Yet another "underage" question

[Quint]

A friend of mine has given her story to me to be edited, and one of the potential problems I saw is that she wrote in flashbacks to the start of her female character's sexuality--specifically, she tells of when she started masturbating and the various ways she did it. There's also some pre-18 petting, but the majority of it is masturbation-oriented. How strict is the underage restriction on self-loving? I want to be able to tell her now and give her time to rewrite it before Laurel returns it. Thanks, all!

 

[Rainbow Skin]

You surely wouldn't be allowed to post a complete story about a 14-year-old in the Masturbation and Toys section. The fact that it's solo probably makes no difference.

You can mention that something happened, but description of it becomes a fantasy for paedophiles: 'I lost my virginity when I was 14' would be okay by me as long as it then moves on, but don't linger on how, or for how long, or how it felt.

IANAL (I am not a Laurel)

 

[BlackSnake]

flash backs can be done without stating age. You don't even have to mention that you were very young.

I'm sure there are plenty other things you can describe other than the age that will allow the reader infer age for themselves.

Sarah sunk her slinder manicured finger's into Jake's tight butt pulling him deeper inside her as she came hard equal to the force of thunder.

Hearing the noise at the door she realized that she was being spied upon. She pushed Jake off her and leaped to the door. In one cat-like motion she swung open the door, pushed Donny back and closed the door behind her.

She towered over him with her hands on her wide hips and Jake's cum dripping from her freshly fucked pussy. "It's very rude to peep through keyholes at people," she said.

Donny still had a grip on his hard cock as he looked up at his mother with his pants and underwear bounded his ankles.

"Go ahead and finish that," she said staddling his waist allowing cum to drip from her cunt onto his hand and cock.

Hesitant and fearful he obeyed slowly stroking his cock. The smile on her face as she looked at his cock excited him. It was the closest he had been to her pussy, since she gave birth to him.

I do believe this will fly.

 

[gauchecritic]

Certainly made me fly.

I think the rule is pretty strict and as someone in another thread mentioned Laurel (or Manu) don't actually have the time to read each and every story in order to determine any underage shennanigins.
If there is a paragraph with sex and a paragraph close by with age of under 18 then this may be rejected although there is no underage sex involved. Appeals through pm or email do work though, apparently.

Black's advice is sound.

Gauche

 

[BlackSnake]

It seems to be easier and better for the reader to infer the age, so your readers won't be laughing at how stupid your character are when they freakout over their first period at 18 years of age.

 

[Quint]

Thanks for the replies.

To clarify, the character is not underage in the main story, but she does give a little bit of her own background intermixed with the real action which takes place many years later. It's like a rondo.

A: Masturbating legally
B: Flashback to when she started masturbating
A: Same masturbation scene
C: Little bit later than B; some petting but no sex
A: Masturbating again
D: The final flashback which occurs right before she is masturbating now

Obviously this will involve rather large changes in the story, since half of it is explanation for why this particular experience is a memorable one. If the description is as vague as "I was 13 and began doing it X way," is that more permissible, or is that just the poor, description-free writing that abounds?

Perhaps the author I'm working with is more flexible and creative about this than me, but I'm having difficulty thinking of a way to vagueify this story and still have it make sense; even if it goes to "I began masturbating when I was very young," that is rather obviously referring to a child.

Thanks once more for the replies.

 

[Weird Harold]

To clarify, the character is not underage in the main story, but she does give a little bit of her own background intermixed with the real action which takes place many years later. It's like a rondo.

A: Masturbating legally Grahic depictions permitted
B: Flashback to when she started masturbating Graphic depictions banned

A: Same masturbation scene graphic depictions OK again.

C: Little bit later than B; some petting but no sex Non-graphics depcitions only.

A: Masturbating again Graphics OK.

D: The final flashback which occurs right before she is masturbating now Depends on how far back this one is.

In general, the rule is that you cannot describe underage sex graphically although characters are permitted to remember underge sexual encounters.

In this scenario, the character can remember the setting and circumstances in detail but can't remember the details of the actual masturbation.

OK:
Her mind drifted back to when she had first discovered the joys of masturbation. She had been home alone one hot summer day and decided it was too hot to wear clothes; it was a wonderfully naughty feeling, especially when she saw the handsome neighbor in his pool from her upstairs window. The thought that he might look up and see her naked made her feel funny in her special place. Exploring that strange feeling with her fingers had begin her long journey down the road of debauchery.

NOT OK:
She remembered the first time; the incredibly wonderful feelings brought by running her finger gently over the hairless lips ...

In other words, flashbacks can remember how wonderful feelings were, but not describe in detail what caused them or what the exact feelings were.

 

[Pure]

But WH, what are these opinions based on? your experience submitting? your interp. of something Laurel wrote? your observations of stories that 'make it' or 'don't make it' through?

Just wondering....

J.

 

[Pure]

Comments on WH's proposals


A: Masturbating legally [Grahic depictions permitted ]
B: Flashback to when she started masturbating [Graphic depictions banned ]

A: Same masturbation scene [graphic depictions OK again.]

C: Little bit later than B; some petting but no sex [Non-graphics depcitions only.]

A: Masturbating again [Graphics OK. ]

D: The final flashback which occurs right before she is masturbating now [Depends on how far back this one is. ]

In general, the rule is that you cannot describe underage sex graphically although characters are permitted to remember underge sexual encounters.

While I don't doubt this is consistent with what Laurel's said, I believe WH ignores the more obvious approaches. He's working with a structure which has explicit time 'tags' or specifications. Yes, once you say, "She, now eighteen, remembered five years earlier" , ..." you have pretty much tied your hands.

But one key is NOT to specify, but suggest.

"She remembered. The slim fingers of her right hand were going into the softly downed pussy. Those of her left hand squeezed the buds of her nipples, and she didn't understand what thundered through her. Much later she was able to say 'That was the first time I came.'"

I hypothesize that something like the above would work. The times can have a certain vagueness, or, where nec, the time jumps can be handled without saying ages, i.e., give some clues as to the scenes relation to each other.

Remember, censors--those looking for 'child porn'-- do not like to think. (Let's see, if she's 28 when the story begins, then 'a few years earlier' [p.10] is early twenties, yet clearly at that point, the masturbation was already in the distant past; so hypothesizing that was age 13 would explain the reference, 'two years ago' [p.13] as dating from age 15; hence the intercourse scene is before the grandmother's death [p. 8], which must be placed at about 17.)

Further there are no pictures: flat chested girls with 10 year olds' pigtails. You control the visuals.

I have no psychic ability re Laurel, but those are my obervations with stories I've seen posted.

J.

 

[Quasimodem]

But WH, what are these opinions based on? . . . Just wondering....
J.

As a living "Font of All Literotica Wisdom," Pure. . .

Weird Harold has never led anyone down the garden path . . . except to show them his prizewinning cucumber. . . .

 

[Weird Harold]

But WH, what are these opinions based on? your experience submitting? your interp. of something Laurel wrote? your observations of stories that 'make it' or 'don't make it' through

First and foremost from the wording of the ban on underage participants in stories.

The opinion has been refined by previous discussions on the subject and converstions with Laurel.

The best defense I can offer for the opinion expressed above is that in previous discussions, Laurel's only comment was "What WH said."

 

[Pure]

Well, my only defense** is based on what Laurel does.

**Though it's simply not the case that we are in diametrically opposite positions.

 

[Weird Harold]

While I don't doubt this is consistent with what Laurel's said, I believe WH ignores the more obvious approaches. He's working with a structure which has explicit time 'tags' or specifications. Yes, once you say, "She, now eighteen, remembered five years earlier" , ..." you have pretty much tied your hands.

But one key is NOT to specify, but suggest.

I wasn't "ignoring" other approaches, I was addressing the specifics of the story being edited.

You're correct that the approach the author wants to use is somewhat limiting and that being specific about ages and time frames are Red Flags that the rules are being bent.

FWIW, the only "censor" that stories here have to pass is Laurel. Her standards are high enough that it's unlikely that other censors are going to be a concern.

 

[Pure]

Hi Weird Harold,



quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Pure
While I don't doubt this is consistent with what Laurel's said, I believe WH ignores the more obvious approaches. He's working with a structure which has explicit time 'tags' or specifications. Yes, once you say, "She, now eighteen, remembered five years earlier" , ..." you have pretty much tied your hands.

But one key is NOT to specify, but suggest.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Weird Harold said,


I wasn't "ignoring" other approaches, I was addressing the specifics of the story being edited.

There were no specifics regarding explicit time labels, as far as I could see.



You're correct that the approach the author wants to use is somewhat limiting and that being specific about ages and time frames are Red Flags that the rules are being bent.

We agree here


FWIW, the only "censor" that stories here have to pass is Laurel. Her standards are high enough that it's unlikely that other censors are going to be a concern.

Well, I was trying to be a little vague, on purpose. Let's just say that if Laurel chooses to screen/censor/prevent stories, my remarks apply. If she reads a hundred stories a day, she will hardly spend time in literary detective work, trying to deduce ages from scattered clues. Ergo....

J.

 

[gauchecritic]

But the point of it all is not to pander to paedophilia.

Budding breasts and hairless (not shaved) pubic areas and general childish physiques whether remembered, in the past, brought forward in a time machine or reverse ageing all pander to what the 'law' (Lit. or otherwise) class as paedophilia.

The reasoning I've seen stated is that the entire site may be closed down otherwise.

It's a rule. Follow it if you want to post stories, or post elswhere.

Gauche

 

[MathGirl]

It's a rule. Follow it if you want to post stories, or post elswhere.

Dear Gauchie,
That sums it up very nicely. It's hard to believe that anyone's artistic license is going to be dealt a death blow by that rule.
MG
Ps. It's also hard to believe that it is necessary to have this same discussion every week or so. The space could be put to better use in a discussion of ....... oh, say,... garderobes.

Pps. Hey, Perdita. Your PM thingie is stuffed full to overflowing and replete with saiety.

 

[Rainbow Skin]

Entirely agree with gauchecritic. There's no good reason to want to dwell on children's sexuality.

But g*rd*r*b*s! Whoa, talk about taboo subjects. Can anyone recall a story in which people go to the toilet for the usual reasons real people do?

 

[Guest]

Dear Gauchie, That sums it up very nicely.

Pps. Hey, Perdita. Your PM thingie is stuffed full to overflowing and replete with saiety.

Gauche, I was about to thank you for your post. I'm glad you frankly mentioned pedophilia. I hesitate to say, but as it may mean something if given a personal angle, one of my sons was molested as a youth. It's a nightmare I work to keep at bay. Any hint of pedophilia, whether w/ mid- or early teens (and whatever distinct term used, phebephilia is it?), has to disturb more people than imagined. I'm glad at least the law keeps the stuff off Lit.

(I for one find your mature-ish fictional ereotic exploits more appealing than all the 18 year old larks on Lit.)

MG: since yesterday I've had on and off problemos w/my PM box. It's NOT full so I have to wait for the techs to get at it again.

Perdita

 

[Quasimodem]

. . . The space could be put to better use in a discussion of ....... oh, say,... garderobes. . . .

You toss that off as though garderobes were not a scathingly-vital issue.

Rainbow,

For shame! How can you expect to create a three dimentional, living character, if you force said creation to be constipated by your prudish limitations.

 

[MathGirl]

How can you expect to create a three dimentional, living character, if you force said creation to be constipated by your prudish limitations.

Dear Quaz,
Would you have the characters in smutty stories take a break for bowel movements? Get outa here! Skat!
MG

 

[Quasimodem]

I can think there could be nothing more disgusting to the reader than several of the vowel movements in which we both have taken a part.

It's not so much mere scat, as a genuine, grassroots movement.

 

[Pure]

Gauche said,


But the point of it all is not to pander to paedophilia.

Ah, now I know the point of it all.**


Budding breasts and hairless (not shaved) pubic areas and general childish physiques whether remembered, in the past, brought forward in a time machine or reverse ageing all pander to what the 'law' (Lit. or otherwise) class as paedophilia.

Not true.


The reasoning I've seen stated is that the entire site may be closed down otherwise.

Well, if it's reasoning, tell the law(s) that would apply, quote the relevant section, tell of other sites experiences, and flesh out this 'reasoning' a little.

To Perdita,
It's awful that your son was molested or that any child--or any loved one--is the viction of a crime. That said, no one has ever established a connection between reading stories and criminal behavior. There are stories that a certain murderer X, was found to have a copy of 'American Psycho' by his bed. I think it can be bought at any large bookstore.

J.

**I thought the 'point' was that Quint's friend has a story in which an adult remembers a teen incident of masturbation, and if written a certain way, and the rules interpreted a certain way, the story might not see the light of day at Literotica. Silly me.

 

[Guest]

That said, no one has ever established a connection between reading stories and criminal behavior.

Pure, I did not mean to imply that at all. I understand your point. As I said, my opinion was very personal and shared by millions unfortunately. I simply avoid the subject, and cannot help but be glad about Lit.'s stand, whatever the reasons.

Perdita

 

[Quasimodem]

To Peridita,

. . . no one has ever established a connection between reading stories and criminal behavior. . .
J.

Wrong!

Rod Serling wrote a story about a aeroplane hijacking, and about five years later, the first aeroplane hijacking occurred, following quite closely along his story's plot.

Serling acknowledged the obvious connection between the two events and vowed to never write such a story again.

Of course, Serling was not just a creature of media, he was also a man of integrity.

Gauche said,

Budding breasts and hairless (not shaved) pubic areas and general childish physiques whether remembered, in the past, brought forward in a time machine or reverse ageing all pander to what the 'law' (Lit. or otherwise) class as paedophilia.

Not true

You don't often see such mind expanding debate.

"It does."

"It doesn't."

"Does too!"

"Does not!"

"'s too!"

"'S not!"


AURRUGHHH! FAWH!

 

[Pure]

QM said,

[as to whether reading a story might cause one to commit a crime]


Rod Serling wrote a story about a aeroplane hijacking, and about five years later, the first aeroplane hijacking occurred, following quite closely along his story's plot.

Serling acknowledged the obvious connection between the two events and vowed to never write such a story again.

Of course, Serling was not just a creature of media, he was also a man of integrity.

Perhaps this is an urban legend? Perhaps not. It's true, though, iirc, that someone wrote a story about hijacker crashing a plane into a big building, and look, there's 9/11.

A simple question then QM, given your concern about the alleged "influence" on the 1 in a million reader: what should the law do, if anything, about books that have the details of planning a crime? Ever read 'A Speckled Band" by Conan Doyle? Does it make you uneasy?

J.