Sensitive content issue

2010/05/04 at 5:16 pm Lazeez 135 comments

You are currently browsing comments. If you would like to return to the full story, you can read the full entry here: “Sensitive content issue”.

Other none

Comments (135)

#1 | Written by John on 2010/05/04.

I like the choice solution, rather than screening or banning stories. For me, the issue is where to draw the line. Is young with young OK, but young with older not OK? How much older to be a problem? Is it OK with consent but not OK without?

I think it is easier and better to put all stories with young, under a certain age, characters having sex of almost any king just be a separate ctegory.

I would require a specific decision by each member to “opt in”.

Sorry you have to deal with this….

jb
#2 | Written by The Black Knight on 2010/05/04.

Perhaps an additional code for the more extreme stories would be useful. Of course, authors would have to use the right code. That may be an issue.

Perhaps (as a fix for that last issue) readers could ‘report’ stories that are incorrectly coded, and site admins could add the appropriate code?
#3 | Written by Ernest Bywater on 2010/05/04.

This issue is purely subjective, as different people regard the definition of pedo in different ways. However, I fully appreciate the concerns raised, and both sides of this issue. While excluding such stories from the site may get a few more readers, it will also lose readers as such stories do have a following.

At present the capability exists to exclude the ability to see such stories in the section ‘My Account’ via the ‘Category Exclusion Preferences.’ However, this is a fairly large page and a bit daunting to some people, and I’m not sure it’s available to the free account users. Why not include a cut down version of the ‘Category Exclusion Preferences’ that is simply for pedo stories, a simple include or exclude pedo stories in all the search systems with a Yes / No choice and make this available through it’s own link on each of the main pages with a title something like ‘My Settings Exclude Pedo.’ I’d also include a simple link where people can report stories they think have not been properly coded pedo, should they find one. This should allow those who do not want such stories to avoid them, and allow those who aren’t so selective to access them.
#4 | Written by Thedad49 on 2010/05/04.

I believe in freedom of speach but I also believe in freedom NOT to listen. I like the option of being able to decide what I want to see. Having said that we already have the right to do that don’t we. Forced sex with Kids is not my idea of entertainment so I don’t read those types of stories….my choice.

RickM
#5 | Written by Rob on 2010/05/04.

I do have to agree that there seems to be quite the rash of those types of stories. As someone who has no interest in reading that particular genre I would definitely appreciate a way to not even see them in the list so a toggle would be great. One suggestion I would make though is to have an option to flag a story for review if the author omits (either accidentally or purposefully) the pedo tag.
#6 | Written by Mack on 2010/05/04.

Lazeez,

I am sure we all appreciate you hard work to keep SOL going and another headache you don’t need. I have too say I like the choice idea best. Its getting like the conservatives are pushing everything uninformed people making bad decisions that will only harm us all eventually.
#7 | Written by Rob on 2010/05/04.

One other thought. Everyone’s definition is going to be different but I would think that anything pre-teen be classified as pedo. Just my two cents.
#8 | Written by T. on 2010/05/04.

Lazeez,

From my perspective, the real solution here is simply education.

For the readers: post a note calling attention to the already present Categories Preferences, and how to use them effectively.

For the authors: post a polite request for them to actually use codes when touching on ‘sensitive’ subject matter.

Accurate (not pedantic) code use combined with Categories Preferences should satisfy both the authors’ freedom of expression and the readers’ sensitivities without either losing out on a positive experience.

Just my 0.02
#9 | Written by Englishperv on 2010/05/04.

Your preliminary solution sounds good, and would certainly help, but I don’t think it would go all the way. I guess it would satisfy half of those readers concerned, but the other half would still be uncomfortable just knowing that the pedo element lurks back there. I’m only guessing. A suggested additional measure:

Make a rule that a writer must have at least two (or 3,4, 5?) none-pedo stories (of a minimum length) for every one pedo story they write. Speaking as a keen pedo witer, I for one would be happy with those conditions of working. In effect you’d be ‘diluting the pool’. You might lose a few pedo-orientated writers who can’t be bothered to ‘earn’ their place so to speak, but these would probably be the most trashy kind of writer anyway. The most serious writers would stay, regardless of having to work a bit harder to post their ‘pet-subject’. So the additional effect would be to raise the overall quality of writing in SOL, which must be a good thing for all readers including those who want the taboo stuff. Any people that you lost in this way would be more than compensated for by the public being happier with the content and image of SOL.

Not sure how easy this would be to administer or put into a program, my ‘wisdom’ ends there. Also, writers would have to honest and accurate with their story codes of course.
#10 | Written by Knave of Hearts on 2010/05/04.

How is this any different from the Exclusion settings you already have in the “My Accounts” page? I excluded pedo stories a long time ago, along with some other categories that don’t trip my trigger.

I agree with John, however, that the “pedo” label seems to be in the eye of the author and stories that I would label pedo aren’t. Some authors don’t label stories on purpose, but others seem to have different thresholds.

Maybe a mechanism for readers to tag stories?

Or require authors to include age designation as a tag?

KoH
#11 | Written by Englishperv on 2010/05/04.

Just thought of something else, which might go some way to soothing those sensitive souls…

For any pedo story posted, the writer must add a bald-lettered disclaimer in the synopsis, or end-word, or at the base of the story itself. Something to the effect of: “I or SOL do not condone the actions depicted in this story, which we believe should remain in the realm of fiction and fantasy only.”

Of course this isn’t addressing the main problem of readers being concerned with the proliferation of pedo stories, but every little bit helps. It’s all about image, i think, and will at least demonstrate everybody involved in the site are conscientious, law-abiding citizeans. Those that are threatening to leave, or have left, obviously feel the ‘image’ of the site is becoming too pedo.
#12 | Written by Jack on 2010/05/04.

I just check the…………Codes,then read the story or not.
#13 | Written by TeNderLoin on 2010/05/04.

very simple, really…
put the PEDOPHILE related codes as MANDATORY CAPS. That way the readers will KNOW what is in the story.
If, after seeing the story codes, they read and still complain… fuck them… THEY WERE WARNED!
If any reader finds a story that does NOT have the MANDATORY CAPS ‘pedophile’ code, and the story *IS* pedophilic; then upon discovery, that authors entire output should be deleted.
This may not be “Politically Correct”, but I tell those bastards to FUCK OFF regularly, anyway!!!!!!!
))
#14 | Written by Maddog on 2010/05/04.

It seems that you solved the problem with codes. I’m not that crazy about “pedo” and when I see that code and if I’m not in the mood to read that type story then I go to other stories that I’d rather read. Just make sure that each story has the codes for that story and if the story doesn’t have their codes, then don’t put it in until the codes have been added.
#15 | Written by Bingain on 2010/05/04.

I like the idea.

However, what will happen if some members are leaving for increasing rape stories? Are you going to make similar cut for other quirk/questionable genres… like rape, adult with teens?
#16 | Written by Mark Mayhugh on 2010/05/04.

Ernest Bywater wrote: “At present the capability exists to exclude the ability to see such stories in the section ‘My Account’ via the ‘Category Exclusion Preferences.’ ”

Is this a members only thing? Because I do not have a Category Exclusion Preferences under My Account.

Personally, I think category exclusion preferences is the way to go. Don’t like Pedo? Exclude it. Don’t like Rape? Exclude it. Don’t like Romance? Exclude it. It puts control in the hands of the readers, as it should be, instead of in the hands of censors.

But this exclusion should also be made available to non-members.
#17 | Written by Jon on 2010/05/04.

Given that only adults have any business being on this site, why try to enforce any sort of limitation on fictional accounts of any behavior. Once you start down this path there will be too many times when you will want to block access to stories with any kind of troubling plots or themes. Let adults be adults.
#18 | Written by IMcRout on 2010/05/04.

Oh dear! Another dilemma I wouldn’t like to be faced with. As a father and (retired) teacher I consider myself a pedophile in the original meaning of the word, i.e. somebody who loves or is a friend to children. I feel the compulsion to protect them in any way I can.
Although I know that there are some very mature and well-developed ten-year-olds as compared to a similar number of naive and infantile 18-year-old adolescents, I simply cannot conceive a consensual sexual pre-teen / adult relationship. As opposed to censorship as I am, I think that the freedom to express oneself in speech, arts, literature etc., is limited by the rights of others, especially if these rights concern young people, who cannot defend themselves.
I agree with T.`s previous remarks:

“For the readers: post a note calling attention to the already present Categories Preferences, and how to use them effectively.

For the authors: post a polite request for them to actually use codes when touching on ’sensitive’ subject matter.”

I would suggest, however, that the request for the authors to use the correct code in this category should be accompanied by a severe warning, that a repeated violation of these rules will result in the withdrawal of the author’s right to publish on this site.

I don’t believe Englishperv’s suggestion is viable. I don’t want to force an author to write and publish something he or she doesn’t believe in. This could result in some funny or ridiculous ‘flash-stories’ or poems, written only in order to comply with one’s quota.
Have them include the correct code and let readers choose to accept this category, or not.

The freedom of choice is yours, Lazeez. I do not envy your position.
#19 | Written by Willie on 2010/05/04.

You already have codes. Give readers a mechanism to report / suggest that the appropriate code(s) were not listed for a story. If an author continues to “exclude” the appropriate code, then suspend or ban them from submitting stories.
#20 | Written by Steve on 2010/05/04.

When you try to satisfy everyone, then no one will be satisfied. When you think you have one problem solved, then people will start bitching about something else. Don’t turn this site into another Literotica.com, Lazeez. If this starts affecting your pocketbook, then you gotta do what you gotta do. Allow advertising?
#21 | Written by Switch Blayde on 2010/05/04.

There are two distinct issues.

1. Legal

I don’t know Canadian law but can speak from the U.S. perspective. Look what happened to the owner of the Red Rose site — prosecuted and convicted for obscenity. Why was she targeted? The type of stories — abusing pedo-aged children (I believe they were VERY young).

So from a legal perspective, you need to consider the risk you’re taking. Some readers may also believe it’s too dangerous to visit a site that contains that content.

2. Readers’ interest/aversion.

I believe the story codes should alert a reader about a story containing pedo. Saying that, and as an author, not all authors code everything, either intentionally or as an oversight. Also, the definition of pedo is rather vague (“An adult initiating sexual contact with a minor under the age of consent”). Age of consent varies from place to place so it’s too vague (in my state it’s 18 and I would never consider a 17-year-old as a pedo story). Also, the definition states that it is only when the adult initiates the sex. Is that valid? For that matter, what if the sex is between a 14-year-old and a 1-year old? Isn’t that pedo?

If the pedo code was clearly defined and authors used it accurately, readers should not be bothered by the existence of pedo stories on your site (other than the legal implications in #1). You could leave it to the reader to avoid a story based on the story code or you can implement an opt-out mechanism. But I repeat, it only works if the stories are coded properly AND the definition of pedo is clear.

I don’t write pedo stories, but I have one story with the pedo code because the girl’s age is 12. I used 12 because any older would have lost the impact. It’s really a story about drug addiction and the affect it has on the addict’s life and that of her family. So is that a pedo story?

Switch
#22 | Written by Grim on 2010/05/04.

I wouldn’t mind a system where users can opt-in or opt-out. The important thing is that this is a creative site and if an author wants to submit something that readers will read there should be nothing stopping them. It really doesn’t much matter about the ages of the characters in the stories because it is all fiction anyways.
#23 | Written by Tim Merrigan on 2010/05/04.

I vote for the choice solution. Of course, switching to the generally accepted definition of the “pedo” code (any participating character under 12, regardless of sex or degree of consent), rather than splitting it into “pedo” and “lolita” would help with that, as would adding “b” and “g” codes.
#24 | Written by Autumn Writer on 2010/05/04.

Here are a few points that come to mind.

First, I believe that it is true that there is a much greater propensity of pedo stories on the site now versus a few years ago. The increasing popularity makes me wonder why they are gaining in popularity. This is an important point. If the site becomes known as a gathering place for pedo material and its “connoisseurs” then we are all going to suffer. It will be like a tavern that becomes known as a “gay Bar” or a “Biker Bar” or a “Yuppie Bar”. Everyone not in the category will avoid it.

2. The “solution” might appease some readers. For others nothing short of censorship will be enough. What will happen when the “pedo” thing is resolved and the new issue is some other subject like “incest”, “MM” of “FF”? We”ll have a check-off for every category.

3. Perhaps a “User Instruction Page” would be a helpful addition. There, a reader could learn how to exclude genres they don’t like. There could be other instructional material. For example, a primer on some fundamentals of voting would be helpful. There could be a number of “how to’s”. A new member could be directed to this page when they signed up and there could be a button in plain sight on the Homepage that could take a user there.

In the same vein, I would suggest some sort of communication vehicle for readers. I know, they can always contact Lazeez. There should be more than that. In that way perhaps there could be a presentation of the line between censorship and sensibility. It could be used for many purposes, including encouraging interaction between readers and authors.

4. I doubt anyone wants censorship, but I think that authors need to help themselves. If an author knows that a story contains sensitive material, then there should be a requirement to tag it. There should be a penalty for failing to do so–such as elimination of the story. I doubt this would happen very often. Most authors are careful about tagging. It is the 90/10 rule = 90% of the problems/10% of the people.

5. Maybe there are too many codes. Some codes are for warning off readers who are squicked by a subject (eg “Pedo). Other codes are often for advertising, like MF, “cons”, “oral”, etc.

Why not have two levels of codes? Level 1 would include all the squick items, while level 2 would be the items of interest that we like to include.

On the same line of thought, how about a way to allow an author to rank codes by importance within the story? It would give the reader an idea of how prevalent a certain topic might be.

Another thought is that certain codes are ambivalent as to their meanings. For example, a “rape” code might be used when that act is intended to have erotic value, but also when it is part of the plot of the story but has not such value.

There’s my two cents.

AW
#25 | Written by Serin Vax on 2010/05/04.

I really hate how puritanical a-holes pushing their social agenda try to force everyone else into compliance with their world view. They do not understand that the price of freedom is tolerance.

Everyone is so emotionally charged over the issue, that they are neglecting some simple facts: First, these are stories, no children were harmed in the writing of this material. Second, these are stories, no children will be harmed in the reading of this material. Catering to the obnoxiously loud militant crusader fighting the fight to create a world free of kid sex literature is caving to the demands of a relatively small minority.

There is no way to please everyone, but I’m confident that the ones who are complaining about the pedo stories to the point of taking some action will not be satisfied by anything less than their complete removal… the world of such a moralist is one of absolutes. And while they are loud, they are very likely not as numerous as they seem to be. Most people are a bit more sensible.

Not to be an a-hole, but if you start restricting/ removing stories based on content, I will remove my works from your site and rescind permission to post any of them, as I absolutely refuse to support censorship in any form. Not that I expect I have a lot of weight to throw around, but I’d imagine many authors will feel the same. The attractiveness of your site to date has been the opportunity to create whatever literary works you wish free of restriction, and publish them in an open forum. If that goes away, what do you have?

It’s your site, do what you gotta do… but, IMHO, starting down this path is a great way to completely fail at everything you’ve accomplished to date.

-Vax
#26 | Written by Pariahsolo on 2010/05/04.

Censorship is a slippery slope and a pet peeve of mine. Self censorship is definitely the way to go. Allowing certain codes to be blocked by everyone is definitely a viable way to allows someone to self censor.

And though it pains me to ask, is it going to far to possible not allow any of the major squicks to appear on the Updates/New stories? I want to say that it isn’t but then my pet peeve flares and even though I don’t care for certain stories (like pedo) it is still censorship.
#27 | Written by massivereader on 2010/05/04.

Being a staunch libertarian I’m strongly opposed to any efforts to censor or restrict freedom of expression in any way. I may inadvertantly have contributed to Lazeez’s current dilemma when I recently decided to withdraw from participation in the SOL Discussion Group hosted on Google. That was not the intent of my action and it comes as a quite a surprise to me that it has been mis-intrepreted by so many that way.

I was merely voting with my feet.

I actually have no problem with hosting pedo content fiction on SOL. The codes are clearly there for those that want to avoid those kinds of stories. The mechanisms for excluding particular kinds of content are already in place. My issue was solely with using SOLDG, a place where I regularly visited and socialized, as a recruiting station / gathering point for people who were inappropriately enthisiastic about yery young age pedo (I’m talking specifically about sex with pre-pubescent children here). No matter what the legalities involved, I think it is wrong and evil to glamorize or accomodate that kind of attitude. While there is no proven link between reading pedophile fiction and abusing children, thought always preceeds action; so I choose to err on the side of caution in this particular matter and cancelled my membership in the Discussion Group.

I was no longer comfortable getting email digest of the recent posts to the group containing numerous and enthusiastic pedo stories and egregious posts, with ever growing numbers of new “fellow travellers” of the pedophile persuasion showing up.

I never once considered or suggested that the fiction on SOL should be censored and remain an enthusiastic supporter of the site _and_ freedom of artistic expression.

I fully recognize and appreciate the value of the transgressive in fiction (and all other forms of artistic expression) and believe it deserves a place to find an audience.

How could anyone think otherwise? I’m one of rache’s biggest fans. )

That said, I have no objection to adding more obvious controls for the less informed consumer on SOL to filter content. Maybe it will help improve the scoring system by reducing the frequency of “drive-by” down-scoring: the more intollerant readers that are in the habit of giving 1-1-1 scores to stories where they disapprove of the content.

To all my friends on SOLDG: I’ll be peeking in on occasion to see if the waters are any less muddy. If rache needs a work-around for third-world restrictions, I’ll set up short-term temporary accounts when and where they are needed for that purpose alone.

John
#28 | Written by JimWar on 2010/05/04.

I sympathize. I almost withdrew my one story that featured a 12 year old because of the things that have happened to a couple of the longtime authors who have primarily written in that genre. When I look around and see the age of consent going up, the persecution of people for their written words (not their actions) and the growing intolerance of mainstream America towards any hint of sexuality in our youth then I realize that we all need to do anything we can to protect those that writers that publish stories in genres that we may not personally approve of lest we wake up one morning and find all erotic writing is off limits.

I think of stories like Wizard’s Trailer Park series that are funny, full of sex between high school and middle school students and realize that a lot of readers consider that to be pedo. it is not labeled as such but some of the youngest characters having sex were middle school students.

My personal preference is such that I do not read any stroke stories that feature very young participants. Some excellent writers try to make these encounters realistic and believable but personally I think a story where a pre-teen and an adult have consensual sex and no one is hurt is more fantasy in comparison than Harry Potter. Since my mind wont believe it for me it’s a hard read.

I personally believe that your best option is to allow people to have the option of reading pedo stories but to make them opt in for that. That way anyone coming to the site will have to make a conscious decision to do so. All others will know that they will not encounter that material.

The real concern is where to draw the line. When I grew up in North Carolina the age of consent was 16. I remember friends going to South Carolina to get married where the age of consent was 14. North Carolina is still 16 as is South Carolina. I live now in Florida where the age of consent is 18. Most states make the age of consent different for people of the same age than they do for someone over 18 and a person under the age of consent. My point is that no one age limit can make everyone happy.

Good luck with this Lazeez, I think all of us regulars will support whatever decision you make.
#29 | Written by gary sears on 2010/05/04.

Indeed, you are confronted with the worst of our culture–the periodic boom/bust in morality. There has been a long-standing acceptance for pre-teen sex stories with the understanding that fantasy in no way reflects reality. Regrettably the current political climate demands that all THOUGHTS are painted with the same tar-brush as truly destructive pedophilic rapists. Your accept/deny policy may warrant an additional layer–let your customers know that they have the option of ‘turning the channel’– if they don’t like it, what the hell are they doing looking at it? It’s pandering to the lowest moral clime– that of the baptist preacher that rejects all that doesn’t conform to their little world view.

Ahem. Sorry. Here, I’ll wipe my foot-prints off this soap box and leave it for the next contender.
#30 | Written by EzzyB on 2010/05/04.

“They came for the pedo and I said nothing, I’m not a pedophile.”

“They came for the incest and I said nothing, I am not Incestuous.”

“They took the teen sex and I said nothing, I’m not a teen.”

“Welcome to Literotica!”

So while I do not like pedo stories they are, after all, still just stories. I furtively deny any piece of fiction can ‘turn’ someone who was otherwise not predisposed to such behavior into a pedophile. The thought is ludicrous. It harms no one but it does offend many (myself included).

I agree that the content should be allowed and simply choosing not to view it could be automated to make your readers more comfortable. You do run the risk I think of having to deal with the ‘squick of the week’. Perhaps next week it is incest, the next two teens making out in the back seat of a car. It’s a hard call.

I would counter Ernest’s comment by suggesting the definition of pedophilia be linked to the the following definition to leave no doubt what we’re talking about here.

“The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders 4th edition Text Revision (DSM-IV-TR) outlines specific criteria for use in the diagnosis of this disorder. These include the presence of sexually arousing fantasies, behaviors or urges that involve some kind of sexual activity with a prepubescent child (often aged 13 or younger) for six months or more, and that the subject has acted on these urges or suffers from distress as a result of having these feelings.”

Note that one has to actually act out the feelings or fantasies or suffer some emotional distress from them. Simply thinking dirty thoughts does not fit the clinical definition. That article goes on to say that the older person in these diagnoses can be as young as 16 so there is certainly a case that f boy or m gir codes can also fit the clinical diagnoses.

I know it sounds like a lot of legal and medical mumbo-jumbo, but if you are going to draw the line somewhere, you may as well do it with the best information you can get.

EzzyB
#31 | Written by mike on 2010/05/04.

the thing i like about the site is its diversity. so make it the readers choice to view or not view the content, all the content, if someone doesn’t like incest or pedo or whatever, let them ‘hide’ whatever content is ‘offensive’.
#32 | Written by AJ Martin on 2010/05/04.

I’m sorry, but I don’t see a problem here. I like the ability to write about characters of all ages doing what comes naturally to them and to be able to share my stories without worry that I’ll be deleted from the system. I usually write about love and coming of age and don’t write just about a very young person except by reference to a character’s early years, but that is just my preference. If when I’m reading, I come across something that I object to or becomes uninteresting, I go on to read another story. For a reader to condemn the entire website because they don’t like a certain type of story seems to me to be very childish. That’s the way I see it. AJ.
#33 | Written by Ernest Bywater on 2010/05/04.

Further to my earlier post, made just before dashing off for some blood tests, I’ve been thinking about this, and have checked a couple of things. I think part of the problem is also the variations on definitions and people’s expectations. From the Code Definitions page (http://storiesonline.net/docs/code_faq.php ) – which I’m sure a lot of readers do NOT read, we get the following:

pedo Pedophilia - An adult initiating sexual contact with a minor under the age of consent
lolita Lolita – When a little girl is the instigator of sex, seducing an older man or woman. The opposite of pedo.

And we also have:

M or F – is a male or female over 18 years of age
m or f – is a male or female under 18 years of age
boy or gi – is a male or female under 12 years of age

These do NOT always align with the expectations of the readers as many go with the definitions used by society, and they vary from society to society.

An example of the conflict is a story about a 21 year old male with a 16 year old female. In some places this would require a pedo code as the age of consent is 17 or 18, while others, like where I live, it does NOT require a pedo code as the age of consent is 16. Yet most societies regard pedo as one partner being a preteen.

I do NOT write stories with sex scenes involving anyone under 16 years of age as that can get me some serious prison time where I live. So some of my stories carry the codes Mf, mf, Ff, ff but not pedo as the characters are over the age of consent here; but, if I was writing in another state I would have to add the pedo code because they have a higher age of consent.

I’ve checked the codes on some of the pedo coded stories, and found the few I checked to be properly coded, while some have codes like pedo, Mf, Fm and all the characters are teenagers or older; others have codes like pedo, gi, boy – and these may or may not involve adults as the code definitions does NOT provide a way to code for an over 12 with and under 12. Thus a fourteen year old girl with an eleven year old girl will only get pedo, gi, les as they are the only legitimate options as the f-gi combo doesn’t exist and you can’t show a f by themselves. This can easily lead to people thinking a story is improperly coded, even when it’s done as best as possible. I’m not sure how to resolve this issue, unless there are changes to the definitions.

I’d suggest the addition of sex codes of Mboy, Mgi, mboy, mgi, boyboy, boygi, Fboy, fboy, Fgi, fgi, gigi – this will make the ages of the sex partners clearer to all concerned.

OR

A change to the pedo and lolita codes definitions to align with the gi and boy codes, so any story with pedo or lolita involves sex with a character under 12. Thus, the inclusion of either of these codes indicates sex with someone under 12, but the gender mix is not obvious.

This second option would be the easiest to implement, and I think it’s the best way to go. Any changes will require authors to go back and review the codes of any stories they have, but that’s not a tiresome task, as I’ve done that myself, and is an easy change to make.
#34 | Written by delbert on 2010/05/04.

The rise in pedo writers may be attributed to the collapse of the huge Perverts R Us site hosted on ASSTR, which was all pedo. On a personal level, I don’t want these writers migrating to SOL. I know that many of the stories on SOL rise above mere stroke and contain strong elements of character development, plot, imagination and great portrayals of erotica. Pedo stroke stories diminish the quality of the site and tarnish some great SOL writers.
Libertarian ideals be damned, I don’t want to read the glorification of pedo rape or abuse.

Fick Suck
#35 | Written by Mike on 2010/05/04.

Your proposal is the minimum acceptable to me. I’d like to see a similar choice for Dom stories. Obviously there are dangers in censorship, but a site owner has to draw some lines. Pedo and Dom stories seem to be taking over this site. Dom, is an adult choice to be at least tolerated. Pedophilia, usually very sympathetically presented, is illegal and a recognized mental illness–not to mention ethically repugnant. I see no reason to provide a venue for Pedo stories and would prefer they were excluded. At a minimum there needs to be a feedback loop for readers to report Pedo stories not self identified.
#36 | Written by LVWolfman on 2010/05/04.

I like your preliminary solution. I’d probably choose to see it, but use the story codes to avoid what I don’t want to read. Much like I do with the rash of gay and gay pedo stories flooding the new stories list. I haven’t read them, the synopsis told me all I needed to know.
#37 | Written by Englishperv on 2010/05/04.

“…or suffers from distress as a result of having these feelings.”

How extremely vague is that?! Define the dividing-line for ‘distress’. An itch? An accelerated heartbeat? A mild pining for what you can’t have? A strong pining for what you can’t have? No? – okay, a ‘medium’ pining for what you can’t have? Laying awake all night wracked with guilt about one’s vile feelings? – I guess the last would qualify, but there must be a million shades below that. One person’s distress is another’s masochistic/hedonistic pleasure.

Besides, i resent the P word being classed as a ‘mental disorder’ by the psychological ‘authorities’, whom in this day and age still have no more idea how to cure ‘mental illness’ – even a case of standard depression – than did a medieval exorcist. Besides hitting it with drugs that is, which in the long term utterly confuses the brain in how to function normally. If pedophilia is a mental disorder, then so is homosexuality. End of.

Sorry, this is a whole other debate, and this is not the place for it. But it’s an emotive issue – we’re seeing right here on SOL how the ‘convential’ outlook on the P word inevitably leads to confusion in the very foundations of free speech, freedom of mind and the very essence of what a human being is.
#38 | Written by LVWolfman on 2010/05/04.

BTw, the current coding system is fine. I have zero problems recognizing a 33kb story marked “boy Mm pedo gay inc ws Much Sex” as something I don’t care to read.
#39 | Written by Mike on 2010/05/04.

I think adults or teenagers with preteens is what most people think of as Pedo, and which is particularly objectionable. Let teenagers do what ever they want among themselves, fictionally or otherwise. Adults with teens is pretty murky and I’d assign some other code and let people decide whether to read, pass or exclude the genre.
#40 | Written by Andrew Johns on 2010/05/04.

I’ve previously stated in the discussion group a long time ago, as well as on my reviewer page, that I tend to stay away from stories that get into the gi/boy codes, which is supposed to be 12 and under, where the m or f code is 13-17. It’s always been my point of view that teenagers are going to be sexually curious, and I’d like to hope that most if not all pre-teens are not active. I know I’m kidding myself, but I do like to see a kid get to be a kid before hormones take over.

There has been a substantial increase in pedo stories lately, and I don’t see a way to curb it effectively short of only allowing an author one per week for the start of a new story. Even that would be a hassle for Lazeez, because many authors have multiple names and/or accounts to post from.

While premium members have a way to filter content, most folks probably haven’t played with it, or used the settings to keep the New/Updated lists from displaying the, as well. I sometimes have to flip one or another back to display to find a story an author or reader asks me to review, and I always get a rude surprise when I forget to put it back. (In fact, I just had to put boy/gi back on my exclusion list. Good reminder!)

I do know that if you find a story that isn’t coded right (an under 13 boy/girl being coded as m/f instead of boy/gi) you can use the link at the top to email the webmaster and give the story link, and Lazeez WILL correct the codes. I’ve done it myself a few times for major subjects like underage being coded wrong or ws/scat being in a story without codes. And if an author blows a major code that offends you, let them know with your vote or your comments.

I think that the search/display exclusions need to be something that is available to everyone, not just premium members. Then, make sure that anyone that complains knows it’s there. If that isn’t good enough for them, they know where the virtual door is.

That’s the only solution I can see working, because different folks object to different things. As long as everyone has the same choices for filtering content displayed, it should work.

And Lazeez, yours isn’t the only place that has this kind of problem. A torrent site I visit sometimes once had a 2 week rash of 90% of the porn content being scat, much of it not labelled as more than “Misc/Fetish”. Since folks include screen prints, there were a ton of unhappy campers that went to look at what had been posted, and got seriously grossed out. (And yes, it hit the fan, pun intended.)

Thanks for being kind enough to solicit feedback from the readers and contributors, Lazeez. It’s why SOL continues to be the best story site on the web.
#41 | Written by Carl on 2010/05/04.

After Reading the comments I figured I would throw out my 2 cents. First I despise censorship with a passion. Second in regards to the legal climate in the good old US I find most of the DA’s to be morons who should be disbarred – tarred and feathered and run out of the country on a rail. As for your problem Lazeez suggestion one check with a competent attorney and make sure you are not violating any Canadian laws, you have to protect yourself first. If no laws are being violated educate the readers about exclusions, add the exclusions to the non paid members. set a standard to the coding for the more sensitive topics , Pedo ,Rape , and so on. For pedo you could say that any sex that occurs with a partner that is 12 or less must be coded. I know that I would be willing and I am sure others would also to assist you have a place were the readers can go and leave a note that story ABC in chapter 3 contains pedo, one of the volunteers reads the chapter and sends you a report meets criteria should be coded pedo or does not meet the criteria set by SOL no pedo code needed. This way we the members can assist you in making the coding better, you have done what is needed to protect yourself and if a member feels that this is not enough then maybe this is not the place for them
#42 | Written by Rachael Ross on 2010/05/04.

Hi. Eliminate pedophilia and another fetish will follow in its footsteps until the site no longer represents your original intentions. If a vocal minority succeeds in imposing their will upon your site, then…Well, that sounds bad all by itself. Have you considered dividing the site into a separate area? I don’t know if it’s feasible, but if stories of a more extreme nature (Pedo, Snuff, Necro, etc) could somehow be listed separately a mouse click away from the main page with appropriate roadsigns to inform readers of the dangerous curves ahead, it might benefit not only readers trying to avoid those stories, but the authors who write them. It might cut down on my hate mail if I don’t have to rely on codes and synopsis to deter some of the less, uh…attentive…readers who confuse me with Frank Downy. (No offense Frank)

Anyway, I’m only here for the tequila. Good luck Lazeez. I worship you, man!
#43 | Written by EzzyB on 2010/05/04.

I think that was my point Ernest. If action is to be taken you need some definition of just what pedophilia is. A Lolita tag may or may not be. I think you are defining pedophilia based on laws defining statutory rape or age of consent.

The medical definition of pedophilia is something entirely different.

Ezzy
#44 | Written by ChrisW on 2010/05/04.

It is “FICTION,” NOT REAL!!!!!!
Geese give me a break censorship strikes again
Just put those stories in the subscript area only with lockout flags to keep the wimps happy!
#45 | Written by Englishperv on 2010/05/04.

“..a recognized mental illness–not to mention ethically repugnant.”

BY whom, and TO whom, Mike? 1) as i stated elsewhere, BY a medical establishment who still have no more clue how to cure a mere case of depression than did a medieval exorcist – therefore i see absolutely no reason to put my faith in their judgement as to what is and isn’t ‘mental illness’ 2) ethically repugnant TO a majority, yes (however, this ‘majority’ might well be much closer to 50% than you would like to think). So do we have to bend to the majority in every respect of life?

Here’s another ‘ethically repugnant’ premise for you: murder – so let’s ban all those murder-mysteries and private dick stories much loved as Sunday viewing and coffee-shop reading by your Aunt and Gran. These are actually worse than pedo-fiction IMO. They trivialize murder, sanitize it, it’s just like saying ‘oh we all know this happens so let’s get a little light entertainment out of it.

Oh, and war movies and stories would definately have to be out. Oh, but wait – war is a ‘necessary’ evil, isn’t it? – even where it involves the napalming or de-limbing of children – so i guess that’s okay. Not morally repugnant, hey? Okay to write about? – or should it be shut out of sight? Goodbye to ‘Bridge on the River Kwai’ or ‘Where Eagles Dare’ – an awful lot of morally repugnant things happen in those, not least where are expected to delight in the machine-gunning down of a lot of hapless Germans.
#46 | Written by Anja on 2010/05/04.

I second the preliminary proposed solution because, I am for free speech and the use of codes to select stories, BUT there is the legal issue with pedo contend, you may get in to problems, if you visit sites with paedophile.
Some future suggestions:
open Categories Preferences for non-members,
distinguish some codes between used in sexual contend or as non stroke part of the story (describing crimes (rape, abuse…) for sexual gratification or as a dramatic action) or let the codes be grouped by importance and contend,
enable readers to report wrongly coded stories.
#47 | Written by Dusty on 2010/05/04.

I don’t like the “opt in/opt out” solution because after you jumped through that hoop then the next complaint will be “incest’ or “gay male” or whatever genre that someone doesn’t like. Educating your customers on how to exclude genres they have no interest in is the key. I’m also for “turning the channel” on stories I don’t like and authors too for that matter. For example, I don’t read “mattwatt” stories. His domination/submission stories are a bit extreme for me and that’s okay. Others may like his stories but they are not for me, so I don’t read them. When I see his name attached to a story I toggle right past it! I can’t be offended by what I don’t read!!! If more of us “adults” exercised the power of the “toggle slider” or the “exclude buttons” we wouldn’t be having this discussion.
#48 | Written by Sterling on 2010/05/04.

I’m not wild about this (I read pedo stories with redeeming value and also try to write them) but if it’s got to be done I can think of some considerations.

The ideas about “just use the existing codes” doesn’t get at the fundamental problem. I think these readers want the fact that pedo stories exist on the site excluded entirely from their consciousness. You don’t want to be aware of the cemetery next door when you go to a hospital. You may not want to think about walking by a whorehouse on your way to your yoga class. So many readers don’t want to think about pedo stories existing — even if they can remember, when asked, that they are here and hidden from view. So Lazeez’s idea of an initial choice sounds good to solve the problem.

There is no point in arguing over a “correct” definition for “pedo”. Assuming there’s only going to be one binary choice and not a menu, the division is just a public relations and marketing decision for Lazeez to make about what is on what side. (I might start with “gi” and “boy” codes, period. But if it’s good business to omit cannibalism and sadism too, no problem with me.). He ought to explain the details to authors of what puts you on one side or the other. Just like moviemakers get their “R” and “PG” ratings and then cut scenes to get the rating they want, authors might do that too, though self-policed in this case.

It might be worth identifying some of these authors who are responsible for the great increase in pedo stories and just ask them respectfully what’s going on. We might learn something useful.
#49 | Written by Bondi Beach on 2010/05/04.

As repugnant as pedo stories may be to some readers, once you offer this option on one category, you must offer it on all. As others have pointed out in so many words, some people think there’s no redeeming value in pedo. Others say the same thing about rape.

Three other issues:

(1) Do you have evidence that a significant number of readers are leaving the site because of pedo stories?

(2) What are you going to do when readers who object to rape (or dog) stories start to leave?

(3) Is the number of pedo stories in fact increasing? (Not that it matters in resolving the first two issues.)

bb
#50 | Written by Millard Watson on 2010/05/04.

Maybe you should set a filter much like your story search system where the member can set his own squicks in that any thing that the member does not want to see can be pre-filtered out of his displayed content. You do a great job of running this site and to my knowledge it is the most flexible and easy to use site of its kind on the net. Thank you!

Comment Pages:

Previous Post Next Post

Lazeez's Corner

Recent Posts

Browse by Tags

Sensitive content issue