How did this story get published?

[Five_Inch_Heels]

EC, New today, Kenzie.

How?

 

[crookedletter]

After a quick skim of the first few paragraphs it seems like, despite all protestations to the contrary, the fantasy is that the woman depicted is by all appearances underage. Is that the issue? It's an interesting problem, if both the story's disclaimer and the narrative itself are at pains to point out that the character is 19, but she's very obviously written to resemble a child, the result is... troubling. But is it actually against the rules? (I honestly don't know)

 

[Writer61]

EC, New today, Kenzie.

How?

All characters depicted are above the age of 18 and all acts described are consensual.

Like Crookedletter, I skimmed it. Unpleasant, but within the rules as far as I can see.

 

[StillStunned]

It should be pulled just for the word "belongingness".

 

[lovecraft68]

It appears to be a daddy's little girl game and as far as I can tell, its fine.

I'm sure the author is grateful for the extra clicks this will get them.

Meanwhile, it's a shame the only thing people scream and pretend to be offended about here is underage. Imagine if they cared as much about rape stories and BTB stories that break the rules?

 

[NotWise]

I didn't read it. If you feel strongly about it, then report it to Laurel, explain your reason, and let her deal with it.

 

[Bramblethorn]

After a quick skim of the first few paragraphs it seems like, despite all protestations to the contrary, the fantasy is that the woman depicted is by all appearances underage. Is that the issue? It's an interesting problem, if both the story's disclaimer and the narrative itself are at pains to point out that the character is 19, but she's very obviously written to resemble a child, the result is... troubling. But is it actually against the rules? (I honestly don't know)

I believe stories like this have been rejected in the past, but sometimes moderation misses stuff. Like NotWise said, if people think it doesn't belong on Lit, report it.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

If enough people report it, Laurel will pull it simply as a knee-jerk whether it breaks the rules or not. Then all the judgemental snobs will triumph in their censorship crusade.

 

[AwkwardlySet]

I don't understand why people get involved in these reports? We all keep repeating the phrase "their site, their rules." But isn't it also "their site, their rules, their concern?"

 

[ElectricBlue]

I don't understand why people get involved in these reports? We all keep repeating the phrase "their site, their rules." But isn't it also "their site, their rules, their concern?"

You've not heard of the expression, "community policing"? If you see someone break into a house or kick a dog, do you shrug your shoulders and say, "Not my concern?"

 

[ElectricBlue]

If enough people report it, Laurel will pull it simply as a knee-jerk whether it breaks the rules or not. Then all the judgemental snobs will triumph in their censorship crusade.

She'll take it down, refer it back to the author. If the author does nothing about it, it stays down. If the author fixes it (in the same way they can if it was rejected in the first place) it will be republished. What's the problem with that process? Seems perfectly reasonable to me. It happens all the time.

I'll extend my analogy above - if the sewer is busted, do you let it flow into your house? I for one don't want underage crapola on this site, no matter what disclaimer the author puts on it. As others have said, if the character is written as a child, that's the point here, not their attitude.

 

[SimonDoom]

You've not heard of the expression, "community policing"? If you see someone break into a house or kick a dog, do you shrug your shoulders and say, "Not my concern?"

My view is that the analogy doesn't work because no story, no matter how much it might violate the "rules," creates a genuine moral concern like that of breaking into a house or kicking a dog. It just doesn't matter.

I leave the policing to the site owners. I truly do not care if some stories slip past the proclaimed rules and the policing system.

 

[AwkwardlySet]

You've not heard of the expression, "community policing"? If you see someone break into a house or kick a dog, do you shrug your shoulders and say, "Not my concern?"

That's precisely my point. We didn't make these rules that Literotica follows, nor are they a product of our own views and morality. We aren't correcting any injustice here, as these are mostly just arbitrary rules from our standpoint.

Also, unlike in actual communities, we have no voting privileges or any kind of say here, so I don't see why anyone should feel invested in this? This, or any other story being pulled down, has no bearing on us, unless one cares deeply about stories that hint at underage? But if that's so, shouldn't that person go and create petitions to take down ASSTR, AO3, and similar story sites when there are toddler-rape stories being published? None of this makes sense to me.

 

[SimonDoom]

By the way, I have no idea what story people are referring to. I couldn't find it. I've always thought it's odd that some people claim to be so bothered by stories that violate the rules but refuse to cite them.

 

[AwkwardlySet]

By the way, I have no idea what story people are referring to. I couldn't find it. I've always thought it's odd that some people claim to be so bothered by stories that violate the rules but refuse to cite them.

I can't find it either. It has been taken down already, I guess?

 

[Five_Inch_Heels]

It appears to be a daddy's little girl game and as far as I can tell, its fine.

I'm sure the author is grateful for the extra clicks this will get them.

Meanwhile, it's a shame the only thing people scream and pretend to be offended about here is underage. Imagine if they cared as much about rape stories and BTB stories that break the rules?

Didn't really want to add clicks to it.

I don't look at NC, LW, EH or a few others because I don't want to see that stuff.

I only caught this one while scanning EC due to the sub-header. 18-19 is fine. Played down to below that isn't. This isn't even DDlg as far as I can see when an adult acts as if they need support. This is the character making the effort to look younger and profit from it.

Age play has limits.

 

[Five_Inch_Heels]

I can't find it either. It has been taken down already, I guess?

Seems to be:

Error 404​

This work is not available

 

[ElectricBlue]

That's precisely my point. We didn't make these rules that Literotica follows, nor are they a product of our own views and morality. We aren't correcting any injustice here, as these are mostly just arbitrary rules from our standpoint.

One of the reasons I came to Lit in the first place was precisely because it does have the age policy, so yes, the Lit policies generally do align with my own views and my morality. I personally think the "caveat" on the non-consent category is bullshit, so I don't read in that category and will never write there, but aside from that, the Lit content policies are reasonable, pragmatic, and align with my moral values. And, I suspect, most of yours, as you carefully caveat yourself, by writing "mostly".

It's okay to have a line you won't step over - this is mine.

Also, unlike in actual communities, we have no voting privileges or any kind of say here, so I don't see why anyone should feel invested in this? This, or any other story being pulled down, has no bearing on us, unless one cares deeply about stories that hint at underage?

My comment above applies. I invest in it because the site gives me something worth having, I don't want my stories on a platform that tolerates pedophilia, and it's a community that, generally speaking, is worth keeping.

Sure, there are assholes, but the site gives me the ability to Ignore. Just as the site gives me the ability to Report. What's the difference?

But if that's so, shouldn't that person go and create petitions to take down ASSTR, AO3, and similar story sites when there are toddler-rape stories being published? None of this makes sense to me.

Because I've chosen not to have anything to do with those sites.

What I don't get is this default attitude that everyone automatically has to disagree.

 

[NotWise]

Seems to be:

Error 404​

This work is not available

You probably weren't the only reader with a gag reflex.

 

[ElectricBlue]

I leave the policing to the site owners. I truly do not care if some stories slip past the proclaimed rules and the policing system.

You do you. Some of us do care.

 

[Five_Inch_Heels]

By the way, I have no idea what story people are referring to. I couldn't find it. I've always thought it's odd that some people claim to be so bothered by stories that violate the rules but refuse to cite them.

The point was to ask the question, not to send eyes to it.

I don't know how many viewed it, or who reported it, if any. Laurel may have seen this thread for all I know.

 

[AwkwardlySet]

One of the reasons I came to Lit in the first place was precisely because it does have the age policy, so yes, the Lit policies generally do align with my own views and my morality. I personally think the "caveat" on the non-consent category is bullshit, so I don't read in that category and will never write there, but aside from that, the Lit content policies are reasonable, pragmatic, and align with my moral values. And, I suspect, most of yours, as you carefully caveat yourself, by writing "mostly".

It's okay to have a line you won't step over - this is mine.

My comment above applies. I invest in it because the site gives me something worth having, I don't want my stories on a platform that tolerates pedophilia, and it's a community that, generally speaking, is worth keeping.

Sure, there are assholes, but the site gives me the ability to Ignore. Just as the site gives me the ability to Report. What's the difference?

Because I've chosen not to have anything to do with those sites.

What I don't get is this default attitude that everyone automatically has to disagree.

I find many types of stories, including some of those that are permitted on Lit, off-putting and distasteful. But I see all of this as fiction and thus something that should be allowed, if for nothing else, then for the sanctity of Freedom of Speech. Unless, of course, there is proof that any of this fiction causes harm and increases violent crimes in real life. That's my standpoint.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

She'll take it down, refer it back to the author. If the author does nothing about it, it stays down. If the author fixes it (in the same way they can if it was rejected in the first place) it will be republished. What's the problem with that process? Seems perfectly reasonable to me. It happens all the time.

There is nothing wrong with it if it does actually break the rules, but Laurel has time and time and time again shown that stories don't get policed by whether or not they break the rules but whether or not anyone complains. So if the story doesn't break the rule, your scenario is 100% censorship crime (and 100% bullshit).

 

[lovecraft68]

[No personal attacks or trolling - including creating accounts for this specific purpose. Heated discussions are fine, even welcome. However, personally attacking / kink-shaming a fellow author or reader is not allowed within the Author's Hangout. Threads which devolve into the exchanging of insults will be closed and repeat offenders will be given a timeout, per the AH rules. ]
[Previous warnings given; one week timeout applied.]

 

[lovecraft68]

Seems to be:

Error 404​

This work is not available

You're a true hero.

FWIW I doubt Laurel saw this on her own, one of the usual suspect rogue mods was probably creeping through.