"ADULT" Sites - thread by request.

[Teenage Venus]

Carried over by request from 'Newbie' thread. It pertains to 'restrictions' on some adult sites, and reasons for this (Other than purely the webmaster/mistress's personal preferences, which everyone has to respect.)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You're quite right. It has to do with legal restrictions in the USA.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

On the face of this it would seem correct. HOWEVER, I can direct you to hundreds - nay thousands - of USA based 'Adult' sites that each provide many thousands of stories of every type of adult liturature, and many have been doing so for several years. Those stories include underage teen sex, teen rape, beastiality, incest with minors, etc.

By general consent it seems ALL steer clear of only two things: Pedophilia. (Which seems generally accepted as sex with pre-adolescent children of under 12 years of age), and pornotype photos of persons that either are - or look to be - under the age of 18.

From research (because I have stories involving 'under 18's on my own USA and UK based sites), I have been unable to unearth a single case where one of these sites has been prosecuted for posting such stories either in the USA or UK.

I'm totally against pornography involving children either pictorially or in writing. However, I see it as simply hilarious that so-called 'Adult Erotica' sites ban stories of normal sex between married persons - albeit under eighteen years of age - but still accepted by USA federal law, and UK law as LEGALLY married. Yet allow stories of sex between young persons and so-called mythical entities in human or beastial disguise, and allow pornographic pictorial adverts for any surfing child to see on any of the pages!

If this is NOT hypocracy, what is?

Personally, I feel that proclaimed and advertised 'Adult' sites should treat their clients and members as adults. I also feel that adult adverts should NOT be displayed for casual surfers - children or adults - without plenty of warning, and requiring the surfer to agree they are both adult, and will not be offended by them, and be required to actually click to gain access to pages displaying them.

How do others feel about this?
Do you think it's a bit hypocritical?
Do you feel minors should not have immediate access to pictorial porn adverts?
Do you feel that stories involving legal sex between persons of legal age should be available (not banned) on adult erotica sites?
Do you feel it hypocritical to allow sex stories between mythical beasts and under 18's, but not true life stories of sex between beasts and adults?
Do you think that stories of legal sex between under 18's will pervert you? - but that between mythical monsters will not?
Do you frequent 'Adult' sites where stories of persons under 18 years are freely obtainable?
Do you know of ANY site-owner that was prosecuted for publishing erotica involving 16 year-olds?

 

[dr_mabeuse]

I write for a pay BDSM site as well as Lit, and I know that the trouble there with rape and under-age and other edgy stuff is not with the law, it's with the credit-card companies who refuse to support sites whose content goes beyond their own bounds of taste.

My own feelings about Literotica are that it's a free, private site that belongs to one individual, and I think it's her own tastes that dictate what's allowed and what's not. Personally, I don't have a problem with that.

I'm not much into pedophilia, scat, bestiality, rape or snuff, so Lit's prohibitions don;t bother me much. I think you can give a pretty good idea of a character's age without mentioning numbers too, so if I wanted to write a story about sex with a fifteen year-old, I'd just write her to act like a fifteen year-old. Mentioning age is like mentioning penis dimensions or bra size to me: you shouldn't have to do it to make your point.

As far as being hypocritical, I don't know. If the site promised no-holds-barred, anything-goes porn and then limited it the stories to sex between people over 18, I guess I'd call that false advertising.

All things considered, I'm way past the age where I expect any sort of logical consistency from any human being, myself included.

---dr.M.

 

[Huckleman2000]

I agree with Dr. M about having expectations of logical consistency, although sometimes it takes more than age to overcome them. They're doing wonderful things in psychopharmacology, nowadays.

That said, some of the best sex I've ever had was with a sixteen-year-old girl. I was eighteen at the time. If I were to write about it, though, I suppose I could make her act sixteen, but the differences between us weren't due to slight discrepencies in emotional maturity. They were more due to the differences between a sophmore and a senior in high school. Different classes, Driver's Ed., different groups of friends, I could buy alcohol and go to bars, or get drafted. I went off to college, she became a junior. It was just a different set of circumstances and dynamics. If we actually were both eighteen, it would have been totally different. Likewise, if I wrote the story as an eighteen and a twenty-year-old.

My own tastes in porn don't go towards beastiality, scat, pedo, or anything that is degrading. I would find it difficult to defend "rights" to publish any of those things, too. In the abstract, I can say "you can't draw a line"; I think, though, that as soon as you have a child, the lines suddenly become a lot more clear. Or, at least, it forces you to try to articulate how one should establish lines and boundaries for themselves, in an age-appropriate manner. It ain't easy.

Sex between non-humans - isn't that what the discovery channel is for?

 

[Weird Harold]

By general consent it seems ALL steer clear of only two things: Pedophilia. (Which seems generally accepted as sex with pre-adolescent children of under 12 years of age), and pornotype photos of persons that either are - or look to be - under the age of 18.

I don't find this to be true at all. Literotica is rare among adult story sites in banning stories about underage sex. and there is NO consensus among adult sites on what is permissible in stories.

As for photos, the only restriction seems to be the imposed legal restriction that models must be 18 years of age when photographed regardless of their apparent age.

Site imposed restrictions run the entire gamut of possibilities -- from no standards on content (or quality) at ASSTR.org to specialty sites that won't accept anything that dosn't cater to the specific fetish they cater to.

I do believe that every "adult" site sould be responsible enough to register with one -- or all -- of the "Net-nanny" services so that thparental controls built into most browsers can block inappropriate material from those who should not have it shoved in their face unexpectedly.

Every so often a glitch in my system turns on parental controls in my browser and Lit gets blocked. Not that I've ever configured any specific sites in the parental controls -- it's Lit's registration with various net-nanny services that causes the blocking.

Unfortuantely, there are large numbers of amoral site operators who feel that "free speech" gives them the right to contrive every means possible to bypass content controls and force their advertisements on people -- they're NOT all porn sites either; porn sites are just a bit more agressive about it than some of the less controversial advertisers and site operators.

Nobody should EVER get anything they did not specifically request from the internet -- whether it's porn or the infamous X10 camera pop-under page.

As for hypocrisy, I find very little of it in the various degrees of acceptability on "Adult" sites. For the most part, each individual site sets the standard for their content and it's not "hypocrisy" for some other site to set exactly the opposite standards -- it's only hypocrisy if the content deliberately does not match the stated standards for any specific site.

 

[Liar]

By general consent it seems ALL steer clear of only two things: Pedophilia. (Which seems generally accepted as sex with pre-adolescent children of under 12 years of age), and pornotype photos of persons that either are - or look to be - under the age of 18.

Like WH said, I don't find this true.

Give me ten minutes, and I'll find a handful of links to sited that allows stories about sex with pre-pubescent minors. Asstr.org, one of the largest sites for erotic stories on the net, comes to mind. And in the same way that many stories even here claims that the characters are all of legal age when they still act and talk like 13 year olds, petite but 18+ women who playact as younger teens are quite common on sites with porn pictures.

 

[R. Richard]

Perhaps an interesting side note to the discussion is a fact I found out whuile researching my 'Nevada Brothels' article. In the State of Nevada, the general legal age of consent is 16, not 18. There are exceptions, particularly that the age of consent for relations between a teacher and a student is 18.

 

[Weird Harold]

Re: Re: "ADULT" Sites - thread by request.

Like WH said, I don't find this true.

Give me ten minutes, and I'll find a handful of links to sited that allows stories about sex with pre-pubescent minors.

I'd bet that in twenty minutes, you could find one or more sites that specialize in stories of pre-pubescent minors, one or more sites that won't accept a story unless it involves the family pet, dozens of sites that won't accept a story if more than one gender is involved, or less than three people, -- just about any kink you can think of has at lest one story site dedicated to it that won't accept anything that doesn't highlight that kink.

 

[shereads]

My own feelings about Literotica are that it's a free, private site that belongs to one individual, and I think it's her own tastes that dictate what's allowed and what's not. Personally, I don't have a problem with that.

I second and third that. I don't know how many of Literotica's few rules and regs are due to the owners' personal tastes, and how much is done to safeguard the site from being targeted by the U.S. Attorney General; but I think it requires a significant amount of courage to host something this high-profile in the current political climate. Hypocritical? By what standard can something provided for free be judged to give us less than our money's worth?

Free dirty stories! What's not to like?

 

[Virtual_Burlesque]

... My own feelings about Literotica are that it's a free, private site that belongs to one individual, and I think it's her own tastes that dictate what's allowed and what's not. Personally, I don't have a problem with that. ...

I have recently been informed that all the stories here are read personally by one woman – Gunga Dinn I must think – who owns the site.

If this is even partially true, can there be any wonder that she might choose to ban some categories, on personal taste. And why not? It is – I assume – her business.

 

[RavenSpirit2k4]

It would be easier if the age of consent were the same throughout the US and the UK, but it isn't. The average is 16 (which is the age I was when I first had sex, incidentally), but there are exceptions. Considering that, I can understand the legal adults only decision.

Now if that were to change and all the states in the US and the UK were to agree on an age of consent, then I would petition that the minimum age on Lit be changed to whatever that was. But that seems a bit unlikely, doesn't it?

 

[Virtual_Burlesque]

... if ...the US and the UK were to agree on an age of consent...

Considering the present Administration, the only agreed-upon age for legal consensual sex would probably be 35.

 

[matriarch]

Considering the present Administration, the only agreed-upon age for legal consensual sex would probably be 35.

That young?

 

[matriarch]

I second and third that. I don't know how many of Literotica's few rules and regs are due to the owners' personal tastes, and how much is done to safeguard the site from being targeted by the U.S. Attorney General; but I think it requires a significant amount of courage to host something this high-profile in the current political climate. Hypocritical? By what standard can something provided for free be judged to give us less than our money's worth?

Free dirty stories! What's not to like?

Exactly.

I find Literotica to be a very well run site, well organised, not in the least tacky. Some of the sites that they advertise, on the other hand are so over the top.......A big turn off, to me personally.

If I find I have a yearning to read about next door's dog fucking his owner, I know I can find it quite easily on another site, the same with other things.

I don't want to read them, so I'm not bothered.

I can see nothing hypocritical in the restrictions of the site. Any business (and it is a business), has to be aware of legalities that could shut them down. And I for one, am very glad about this. Lit is a great place, and I would hate it to disappear in a legal backlash.

Just for the record, in the UK, sex and marriage are legal between hetero couples at the age of 16.

Consenting, private sex for gay males is 18.

Lesbian women have no restrictions, so the adult 16 age applies to them.

Perversely, you cannot own a driving licence, or drive a car until you are 17.

You cannot legally buy alcohol until the age of 18.

And you cannot vote on the laws that allow you to have sex at 16 until you are 18.

Go figure.

Mat

 

[snooper]

Re: Re: "ADULT" Sites - thread by request.

... Nobody should EVER get anything they did not specifically request from the internet ...

Oh, the perfect computer, which always does what I want and ignores my obvious mistakes!

Every so often I get to a page I really don't want because I mistype by one letter, or put .com instead of .co.uk.

 

[Teenage Venus]

Do you feel that stories involving legal sex between persons of legal age should be available (not banned) on adult erotica sites?
Do you feel it hypocritical to allow sex stories between mythical beasts and under 18's, but not true life stories of sex between beasts and adults?
Do you think that stories of legal sex between under 18's will pervert you? - but that between mythical monsters will not?
Do you frequent 'Adult' sites where stories of persons under 18 years are freely obtainable?
Do you know of ANY site-owner that was prosecuted for publishing erotica involving 16 year-olds?

Some interesting replies, though none just answer all the questions.

Generally, most replies seem to concentrate on defending LIT - very noble - however, LIT is not the target of the questions (except perhaps in the case of adverts exposure.)

The questions really are to point out my opinion of the hypocracy of such as the US Attorney General, and see if others agree.

To try to make webmasters of adult sites conform to such conflicting 'rules' with so many loop-holes, under penalty of prosecution merely shows to me that it is not the morals of the nation, or protection of the innocent which is the intent, but a purely political one of trying to be all things to everyone to gain votes.

By appearing to be moralistic they seek to gain the approval of the churches, biggots, prudes, etc., however, they leave 'loop-holes to appease the commercial and mercenary ones, and Joe Americans, who have between them a powerful bunch of votes. (An example of a loop-hole is the laxity of control of advertising.)

In my opinion, if a site owner (adult or otherwise) sets down rules of acceptance, then the public accept them or moves on - including LIT.

However, if the owner sets the rules for 'moralistic' or 'conscience' reasons, but then is happy to display porn adds to get a lucrative income, I consider this VERY hypocritical.

I find it equally hypocritical for webmasters to hide behind blaming Government law and restrictions for their own site restrictions - when it is THEIR choice as to what they restrict to a very large degree - based on their own preferences of what particular sexual activities turn them on or off. (Most all of these willingly accept advertising revenue for whatever 'perversion' - as their personal dislikes stop short of missing out on making money. (More hypocracy.)

Originally posted by Teenage Venus
By general consent it seems ALL steer clear of only two things: Pedophilia. (Which seems generally accepted as sex with pre-adolescent children of under 12 years of age), and pornotype photos of persons that either are - or look to be - under the age of 18.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I don't find this to be true at all. Literotica is rare among adult story sites in banning stories about underage sex. and there is NO consensus among adult sites on what is permissible in stories.

As for photos, the only restriction seems to be the imposed legal restriction that models must be 18 years of age when photographed regardless of their apparent age.

I disagree: There IS a consensus between USA and UK based sites. This pushes the limits without forcing governments to act against them. (Governments do not wish to act for commercial/political reasons.)

In the case of PHOTOS: I disagree again. As I stated, actual age is one criteria, the more important one is that the person DOES NOT LOOK UNDERAGE - irrespective of if they be 18 or 28 years old. (ALL Western Governments steer very clear of allowing any pictures of anything that may be considered as encouraging pedophilia, and an 18 year-old looking like a 12 year-old is ABSOLUTE TABOO.)

Sites allowing postings breaking these rule blatantly are almost exclusively NOT USA/UK based, and it is these two Country rules under question.

 

[Black Tulip]

How do others feel about this?
Do you think it's a bit hypocritical?
Do you feel minors should not have immediate access to pictorial porn adverts?
Do you feel that stories involving legal sex between persons of legal age should be available (not banned) on adult erotica sites?
Do you feel it hypocritical to allow sex stories between mythical beasts and under 18's, but not true life stories of sex between beasts and adults?
Do you think that stories of legal sex between under 18's will pervert you? - but that between mythical monsters will not?
Do you frequent 'Adult' sites where stories of persons under 18 years are freely obtainable?
Do you know of ANY site-owner that was prosecuted for publishing erotica involving 16 year-olds?

TV,

Some of your questions do not apply to me. In the Netherlands the age of consent is 16, with a slightly grey area regarding 15-year olds.
Say a boy who is 16 has sex with his girlfriend of 15 or 14, the parents can try to get him for rape but it won't work if the girl is consenting.
If on the other hand the guy would be 20 than he'd have a problem.
(The legal age is 18 for voting, driver's licence and hard liquor. Beer is acceptable from 16.)

I think sex with a mythical animal is fantasy, period. Like a lot of stories, heck most of them. Sex with animals is just another fantasy. There's nothing wrong with indulging in fantasies. I am very happy without stories about bestiality, but I wouldn't mind if they were allowed. I'd simply skip that category.

The trouble starts if you want to make it reality. Sex with animals happens. That does not mean you have to condone it. Sex with children and murder happen too. I feel very comfortable with a site that draws the line there since it coincides with my own boundaries.

I think I already am perverted since I make an active contribution to a site with adult content. LOL

I do think however that it would be very nice to have a guard at the door of adult sites. Make sure you do not stumble onto a site that shoves the pussies in your face.
I never had an adult filter installed, since my son would have figured out how to detour it in no time. Besides, I think it's more important to make sure you know what your kids are up to or into than in prohibiting things. Once their activities are in the sneaky territory you lost your chance to guide/steer/modify.

I restricted surfing the internet in the beginning to the pc in the livingroom till I was sure there would be no stupid actions like giving out your name or address. And yes, we did have some scary phone bills because of accidental (?) hookups to sex sites.

 

[shereads]

Considering the present Administration, the only agreed-upon age for legal consensual sex would probably be 35.

Disagree. I think with fundamentalists it's all about marriage, not age. The younger the wife, the more fruitful the old coot who marries her, right?

I can picture Dubya secretly taking the side of Joseph Smith, founder of the Mormon faith, on this issue. If the Lord guides a man to marry a fourteen-year-old girl, it's the Lord's way of saying she's better off with someone old enough to be her daddy.

 

[Weird Harold]

I disagree: There IS a consensus between USA and UK based sites. This pushes the limits without forcing governments to act against them. (Governments do not wish to act for commercial/political reasons.)

In the case of PHOTOS: I disagree again. As I stated, actual age is one criteria, the more important one is that the person DOES NOT LOOK UNDERAGE - irrespective of if they be 18 or 28 years old. (ALL Western Governments steer very clear of allowing any pictures of anything that may be considered as encouraging pedophilia, and an 18 year-old looking like a 12 year-old is ABSOLUTE TABOO.)

Sites allowing postings breaking these rule blatantly are almost exclusively NOT USA/UK based, and it is these two Country rules under question.

We must be surfing different Internets.

I tend to shy away from sites ending in .ru and some of the other national domain indicators because of the tendency for them to indulge in bait and switch linking and multiple pop-ups. Combined with a preference for sites in English, that leaves me surfing mostly sites indistiguishable from US an UK based sites and I simply do not see the collusion or agreement you assert.

What I do see is porn site operators catering to specific kinks -- including stories and photos of very young (appearing) females that adhere only to a specific legal prohibition against using modles under eighteen years of age.

"Off-shore" sites that cater to illegal kinks exist, but I only see them by accident, as that's not the kind of porn I'm interested in.

The hypocrisy of legislators and regulators is self-evident to most people. Porn site operators don't indulge in hypocrisy -- they provide whatever will cause people to join their sites.

 

[Teenage Venus]

Porn site operators don't indulge in hypocrisy -- they provide whatever will cause people to join their sites.

I guess we will have to agree to differ on that. My experience is that some do - the temptation of cash allows them to post adverts (available for any surfers to see indescriminately) for the very things they deem to consider taboo, or unacceptable on their own sites. If they have principles they should stand by them, not let the lure of cash take priority. (My opinion and I stand by it.) Your opinion is different, but equally valid for you to have and express.

At least we seem to agree that the hypocrisy of legislators and regulators is quite prevelent.

 

[dr_mabeuse]

If they have principles they should stand by them, not let the lure of cash take priority.

Wait a minute! You're accusing a business of being hypocritical?

Next you'll be accusing advertisers of lying!

TV, I'm deeply shocked! How Un-American!

---dr.M.

 

[Teenage Venus]

Wait a minute! You're accusing a business of being hypocritical? Next you'll be accusing advertisers of lying!
TV, I'm deeply shocked! How Un-American!
---dr.M.

How utterly crass of me - but very honest .

My only regret is that it had such a profound shock effect on you (Oh! the innocence of the elderly .)

 

[Weird Harold]

My experience is that some do - the temptation of cash allows them to post adverts (available for any surfers to see indescriminately) for the very things they deem to consider taboo, or unacceptable on their own sites. If they have principles they should stand by them, not let the lure of cash take priority.

On the subject of advertisements for other porn sites, I think you're over-estimating the amount of control most websites have over the specific advertisements that are shown.

I haven't done a survey of all porn sites, but I have done some digging into Literotica's HTML code and I know that the advertisements here are randomly presented from a selection Literotica has no (or at lest very little) control over. Lit has the option of using or not using the ad service that pays them for two spaces on each story page, but very little say in the content placed in those two spaces.

In a sense, it's like a local station being forced to accept the advertisements that their national networks imbeds in their programming -- it's either accept everything or sever their affiliation with the Network and lose all of their revenue.

Principles are all well and good, but when the choice is financial suicide because you disagree with some of the content your advertising broker provides and allowing people you disagree with to advertise with the ad broker that pays your bills...

Well, My principles aen't strong enough to commit suicide over,and I doubt that any Porn site operator's are much stronger than mine.

 

[Teenage Venus]

On the subject of advertisements for other porn sites, I think you're over-estimating the amount of control most websites have over the specific advertisements that are shown.

As an owner of a number of websites I can assure you the webmaster has very good control. In the case of porn they usually get a varied sample of adverts they can download and show, or link to for display. These vary from none graphic adverts, through soft porn to animated blowjobs or fucking etc. Where they have 'rolling' adverts (changing regularly) the same applies.

If LIT - or any other site choose the 'hard' option - so be it. HOWEVER, I STILL say it is hypocritical to limit postings on grounds of 'decency', or whatever, yet allow such adverts by choice - because they HAVE choice.

And they CERTAINLY have choice to warn surfers and require you chose to enter pages displaying such adverts. In my opinion it is a straight case of the pull of the promise of cash is too strong.

In a sense, it's like a local station being forced to accept the advertisements that their national networks imbeds in their programming -- it's either accept everything or sever their affiliation with the Network and lose all of their revenue

It's nothing like that. The webmaster builds or has his a site built. They set the rules of both content and adverts - if any.

There is CERTAINLY no need for a good site to go bust simply because they do not allow blatant porn adverts - millions including myself manage quite well.

Large 'story' sites with high hits can do 'very nicely, thank you', on having plain ads for writing related commodities, and 'AMAZON' adverts, etc. without touching porn. (I only average around 3-4,000 hits daily and aint got any complaints) It depends how 'hungry' you are as to how your principles stand up - and how big a hypocrit you are or are not

If you have qualms about content other than outright porn and pedo content - in my opinion - you should have the SAME qualms about having porno adverts for all to see flashing on your pages.

Leaving LIT out of it, how many agree? (and have the guts to admit it)

 

[Weird Harold]

As an owner of a number of websites I can assure you the webmaster has very good control. In the case of porn they usually get a varied sample of adverts they can download and show, or link to for display. These vary from none graphic adverts, through soft porn to animated blowjobs or fucking etc. Where they have 'rolling' adverts (changing regularly) the same applies.

I bow to your greater hands-on experience. My only source of information is the HTML code that Lit sends to my computer and that indicates that Literotica doesn't control the specific ads on the story page. They may have selected an option for the general content of the ads, but the ad provider has the ultimate control over what ads are actually sent.

Lit simply inserts a boilerplate section of code that calls up a random -- or semi-random -- ad from the ad provider.

I'm sure that there are other methods that can be -- and are -- used, but I'm only familiar with how Lit's story pages present the ads and the HTML code doesn't reveal any control over content except for trusting the ad provider to provide ads within the limitations contracted for.

 

[Teenage Venus]

I'm only familiar with how Lit's story pages present the ads and the HTML code doesn't reveal any control over content except for trusting the ad provider to provide ads within the limitations contracted for.

The webmaster choses the code from the provider and inserts it in his page - this code dictates what adverts - or type if they rotate - are displayed. If you view the sourse code numericals, then those on a site displaying none graphics from the same advertising sourse you will see what I mean.

Nobody can force a site owner to display other than what they choose to. And whether or not they display it without appropriate warnings/safeguards. Any contractors sending other than that which the owner contracted for would be out of business VERY quickly. And they can only send it to the page-place it is coded for. It is a lucrative, cut-throat business.