[None]

I know, I know, I was a little harsh but darn it I want to keep that kind of crap off of the story site.

[Pug]

Cool your jets Mal, that’s not at all what I said.

What I *did* say is that the end point of that kind of absolutist line is a completely inability to write any genuine story about a culture whose taboos are drawn differently than our own. The realization that the advent of adulthood has varied over time and culture (And indeed does so right here in the United States from state to state, here and now, from 14 for a male in Arkansas to 18 in other states. ) is legitimate.

Your line in the sand, as drawn here in the United States without even referencing foreign or historic cultures, is a full presidential term wide. So, yeah Mal, unless you have a specific state whose law you intend to enforce across the other 49, plus every other country, then yeah, you *are* a relativist who is putting up with all the other states immoral behavior and has evidently never been bothered by it before now.

Sorry – if you’ve never bothered to become informed and take action about the actual real age of consent across the real states of the real USA, I have some difficulty understanding your having a moralistic hissy fit about a fictional age of consent between characters that your original statement accuses of being of ‘questionable age’, whatever *that* means.

Heck if you watched the first seasons of “Buffy the Vampire Slayer” characters had implied sex under 18 – conveniently covered by the “Fade to Black” Veil, but if we’re talking about a *principle* here that’s hardly sufficient, and I can name a dozen other shows, going back to 21 Jump Street, Hill Street Blues and 90210, nevermind Daytime Soap Opera’s.

That being the case – well, my objections to it are pretty clear; it had damn well better make sense in accordance to the plot because if it’s not a damn good story I’m not reading it. And the objection that such stories are rarely damn good stories is a valid one – throwing out a story on *that* basis doesn’t bother me in the least.

*Your* objection however, as near as I can read it is that you’ve drawn a line in the sand against fictional characters having fictional sex when not covered by a “Fade to Black” Veil, regardless of other writing considerations, because you have stringent non-relativist moral objections — which don’t apply to *actual* citizens of Arkansas.

I understand the emotional response – None of what I’ve written in the previous paragraphs should undercut the fact that I have the same response. But there’s a certain lack of coherence here.

Pug

[None]

“Cool your jets Mal, that’s not at all what I said.”

And I said that perhaps I was harsh. However, I think that perhaps my post above still had some merit.

“What I *did* say is that the end point of that kind of absolutist line is a completely inability to write any genuine story about a culture whose taboos are drawn differently than our own.”

There is nothing wrong with the absolutist line. I don’t consider the types of stories we’re discussing to have any size, shape, or connection to understanding a “culture” that is merely “taboo” or drawn differently than our own. And if we were, I could care less about understanding another culture if the differences were that vast between us and their practices are the total opposite of my own. I know, I know.. I’m not a “cultured, sophisticated, elite”

http://www.southparkstudios.com/clips/104282/smuggy-san-francisco-town

These stories are written in the framework of OUR culture and fall under OUR laws and mores. This is what I mean by your relativism. I don’t NEED to understand this material. I don’t NEED to give it latitude. This isn’t me dining with a bunch of people from a foreign nation and then practicing a festive ritual with them. Hell, and if that WAS the case and after dining with them they wanted me to practice a ritual with them that was against COMMON decency, I’d tell them to f’ off.

I’m not a cultural ethnographer from some damn National Geographic magazine.

“(And indeed does so right here in the United States from state to state, here and now, from 14 for a male in Arkansas to 18 in other states. ) is legitimate.”

I’d check that law and read it VERY carefully.

“So, yeah Mal, unless you have a specific state whose law you intend to enforce across the other 49, plus every other country, then yeah, you *are* a relativist who is putting up with all the other states immoral behavior and has evidently never been bothered by it before now.”

Go check out the stories I’m speaking of. While, in my opinion a sexual FETISH story on a FETISH site (let’s not kid ourselves what Brawna is folks) is disturbing, the stories there depict characters much younger. I’m NOT a relativist. Those stories I’m speaking of are wrong. Finito, finished. Do not pass go, do not collect $200. It’s simply wrong for ADULTS to fantasize over someone that young. That’s a clearly defined line.

“Sorry – if you’ve never bothered to become informed and take action about the actual real age of consent across the real states of the real USA, I have some difficulty understanding your having a moralistic hissy fit about a fictional age of consent between characters that your original statement accuses of being of ‘questionable age’, whatever *that* means. “

There is FEDERAL LAW. I beg, beg, BEG you, to take those stories to a Federal Judge and ask him if the characters depicted in those stories, as others have argued here and on Brawna, have any valid artistic merit and then compare Federal law to all 50 states which possess obscenity laws based on the Federal statute and application. I ASSURE you, that they would find those stories troubling. They might even find mine troubling but they would probably differentiate it based on content (age of the characters). I’m just saying.

“Heck if you watched the first seasons of “Buffy the Vampire Slayer” characters had implied sex under 18 – conveniently covered by the “Fade to Black” Veil.” Implied and fade to black do not constitute “obscene” which is often defined by pornographic content.

As for my “moralistic hissy fit”, you may call it what you will but I’m willing to bet that the more of those types of stories that are put on Brawna, and given the technological powers of the modern age to sift through questionable data, that at some point, if not already, those people who insist on writing those scenarios are drawing an unwanted and questioning gaze upon all of us who have NO interest in those types of materials.

That is all I’m saying. As I said, call it what you will but it’s troubling. Why should we try and make excuses for it?

There is no excuse to have those types of stories associated with OUR community and/or ADULT centered interests. Unless something’s changed and I’m wrong in which I’ll be making a hasty exit.

None.

I can’t believe that I even have to have this discussion and why it’s troubling. Why should I even bother writing anymore after this?

[Pug]

captr wrote:

“Cool your jets Mal, that’s not at all what I said.”
And I said that perhaps I was harsh. However, I think that perhaps my post above still had some merit.

For record keeping purposes, yes, your addenda was posted between when I started and finished mine. Darn straight I take my time picking my words given the subject matter – .

“What I *did* say is that the end point of that kind of absolutist line is a completely inability to write any genuine story about a culture whose taboos are drawn differently than our own.”

There is nothing wrong with the absolutist line. I don’t consider the types of stories we’re discussing to have any size, shape, or connection to understanding a “culture” that is merely “taboo” or drawn differently than our own. And if we were, I could care less about understanding another culture if the differences were that vast between us and their practices are the total opposite of my own. I know, I know.. I’m not a “cultured, sophisticated, elite”

http://www.southparkstudios.com/clips/104282/smuggy-san-francisco-town

These stories are written in the framework of OUR culture and fall under OUR laws and mores. This is what I mean by your relativism. I don’t NEED to understand this material. I don’t NEED to give it latitude. This isn’t me dining with a bunch of people from a foreign nation and then practicing a festive ritual with them. Hell, and if that WAS the case and after dining with them they wanted me to practice a ritual with them that was against COMMON decency, I’d tell them to f’ off.

I’m not a cultural ethnographer from some damn National Geographic magazine.

See, I have a problem with snide comments about “cultured, sophisticated, elite”, when the entirety of my post was about the fact that you’re not even speaking for the whole of your own culture. And we’re not talking about them “damn ‘litist libruls ona the coasts” – Those “Cultured Sophisticated Elites” in have the age of consent at 18. It’s (In large part) middle America that trends towards 16 (or less, depending upon vagaries of specific law).

Federal Law *is* 18, but only applies ‘in transport across state lines‘ situations (Interestingly enough, the Uniform Code of Military Justice is 16, and requires proof of coercion.)

So you’re going off on a high horse about not being from National Geographic, and you leave me with nothing but suspicion you don’t know your own state law.

“(And indeed does so right here in the United States from state to state, here and now, from 14 for a male in Arkansas to 18 in other states. ) is legitimate.”

I’d check that law and read it VERY carefully.

“So, yeah Mal, unless you have a specific state whose law you intend to enforce across the other 49, plus every other country, then yeah, you *are* a relativist who is putting up with all the other states immoral behavior and has evidently never been bothered by it before now.”

Go check out the stories I’m speaking of. While, in my opinion a sexual FETISH story on a FETISH site (let’s not kid ourselves what Brawna is folks) is disturbing, the stories there depict characters much younger. I’m NOT a relativist. Those stories I’m speaking of are wrong. Finito, finished. Do not pass go, do not collect $200. It’s simply wrong for ADULTS to fantasize over someone that young. That’s a clearly defined line.

Umm – to be blunt Mal, you haven’t actually named any or clearly defined the line they crossed. McInvictus has stories about a teenager – and my internal censor bluntly assumes he *must* mean 19, because I’m sure he couldn’t mean something else (Hell, in my experience women aren’t even interesting till they’re 25.). But you keep making claims about being an absolutist, but haven’t actually given any absolute facts about which stories your speaking of or the line they crossed.

“Sorry – if you’ve never bothered to become informed and take action about the actual real age of consent across the real states of the real USA, I have some difficulty understanding your having a moralistic hissy fit about a fictional age of consent between characters that your original statement accuses of being of ‘questionable age’, whatever *that* means. “

There is FEDERAL LAW. I beg, beg, BEG you, to take those stories to a Federal Judge and ask him if the characters depicted in those stories, as others have argued here and on Brawna, have any valid artistic merit and then compare Federal law to all 50 states which possess obscenity laws based on the Federal statute and application. I ASSURE you, that they would find those stories troubling. They might even find mine troubling but they would probably differentiate it based on content (age of the characters). I’m just saying.

Again, I get frustrated for the simple reason that you can look this up and obviously haven’t – The Supreme Court already ruled on this almost a decade ago Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition – and even the *dissenters* Scalia and Rehnquist conceded things like a story were constitutionally protected.

And yeah – that statement brings it into focus for me. Here’s my objection to your ‘absolutist’ diatribe.

WHY is it it’s always the Culture Warriors that want to separate the constitutional protections from our Culture? I’m sorry, I’m a Veteran, I was shot at, and dammit, a belief in our Constitutional protections is part of why I joined. What *is* it about people trying to invoke moral authority that the Bill of Rights has no moral authority to them?

There are all sorts of countries without a Constitution or a Court system strong enough to protect it. If you hate ours, pick someplace you like!

Thank you, that’s *my* moralistic hissy fit. Moving On . . .

“Heck if you watched the first seasons of “Buffy the Vampire Slayer” characters had implied sex under 18 – conveniently covered by the “Fade to Black” Veil.” Implied and fade to black do not constitute “obscene” which is often defined by pornographic content.

As for my “moralistic hissy fit”, you may call it what you will but I’m willing to bet that the more of those types of stories that are put on Brawna, and given the technological powers of the modern age to sift through questionable data, that at some point, if not already, those people who insist on writing those scenarios are drawing an unwanted and questioning gaze upon all of us who have NO interest in those types of materials.

That is all I’m saying. As I said, call it what you will but it’s troubling. Why should we try and make excuses for it?

There is no excuse to have those types of stories associated with OUR community and/or ADULT centered interests. Unless something’s changed and I’m wrong in which I’ll be making a hasty exit.

None.

I can’t believe that I even have to have this discussion and why it’s troubling. Why should I even bother writing anymore after this?

I’m sorry, these last paragraphs have nothing but a vague fear of being caught less than six degrees of separation from stories you don’t like, and until you go to the trouble of listing something specific with specific objections and bringing it to Lingster’s attention there’s not much I can say about vague ‘troubling’ aspersions – I don’t have any actual power, and I’m not going to go dumpster diving for them. I might or might not be troubled by a specific story (Or indeed, might be troubled but recognize it as a good story.), but if you’re going to quit writing because your ‘troubled’ that out there somewhere your story may be filed in a folder with another story you find ‘troubling’, well, I love your writing but for god’s sake stop because it’s gonna happen and no amount of ‘absolutist’ moral dogma is going to stop that.

It seems to me that the end point of that path is archives that contain no erotica and nothing but obscenity because all the *good* writers have left rather than be ‘sullied’ by being put into a distasteful folder somewhere. But that’s your call.

Pug

[None]

Here are my concerns. I know that I will have many challengers who will cite specific case law or legal usage, but please remember that modern cases often use standards from similar applicable laws in order to interpret laws or make findings of fact in various cases. For my concerns, (after research) I’m going to use the Miller Test to state my concerns.

The test has the following points to it.

1. whether the average person, applying contemporary community standards (not national standards, as some prior tests required), would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest;

2. whether the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct or excretory functions[3] specifically defined by applicable state law; and

3. “whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.”[4]

Lets address number 1. The point about the changing nature of what is culturally excepted as societies progress through time, while true in itself, is not legally applicable here. The Miller test utilized “contemporary community standards” as a basis of viewing potentially objectionable material.

With that said, while many states may have laws that allow for the age of consent to be 16-18, sexual acts concerning minors are often subject upper age limits where the two individuals are often in a close proximity of age. Once the age of 18 is reached, the 18 year old and partner are no longer subject to age proximity laws. Because of this, the commonly perceived community standard in the United States (the country of origin of this website) is 18. Furthermore, as of late there has been a trend for revision in law related to the age of consent upwards to 18 based on this commonly held view, not an erosion of it to younger age. (the law isn’t making age of consent younger). Lastly, these sexual encounters related to age of consent have nothing to do with public access or dissemination of questionable material where such materials may be subject to sexual exploitation laws (visual depictions) or obscenity laws.

In order to determine what constitutes obscene, there is a partial reliance on Federal laws involving sexual exploitation to consider. (Which also employ facets of the Miller Test). Simply put, a visual depiction of a minor (under 18) is commonly held to be obscene AND a violation of federal law. Now, while sexual exploitation statutes requires a VISUAL depiction of an actual person, if that person is under the age of 18 there is a violation. Therefore, 18 and up is legally safe in a visual depiction, while 18 and under is a violation. In determining if a violation against a minor has occurred, it may possess any of the following elements: They are this:

§ 2256.
For the purposes of this chapter, the term—
(1) “minor” means any person under the age of eighteen years;

(B) For purposes of subsection 8(B) [1] of this section, “sexually explicit conduct” means—
(i) graphic sexual intercourse, including genital-genital, oral-genital, anal-genital, or oral-anal, whether between persons of the same or opposite sex, or lascivious simulated sexual intercourse where the genitals, breast, or pubic area of any person is exhibited;
(ii) graphic or lascivious simulated;
(I) bestiality;
(II) masturbation; or
(III) sadistic or masochistic abuse; or

With these have a starting perspective for what MAY constitute obscene (in materials involving adults), but which definitely and for FACT are obscene and thoroughly violate Federal law when visually depicting a minor.

The law is a crosscurrent of standards which may be applicable in other understandings and applications of law.

This takes us to prurient interest and how it applies to literature:

When taken as whole the nature of Brawna’s stories and the sexual subject matter often employed in stories on the site (a fetish site) can be considered to appeal to a “prurient interest.” However, since ADULT pornographic visual materials require participants and actors to be the age of 18 or older to avoid violating Federal law, (with porn generally considered outside of the norm and best left out from Grandma’s kitchen table), mainstream adult porn while objectionable, is considered legal and consumed by adults. Mainstream adult pornography therefore is “generally accepted” by current community standards” even though some elements lack artistic merit and appeal to the prurient interest. This same sense of legal acceptance for ADULT pornography can be easily transferred to adult literature as well even if that that literature may be objectionable to some.

This is not the case with the stories featuring underage characters, which if they were visually depicted in film would be against against the law. When explicit acts (cited in list above) are merged with underage characters, there is NO QUESTION that it is obscene when viewed as whole under the three pronged Miller Test.

The stories on Brawna I speak of (featuring underage characters) and the very lewd depictions depicted therein, are questionable.

Hell, even the AUTHORS admit that their stories are questionable! Thus they even have doubts when compared with percieved contemporary community standards.

Moving onto number two, the works are explicit works which, when coupled with the age of the characters therein, are offensive by general community standards, and if depicted visually, would constitute a felony under Federal law which most states have adopted the terms I quoted above.

Number three: This is simple. All of Brawna’s stories, as well written as some of them may be, do not meet the criteria for SERIOUS LITERARY works such as Mark Twain which you employed in your original response to my concerns. However, as noted above, because they involve adult characters, like VISUAL depictions in adult film industry, they are legal and do not general fall under the same burden of obscenity that the underage fetish stories most definitely do when all of the elements of the Miller Test and definitions of “explicit” (derived from sexual exploitation statues) are brought to bare.

Therefore, based on this notion that I MAY be posting my stories on a sight housing questionable materials which may violate community standards related to obscenity when considered as whole per the considerations of the Miller test and federal definitions, I don’t feel comfortable posting them there until we have some standards which reflect the ADULT oriented values of our community. All of these may be easily addressed by simply removing questionable materials and providing a more clearly defined posting rules.

That’s just MY feelings. Would I like to post them? Yes. I’ve worked very hard on them. Would I love to have you read my stories? Yes. I enjoy praise and I think I’ve got some cool things around the bend which are very entertaining.

And yes, whether you agree with me or not, I AM concerned depositing my stories on a site which may draw unwanted attention. That is only natural.

[demented20]

Wow this little thread is getting to be a slugfest. You’ve even brought in state and federal statues(which usually causes my head to spin), but in truth what is legal and what is right are rarely the same. We all know that there have been stories with questionable content when it comes to the age of the characters and the way they are depicted in the stories. This topic has come up before and I usually ignore it. I figured that it didn’t apply to the stories that I write and post or to the stories that I read from other writers, but now captr has got me thinking.
Is there a guilt by association if you post stories on a site that host material that you yourself find offensive? I don’t really know the answer to that yet, but the question is floating around in my brain now.

[None]

Pug there are some things that I had commented on last night that did not make it the board and I was unable to recover. So, let me address some of those things now.

First, you cite Ashcroft vs. Free Speech coalition. This was aimed at shooting down the CPPA which prohibited speech “DESPITE its SERIOUS literary, artistic, political, or scientific value” citing classical works of art such as Romeo and Juliet as it’s standard. Nowhere does Ashcroft v. Free Speech coalition make 18 U.S.C. null, void, or unenforceable in determining what parameters may constitute OBSCENITY (artworks, literature, etc, with NO serious literary, political, or scientific value such as a “fetish” website.)

Secondly, when you note the First Amendment, please be mindful that the Founding Fathers were not libertines and expected morals and values to naturally limit speech or actions that they would have seen injurious to others and the public good barring government criticism or religious expression. In fact, the Founding Fathers saw morals and values as necessary elements of SELF GOVERNANCE, which, when followed, would further limit the need for intrusive external government. The concepts of self governance would aid and bolster the limits they sought to impose on external government, which is expressed in the ABSOLUTIST principles (lines that government cannot unreasonably cross) enshrined in the Constitution. However, with that said, they lived in an era in which the Great Awakening had just occurred, and because they noted that “men are not angels” they also understood that men must be governed and that government should be a reflection of benevolent morals and values.

Hence this idea of upholding public policy to prevent injuries to the public is a staple of our legal system. If the Founding Fathers had been libertines and had adopted an anything goes mindset, they would have felt no need to create a government that sought to uphold morals and values associated with human freedom even though that may not have always been the outcome at various times in history. Governments are not always angels either.

As for the stories, and my “aspersions”, you know of the stories I’m speaking of and you even yourself admitted or alluded to their troubling nature.

Lastly, I thought the Southpark clip was funny and was designed to inject humor into the conversation.

In the end, this is Lingster’s world. I am not trying to anger anyone and the same concerns I have with protecting the nature of our community and preventing unwanted attention, not only protect myself if there should be questions, but everyone else (and Lingster) who contributes as well. Please remember that in the last few months, 88,000 websites have been taken down by the government because of questionable materials. Do you want Brawna, mistakenly or not, to be one of them?

All we have to do is draw a line for the age of characters which is easily done.

P.S. Keith Olberman still sucks 😉

[None]

….

[None]

…..

[None]

I deleted this comment. I expressed my opinions on the law as I understand it. Nothing more to say. *shrug*

[Author]

Posts