Keith's "grand entrance" and "prima donna" jibes, which were uncalled for. Perhaps it's coming from a country too often stereotyped as being reserved and unwilling to complain that makes me kick against type. I joined in with the patter when I arrived. So what? I say what I mean and I mean what I say.

 

[SimonDoom]

At the moment I think I feel more annoyed about Keith's "grand entrance" and "prima donna" jibes, which were uncalled for. Perhaps it's coming from a country too often stereotyped as being reserved and unwilling to complain that makes me kick against type. I joined in with the patter when I arrived. So what? I say what I mean and I mean what I say.

That's Keith. To paraphrase a line from the movie The Departed, Keith has a style of his own, and I'm afraid we all have to get used to it.

He's not representative of the Author's Hangout.

Be a duck. Let comments flow like water off your back.

Don't take the rejection of your story personally, or as representative of anything about this site other than Laurel's very peculiar application of the under-18 rule. Tinker with the story and resubmit it and you'll be fine. Or send a message arguing your case. Stick around and don't give up. It will be worth your while.

 

[LoquiSordidaAdMe]

AAAAAAaaaaaarggggghhhhhhhhh!

I am NOT a happy bunny.

My submission has been rejected and I am really, really pissed off.

Don't put too much stock in the rejection response, Rosie. It's a form letter. I got the same message when my story was rejected because I tried to use a HTML entity in my story.

I would suggest finding an editor or a beta reader, someone familiar with Lit's foibles, and see if they can spot the specific problem with your story. It might be the inclusion of a 13-year-old, but it might be something else.

That, right there, is enough to get the rejection - plus you have a thirteen year old girl, which is an immediate red flag for the site editor. An immediate flag.

Maybe not. My latest story has lots of kids in it. Like three to six-year-old children, and one "adolescent". It may be that Laurel uses some kind filter tool that hits on ages below 18 to parse stories before she reads them. If I had her workload I'd automate as much as I could. So in the "Note to Admin" I said very plainly that the story includes children, but they only appeared in a family context and were not involved in any kind of sexual activity. That may have been enough for Laurel to pay closer attention to what her filter hit on.

Don't give up Rosie. The rules can be tricky, and the explanations thin, but you'll get the hang of it.

 

[ElectricBlue]

I think you're overstating this a bit.

...

A new author mentioning a teenager without that kind of note is likely to get bounced, because Laurel skims and errs on the side of caution. But we've seen cases before where people resubmitted without changing the story, just adding a note to clarify the nature of the content, and then got waved through.

Overstating to emphasise the point for a new writer. I suspect the stories you mention are by more "Lit aware" writers who carefully craft their sexual content distances and their sentences to completely and deliberately avoid any sexual connection, however remote.

I know that writers successfully include children in stories, realistically but not salasciouly (and not accidentally salaciously, once they know the rules). I've done so myself - at last count I have a fourteen year old girl with her first period, another child with a blind grandmother who "sees" my leading lady's face with her hands, several child-birth scenes, a couple of breast-feeding scenes, and endless children in my multi-generation Arthurian thing hanging around the pig-sty and stables waiting to turn eighteen. Not one of which got bounced, because the nearest sexual content was a page away or even in the next chapter, the children were portrayed as innocents (not as knowing thirteen year olds rolling their eyes at mum), and I specifically drew Laurel's attention to their ages in a note.

The one time I did try to blatantly get a preamble through (young teenage boy seeing his older sister naked for the first time - for an incest story so where's the surprise?) it was rightfully bounced, the scene expurgated, and re-submitted, all good. But that was a deliberate push on the line, years ago.

Where Rosie has been caught out is thinking that gritty urban realism, Ken Loach BBC style, is okay - but as we all know, in Lit-world, it's not. It's just another right-of-passage for a new Lit writer, no big deal unless you make it one. She'll be asking about the scoring system and troll-bombing next, and there'll be a mix of polite explanation and furious fingers bleeding raw on the keyboard, and all will be right in the Lit universe. The world turns, and the sun comes up in the morning .

 

[ChloeTzang]

Everyone learns..... it took me three or four resubmits to get my first story thru. Just keep at it. No point in complaining.

 

[RosieVelvet]

Where Rosie has been caught out is thinking that gritty urban realism, Ken Loach BBC style, is okay - but as we all know, in Lit-world, it's not. It's just another right-of-passage for a new Lit writer, no big deal unless you make it one. She'll be asking about the scoring system and troll-bombing next, and there'll be a mix of polite explanation and furious fingers bleeding raw on the keyboard, and all will be right in the Lit universe. The world turns, and the sun comes up in the morning .

Trolls I can handle: At 64 and an early internet adopter I am forum savvy and can usually hit trollish long hops straight over the pavilion clock (it is my mission to replace baseball metaphors with cricket ones). I know I got burnt by a clown who wasn't what he seemed to be at first but that was exceptional. I have confidence in the quality of my writing: maybe that's my trouble.

 

[TarnishedPenny]

One suggestion, dear lady. Pray do not let the AH become the cesspool other areas of the Forum have.

Oh, and while cricket jargon might sell in some places, keep in mind that the vast majority of your audience don't know it, being more familiar with running in circles than lurching back and forth between piles if sticks. Your call, of course, but you might as well write in Swahili when some people are concerned.

Be welcome, be happy - and I fully support RubenR's suggestion to let things sit for 24-48 hours.

 

[ChasingAnna]

Here a scenario for you. U.S. court. Someone files charges against Lit for underage porn.
___________________________________________
Prosecution lawyer: Is there a 13 year old in this story?

The only answer is yes. It is not yes, but...

Is there sex in this story?

Yes again. There is no room for explanation.
____________________________________________

Do you see where this is going? Laurel is trying to cover her own ass and ours also since we do the writing around here.

Terrible example. The supreme Court has consistently ered on the side of free speech when artistic works have depicted underage nudity or sexual activity. (Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition)

Legally, you could write an erotic story with even young children having sex, add graphic illustrations, and share it with other adults without falling afoul of the law. Most sites choose to be far more restrictive about what they allow, but that's the door owner, not the government.

 

[TxRad]

Terrible example. The supreme Court has consistently ered on the side of free speech when artistic works have depicted underage nudity or sexual activity. (Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition)

Legally, you could write an erotic story with even young children having sex, add graphic illustrations, and share it with other adults without falling afoul of the law. Most sites choose to be far more restrictive about what they allow, but that's the door owner, not the government.

Yes, but and there is always a butt... Mainstream and the internet run on different laws and agendas. And you are right, Laurel's site, Laurel's rules. I deal with the legal department at my publishing firm every time I put up a novel. Here it is no different except we have to deal with laurel.

 

[AwkwardMD]

That's Keith. To paraphrase a line from the movie The Departed, Keith has a style of his own, and I'm afraid we all have to get used to it.

He's not representative of the Author's Hangout.

He is while people excuse his behavior, and put the onus on her to do something about it. There's a reason why everyone has this reaction to Pilot at first.

 

[TarnishedPenny]

ChasingAnna, you may be right, but there’s a reason top lawyers drive Cadillac’s and shades of interpretation keep the Supremes employed. Whether or not there’s artistic merit in any given story, I can understand Laurel’s having set a hard-and-fast policy.

Moreover, not all trials take place in courtrooms. Ensuring that all - all - sexual acts and proceedings are limited to 18+ is one way to keep out of the Twittertrial sewer.

 

[AfterDusk]

Eh I wasn’t going to comment but I kind of agree with KeithD’s assessment. Rosie, you seem like fun but you aren’t humble in anyway shape or form and you’ve done quite a bit of grandstanding since you arrived here. He made a very good point—every other week there’s a thread about underage this and underage that. The responses are *literally* the same ones everyone has given you—this is Laurel’s site, she makes the rules; either work with her or take your stories elsewhere. That’s all there is to it; this may be harsh, but you’re not special—you have the same merit as the rest of us (actually, less because you don’t have stories out there yet).

A lot of us have had stories rejected that have needed alterations; one of mine was kicked back for underage characters who were in fact not, nor did they behave young it was simply a matter of how I worded something. I had to resubmit that first chapter six times and it took about two months to get it pushed through. I’ve had chapters kicked back for violence/snuff when there was none. Just comes with the territory.

So I’ll say it because it seems these men folk are too intimidated by you (aside from KeithD but he’s his own category)—calm the fuck down lady. Take a chill pill, have a glass of wine or whatever and behave like a lady of your age. You may have history writing but you don’t have history on this site and it would do you well to step back and listen to what the elders are saying instead of strutting around. Spend sometime researching, listening and learning before being boastful. If you truly are a teacher then you, of all people, should realize that when entering a new situation you have some stuff to learn.

 

[ChasingAnna]

ChasingAnna, you may be right, but there’s a reason top lawyers drive Cadillac’s and shades of interpretation keep the Supremes employed. Whether or not there’s artistic merit in any given story, I can understand Laurel’s having set a hard-and-fast policy.

Moreover, not all trials take place in courtrooms. Ensuring that all - all - sexual acts and proceedings are limited to 18+ is one way to keep out of the Twittertrial sewer.

Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition didn't establish artistic merit as an acceptable defense, that was already the case. Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition struck down the attempt to classify virtual images as child pornography. There exists no law making non photographic depictions illegal.

 

[RejectReality]

There's no prohibition against minors in a story. There's an absolute prohibition against minors involved in anything remotely sexual.

It is entirely possible that mentioning a minor's age could cause a speed-reading rejection, but if they're nowhere near the sex, they're fine. I've written gaggles of kids into stories, and even had a main character who first appears at 5. There's just nothing remotely sexual about him in the story until a few scenes later when he's in his 30s.

Also, it seems as if there's a glitch in the system on Laurel's end, causing some rejections to append the underage rejection without it being purposely selected.

So, if you have any other rejection reason listed, and you're positive there's no sexual content with a minor ( remembering that nudity, admiring even clothed bodies, etc. are consider sexual ) then concentrate on the other listed reason.

When it comes to spelling and grammar rejections, the overwhelming number of those happen because of punctuation around dialogue. Do a find for quotation marks, and double check where your punctuation is on each one. It's easy to miss one or two, and if those are the ones that Laurel's eyes fall on...

 

[yukonnights]

Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition didn't establish artistic merit as an acceptable defense, that was already the case. Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition struck down the attempt to classify virtual images as child pornography. There exists no law making non photographic depictions illegal.

I think the relevant point is being overlooked in this side discussion - How much money and time does it take to get through a court case? If it's $1, and I'm the owner of the site getting whacked, that $1 is more than any one story here is worth to me. Bottom line IMO, the scene as described is totally irrelevant to the story...could be deleted in it's entirety and not one reader would ever know or care.

Sometimes a deep breath or two helps. In regard to SR71/KeithD; The only way to successfully engage with him in debate is to be 100% certain of your facts and your argument before launching. In this one about the kids, he's just telling it like it is. Whining only makes the one whining look immature.

In regard to "social media" experts; The General Board has quite a few of those...and probably even some Russian trolls The AH is somewhat of a sanctuary of restraint and sobriety (well, maybe sobriety was the wrong word...but eh, I'm too lazy to change it )

 

[SimonDoom]

Terrible example. The supreme Court has consistently ered on the side of free speech when artistic works have depicted underage nudity or sexual activity. (Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition)

Legally, you could write an erotic story with even young children having sex, add graphic illustrations, and share it with other adults without falling afoul of the law. Most sites choose to be far more restrictive about what they allow, but that's the door owner, not the government.

This is not an accurate statement of the law in the U.S. It's much less clear than this, because the Supreme Court has yet to render a definitive ruling on this issue.

The Ashcroft case was a 2002 case where the court struck down the statute on the ground that it was overbroad. It did NOT endorse the viewpoint you've espoused above. Since that case there have been federal cases where people have been successfully prosecuted for (a) creating cartoons depicting child sex, and (b) writing stories about child sex. The question in these cases is whether the material is "obscene," because obscenity is not protected by the First Amendment. The problem is that it's very unclear what, in this day and age, is obscene.

 

[Emirus]

AAAAAAaaaaaarggggghhhhhhhhh!

I am NOT a happy bunny.

My submission has been rejected and I am really, really pissed off.

Oh for fuck's sake, what's a girl to do? (

The first thing I would suggest is CALM down. You may not be a happy bunny and I agree. You come across as a deranged version of Roger Rabbit. (That’s a joke!!)

I’ve glanced at the threads you’ve begun, I haven’t read anything in depth because most of the comments from people I don’t find interesting but I do wonder if you’ve been blasting away in order to get to the magic 100 for an avatar? It certainly took me a lot longer. Perhaps you’re a self publicist? Perhaps you are someone who wants to be liked by everyone and tries too hard. Perhaps you’ve escaped from the mental asylum? I’m not being serious (or am I)

Perhaps after 64 years you’re just generally pissed of with everything. After 72 years I get like that myself sometimes. As I said earlier CALM down. Now on to serious matters.

In my experience Laurel isn’t bothered about English or American spelling. Or minor punctuation or grammar mistakes. But if the mistakes are so pronounced that it would, in her opinion, spoil the readers enjoyment then you, and anyone else, is in trouble.

There are cretins on this bulletin board as there are in life generally. In life I ignore them and I do on here. Responding to them only fuels their fire.

As for the American/Rest of the World divide remember, and I say this as someone who has many American friends and relatives and for nearly 50 years had visited the USA regularly, 99% of Americans don’t know the rest of the world exists and those that do don’t care.

That’s why you get comments, thsnkfully only from a few, on here saying that this is an American site and if you don’t like it stick it up your arse. They forget that it’s worldwide and just happens to be run from an American base. I’m sure the owners don’t want it to be regarded as a site just for Americans.

I’ve only had to resubmit two stories. The first was because the “victim” didn’t get any pleasure from being raped. Have you ever heard of anyone enjoying being raped? Ridiculous. I amended it so they did enjoy it and it got published. The second was because at the ending the villain was murdered. I resubmitted and in the notes explained that the murder wasn’t gratuitous and if he didn’t die the story was pointless. It got published.

I thought it annoying but as others have said it’s Laurel’s site and her rules. Deal with it without getting agitated and there is no problem.

As for the cricket bats and baseball bats be realistic. They have the World Series and, as I understand it, apart from Cuba it’s only American teams that compete. But it’s still the “World Series.” That tells you something. Of my nine stories so far two have been set specifically in England, the first two parts of a trilogy in Mississippi and Alabama, and the other five could be anywhere. I haven’t altered the English language except for the American two and that hasn’t been spelling it’s been to use slang terminology to fit in with the location.

You won’t find me writing “aluminum” instead of “aluminium” because “aluminum” doesn’t exist or “favor” instead or “favour.” But you won’t find me having a Mississippian ask “may I enquire after your health?” You won’t find me having an Englishman do that either as it happens.

So my advice is CALM down, learn from your mistakes, accept the constructive criticism, ignore advice that isn’t constructive and the people who give and work to improve your writing to a level that both you and your readers are happy with.

My writing now is a damn sight better than when I started and it was brought home to me only today. I began a story about a year ago, long before I joined this site, and was writing for my own amusement. I’ve just finished a story and decided to dig this one out, I’d got about halfway through writing it, and finish it. Upon reading what I’d written I was horrified. There’s no way I would submit it. It’s terrible compared with what I’m turning out now. Practice might not make me perfect but it’s made me a damn sight better than I was nine months ago.

By the way. A lot of the time I’m not as CALM as my comments might suggest.

 

[ChloeTzang]

Well, this comes up weekly. No biggie. Edit, rewrite, resubmit. Repeat until it’s accepted. I’m with Keith, ascerbic as he can be. Wish I’d known the AH existed when I started. It would have speeded up my learning curve. I figured it out by trial and error. Mostly errors.

The one thing is not to get your tits in a tangle (those aussies, it’s catching), just sit back and understand everyone’s being a lot nicer than they usually are LOL

 

[ChasingAnna]

I'm not going to Wade into the "who's being too much of a dick" debate, but I'll defend the frustration of the lack of clarity with the rules. I got a kick back for apparently not explicitly stating that all character was 18, even though the character never actually engaged in any sexual contact. It was annoying mostly because it wasn't a big deal to explicitly make him 18, there was just nothing to indicate that it was necessary

 

[ChloeTzang]

I'm not going to Wade into the "who's being too much of a dick" debate, but I'll defend the frustration of the lack of clarity with the rules. I got a kick back for apparently not explicitly stating that all character was 18, even though the character never actually engaged in any sexual contact. It was annoying mostly because it wasn't a big deal to explicitly make him 18, there was just nothing to indicate that it was necessary

Yep, happened to me. One figures it out. Coffee helps