Re: Uh-huh... *is scared*

Subject: Re: Uh-huh... *is scared*
Author: thejadefalcon
Posted on: 2009-01-13 15:41:00 UTC

Thanks for the information. Although it still confuses me a bit that sex leads to UTIs... whatever.

Jump to this post's position in the thread ↴

M and NC-17 by thejadefalcon on 2009-01-06 14:25:00 UTC Reply

Very few people seem to know the answer to my question, so I thought I’d come to you and see what you thought.

Where exactly is the line drawn between M and NC-17 (or MA as FF now uses)? Because I have a number of stories planned that I don’t particularly want to get banned for (on this note, do people get a warning first, or are they instantly kicked off?).

What is the line between M and MA for gore? What is the line for swearing? Most importantly, what is the line between M and MA in regards to sexual content? Is there a line at all, or is it just depending on the context it's in and the administrator who sees it?

Often up to the person looking by IndeMaat on 2009-01-06 21:51:00 UTC Reply

FFnet doesn't allow MA rated stuff, but says the rating is for graphic sex and graphic violence. But what is graphic?

It seems that if you name all the bit parts by their proper names it's graphic (or too graphic for FFnet). Talking in metaphores and similies would often be okay for M, or even T (though will probably make half the people here want to slap you).

I once wrote a scene were there was one mention of how blood splattered. I offered it for consideration to an administrator of a fanfic site/forum and suggested an M rating. They said I should scratch the sentence about the blood and tag on an M rating (while the blood sentence was the only reason I thought it should be M). It's currently on FFnet with the blood line and rated T. Used to be M, but the rest of the story so is not, and I don't think the one sentence has enough shock effect in it to warrant the M.

And really do warn for things. There's another story, in the same fandom as my above mentioned story, where a torture scene takes place. It's rated T, but I stopped reading when the first joint popped. I asked the author to at least warn for gore if they weren't going to mark their story as M. The torture is built up slowly, and that's just too much drama (for lack of a better word) for a T rated fic.

Expand this post →

*curses* by thejadefalcon on 2009-01-07 10:13:00 UTC Reply

"FFnet doesn't allow MA rated stuff"

Why do you think I was asking? :P

"It seems that if you name all the bit parts by their proper names it's graphic (or too graphic for FFnet)."

Damn. My rule is (apart from trying to avoid euphemisms as much as possible) to always call things by their biological names (pen*s, vag*na etc) and never to turn crude (c*ck, c*nt etc). That, to me, separates the sex from the porn.

Thanks for the response though.

Expand this post →

Re: *curses* by Pads on 2009-01-07 18:05:00 UTC Reply

Out of interest, how do you deal with people talking about their wedding vegetables? 'Cause in dialogue, a lot of the time, medical terms aren't going to do you many favours in terms of characterisation.

Trojie and I keep having this problem with her Narnia fics. Latest decision we made on how Caspian X would refer to the crown jewels was based on the realisation that the Telmarines probably originated on the Bounty, and, being nautical types, they'd know some fairly colourful language. So we turned to the Earl of Rochester as an example of contemporary terms the Telmarines, or at least the ones who aren't posh and kingly, might use. Unfortunately, this is actually fairly sound logic, so we couldn't throw it out the window after realising just what sort of language this would require us to use.

Plan number two, therefore, is to go with courtly language instead, as all this requires is asking one of my lecturers "How would King Arthur describe his testicles?"

Expand this post →

Re: *curses* by Ansela on 2009-01-08 21:52:00 UTC Reply

"How would King Arthur describe his testicles?"

You actually asked your lecturer this? What was their reply?

funnily enough, I haven't dared ask yet (nm) by Pads on 2009-01-09 02:39:00 UTC Reply

Re: *curses* by thejadefalcon on 2009-01-08 11:03:00 UTC Reply

"Out of interest, how do you deal with people talking about their wedding vegetables?"

Wedding vegetables? That's a new way of referring to them. In narration, I stick to biological terms or simply 'genitalia' or something, but in speech, I say whatever I feel the character would say based on their personality and their current state of mind.

"How would King Arthur describe his testicles?"

Delicately.

Expand this post →
I was under the impression... by The Trojanhorse on 2009-01-07 20:08:00 UTC Reply

... that the only concrete decision we'd reached was that Caspian would never say 'cock'?

I'm still in favour of euphemisms. Euphemisms all the way!

we would have reached more decisions, except... by Pads on 2009-01-08 06:17:00 UTC Reply

...You wouldn't let me quote Rochester while you were at work. And I really don't blame you.

I rise at eleven, I dine about two
I get drunk before seven, and the next thing I do,
I send for my whore, when for fear of a clap,
I spend in her hand, and I spew in her lap;
Then we quarrel and scold, till I fall fast asleep,
When the bitch growing bold, to my pocket does creep.
Then slyly she leaves me, and to revenge the affront,
At once she bereaves me of money and c*nt.

If you can think of a legitimate way for Caspian X to use such language, I salute you.

Expand this post →

They could ... have a dramatic poetry reading? (nm) by The Trojanhorse on 2009-01-09 07:10:00 UTC Reply
Woah... by thejadefalcon on 2009-01-08 11:04:00 UTC Reply

I've never heard of this guy, but he sounds like he's an... interesting poet.

no suggestions for Narnian bodily terms, then? by Pads on 2009-01-08 19:28:00 UTC Reply

Damn. I was hoping somebody might be able to come up with something.

There's a film about him called The Libertine, starring Johnny Depp. It begins with him telling the audience that he knows they all want to shag him, and he doesn't blame them, and they'd love it because he's brilliant in bed, and they can shag him if they want because he can't get enough. English degrees contain some funny stuff.

Hmm... by thejadefalcon on 2009-01-09 16:36:00 UTC Reply

'Member' would be the only real thing I could think of without delving into euphemisms (flowery and otherwise).

On that note, how the hell did the terms 'flower', 'petals' and 'honeypot' originate? Because they're everywhere and it's creeping me out.

Probably with Linnaeus ... :P by The Trojanhorse on 2009-01-09 19:34:00 UTC Reply

At least, he got into quite a lot of trouble for talking about floral sexual organs as if they were human ...
Re: Hmm... by Pads on 2009-01-09 19:24:00 UTC Reply

I hardly dare speculate. Although I'm going to anyway. "Honeypot" just says "sticky" to me. Admittedly the front bottom does not tend to be sticky, per se. But the application of the gentlemanly parts and their subsequent leakings do make the entire affair somewhat tackier (in the not-quite-sticky sense, not the cheap sense). Also, presumably, men are bees who, er, like to... store memories by making patterns in vaginas?

Uh-huh... *is scared* by thejadefalcon on 2009-01-10 10:52:00 UTC Reply

And I'm almost afraid to ask but...

In most of the things I've seen on AFF, after the man has climaxed, semen started... well, leaking from the woman. Is this at all accurate.

Sorry... total virgin here... (which makes it rather scary that I can still seem to write better sex scenes than those who claim to have it daily)..

Re: Uh-huh... *is scared* by Pads on 2009-01-10 14:59:00 UTC Reply

When you say leaking, what sort of quantities, velocities etc are we talking here?

If a man ejaculates inside a woman sans condom, and she then lies down for snuggles or sleep or angstiness or whatever (please, don't detail the whatevers you've found on aff.net for me), she's going to be feeling a bit... damp, thanks to their combined fluids.

If she gets up the next day, throws her knickers on, and dashes straight out to work, she's going to be finding semen in her undies all day. This is decidedly Not Pleasant.

If a woman has the sense to go to the toilet immediately or shortly after sex (because we don't want any UTIs, thank you very much), then some semen can be wiped away, and "bearing down" (as I believe is the technical name for those pelvic contractions used in passing waste, giving birth, and removing garlic if you're into home remedies for yeast infections) will help to remove much of the rest.

If a woman is trying to get knocked up, therefore, he best bet is to shuffle about immediately after sex so her legs are leaning up against a wall. This prevents leakage and so aids conception.

And that got disturbingly graphic, so maybe we should keep further technical sex questions to emails.

Expand this post →

Re: Uh-huh... *is scared* by thejadefalcon on 2009-01-12 11:05:00 UTC Reply

Well, my address is shown above.

I wasn't planning to detail anything. Partially because I can't think of anything off-hand, just that it happens.

What's a UTI? I presume it's another way to say STD? But they're not automatically going to happen, are they? Now I'm confused.

Expand this post →

Re: Uh-huh... *is scared* by Pads on 2009-01-12 15:13:00 UTC Reply

As Ansela says, a urinary tract infection. The short version is: stuff can get smushed up there, so you pee to clear it out. I'm guessing men don't have to do the same, because they have semen coming out and clearing the tubes.

Far simpler than Wikipedia's explanation... (nm) by thejadefalcon on 2009-01-13 15:44:00 UTC Reply

Re: Uh-huh... *is scared* by Ansela on 2009-01-12 13:16:00 UTC Reply

A urinary tract infection.

Re: Uh-huh... *is scared* by thejadefalcon on 2009-01-13 15:41:00 UTC Reply

Thanks for the information. Although it still confuses me a bit that sex leads to UTIs... whatever.

Re: Uh-huh... *is scared* by Pads on 2009-01-13 19:21:00 UTC Reply

Well, we're not exactly the best designed creatures, as you must have noticed every time you choke on a peanut.

Re: Uh-huh... *is scared* by thejadefalcon on 2009-01-14 10:22:00 UTC Reply

And the inclusion of an appendix we no longer use.

mm, but... by Pads on 2009-01-15 00:51:00 UTC Reply

Didn't the appendix used to have a use, at least? The choking thing, on the other hand, was pure accident.

Digesting leaves, I think... by thejadefalcon on 2009-01-15 11:51:00 UTC Reply

But nothing useful anymore. Therefore, it should be vanishing. But if it is, it's taking far too long.

not necessarily by Pads on 2009-01-15 17:25:00 UTC Reply

After all, it's not doing any damage. Except appendicitis, and not everyone gets that. What are the odds of spontaneous genetic mutation that means a baby's born missing an entire organ? And even if it is, where's the advantage that'll make that trait spread? Nope, it's much harder to unevolve traits. Once you've got 'em you're stuck with 'em, for the most part.

Does it predate molars then?

Expand this post →

Re: not necessarily by thejadefalcon on 2009-01-16 13:33:00 UTC Reply

I know it won't just vanish, but it could grow smaller with each generation until it's finally gone kaput.

"What are the odds of spontaneous genetic mutation that means a baby's born missing an entire organ?"

Not all that low, I believe. Usually, it's a valuable organ, however.

"Does it predate molars then?"

Not sure. I think it was simply used for digesting leaves. *dons cape* To Wikipedia! *dives into Jademobile*

Expand this post →
just hit wiki on that by Pads on 2009-01-15 17:35:00 UTC Reply

Some people are born without an appendix, it seems. But the lack of it provides no decisive advantage. And it looks as though the appendix has shrunk and shrunk over the years, but "Evolutionary theorists have suggested that natural selection selects for larger appendices because smaller and thinner appendices would be more susceptible to inflammation and disease."

So that's why we still have 'em - they get any smaller, you're much more likely to get appendicitis and die.

Expand this post →

I can't give you a definitite answer, but ... by The Trojanhorse on 2009-01-06 20:19:00 UTC Reply

... where I always think of the line as being is; M = swearing frequent but not incessant and/or moderate violence and/or sex scenes that exist but aren't graphic.

NC-17 = incessant bad language and/or graphic violence and/or graphic sex.

I'd also suggest that rape and non-con are almost always NC-17 even if not gone into in too much detail (just a mention in passing could be M, but if you have such a scene, even a vague one, it ought to be NC-17).

And whatever rating you choose, always WARN for: slash or het (because people like to know before clicking the link) non-con, dub-con, threesomes/unusual pairings, underage!, kink, bad language, violence and character death.

-Trojie

PS: I believe that ff.net do not allow NC-17 type stories or graphic sex scenes. I'm not sure of the details, though, so I advise checking their terms and conditions etc.

Expand this post →

Double damn... by thejadefalcon on 2009-01-07 10:18:00 UTC Reply

"I'd also suggest that rape and non-con are almost always NC-17"

Damn, damn, and damn just for the hell of it. I've got a fic with a rape scene in and I wanted to know where the cut-off point was. I usually wouldn't include something like that, but I want to really drive it in that it's not fun. Because I get really pissed off by the writers that have them demand comfort sex five minutes later.

"And whatever rating you choose, always WARN for: slash or het (because people like to know before clicking the link) non-con, dub-con, threesomes/unusual pairings, underage!, kink, bad language, violence and character death."

I have pairing warnings in my list of stories. I mention non-con etc in the specific chapter. I have no threesomes. Underage varies for me, because it depends HOW underage they are. Kink... don't think I have. Bad language I rarely warn for because I rarely use (and the M rating generally covers it anyway). Violence and death, rarely use because that kind of spoils things in my opinion.

Dub-con? Dubious consensual issues? Correct? And is that the "started-liking-it-then-hated-it" and the "hated-it-then-liked-it" stuff?

Expand this post →

I'm afraid so. by The Trojanhorse on 2009-01-07 20:00:00 UTC Reply

Rape is pretty much by its nature an NC-17 issue.

Dub-con is, yes, dubious consent. And yes, it's that stuff. Usual use of it is when someone is pressured into going along with things, but never actually says no, and sort-of ends up enjoying. It's a hazy, rather grey area. I'd generally use it if a participant was not 100% consenting. Some badslashers like to write stories where one character is soooo persuasive that they talk the other into it by their OMG TEH AMAYZING SECKS POWARZ - it starts off non-con and ends up pretty much consenting. That I'd also call dub-con, but not a lot of badslashers actually bother to warn for things like that, so *shrug*.

As with everything, it's always best to warn. People might like surprises in their stories, but not these kinds :)

Expand this post →

Re: I'm afraid so. by thejadefalcon on 2009-01-08 11:09:00 UTC Reply

"Rape is pretty much by its nature an NC-17 issue."

*curses again* Know any fanfiction sites that allow it? Because I am not turning to AFF even if I could (all public computers have it blocked).

What about LiveJournal? Aren't there story sections on that?

"Some badslashers like to write stories where one character is soooo persuasive that they talk the other into it by their OMG TEH AMAYZING SECKS POWARZ - it starts off non-con and ends up pretty much consenting."

Them and pretty much everyone on AFF.

Expand this post →

I'm afraid I don't know any sites by The Trojanhorse on 2009-01-09 07:14:00 UTC Reply

As for LiveJournal, I advise looking for ficcing communities for whatever fandom you're writing in. Or, y'know, you could put it on your journal :)

Them and pretty much everyone on AFF.

See, this is why I don't go to ff.net or aff anymore: I just end up with more fics in my mission queue than any human can actually deal with...

Sorry, forgot to say... by thejadefalcon on 2009-01-09 13:34:00 UTC Reply

"See, this is why I don't go to ff.net or aff anymore: I just end up with more fics in my mission queue than any human can actually deal with..."

Have you beaten the 620 fics I got off of there before my access was blocked? I just went through the fandoms I was familiar with and ripped everything from them. I'm scared to even read the 130-odd Resident Evil fics I got. I know what Deathstalker's done to that fandom.

I stopped frequenting the place before I got that many (nm) by The Trojanhorse on 2009-01-09 19:32:00 UTC Reply

Then you were smarter than I... by thejadefalcon on 2009-01-10 11:02:00 UTC Reply

but I have a morbid interest in, say, Deathstalker because I have no idea how he writes what he writes without throwing up. Also, he has no concept of biology and believes that the mouth and the womb are connected, but whatever...

the WHAT and the WHAT? by The Trojanhorse on 2009-01-10 19:47:00 UTC Reply

Let me at him! Let me at him!

Want his address? by thejadefalcon on 2009-01-12 11:15:00 UTC Reply

It's a Nightmare on Elm Street fic and I'm almost positive that Mr. I'm-A-Serial-Killer Kreuger is out-of-character. Partly for the rape, partly for caring how the girl feels. Bzuh?

I'm afraid I don't know the continuum (nm) by The Trojanhorse on 2009-01-12 20:15:00 UTC Reply

Doesn't matter... by thejadefalcon on 2009-01-13 15:48:00 UTC Reply

Kreguer and the dream thing seemed to be the only link to the fandom.

Damn, I've spelt his name wrong, haven't I? Sorry. I haven't actually watched the movie even though I've had it on DVD for six months.

Yet another reminder, by Ansela on 2009-01-10 21:40:00 UTC Reply

as to why mentioning bad biology stuff to Trojie is a Very Bad Idea.

~~Me and biology have had a falling out. The enzymes just didn't want to explain themselves to me.~~

Enzymes can be tricky... by The Trojanhorse on 2009-01-10 21:42:00 UTC Reply

...I blame washing powder commercials - an entire generation, perhaps more, of children has grown up thinking that enzymes are little Pacman things that eat dirt. No doubt it will take years to clear the confusion up.

People were coming to my university biology classes holding this belief like some article of faith, much to the consternation of the professors ...

What? by Ansela on 2009-01-10 21:49:00 UTC Reply

I would ask if you were kidding, but the internet has stripped me of my faith in humanity's intelligence.

That wasn't the problem. I think I sketched the wrong graph and I left the part about what happens to an enzyme in terms of its protein structure when it's placed in an environment hotter than its optimum temperature completely blank.

~~In my defence, I was ill that week and missed the bit on enzymes.~~

Expand this post →

I'm sadly not kidding by The Trojanhorse on 2009-01-10 21:52:00 UTC Reply

It's okay, I'm not about to leap down the throat of someone who tried :)

(their protein structure 'denatures' and unfolds and so they will no longer connect with the right molecules and cannot function as catalysts anymore ... this is why we boil things to sterilise them, as pathogenic microbes have an optimum temperature very close to that of humans, and so by boiling we can usually eliminate them by denaturing their enzymes, amongst other things. This doesn't work for anthrax, btw (handy fact for any Assassins thinking about using it))

-Trojie, stopping now lest she get the urge to pull out the diagrams

Expand this post →

Why didn't I ask you for help with my revision? (nm) by Ansela on 2009-01-10 21:57:00 UTC Reply

I dunno? Feel free to do so in the future :) by The Trojanhorse on 2009-01-10 21:58:00 UTC Reply

You know how much I like to spout these things endlessly.

Re: I dunno? Feel free to do so in the future :) by Ansela on 2009-01-10 22:09:00 UTC Reply

I'll probably be bugging you around late April/May time then. Robin's useless for explaining things most of the time. Sometimes he'll tell us something completely different to what he told us five minutes beforehand, which doesn't help much.

How much would you kill me if I said I might have found a Discworld Sue on my first trip into that section of the Pit? Rincewind/OC, from another world which is possibly World One, who happens to be as powerful as Coin.

Expand this post →

Consider me on standby for biology notes :) by The Trojanhorse on 2009-01-10 22:51:00 UTC Reply

I wouldn't kill you ... I might demand that it get killed though ...

Re: Consider me on standby for biology notes :) by Ansela on 2009-01-10 22:55:00 UTC Reply

Not by me. I've not so good on Discworld canon. Yet.

send me linkage? by The Trojanhorse on 2009-01-11 00:26:00 UTC Reply

I dare say Trojie and Pads' malfunctioning attempt to hack into the system and only get the missions they want can backfire just one more time ...

Re: send me linkage? by Ansela on 2009-01-11 07:00:00 UTC Reply

http://www.fanfiction.net/s/4153700/1/MagicNotsoSimplyPut

I couldn't even finish the first chapter, it was so bleh. Teenage girl, kinda ordinary looking (where've we heard that one before?), doesn't 'act like a girl' (whatever that is, I suspect it means being a make-up, clothes and boy-obsessed cheerleader stereotype or something), does things her parents don't want her to and has a cat that only listens to her.

Expand this post →

My eyes keep skipping over every second word by The Trojanhorse on 2009-01-12 07:18:00 UTC Reply

I think they're trying to protect my brain from the sheer boredom.

I had considered LJ... by thejadefalcon on 2009-01-09 13:32:00 UTC Reply

But I wasn't totally sure on their rules regarding what is probably now classed as an NC-17 fic. Also, it would just seem like a clunky interface after FF's general ease.

As far as I'm aware... by The Trojanhorse on 2009-01-09 19:31:00 UTC Reply

... as long as you use the option to warn that there's material which isn't suitable for those under 18 ('explicit adult content' is the option, and it asks all people attempting to view the page to confirm that they are over 18, or if they're logged-in LJ users whose profile says they're under 18, they can't get in), it's okay.
Re: I had considered LJ... by Ansela on 2009-01-09 15:04:00 UTC Reply

I think it depends on the rules of the comm you want to post to. Some don't allow NC-17, some do and and all require explicit stories to be members-locked and warned for.

Some comms also require a separate disclaimer on R and NC-17 fics, that goes something like this:
"COMMUNITY DISCLAIMER: All characters depicted in sexual situations in this post/fanfiction/fanart (including material in the comments) are fictional and are intended to be and considered to be by the author of said material of the legal age of consent in the United States state of California, regardless of what age these characters may be in the material they are derived from."

As long as you read the rules of the community you want to post to and appropriately label your fic, you should be fine on LJ.

Expand this post →

Re: I had considered LJ... by thejadefalcon on 2009-01-09 16:40:00 UTC Reply

Thanks. I'll consider LJ further then.

What did you mean by 'members-locked' though?

Re: I had considered LJ... by Pads on 2009-01-09 19:32:00 UTC Reply

As well as the locking, which Ansela's explained, lj also has adult content filters. So say you'd written a graphic and gory non-con fic. You'd mark it with the highest category of filter. Then, if anyone was logged into lj and tried to view your fic, if their stated birthdate makes them under 18, they'll be denied access. People who aren't logged in have to click a button confirming their age. It's not going to stop anyone from reading what you've written, but that extra level of attempt, on lj's part, to make sure underage people go where they're going willingly and with warnings, covers them slightly more legally (I presume) and means they're not so fussed about really graphic stuff.

On the other hand, don't ever specifically say a character is under 18 in an unlocked post if they're making with the sexytimes. There was an awful lot of "the intarwebz are exploding!" over that a while back.

Expand this post →

What? by thejadefalcon on 2009-01-10 10:59:00 UTC Reply

"On the other hand, don't ever specifically say a character is under 18 in an unlocked post if they're making with the sexytimes. There was an awful lot of "the intarwebz are exploding!" over that a while back."

But it all depends on what fandom you're writing for and what the legal age of consent was in the country it is set in/your country. I think that Britain's legal age is sixteen. If I was writing something set around Roman Empire times, surely it'd be acceptable to write about a thirteen year old girl, say, in the first stages of sex. It'd be too uncomfortable for me to go 'all the way', shall we say, but that was what happened in that era. In one country (I can't remember what) grown men are married to girls before they're even out of the womb.

A couple of my scenes involve seventeen year olds, because that's perfectly legal here. I've considered one with two fifteen year olds, but I can't remember what for and it's not that far from the legal age, so it's relatively fine compared to some things I've read. *glares at SuicideKing on AFF*

Expand this post →

Re: What? by Pads on 2009-01-10 15:06:00 UTC Reply

I know ages of consent vary, but what matters is the legal age in the country that houses the servers that host your fic. And if you're posting on lj, that's America. (Or is it Russia now? I lose track). The age of consent on livejournal is therefore 18, even if you're English and writing about English teenagers having perfectly legal and consensual English sex.

When all this kerfluffle went on last year (I seem to recall it was some extremely conservative American group causing hassle, or claimed to be; I forget the specifics), the rule being implemented was simply No Sex Involving Minors. In the ensuing purge of livejournals, fanart (and not necessarily realistic art) of possibly-minors was hit, as were some journals and.or communities in which people discussed their experiences of sexual abuse. Suffice to say, it was a tad silly, but the net result is you're better off not taking the risk.

Of course, locked posts are another matter, because it's not like the general public is just going to stumble upon them, be outraged, and report you.

Expand this post →

Re: What? by thejadefalcon on 2009-01-12 11:10:00 UTC Reply

"... even if you're English and writing about English teenagers having perfectly legal and consensual English sex."

Are you saying our sex is different from your sex? :P Thanks for the advice. So America's 18 then?

I don't know by Pads on 2009-01-12 15:15:00 UTC Reply

After all, I've only tried English sex, so I can't really compare it.

I think America's 18, yes. Although they can't drink until they're 21. Which strikes me as odd, because how the hell do you cope with one night stands when sober?

English Sex FTW? by thejadefalcon on 2009-01-13 15:46:00 UTC Reply

I don't understand one night stands all that much. I'm a man and I wouldn't even consider sex with a woman (or man, if I turn out to be gay) unless I had a major emotional connection with them. Sex with a prostitute, for example, just wouldn't be as mentally satisfying as with my wife for example (I think. Given that I'm a virgin, this is all speculation). Unless, of course, you know, I happened to be dating a prostitute. *shrugs*

better than for the lose, I s'pose by Pads on 2009-01-13 19:19:00 UTC Reply

You might change your mind once you start having it. A lot of people just have urges that need fulfilling. Depends on your sex drive, really. And it's not always about the mentally satisfying, either. One night stands are more about the physically satisfying. For that matter, sex in a committed relationship's sometimes mostly about the physical satisfying too. It's, y'know, fun. In theory, anyway.

Of course, it helps if you're drunk. One night stands, I mean; if you need to get pissed to shag your wife there's a bit of a problem.

Expand this post →

Of course... by thejadefalcon on 2009-01-14 10:19:00 UTC Reply

Like I said, it's only my theory anyway. I was brought up to be a gentleman. Therefore I'm chivalrous, don't take advantage of people et cetera.

granted, but... by Pads on 2009-01-14 21:00:00 UTC Reply

One night stands don't automatically equal taking advantage. They're usually perfectly consensual.

*shrugs* by thejadefalcon on 2009-01-15 11:48:00 UTC Reply

Still feels like it to me...

Re: What? by Ansela on 2009-01-12 13:21:00 UTC Reply

I asked July about American ages of consensual sex a while back. It varies from state to state, some states have different ages of consent for each gender and it's different for homosexual sex in some states.

This page is what July gave me.

Wait... hold on... by thejadefalcon on 2009-01-13 15:42:00 UTC Reply

If I'm reading this right, men can have sex at 18 in some states, but women at 16? WTF Equality?

Re: Wait... hold on... by Ansela on 2009-01-13 17:54:00 UTC Reply

There's on state where the age of consent is 14 for females and 16 (I think) for males. Um, no. DNW!

Re: Wait... hold on... by thejadefalcon on 2009-01-14 10:16:00 UTC Reply

DNW?

Do Not Want (nm) by Ansela on 2009-01-14 17:03:00 UTC Reply

Thank you... (nm) by thejadefalcon on 2009-01-15 11:48:00 UTC Reply

Re: Wait... hold on... by Pads on 2009-01-13 19:20:00 UTC Reply

The weirdest bit's the way so many states have no laws about homosexual acts.

Re: Wait... hold on... by thejadefalcon on 2009-01-14 10:17:00 UTC Reply

I just figured that the ages were the same, which I think is perfectly fair.

Does England have laws on homosexuality?

yep by Pads on 2009-01-14 11:18:00 UTC Reply

Homosexual acts decriminalised in 1967 in England and Wales. Ditto in Scotland in 1980 and Ireland in 1984. Age of consent lowered from 21 to 18 in 1994. From 1997 attempts were made to lower it to 16 so as not to breach the European Convention on Human Rights, but Lords kept blocking it. Finally passed in 2000 despite the resistance of Lords, but was superseded in 2004 by the Sexual Offences Act 2003, which basically removed any gender-specificality from sexual acts, and also incidentally made it legal for two men to engage in homosexual acts while other people were elsewhere in the building.

Expand this post →

Wait, wait, wait... by thejadefalcon on 2009-01-14 11:37:00 UTC Reply

The Human Rights Act has done something useful?!?!

What about women? Can lesbians have sex while others are in the building?

Re: Wait, wait, wait... by Pads on 2009-01-14 21:02:00 UTC Reply

I think they could anyway. It was a long time before lesbian acts were even recognised in law. The in the house bit relates to privacy - it became legal for two men aged over 18 to mutually consent to buggery, but only in private, and private was defined as "no one else in the building, not even on the other side of a locked door".

So much for all those gay Marauder orgy stories, then.

Expand this post →

Re: Wait, wait, wait... by thejadefalcon on 2009-01-15 11:50:00 UTC Reply

But wouldn't the Wizarding world have different laws?

Wait... never mind. They've been shown to have slightly odd laws.
Re: Wait, wait, wait... by Ansela on 2009-01-14 22:29:00 UTC Reply

Wizarding Law is different? And a rather large part of my brain snorts at that and says 'yeah, homosexuality's probably still banned because it doesn't carry on a family name through the production of offspring and heirs'.

Although fanbrats seem to get around that with MPreg spells and potions most of the time. If I had a quid for every 'Draco is really Lucius and [other male's] son' fic I'd seen, I'd be a rich Ansela. Especially if I added the Harry is James/x's fics as well.

Expand this post →

maybe by Pads on 2009-01-15 00:58:00 UTC Reply

A lot of the time Wizarding law doesn't seem to differ at all from Muggle law. Their age of consent, inasmuch as they have one, is 17 - at 17 they can Apparate... and, er... actually, no. There's 16 too; at 16 they can leave school. And that's all we really know. At any rate, all the magical laws we know of are relating to things that don't crop up in the Muggle world. The only comparison I can see is the school leaving age; you can leave at 16, or stay for NEWTs until you're 18.

Anyroad, wizarding society being what it is, can you really see them being less conservative than Muggle society? Especially given, as you mentioned, the whole blood purity thing. Unless, of course, the fanbrats are right, and male wizards' magic will somehow allow them to carry children. If that's the case, I can see them being more liberal. If not? Purity of blood = important = strict rules pertaining to virginity; and necessity of perpetuating bloodlines = necessity of fecund relationships = predisposition towards viewing heterosexual relationships more favourably.

Expand this post →

Re: I had considered LJ... by Ansela on 2009-01-09 18:14:00 UTC Reply

When you post to a community on LJ you can choose to leave it as a public post that anyone can see or lock it so that only members of that community can see it. Most communities require this for all explicit fanfiction/art and media downloads. Some communities, such as RPF/S comms are completely locked. I think it's so random people can't wander in and complain about finding explicit stuff just lying there for minors to access.

Well... yeah, but... by thejadefalcon on 2009-01-10 10:49:00 UTC Reply

... couldn't the minors just, you know, lie about their age? I know that I first encountered AFF when I was sixteen. I was on a Halo website at the age of fourteen and clicked 'yes' to 'are you over sixteen?' Those sorts of things just annoy me.

of course by Pads on 2009-01-10 15:08:00 UTC Reply

And they do - there are underage Boarders who read mine and Trojie's missions, after all. All it involves is logging out. But at least lj can then say they tried.

(More and more OT as she goes on) *waves* by CirГchen AnekГЎth on 2009-01-10 23:43:00 UTC Reply

Or just subscribing to the RSS feed of your/Trojie's journal, as the case may be, so that they don't even have to log out. 'S what I do, for recent missions.

And, though in theory I understand the point behind LJ doing that, in practice it makes me want to bludgeon them. ie, "Yes, I approve of this! But why are you applying it to me?" I am hypocrite.

However, for the most part I avoid stuff with graphic... ness..., at least during the school year, because it makes me twitchy and useless. Oddly enough this has not stopped me reading it. *shrug* So, yes. We minors be tenacious! Or bloody-minded, or something.

C, who is going to stop now, and justify her rambling as relief that she's on the Board again.

Expand this post →

Re: I'm afraid so. by Pads on 2009-01-08 06:47:00 UTC Reply

I've a notion it shouldn't automatically be rated as "not for the eyes of the young or the juvenile", but we'll save that conversation for a conversation, not a message board.

To clarify on your behalf, dub-con is when consent wasn't explicitly given. It's not just badslashers who view this as acceptable; I've lived with people who've thought similar scenarios were suitable cause to throw a condom and shout "have fun!" Dub-con is therefore where explicit consent is not given, and the persuaded party's consent is not explicit in narration or in dialogue.

Short version: did both characters say "sex please!"? If yes and it's graphic, you want a mature / adult / 18 / top of your rating system of choice on it.
Did one character say "yes please!" while the other said "er... uh... well. okay... I guess... um? wow, sexxors yay!" If yes, you warn for dub-con and you turn it over to the DBS for betaing and making realistic.
Did one character say "you know, I really don't think I... no, get off... but shouldn't we... hang on... no, let go, I'm talking here... argh!"? If yes, you warn for dub-con and magical cock powers, and you turn it over to the DBS for sporking.

And when you're on ff.net you're pretty much doomed. Saying cock is against their rules. You'll never be called on it, though, so it all depends how much of a good boy you want to be.

Expand this post →

Re: I'm afraid so. by thejadefalcon on 2009-01-08 11:13:00 UTC Reply

"I've a notion it shouldn't automatically be rated as "not for the eyes of the young or the juvenile", but we'll save that conversation for a conversation, not a message board."

E-mail's at the top. Explain please.

What happens if one character says "yes please!" and the other "no! get off! let me go! no! *screams*"? Where does that go?

"And when you're on ff.net you're pretty much doomed. Saying cock is against their rules. You'll never be called on it, though, so it all depends how much of a good boy you want to be."

If it's against their rules, then why wouldn't I get in trouble?

Expand this post →

Re: I'm afraid so. by Pads on 2009-01-09 02:40:00 UTC Reply

Will do.

That would be rape, if the first character goes through with it anyway.

And that would be because ff.net are renowned for not actually bothering to enforce their own rules.

They're not? by thejadefalcon on 2009-01-09 13:36:00 UTC Reply

I know I was once on the recieving end of a major report (*winces and represses memory of Suethor days once more*), but I thought that they generally... okay, never mind. That Michael Jackson author's still there.

What about My Immortal though? Or are the FF admins really preps? :P

Re: I'm afraid so. by Ansela on 2009-01-08 21:51:00 UTC Reply

If it's against their rules, then why wouldn't I get in trouble?

Because so many people read and write smut over there that even if the (non-existent and completely incompetent) admins searched through all the M-rated fics they'd never in a million years catch all of the smut fics, never mind those that mention cocks in passing.

Re: I'm afraid so. by thejadefalcon on 2009-01-09 13:38:00 UTC Reply

Hold on, if they're non-existent how can they be incompetent? :P

And knowing my luck, I'd be the one to be spotted and get my account banned for it.

Re: I'm afraid so. by Ansela on 2009-01-09 14:58:00 UTC Reply

Hold on, if they're non-existent how can they be incompetent? :P

Because most of the time they might as well be a figment of our collective imagination, but when they finally do something it's not what's needed, like getting rid of the rule breakers.

And if they ever did get rid of all the smut fics, mine would be on the way out as well. Luckily, they're archived on LJ as well.

Expand this post →

Re: I'm afraid so. by thejadefalcon on 2009-01-09 16:38:00 UTC Reply

It's not the getting rid of the fic I'm worried about, it's the banning of my entire account (because that'd require me to get a new hotmail address and everything and it'd just get chaotic).

What did you think about them getting rid of My Immortal, then?