wizzard
2003-06-10 07:57 pm UTC (link)

The first entry has been friends locked. I hate it when they do that. This comment in the second entry was certainly wanky.

Plus, how is it everyone is throwing stones? Aren't you the one in a poly relationship? Didn't harmonybf have an abortion at 19? Who here is pure and clean and completely mistake free? I too was 'fucking around' with my long term boyfriend at 15...I guess

Personal attacks are always fun.

(Reply to this)

	petulance 2003-06-10 08:10 pm UTC (link)
	Alas, the first entry is friends-locked now. However, I do find the heading Evil Bitch Mom's Unite! horrifying in and of itself. What can I say, I have a phobia of apostrophe dysfunction. (Reply to this)

	chaos_priestess 2003-06-10 08:44 pm UTC (link)
	I feel ashamed. I couldn't help myself... I had to put my semesters of Intro to Psych and Developmental Psych to the test over this. And I do believe all these laws do go overboard. They are squashing a normal, biological urge within an adolescence! (Reply to this)(Thread)

	phosfate 2003-06-10 08:59 pm UTC (link)
	Oh, I agree - shoot, 14-year-olds are supposed to have Playboy, so they can learn what stupid is. That said, I'm not going to risk jail because some dumbass kid wants to read K/S. Let her start her own list. Do the kids who write Digimon rapefic have to go to juvie for corrupting themselves? (Reply to this)(Parent)

esorlehcar
2003-06-10 08:47 pm UTC (link)

(Reply to this)(Thread)

	hotpinkdragones 2003-06-10 08:57 pm UTC (link)
	Or every single Harlequin romance novel? -hp (Reply to this)(Parent)

	pradaloz 2003-06-10 09:00 pm UTC (link)
	I had the ~~not very~~ good fortune of stumbling across one of Jean M. Auel's books at a tender young age. I only wish I'd gotten my introduction to smut from the internet. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	hotpinkdragones 2003-06-10 09:24 pm UTC (link)
	The Clan of the Cave Bear was on the required reading list for my high school. Did they not think that people would continue to read the rest of the series? -hp (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	ymfaery 2003-06-10 09:33 pm UTC (link)
	Maybe they thought people would graduate first. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	redpanda 2003-06-10 09:25 pm UTC (link)
	"Valley Of The ~~Jondalar Is Apparently Hung Like~~ Horses," eh? So it wasn't just me! (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

zannechaos
2003-06-11 02:45 am UTC (link)

"Valley Of The ~~Jondalar Is Apparently Hung Like~~ Horses," eh? So it wasn't just me!

::chokes on her coffee!:: No, no, it wasn't just you.

I read it in my senior year of High School, and while it wasn't the smuttiest thing I'd read (I managed to get my hands on a copy of Nancy Friday's "Women On Top" at age 16) I was raising my eyebrows because... well... one, the book's mainstream, but it wasn't really so much that. I was starting to wonder if it was going to get into bestality, since the lines between them and the animals were just a wee blurry at times.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	pradaloz 2003-06-11 03:58 am UTC (link)
	I read it in my senior year of High School, I was 14. bursts into hysterical sobs ...then again, it certainly would explain a lot. OMGWTF???!!!?!?!?!!1111 It's true! Reading porn at a young age does warp you! (Reply to this)(Parent)

	iris 2003-06-18 07:48 am UTC (link)
	I read it in middle school and I think I was scarred for life. All that stuff about how he always has to be so careful when he's having sex because he's too big to fit inside the average woman, and how Ayla is the only woman he can fit his entire schlong inside of... throws up (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

zannechaos
2003-06-18 07:55 am UTC (link)

...thank you. I'd managed to repress that. ::beating head on desk:: Actually, it's funny. If you've read The Godfather, there's a couple like that (although they're not together) and the reason the woman was like that was due to abnormal development that could be corrected with surgery. I don't recall right now what it was (it's been about 2 years since I've read The Godfather) but I can't help now but think that Ayla's definitely abnormal if she can take something that big without lots of practice and experience (and lube!).

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	iris 2003-06-18 09:39 pm UTC (link)
	laughs Yeah. I may not have the experience to know most of the mechanics of sex, but I know that that just ain't right. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	mydarkstar 2003-06-15 12:39 pm UTC (link)
	In addition to reading VC Andrews at 12, I found and read the Sleeping Beauty books at the library - just shelved in the fiction section! No "WARNING WARNING NO CHILDREN ALLOWED EVER OR WE'LL CALL THE COPS" signs or anything! - at 13. Does this mean I'm warped for life now? (Reply to this)(Parent)

	ymfaery 2003-06-10 09:32 pm UTC (link)
	Don't forget Nora Roberts, aka JD Robb. (Reply to this)(Parent)

unoriginality
2003-06-10 11:18 pm UTC (link)

847.012 Prohibition of sale or other distribution of harmful materials to persons under 18 years of age; penalty.--

(1) As used in this section, "knowingly" means having the general knowledge of, reason to know, or a belief or ground for belief which warrants further inspection or inquiry of both
...

(b) Any book, pamphlet, magazine, printed matter however reproduced, or sound recording which contains any matter defined in s. 847.001, explicit and detailed verbal descriptions or narrative accounts of sexual excitement, or sexual conduct and which is harmful to minors.

May I stress the "harmful materials" and the "sexual conduct AND which is harmful to minors" parts? There's no harm in a kid reading smut. Standard, straight, smut. Rapefic I'd question. Some heavy BDSM stuff you can argue. Straight smut? Nope. Not harming. I've been reading smut since I was 12. I have a perverted sense of humor, but I'm hardly sleeping with every guy I know (19 and never even been kissed no less!) and I'm certainly not forcing it on anyone. (I'll tease my uber-prudish friend Becky but I'd never force this stuff on her against her will.)

So where's the harm again? As long as it's not harmful, I don't see what the big deal is. Yes, a parent has the right to say "no, I don't want you looking at this". That's not the law's job though. And yes, there should be a warning on the fic. This is NC-17. The ratings and what they mean are easily available. The ratings are set up to let people know the content at a glance- it's up to the people to educate themselves on what the ratings MEAN. There's a poster on the movie theatre a couple blocks from here that says, "The system can't work if you don't know the system." That means get off your lazy asses and find it. I shouldn't have to spell out "This fic contains violence, swearing, innuendo, and some mild sexual content and earns the rating R." I should be able to just say "This fic is rated R." R INDICATES all those things.

Gah, I'm done now. I'm just sick of parents thinking that the law and everyone else in this country is responsible for raising their fucking spawn for them. I hate lazy parents.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	nekoneko 2003-06-10 11:35 pm UTC (link)
	I hate lazy parents. Don't forget self-righteous ones. Somehow, I could imagine my aunt in this wank... Ergh. I wish I wasn't related to her. >_<;; (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	chaos_priestess 2003-06-10 11:40 pm UTC (link)
	This person seems like the type to say "Laws are there for a reason!" and when the government implements a law she doesn't like... "It's a stupid law! Let's protest and get it taken down!" Gee, aren't laws there for a reason? (Reply to this)(Parent)

	Re: unoriginality 2003-06-11 12:53 am UTC (link)
	-_- I have members of my family like this too. I think most people do. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	petulance 2003-06-10 11:43 pm UTC (link)
	I'm just sick of parents thinking that the law and everyone else in this country is responsible for raising their fucking spawn for them. I hate lazy parents. clap clap clap I so agree! Nothing like moral outrage first thing in the morning. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

iczer6
2003-06-10 11:52 pm UTC (link)

Ditto. Last time I checked it was the authors responsibility to make sure that underage kids don't read their stuff. Here I thought it was the PARENTS job. Silly me.

Fact is they really have no way of knowing who's reading thier fic [unless the readers tells them] and even then they have no way of knowing that the other person is being honest.

I agree that Debbie Does Dallas will never replace Bambi as family viewing but I doubt any kid will end a serial killer because they read a Lex/Clark smut fic when they were 15.

Icz

(Reply to this)(Parent)

mirabellawotr
2003-06-10 11:49 pm UTC (link)

Yes, but again, the point of her post was not that it's right or wrong to let kids see this stuff. The point is that it's illegal, which is not the same thing as wrong, and that other people's kids engaging in illegal activities with her material has legal consequences for her regardless of who thinks it's right or wrong.

As a mother, I am pretty militant in my belief that raising my daughter is my job, not the job of the state or the federal court system or whatever. As a writer of occasionally NC-17 fanfic, I completely agree with her point that even unjust laws get enforced, and fanfic writers have a right to protect themselves from the consequences of that enforcement.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	Re: unoriginality 2003-06-11 12:55 am UTC (link)
	I was pointing out the AND part for it. If the stuff isn't harming the child- if you cannot PROVE that harm was done to the minor, then you can get off on a technicality. The law's funny like that. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

jfpbookworm
2003-06-11 07:57 am UTC (link)

(Disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer, though I've taken several classes in First Amendment law. This isn't legal advice; if you're actually worried about being prosecuted, find a lawyer in your jurisdiction.)

I was pointing out the AND part for it. If the stuff isn't harming the child- if you cannot PROVE that harm was done to the minor, then you can get off on a technicality. The law's funny like that.

Not exactly. "Harmful to minors" doesn't mean you have to show harm. It's usually defined elsewhere in the statute, and most of the ones I've seen use the Miller test (appeals to prurient interest, patently offensive, lacks redeeming value) as applied to minors.

A lot of fanfic won't appeal to the prurient interest of minors if taken as a whole, but a lot will. Patently offensive to minors is often defined as well, and a lot of the NC17 stories possibly are. Most fanfic has redeeming literary value for minors, I think, depending on the story. Stories that are entirely erotica may not be.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	Re: unoriginality 2003-06-11 09:53 am UTC (link)
	I stand corrected then. I shall stand by my other statement instead that the law needs to stay out of the parenting bit and that parents need to learn how to parent or quit their damned whining. Although I'd love to know how they expect us to know who the hell is reading our work on the internet. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	unoriginality 2003-06-11 01:00 am UTC (link)
	On a side note since I forgot it in my last post, I wish to applaud you for taking responsibility for your own child. You're one of the parents that I can respect. applaud! (Reply to this)(Parent)

	embitca 2003-06-10 11:37 pm UTC (link)
	Never mind V C Andrews and Jackie Collins, what about Judy Blume? She's considered a juvie writer and she's written smut! Anyone can walk into B&N and buy a copy of Delta of Venus by Anais Nin and no one checks your ID. Assuming of course you live someplace where they haven't preemptively banned the book. Heh. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

esorlehcar
2003-06-11 12:07 am UTC (link)

V.C. Andrews is considered a juvie writer, isn't she? That's why I mentioned her. Judy Blume is a much higher quality of juvie writer (it helps that she didn't die more than 10 years ago and yet mysteriously continue to publish, of course *g*).

But yeah, that was basically my point. At 13 and 14 I checked out more than my share of smut from the local library - librarians/book store clerks let kids walk away with sexually explicit material every day, and I doubt that is any different in Florida. Unless they're prosecuting librarians for letting 13-year-olds take home stacks of harelequin romance novels (and that WOULD have made the news), I think erotica published online with appropriate warnings is relatively safe.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	phosfate 2003-06-11 12:20 am UTC (link)
	I don't know how she's categorized now, but back in the day VC Andrews (now VC Andrews[TM]) was most definitely not a juvie writer, and our parents warned us not to read her as they pulled dog-eared copies of Flowers in the Attic from their straw pool totes. This of course made her mandatory reading for teen girls. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

esorlehcar
2003-06-11 12:27 am UTC (link)

and our parents warned us not to read her as they pulled dog-eared copies of Flowers in the Attic from their straw pool totes. This of course made her mandatory reading for teen girls.

Really? Funny how different it was for me - I don't think I've ever seen anyone over the age of about 15 with one of her books, and just about everyone I know who has read her (the majority of the women I know, actually) did so at about 12 or 13. I rather shudder to think now - they're not exactly appropriate books for that age group. Though I suppose they didn't do me any lasting harm, except perhaps for my lingering fixation with incest... :-)

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	phosfate 2003-06-11 12:46 am UTC (link)
	I never read her. I wouldn't've touched one of Mom's grocery-store novels on a bet, and I was much more interested in the copy of Delta of Venus I kept under the bed. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

zannechaos
2003-06-11 02:53 am UTC (link)

::snerks:: I saw the "Flowers in the Attic" movie under the recommendation by my best friend who was a bit more than a year younger than me.

Never read the books. If an underage teenager like me was going to hide forbidden material, it might as well be something worth hiding. ::coughcoughNancyFridayWomenOnTopcough::

And I turned out all right, hardly promiscious by anyone's standards. Parents should monitor what their children do online if they're that worried about things.

(Reply to this)(Parent)

	singe 2003-06-11 03:27 am UTC (link)
	Never read VC either but 'Delta of Venus' was a classic. But I hate Anais Nin. Those diaries got on my nerves. My childhood porn books were 'Titan' by whatshisname, anything by Jean Auel, anything by Anne Rice and certain parts of Stephen King's books. No wonder I'm a wreck! (Reply to this)(Parent)

	nekoneko 2003-06-11 04:58 am UTC (link)
	I read some of Flowers in the Attic. That book creeped me out. And I think I was about 13 when I tried to read it. o.o;;; Geez. (Reply to this)(Parent)

quinctia
2003-06-11 07:58 am UTC (link)

Well when I was about 14, 15 or so, my mother suggested I read her V.C. Andrews books (then again, they were better in terms of vulgarity than the Stephen King books). My high school also had several of her books in the library there, so I had full access to all the ones I wanted. Only read the Dollanganger series, though.

Not as bad as a Harlequin, IMO, because there was some plot.

(Reply to this)(Parent)

	embitca 2003-06-11 12:22 am UTC (link)
	Nope, VC Andrews was not marketed as a juvie writer. In fact, she was verboten where I went to school, but we all passed her books around. I blame her for my Lynncestuous ways. Reposted because typos change the meaning of things. (Reply to this)(Parent)

aruru
2003-06-11 04:46 pm UTC (link)

Wow, you guys remember all your first books? Heh. XD

I never really read any trashy softcore porn until a friend of mine gave me one of her romance novels to keep, and hell if I can remember what it was about anymore (yup, that bad), but I DO remember reading Seventeen magazine's occassional articles on so-called "honest talk about (straight) sex" with much interest when I was a teen. *LOL* Maybe this is why I never got around to liking flowery descriptions of genitalia, I was used to reading mostly clinical-type terms.

But yeah, it didn't warp me either... I think. ~~The Internet combined with my case of TWS is doing a fine job of it, though!~~

(Reply to this)(Parent)

	jfpbookworm 2003-06-10 09:53 pm UTC (link)
	Gah. The original poster (of the post that wasn't locked) was okay in this respect, but I'm really sick of folks conflating what's legal/illegal and what's ethical/unethical, especially by people who know jack shit about First Amendment law (or the equivalent in their jurisdiction). (Reply to this)

	moonjaguar 2003-06-11 06:22 am UTC (link)
	I'm wondering how the State of Florida applies to the entire internet. (Reply to this)(Thread)

kimera
2003-06-11 10:37 pm UTC (link)

I'm thinking its because it's where she lives, and therefore if she gets charged, that's where she'd be prosecuted, but that's just logic.

And then it made me think about the fact that I was legally allowed to *have* sex at 14, but not to read about it, according to the American rating system. And how at the time, as far as I knew, NC-17 meant 18A, which meant as long as I had parental consent, I was okay.

*shrugs* I'm 19 now, so not being legal age for anything doesn't matter anymore for me anyway. Hah!

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	mpoetess 2003-06-12 12:51 am UTC (link)
	Until you try to get into a bar [in the US]. ;-) Even if you're not drinking. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	aruru 2003-06-12 03:54 am UTC (link)
	Canadian, I presume? :) (Reply to this)(Parent)

snowball
2003-06-11 09:28 am UTC (link)

...Is it illegal if your parents gave you permission to read smut? Because I know I was reading softcore porn romance novels at 15 and my mom didn't care. She thought it was a normal part of my development and knew I'd grow out of it in a couple years anyway. I wasn't scarred in the slightest, except that I've developed a strong distaste for the words 'shaft' and 'maidenhood'... ;)

(Reply to this)

pradaloz
2003-06-13 05:38 pm UTC (link)

After reading through all the latest comments, I have to ask:

If you're that concerned about being prosecuted for having NC-17 material that minors can access on your website, why would you post that material? Barring implementation of an AVS, there's no way to ensure that minors won't access your smut. Keeping it online when you're supposedly that upset about the thought of prosecution or (god forbid) the underage reading porn seems a bit...well, retarded.

(Reply to this)