Rules violation?

[LegendInMyOwnMind]

I am writing my fourth story. In the story idea, the main characters are twins who become aware that they are sexually attracted to each other and think of each other while masturbating (and know this about each other but never witness it), but no sexual activity occurs until they celebrate their eighteenth birthday. Would this violate the guidelines? If so, I can shift the character's ages a couple of years and change a few other things (perhaps they discover at 18, and do the nasty at 21, celebrating their first legal drink?), but if the original idea is acceptable, I'd prefer to go with it.

 

[TheWorldBuilder]

It appears from feedback that other authors have posted that the rules are progressively becoming more stringent. Not only must your characters be many years beyond the age of consent in most of the world (14 to 16) before any intimacy occurs; but they must have passed through all the stages of maturity, up to the permitted age in the most repressive of jurisdictions, as total innocents without a single hint of curiosity or desire.

Write them as having been at single sex boarding schools, reconnecting at 19+ and becoming increasingly more attracted after that. You shouldn't have any problems then.

 

[astushkin]

Underage "sexual activity" as defined by the site includes: masturbation, fantasizing, thinking about sex, voyeurism, witnessing others' sexual activity (irrespective of the character being turned on by what they're seeing), engaging in conversations about sex, and descriptions of bodies of underage characters. None of these can be included if your character is under 18. Also, claiming a character is over 18, but having them look and behave like an underage person is not allowed.

 

[LegendInMyOwnMind]

I can easily accommodate the more stringent rules, I will need to change some supporting details to fit the changed ages, handled well it could even make a better story. I have them going to different colleges in different states after their first sexual experience, trying to run away from their attraction. I can have them at different schools because of educational choices instead. I want to retain the aspect of trying to run away from their mutual attraction before embracing it. Thanks to TheWorldBuilder and astushkin for your help.

 

[LegendInMyOwnMind]

So Literotica needs me to pretend we don't have genitals until we are 18? I profoundly disagree with that, but suspect it isn't actually Literotica's choice, but is forced by our ridiculously over-defined and over-enforced child pornography laws, which treat sixteen year olds wanting to have voluntary sex without actually doing it the same as raping a three year old girl. When it comes to sexuality our government is downright evil.

 

[KeithD]

the main characters are twins who become aware that they are sexually attracted to each other and think of each other while masturbating (and know this about each other but never witness it), but no sexual activity occurs

That IS sexual activity.

 

[LegendInMyOwnMind]

That IS sexual activity.

I knew that, I was verifying if it is indeed sexual activity prohibited by the rules of the site, I don't want to needlessly limit my choices as author but I will gladly abide by the rule. I wanted to be perfectly clear about the boundaries of the rule. The question is whether sexual activity for the purpose of the rule is defined narrowly or broadly. It's clear that broadly is the correct answer. It would have been helpful if Literotica had posted more detail about the rule, in which case I would never have needed to ask the question. I would rather ask beforehand than rewrite after a rejection.

 

[KeithD]

If you knew it wouldn't fly here, I wonder why you opened a thread on it. It's not like either this doesn't come up here every other day or that anyone on the discussion board has a say in the matter.

 

[ElectricBlue]

It would have been helpful if Literotica had posted more detail about the rule, in which case I would never have needed to ask the question. I would rather ask beforehand than rewrite after a rejection.

The FAQ covers it:

https://www.literotica.com/faq/publishing/publishing-guidelines

What's not clear about the rule?

 

[Limnophile]

So Literotica needs me to pretend we don't have genitals until we are 18? I profoundly disagree with that, but suspect it isn't actually Literotica's choice, but is forced by our ridiculously over-defined and over-enforced child pornography laws, which treat sixteen year olds wanting to have voluntary sex without actually doing it the same as raping a three year old girl. When it comes to sexuality our government is downright evil.

I absolutely agree with you! In our case, they treat us writing about an IMAGINARY 17-year-old masturbating and a pedophile raping a REAL child on camera as equally bad.

Using similar reasoning, "He robbed a bank using a gun but you only shoplifted a candy bar? Both are theft, therefore I sentence both of you to twenty years in prison."

 

[Limnophile]

The FAQ covers it:

https://www.literotica.com/faq/publishing/publishing-guidelines

What's not clear about the rule?

I have had stories kicked back for teenagers holding hands and for an elf taking off her shoes. It would have been nice to know the site considers those 'sex'.

 

[ElectricBlue]

I have had stories kicked back for teenagers holding hands and for an elf taking off her shoes. It would have been nice to know the site considers those 'sex'.

Probably the words around the action.

Your drafts must have had something in them to catch a word-bot's eye, and something a human eye agreed with. Hence the rejection(s).

Those who bang on most about something like this are very often trying on a distraction. I'd stop, if I were you, because the site owner/editor does read these threads, as evidenced by occasional posts, and all you're doing is drawing attention to yourself, not in a good way.

On this topic, the site rules, so there's not much point going on about it.

 

[KeithD]

On this topic, the site rules, so there's not much point going on about it.

And yet folks come here to do so three times a week.

 

[TheWorldBuilder]

....and yet after the question has been answered in the second post, a mob turn up three, six, or even eight hours later to moan that someone had the temerity to get an opinion from other authors before submitting.

 

[Bramblethorn]

I absolutely agree with you! In our case, they treat us writing about an IMAGINARY 17-year-old masturbating and a pedophile raping a REAL child on camera as equally bad.

No they don't. One leads to actual jail, the other leads to not getting your story published on Literotica. Let's not get ridiculous here.

 

[ElectricBlue]

....and yet after the question has been answered in the second post, a mob turn up three, six, or even eight hours later to moan that someone had the temerity to get an opinion from other authors before submitting.

There is never a single answer, you've been here long enough to know that; and what, I'm not allowed to provide a response, merely because I live in a different time zone?

Anyway, you said it yourself, "an opinion from other authors," not, "the opinion of one author."

 

[LegendInMyOwnMind]

Yes the rule is clearer now I reread it. It didn't seem so clear when I read it years ago. I suspect my wish for greater clarity was granted before I made it. As it happened, the youngest character (apart from mentions of charters having children) I'd written before now was slightly under 21 and had an experience in connection with his first legal drink. So I really haven't run into the guidelines. Please forgive my ignorance. I appreciate constructive criticism whether positive or negative, but a kind tone never hurts. I am a retired computer programmer/systems analyst. There are hundreds of times I could have told a user Read The Fucking Manual with perfect justice, but have never done so--what value is justice not tempered by mercy.

 

[ElectricBlue]

There are hundreds of times I could have told a user Read The Fucking Manual with perfect justice, but have never done so--what value is justice not tempered by mercy.

Fair call, but it's a fair assumption on a website that one has read the FAQs, at least.

Similarly, one might consider a political rant a little unnecessary, when seeking guidance about what is and what's not allowed on an erotica website. But as you say, one must be gentle .

 

[Limnophile]

No they don't. One leads to actual jail, the other leads to not getting your story published on Literotica. Let's not get ridiculous here.

From the US Department of Justice website:
"Tuesday, June 22, 2021 - A Texas man was sentenced in the Western District of Texas to 40 years in prison for multiple obscenity crimes involving children. Thomas Alan Arthur, 65, of Terlingua, was convicted by a federal jury on Jan. 21, 2021, of three counts of trafficking in obscene stories and visual representations..."

The stories earned him ten of his 40 year sentence. He also committed several other crimes. People CAN go to prison for publishing fictional stories if a judge or jury decides they are 'obscene'.

I'm appalled by what he did to actual people and not trying to defend his actions, other than writing some fiction stories. I feel it's wrong to prohibit writing about bad things happening to IMAGINARY characters, but there's no point in me arguing further. I'll save you the trouble.

I do wish you well.

 

[Bramblethorn]

I absolutely agree with you! In our case, they treat us writing about an IMAGINARY 17-year-old masturbating and a pedophile raping a REAL child on camera as equally bad.

No they don't. One leads to actual jail, the other leads to not getting your story published on Literotica. Let's not get ridiculous here.

From the US Department of Justice website:
"Tuesday, June 22, 2021 - A Texas man was sentenced in the Western District of Texas to 40 years in prison for multiple obscenity crimes involving children. Thomas Alan Arthur, 65, of Terlingua, was convicted by a federal jury on Jan. 21, 2021, of three counts of trafficking in obscene stories and visual representations..."

I'm aware of the case, but I have no idea where you're getting the idea that "writing about an imaginary 17-year-old masturbating" is the content that got Thomas Arthur convicted for obscenity. The DoJ press release makes it pretty clear:

"The website was dedicated to publishing writings that detail the sexual abuse of children, including the rape, torture and murder of infants and toddlers."

That kind of content can indeed lead to an obscenity conviction. But it's a long way from what you were talking about.

 

[LegendInMyOwnMind]

I may have ranted a bit. My belief is the broad interpretation of the rule may not be entirely the editors' own judgement, but is constrained by a law that many people think is over draconian as applied to the realities of teenage life, while indeed under draconian in the case of the worst offenses, since the penalty though harsh is less than life without parole. That is my opinion and I'm sticking to it.

I want to thank everyone on this thread for your help and advice. My story I now rules conformant and is also now better, making the characters older and raised more repressively definitely improved the story. I'm not quite ready to submit, I used the rewrite as an occasion to polish the story more, dropping some unneeded explanations and adding others, and spicing up the sex a bit. I'm not through with the process.

 

[lovecraft68]

Probably the words around the action.

Your drafts must have had something in them to catch a word-bot's eye, and something a human eye agreed with. Hence the rejection(s).

Those who bang on most about something like this are very often trying on a distraction. I'd stop, if I were you, because the site owner/editor does read these threads, as evidenced by occasional posts, and all you're doing is drawing attention to yourself, not in a good way.

On this topic, the site rules, so there's not much point going on about it.

Coming from the guy who used to run around the boards pretending to be an imaginary under aged playmate named Suzie.

 

[lovecraft68]

I'm aware of the case, but I have no idea where you're getting the idea that "writing about an imaginary 17-year-old masturbating" is the content that got Thomas Arthur convicted for obscenity. The DoJ press release makes it pretty clear:

"The website was dedicated to publishing writings that detail the sexual abuse of children, including the rape, torture and murder of infants and toddlers."

That kind of content can indeed lead to an obscenity conviction. But it's a long way from what you were talking about.

I might be mistaken, but it wasn't just about writing about under age characters having sex, but there was physical violence as well, and in a couple cases maybe even snuff....so it was about more than sex.

I think this is true because there are sites out there that allow under age sex. I think asstr may have closed up shop but they were around for years and had no limits.

However, its still a double standard of erotica V mainstream of there's a case to be made to lock up King and Martin and some others.

 

[lovecraft68]

When did this link come about

https://www.literotica.com/faq/publishing/publishing-guidelines

For years, and I mean years, the rules could only be found by going through a lot of hoops then ending up on that ancient Killer Muffin post where she listed them and the site linked it.

 

[Lucy_Lastic]

not sure story characters are allowed to even imagine masturbation until they're 18. Just like real life.