Combined Moderation Morality Question

[NotWise]

But in the reader's mind she may. That's all that counts. No appeal to the way things "really are" in the real world counts for anything here on this question.

What's in the reader's mind only counts if someone reports the story, and then Laurel would have to agree.

The cases I'm aware of in which a story was rejected or removed because a character was said to be over eighteen but appeared underage, the character was actually described as a child.

You can describe a woman as "full-breasted with smooth skin, and sleek lines and curves" and you could be describing a fourteen year old or a thirty-year old. The description is not at all age-specific.

 

[Hypoxia]

The subject here is NOT the appearance of any IRL females, but OP saying his fantasy girl turned vampire at 16. Laurel will reject that story.

 

[NotWise]

The subject here is NOT the appearance of any IRL females, but OP saying his fantasy girl turned vampire at 16. Laurel will reject that story.

There's no reason for me to believe she would reject that. There is nothing in the site policy that even suggests that would be true.

 

[ElectricBlue]

A sixteen year old girl doesn't "appear underaged." How many times do I have to say that?

When the site rule says eighteen, she's underaged at sixteen. When the vampire girl is permanently in her sixteen year old body, it follows that any sexual activity with said vampire girl, in the eyes of the site, is underaged. It doesn't matter what she looks like, it doesn't matter how many years she's been dead.

That is all any of us have been saying to the OP, and it's all that needs to be said here. There was no "attack," but he's clearly a little sensitive, and can't quite understand words he doesn't want to hear.

A snowflake walked into a puddle and drowned. "Didn't you see the sign?" the barkeep asked, pointing to the sign on the wall.

"What sign? I don't need to see a sign, I'm a vampire, that sign doesn't apply to me," replied the now drowned snowflake.

"Please yourself," said the barkeep. "Folk always drown in a puddle if they're not at least eighteen inches tall."

Still, it's been an entertainment, better than a drive-by shooting, better than looking into our damaged, narcissistic mirrors. Wait, we're all vampires here, I see nothing .

Once again, the good ship Authors Hangout sailed off into the sunset, the crew in the rigging setting sails, firm hands squabbling over the wheel, coffee on tap in the mess. Back in the doldrums, a forlorn rowing boat drifted, its occupant thinking, "What the fuck just happened?"

"You didn't climb on board, mate, so you got left behind," a voice cried out.

Some of the newer crew-members looked around. "Well, it ain't dry land, but at least it's not swimming with sharks."

 

[Voboy]

There's no reason for me to believe she would reject that. There is nothing in the site policy that even suggests that would be true.

No biggie.

We can find out. Write the OP’s story and submit it. We'll see what happens. Or, hell, just PM Laurel and ask.

If not, ask yourself this: why, fundamentally, is it so important to the OP that she be sixteen rather than eighteen?

He doesn’t seem to want to come back and answer that, but I’d submit there are several possible reasons. A few make sense. Most don’t, and the ones that do could easily be changed to 18; for those of us who’ve set stories in high schools, it’s something simple that we do often.

Why won’t he? Perhaps because he knows it’ll be more titillating, perhaps not. But either way, it’s not his call, nor mine, nor yours. It’s Laurel’s. And, as others have pointed out, others have asked about how to get around her rules by playing the Vampire Card, so I’d assume it’s something Laurel has experience with.

 

[NotWise]

When the site rule says eighteen, she's underaged at sixteen. When the vampire girl is permanently in her sixteen year old body, it follows that any sexual activity with said vampire girl, in the eyes of the site, is underaged. It doesn't matter what she looks like, it doesn't matter how many years she's been dead.

EB, you're one of the biggest problems when it comes to accurately describing the site's policies on underage characters. You spout your strongly-held beliefs, not the site's policies.

The sites rule is "no sex with characters under eighteen." Nothing in the story concept violates that rule. Everything you've said is just your fantasy of site rules, and it depends on how the author might write the story. Exactly how Laurel views the story content when/if it's written is going to depend entirely on how it's written, and it hasn't been written.

 

[SimonDoom]

EB, you're one of the biggest problems when it comes to accurately describing the site's policies on underage characters. You spout your strongly-held beliefs, not the site's policies.

The sites rule is "no sex with characters under eighteen." Nothing in the story concept violates that rule. Everything you've said is just your fantasy of site rules, and it depends on how the author might write the story. Exactly how Laurel views the story content when/if it's written is going to depend entirely on how it's written, and it hasn't been written.

You raise a good point. I have never attempted to write or submit a story with any underage elements, or had any personal experience with having a story rejected on this basis. I've read dozens and dozens -- hundreds -- of posts on this subject, however, including some by those with such experience, and I'm relying on their accurate account of those experiences and on the judgment of people who've been around here for a long time. The issue is not what we think Laurel might do, or what we would do in her shoes, but how in practice she's actually interpreted and applied this rule. I have no personal experience with that.

 

[KeithD]

I have experienced the "Is there underage?" rejection--three or four times, and once within the last week and a half. (It's hard to remember how many times, because it's happened so rarely over 1,100 submissions). In each case, I've asked Laurel to point out where the problem is, as I haven't written any underage sex (or underage anything else) in the stories, and each time she's just passed the story into the file as originally written. That tells me that the system rejection for underage is dipping deeper than the actual presence of underage. I have never put a sixteen-year-old character in a Literotica story and certainly not in the context the OP proposes and is stubborn about. So, I agree with those who say Laurel would see this as an attempt to play the underage titillation card, and I don't understand why NotWise is so hardheaded about what the OP actually has posted.

 

[NotWise]

The issue is not what we think Laurel might do, or what we would do in her shoes, but how in practice she's actually interpreted and applied this rule. I have no personal experience with that.

This became an issue for me when authors started spouting their own beliefs about what was and wasn't acceptable to the site rather than what actually is and is not acceptable to the site. If it comes up again, then I'll probably respond again.

I understand that they have strongly held personal beliefs, but their personal beliefs aren't good guidance for other authors.

 

[KeithD]

This became an issue for me when authors started spouting their own beliefs about what was and wasn't acceptable to the site rather than what actually is and is not acceptable to the site. If it comes up again, then I'll probably respond again.

I have the same irritation when posters move the goal posts from what the OP actually posted.

 

[NotWise]

I have never put a sixteen-year-old character in a Literotica story and certainly not in the context the OP proposes and is stubborn about. So, I agree with those who say Laurel would see this as an attempt to play the underage titillation card, and I don't understand why NotWise is so hardheaded about what the OP actually has posted.

What the OP actually posted was a story concept -- not a story. The concept could be written so as to be completely acceptable, or it could be written to be completely rejectable. All of the responses have made assumptions about how the story would be written, when the original author seemed to be asking for ideas about how it should be written.

The basic story idea can be written to be acceptable to Lit.

 

[KeithD]

I've had enough of you on this thread, NotWise.

 

[NotWise]

I've had enough of you on this thread, NotWise.

Fist pump. I'll do some air guitar now.

 

[ElectricBlue]

EB, you're one of the biggest problems when it comes to accurately describing the site's policies on underage characters. You spout your strongly-held beliefs, not the site's policies.

The sites rule is "no sex with characters under eighteen." Nothing in the story concept violates that rule. Everything you've said is just your fantasy of site rules, and it depends on how the author might write the story. Exactly how Laurel views the story content when/if it's written is going to depend entirely on how it's written, and it hasn't been written.

I always stress the "sexual activity" whenever I articulate the under eighteen rule. If you look closely at my posts on this, in the various threads whenever this comes up, I often use words to the effect of "keep the sexual content at least a thousand words away." I believe I am consistent on this. Show me where I have said otherwise.

In this particular case, IF the writer proposes a sexual scene with his female died at sixteen vampire character, it follows that such scene is, by Lit policy, underage.

The OP does propose this (or why ask the question?), but argues it is some calendar years later. But the point HERE is the vampire trope of permanently remaining in the "Lit underage body." If the OP's story has zero sexual content with this character then he's safe, but the implication of sexual activity is there, from my read of his post. Otherwise, why would you have the character at all, in a Literotica story?

I know full well the rule and how the line is drawn. In my collection of stories, I have several birth scenes where babies are born, and half a prologue with a fourteen year old pre-menarche girl. In that instance, any sexual content is in the next chapter, which opens with an explicit statement that five years have passed, and the protagonist is now nineteen, nearly twenty. Every one of these scenes passed muster with Laurel, without return, comment, or any rewrite, and not one of those scenes has subsequently been reported. On that basis alone, I'd argue that I know the policy line quite well.

 

[gunhilltrain]

It boils down to website rules. SOL goes down to 14. ASSTR has no rules and I’m sure there’s other sites out there that’ll take it.

Lush Stories goes down to sixteen. (I've submitted a story there - nothing to do with underage - as an experiment and they seem to operate very well.)

If I may, what is SOL?

 

[NotWise]

I know full well the rule and how the line is drawn. In my collection of stories, I have several birth scenes where babies are born, and half a prologue with a fourteen year old pre-menarche girl. In that instance, any sexual content is in the next chapter, which opens with an explicit statement that five years have passed, and the protagonist is now nineteen, nearly twenty. Every one of these scenes passed muster with Laurel, without return, comment, or any rewrite, and not one of those scenes has subsequently been reported. On that basis alone, I'd argue that I know the policy line quite well.

I have stories that passed muster with Laurel that were more challenging than that.

The original poster had a story concept, not a story. Yet, people were telling him that it was not acceptable, even though there was nothing in the concept that was (as near as I can tell) unacceptable to Lit.

I think the question was whether the idea worked or could work. I don't think there's any reason why it couldn't work. There's no sex with anyone under eighteen. The rest of it comes down to how it's written.

 

[ElectricBlue]

I think the question was whether the idea worked or could work. I don't think there's any reason why it couldn't work. There's no sex with anyone under eighteen. The rest of it comes down to how it's written.

I'll agree with you there - if there's no sexual content, there's no problem - but somewhat a dry story for Lit.

But if there is sex with the dead at sixteen vampire, then there is a problem. Can we at least agree on that .

 

[KeithD]

Fist pump. I'll do some air guitar now.

If I'd known that was your goal, we could have stopped this silly time waster earlier. I thought you were just being obtuse.

 

[KeithD]

Lush Stories goes down to sixteen. (I've submitted a story there - nothing to do with underage - as an experiment and they seem to operate very well.)

If I may, what is SOL?

Storiesonline. give it a "net" extension and you can find it. As Chloe noted it lets the age go down to 14.

 

[NotWise]

If I'd known that was your goal, we could have stopped this silly time waster earlier. I thought you were just being obtuse.

I'm not being obtuse. I want the crappy feed back on underage comment to stop.

 

[KeithD]

I'm not being obtuse. I want the crappy feed back on underage comment to stop.

That would be easy. You could stop just repeating it over and over again without regard to the thrust of the original post. (You walked right into that.)

 

[Hypoxia]

This became an issue for me when authors started spouting their own beliefs about what was and wasn't acceptable to the site rather than what actually is and is not acceptable to the site.

I spout no beliefs; I merely relay Word From Upon High. I PM'd Laurel asking about an ancient immortal in a youthful body. Her reply: Nobody appearing to be an underage human can have sex here. Aliens, witches, vampires, succubi, dreams -- no matter. If she perceives seeming underage sex, they're rejected. Don't believe me; try her and see.

PS: I dunno how she'd react to an 18-yo human turning into a pre-adolescent werewolf. Can adult werewolves (in wolf form) get away with puppyfucking?

 

[NotWise]

I spout no beliefs; I merely relay Word From Upon High. I PM'd Laurel asking about an ancient immortal in a youthful body. Her reply: Nobody appearing to be an underage human can have sex here. Aliens, witches, vampires, succubi, dreams -- no matter. If she perceives seeming underage sex, they're rejected. Don't believe me; try her and see.

I'll repeat myself again, though it seems like you are the only one who needs it. A sixteen-year-old girl would not "appear underage." A sixteen-year-old girl is physically mature. She looks like an eighteen-year-old girl. She looks like a twenty-year-old woman.

If someone wants to make a sixteen-year-old girl seem immature then they might be describing a thirteen-year-old.

 

[KeithD]

You claim not to be obtuse and yet you continue to be. The minimum age here is 18. If the age 16 is used, it doesn't fly here. All of the crap you are spieling about a 16-year-old being developed already has no relevance here in Literotica land. The OP clearly said he still wants to use the age 16--which is clearly a desire to play the underage titillation card--and all of your obtuseness on the point means diddly squat--no matter how many times you repeat it.

 

[NotWise]

You claim not to be obtuse and yet you continue to be. The minimum age here is 18. If the age 16 is used, it doesn't fly here. All of the crap you are spieling about a 16-year-old being developed already has no relevance here in Literotica land. The OP clearly said he still wants to use the age 16--which is clearly a desire to play the underage titillation card--and all of your obtuseness on the point means diddly squat--no matter how many times you repeat it.

I gave the original poster my advise on how he might write the story. The rest of this thread has been an argument about nothing. No part of site policy will be threatened until the story is written.

The original poster said that that it was easier if she was sixteen. I'm clueless as to why that's easier. Maybe it has something to do with the story's timeline, which he didn't describe. The author is forewarned and I'm going to let him make his judgement and take his bumps, if there are any.

As far as what's acceptable, this was on Lit for two and a half years before I took it down (and the reader rating was pretty good):

Elsie pulled a teddy bear out of the pile and sat up cross-legged with the filthy-looking bear on her lap. She changed the subject and introduced them "Mr. Bear, this is my best lover, Ellis. Ellis, this is my first lover, Mr. Bear." She turned the bear to look at his face. "Mr. Bear slept with me when I was young and starting when I was, like 12 I would squeeze him between my legs and fantasize about boys.

"You were the first boy that ever made me climax, but it was Mr. Bear that gave me my first orgasm ever." Elsie admitted. “Like this.” She rose to her knees and pushed Mr. Bear between her legs, then leaned forward with one hand on Ellis' shoulder. Her body undulated while she ground Mr. Bear's matted carcass against her clitoris. Elsie breathed into Ellis' ear. "Oooh, and Mr. Bear still has it."

It breaks all the rules, doesn't it? And it does it explicitly. For the record, the quotation is from "Unlikely Angels" which I wrote a couple years before I came to Lit. I didn't recall that the segment was there until a couple months after it was published and a thread like this came up.

Now tell me more about what can't be done on Lit.