In the series Kelly's Diary by Kelly85 she has sex with her 14 year old cousin Tammy. In referencing Tammy in stories that are chronologically earlier and later in the series, she is 13, or almost 13. She only becomes 14 when sex is involved. Given that this is designated a series, rather than stand-alone stories, does it comply with the rules?
In the series Kelly's Diary by Kelly85 she has sex with her 14 year old cousin Tammy. In referencing Tammy in stories that are chronologically earlier and later in the series, she is 13, or almost 13. She only becomes 14 when sex is involved. Given that this is designated a series, rather than stand-alone stories, does it comply with the rules?
This is largely a gray area.
A great many stories have characters under 14. And so long as their is no explicit sex, it is allowed. I myself have done that, only implying that person had sex, without ever describing it.
Specifically, I had a character never seen but only mentioned, and stated clearly she had sex starting at 12 or 13. But no details were ever given.
This is largely a gray area.
Not really. The key is, you can't describe the actual sex act involving anyone younger than 14, so 14-year-olds having sex is fine (at least for SOL). Technically, the Canadian law which sparked the change is stricter, but Lazeez decided the authorities were unlikely to bring a suit, which stood to declare the law illegal, unless is was more sensational.
You can talk about children being abused in stories, but it's the actual descriptions, including describing what children look like when nude, that get you into trouble.
you can't describe the actual sex act involving anyone younger than 14
Lazeez's rule is more restrictive than that.
Rule 7 - Age restrictions: Your work (stories, poems or blog entries) may not contain characters younger than 14 having sex or being in sexual situations (masturbation and nudism are not allowed). In other words, all characters that engage in any sexual activity must be 14 or older.
Descriptions of an under 14 YO kissing or being kissed in a sexual manner, even if they are fully dressed, violates the rules. Descriptions of being touched in a sexual manner is also against the rules.
REP, that's the keyword. "Descriptions". Anything describing a sex act, be it kissing, snogging or basic dry-humping with your clothes on isn't allowed, as they're just ways of getting around the restrictions. What I was describing, is if you want to address those issues in a story, you leave all the sexual descriptions (and even the merely sexually 'suggestive' suggestions out entirely), and focus on the characters' responses. Rather than throwing the characters together and seeing what terrible things they do to each other, have them sit down and discuss the after effects: how it impacted them, how they're coping, but just with any sexual abuse victim, you don't demand the titilating details.
I understand that's not for everyone, and I've rarely seen it done, but you can explore virtually anything in an SOL story, if you're willing to abide by the rules. That's not necessarily a restriction, that's just common sense. Why piss off those supply you with a place to explore your creativity, when you can simply work within the rules with a little more effort. Creativity is the key, not relying on established porn cliches.
By the way, when you write stories that way, they're hard to find, as I discovered the only way to write that way, I had to chuck the vast majority of 'applicable' codes, since they no longer applied.
IMHO, SexyText blatantly violated Rule 7 with his newest story "Tina's Extra-special Birthday" so I reported it.
It's removed already. That was really fast!
HM.
, does it comply with the rules?
Recently three of those stories were removed for inappropriate content so Lazeez does pay attention and takes action when necessary.
I have contacted Lazeez directly if I think what I'm writing may cross the limit. Not sure if people should be doing that, but I've only had a question like it, every few years.
He's responded promptly and graciously. Thank you @Lazeez!
I have contacted Lazeez directly if I think what I'm writing may cross the limit. Not sure if people should be doing that, but I've only had a question like it, every few years.
I've done this as well, and Lazeez was prompt and gracious as well.
The rule relates to scenes involving graphic descriptions of sex including someone under 14 y/o. Thus is there is no graphic description it doesn't violate the rules. Also, if the story was on the site prior to the rule being introduced it's 'grandfathered in.' However, some people do post stories that violate the rules and they get deleted when Lazeez finds out about them.
Thus is there is no graphic description it doesn't violate the rules. Also, if the story was on the site prior to the rule being introduced it's 'grandfathered in.' However, some people do post stories that violate the rules and they get deleted when Lazeez finds out about them.
I've always been curious, although I've heard all of Lazeez's decrees, how often are authors actually banned for repeatedly violating the rules, essentially trying to 'sneak' one past the Admins?
I see stories disappear all the time, or get switched from 'waiting to read' to pointing to an entirely different story, but there's never an actual reason given, other than an author stating that they've 'fed up' with SOL and are taking their ball (i.e. their stories) and looking for another ballfields to play in.
I had a story pulled by Lazeez.
I rewrote it, moving the sexual encounter two years from the first encounter. I actually like that version better
I rewrote it, moving the sexual encounter two years from the first encounter. I actually like that version better
In my opinion, it's like poetry: being restricted concerning how you can phrase things (set-length stanzas), you spend more time crafting the story in the first place, and generally end up with a more beautiful piece.
The same has been said by many of the all-time great, controversial authors of the past, that having to restrict what they're able to say in print made them better authors, and never actually impacted their output (other than taking slightly longer to write each piece).
In my case, as everyone's observed, I tend to blather a bit online, but I really knuckle under during the final editing phase, where I cut, not just to excesses, but trim each sentence to the bone. With so many writing 'stream-of-conscious' stories, it's difficult seeing what their real potential writing is like. You get great unfolding stories, but you also get an incredible amount of pure drivel too!
Sadly, unless you increase the characters' ages to being 18 or older with the sex scenes I can't access you stories now due to the current 'thought control' laws here on using the communications systems.
Personally, from what I remember of your stories from way back when, I think you could skim out the actual descriptive sex scenes to the point they'd be safe for Fine Stories and still be damn good stories due to the character and plot development in them.
Interesting point. My MC, being 14 at the beginning of the story - and also being 55, depending on how you count it - is interested in sex and manages to have a fair bit of it. Thus, sex scenes.
I hadn't really considered those whose laws are different than SOL's rules. I'm pretty certain that removing the graphic content would leave a perfectly solid story - though, I'd have to look carefully at FineStories' rules.
Maybe that's worthwhile. I'm not sure. It's a fair bit of editing, but it would open up some audiences that aren't there otherwise.
In many stories just reducing the sex scenes from being graphic description to a line simply stating they had sex or implying it will still leave the story as a good story while making it more suited for the wider general audience. I know I get a lot of readers on Fine Stories that don't access my stories on SoL while I also get a lot of readers who read my stories on both. Numerous readers have mentioned starting a longer no sex story of mine on SoL and finishing it on Fine Stories where they can safely read the story while having lunch at work.
In many stories just reducing the sex scenes from being graphic description to a line simply stating they had sex or implying it will still leave the story as a good story while making it more suited for the wider general audience.
I find that true for a lot of stories. Some authors seem to think that graphic sex scenes must be included to be on SoL while most of those stories would be better by changing most of the sex to implied or hinted at.
Numerous readers have mentioned starting a longer no sex story of mine on SoL and finishing it on Fine Stories where they can safely read the story while having lunch at work.
The idea of finishing a story on Finestories could boost readership on Finestories immensely while not denying the readers the full story. A very innovative idea! Lazeez would have to implement a way to change the "Next chapter" to Finestories so the transition is seamless for the reader that started reading on SoL.
The idea of finishing a story on Finestories could boost readership on Finestories
I know of this because of some readers telling me they use SoL at home but Fine Stories at work and find it easy to switch between the two because of me using the same files for both, so they finish a chapter then open the next one on the other site, depending on where they are. They do it on a personal level. I think it would be very hard for Lazeez to do it as an automatic process and still ensure he maintained the proper integrity of both sites.
I agree there are many stories that could cut back on the graphic sex scenes and still be very good stories. However, there are also a few stories where the sex scenes are part of the character or plot development and can't be cut without adversely affecting the story.
I think it would be very hard for Lazeez to do it as an automatic process and still ensure he maintained the proper integrity of both sites.
I went from the idea that you start a story on both SOL and Finestories. While posting you could set an indicator that from that chapter on the rest is only on Finestories, that should make it easy for Lazeez to handle the links. That way the last chapter on SOL could jump to the next chapter on Finestories from which point on there's no link back to SOL, so no integrity problem.
This has the advantage that authors can increase their readership on Finestories too. I know some have stories on Finestories that are not on SOL but this way it might be interesting for them to post the start on SOL too, thus increasing readership from both sides. Which in turn benefits SOL too. Everyone happy :D
I know some have stories on Finestories that are not on SOL
If a story is suitable for FS it's suitable for SoL, so there is no reason an author who's over 18 can't post stories to SoL as well as FS.
There are a lot of stories on SoL that are suitable for FS, but the authors haven't posted them there. I'd like to see them do that.
As to auto jumping between the sites, that's something I'll let Lazeez make a decision on. I only see it can cause some code and admin issues to keep up.
Most of my stories a 'no sex' so they can go on both sites, and I post them on both. This has the advantages of the wider audience on Fine Stories (the same way I post the SciFi stories on that site too) and it also means those following me have all of my stories available to them on SoL. Yes, it means a little extra work for me with posting to the 2 sites, and a bit more work for the moderators, but I see them as minor issues for the wider audience to enjoy the stories.
So, I am relatively new here. And I have a genuine question that is in no way meant as a criticism. Why post 'no sex' stories to an erotic story site? Or is the mission goal of this site broader than that?
Why post 'no sex' stories to an erotic story site? Or is the mission goal of this site broader than that?
Parent company - World Literature Publishing Company
Three subordinate sites:
StoriesOnLine - this place, where anything goes
SciFiStories - for Science Fiction Stories, and age rated
FineStories - for all stories, but with no sex
Technically, this isn't an erotic story site. This is a site that doesn't have restrictions (other than age 14!) on the material it allows to be published. There is a difference.
The nice thing here is that it's a well respected site, Laz keeps it policed (as do the rest of us), because having someplace to share our stories is a great thing, regardless of the content.
Why post 'no sex' stories to an erotic story site?
When I started here on Storiesonline.net (not sexstoriesonline.net) the front page declared it was a "Story site where all stories were welcome, even adult stories." In the last decade or so people have been pushing the idea it should be only for sex stories. However, that flies in the face of why the site was originally created. many years ago Lazeez posted a blog entry saying he created the site as one for all stories as he was fed up with sites being either for sex stories or for non-sex stories, and he wanted one where he could post all of his stories, regardless of the sex level. Thus he created storiesonline.net - and that's how it is today.
When he did a major update of the site pages some years back he redesigned the front page to promote the sex stories more as he saw that as a way to garner more visitors, and he was proven right. But he's never changed the core mission statement of the site.
Weirdly enough I am very prone to reading no sex or some sex stories here. It is plot and character development I am most interested in, the sexual elements are fine, even the hardcore ones, as long as it is, to me, a good story.
I'm the same, expecting more plot than 'just another lay' each chapter (i.e. there's got to be regular character enhancement and growth). But as I noted in another thread, I've noticed lately (my last several books, which accounts for a couple of years) that there seems to be a definite trend in general (i.e. non-SOL) readership (mostly following Covid-19) with readers more focused on PG rated stories. They don't seem to object to sex, but it needs to be 'clean', without the rampant cursing, violence and graphic descriptions. Personally, I'm not sure how I feel about that. I've been doing very real for a long, long time!
I wonder if there's a connection between this and the general decline in actual sex (https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/12/the-sex-recession/573949/, replicated in many other articles).
This article (https://www.theguardian.com/society/commentisfree/2021/jul/13/what-does-the-dawn-of-demisexuals-tell-us-how-sex-drenched-society-has-become) makes a really interesting point: media/advertising is extremely sexualized now (not that it hasn't been before, but it certainly isn't any less so), yet actual sex is dropping - quite a lot for younger people, and a fair bit for not-as-young demographic groups. Some of the reaction to this is the rise of terms like 'demisexual', which is (I agree with the author of the Guardian piece) a reaction to media which seems to imply that people should fall into bed if there's the least bit of attraction. The notion that 'having feelings for each other' is important runs counter to what people are being fed to the extent that we need a term for it.
If people are sensitive to the emotional aspects of sex, and oversaturated with the 'down and dirty', it makes sense that story preferences might swing in the same direction.
If people are sensitive to the emotional aspects of sex, and oversaturated with the 'down and dirty', it makes sense that story preferences might swing in the same direction.
As I noted earlier, I doubt it'll affect the SOL appetites, as the vast majority of SOL readers are older white men, whose sexual appetites back when they were young, hungry for it yet never getting much.
If anything, those who are bothered by the constant sexual barrage will likely head over to FineStories, which could certainly benefit from the extra readership. But for those of us who are actively publishing our works, it's certainly a red flag when even your beta readers are saying 'sorry, but this is too much' when the scenes are milder than the majority of my past stories. Luckily, I was already heading in that direction anyway.
Now, I just need to disabuse my editor for the need for the constant doom & gloom! (I've ended up trashing several full novels that were sufficiently 'dark', despite my loving them!)
I wonder if there's a connection between this and the general decline in actual sex (https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/12/the-sex-recession/573949/, replicated in many other articles).
Might want to google around a bit more, I haven't researched it much at all, but there seems to be an issue with low testosterone among young men in the roughly 40 and younger crowd. (IIRC, there are some theories linking the issue to the use of certain kinds of plastics)
As testosterone also strongly correlates to sex drive, that would certainly account for much of the issue. And account for why the political scene has been getting weird as the population of "low-T males" able to vote starts to balloon in its share of the population.
One of the reasons for lowered testosterone, aside from generally increased testing, is the decline in tobacco smoking. Smokers have higher levels than non-smokers.
One of the reasons for lowered testosterone, aside from generally increased testing, is the decline in tobacco smoking. Smokers have higher levels than non-smokers.
I doubt it increases testosterone by that much, but as I think about the sterotypes, especially around female smokers. I could certainly see a potential correlation with some of the "common traits" and higher testosterone. But by the same token, female smokers don't have fertility issues (regarding ability to become pregnant) at sufficient levels to indicate the boost in testosterone for most smokers is unlikely to be significant much beyond the matter that it can be noticed.
Edit: And first hit on Google is telling me "between 15% higher total and 13% higher" among smoking men in comparison to non-smoking men.
I guess I need to go find what the numbers look like for the "low T" situation that has been getting noticed, but I think it is a lot more than 10 to 15% on that one.
Edit 2: Okay, the only hard number I'm seeing is a 17% drop in testosterone levels in 65YO males circa 2011 compared to 65YO males back in the 1960's. Which could largely be explained by less smoking, higher obesity rates(body fat decreases testosterone), and probably more sedentary work pursuits among men and things have mechanized and automated.
Which could largely be explained by less smoking, higher obesity rates(body fat decreases testosterone), and probably more sedentary work pursuits among men and things have mechanized and automated.
Of course, having a longer lifespan due to not smoking would be a positive. As for being fatter - yeah, we are.
The other thing is that the 65 YO man in 1965 would have been born in 1900. He fought in WWI, survived the depression, and may have also fought in WWII. In general he was a laborer, not an office worker. The 65 YO male in 2010 was born in 1945. He grew up in the era of atmospheric testing of nuclear devices and 'duck and cover'. He was of the perfect age to hit puberty during the sexual '60's, which included lots of recreational drug usage. He didn't fight in Vietnam, and probably protested it. Chances are, he also worked in an office.
Not saying those are everyone, but societal aspects do shape things. I've been studying testosterone levels in men of all ages since 1983 for personal reasons. (Testicular cancer with removal of one.)
Why post 'no sex' stories to an erotic story site? Or is the mission goal of this site broader than that?
While SOL allows and has plenty of erotic stories the sites the name of the website is "Stories Online" thus allowing for any and all types of stories plus Finestories amd Scifi-Stories didn't come till years latter.
A while back Lazeez mentioned a long term plan to have one back end database for the stories and one posting wizard/engine then all stories would appear on SOL, and any appropriate stories would be served to the other two sites.
Don't know if that's still in his plans or if he's given up on it.
Probably the biggest hurdle is unifying the story codes across all three sites.
Probably the biggest hurdle is unifying the story codes across all three sites.
ayep, and he's been working on it, a little bit at a time, for some time and still is.
ayep
"AYEP Meaning
What does AYEP mean as an abbreviation? 3 popular meanings of AYEP abbreviation:
AYEP
Aboriginal Youth Entrepreneurship Program
Education
School
Canada
Ayep
Alan YΓΆnetimi EΔitim ProgramΔ±
Program
Technology
Community
AYEP
Asian Youth Empowerment Program"
"AYEP Meaning
What does AYEP mean as an abbreviation?
I have no clue where 'ayep' came from, but "yep" is generally related to the southern U.S., as its a "southernism" for "yes". "Ayep" is simply a shortened version of the even more southern "Ah, yep!" expression.
I have to assume then person to whom you were responding was trying for some kind of humor, because you would have to be a drooling idiot not to know what it meant.
you would have to be a drooling idiot not to know what it meant
The first time I saw it I was able to work out its meaning from the context, but it's not in my deskside dictionary (one of the OED family).
So for most of my life I was a drooling idiot.
AJ
The first time I saw it I was able to work out its meaning from the context, but it's not in my deskside dictionary (one of the OED family).
Again, the term is a common way of stigmatizing a particular region's citizens, so there's really no way for anyone outside of that region (southern vs. northern U.S.) to realize what they hell they're referring to. So, no, for someone reading in India, the Caribbean or South America, the expression would be utterly meaningless.
Frankly, having lived in the South off and on for most of my life, I hardly ever hear the expression anymore. Nowadays, people pattern their speech based on movies, tv and the press, rather than on what their great-great grandpappy used to say!
I thought ayep was a Maine expression. I am from the deep south and have never heard it used down here.
I thought ayep was a Maine expression. I am from the deep south and have never heard it used down here.
Sorry, I moved around a LOT, so sometimes I conflate accents, especially since I regularly visited relatives originally from West Virginia who then spent time in both New York and Maine, before settling in Delaware, so after a while, all the accents begin to merge together. Which is largely why I fail to notice accents anymore.
My brother (2 yrs older) is the opposite, whenever he went, he'd immediately adapt, accepting their regional accents and would fit right in with the locals.
@eroticafan
I thought ayep was a Maine expression. I am from the deep south and have never heard it used down here.
Sorry, I moved around a LOT, so sometimes I conflate accents
I would have guessed it was a Yooper (Upper Peninsula Michigan) thing.
As I recall, it was a common word in 50-60's western movies and TV.
Ayep, also in the TV western series.
one back end database for the stories and one posting wizard/engine then all stories would appear on SOL
That could be problematic. An author might not want his story on a site that has sex stories.
That could be problematic. An author might not want his story on a site that has sex stories.
Which would not happen, everything in a single database does not mean every story will automatically appear on all sites. I assume every story will get an indicator on which site(s) it should appear, still an authors choice as it is now.
Which would not happen, everything in a single database does not mean every story will automatically appear on all sites.
IIRC, the plan as originally stated by Lazeez was not author's choice, it was each site would get all the stories appropriate to that site as determined by the codes.
That could be problematic. An author might not want his story on a site that has sex stories.
The way it was explained, some years ago when it was first mentioned by Lazeez, was you would upload the story into the same submission wizard system with an extra step where you marked which site or sites you wanted it to be posted to - that way the author chose the site / s for posting.
The submission system change has been delayed while Lazeez slowly brings the code for both sites into line with the same code for all aspects of the site.
As I see it he has two major aspects left to deal with: one is to finish the changes to the submission system itself which has been slightly worked on in parts to allow the change; the other is the changes to the story codes as he will need a unified set of codes and he'll have to decide if some codes will be kept, changed, or removed.
The codes include the 'genre' lists would have to be changed to be the same, and the categories applicable to both would need to be changed to have the same title and contents. While the sexual activity ones on SoL will stay the same and a selection in them would stop a story from being eligible for FS or being listed as 'no sex' the other categories would need to match, and that could also mean adding some categories to some stories where they don't already match. For example: SoL has a Story Type group story code of Sports while FS has a Sports group with Sports, Baseball, Football within it. To merge the 2 lists would mean the loss in FS or to add them in SoL - I hope he goes with the add option and includes a way for readers to easily suggest the addition of a code to a story that was lodge before the change was made.
The merging of the lists would be a great opportunity to put them in alphabetical order as well.
Probably the biggest hurdle is unifying the story codes across all three sites.
The majority of SOL codes are kind/squick related (block=BBM, asian=Asian kink, etc.). The codes on the other sites are more generic (i.e. they apply to the overall story, rather than readers sexual predilections).
Personally, I wouldn't mind a unified code list, where the SOL kink codes are added to the underlying story codes, but so many stories are based on the SOL codes, it would be difficult to retrofit all the codes.
While posting you could set an indicator that from that chapter on the rest is only on Finestories
That violates the "teaser" rule. True, Finestories is owned by the same company as SOL, but it is still a teaser in the sense that you must go to another site to finish the story.
That violates the "teaser" rule. True, Finestories is owned by the same company as SOL, but it is still a teaser in the sense that you must go to another site to finish the story.
No, what I was thinking was that the 'Next chapter' link (on SOL) just routes to Finestories, no need to first go there and look up the story. So no teaser. From SOL to Finestories or Scifistories that could work, from Finestories to SOL obviously not.
I do something similar but without breaking the teaser rule. I posted my recent scifi trilogy on both SOL and Scifistories. To boost readership to the later, I simply post each chapter a day earlier on the lesser visited site. Eager readers have the choice to wait a day or go visit that site to read the chapter.
Eager readers have the choice to wait a day or go visit that site to read the chapter.
If they know about it, especially with different pen names. I didn't know until you mentioned it here.
I agree there are many stories that could cut back on the graphic sex scenes and still be very good stories. However, there are also a few stories where the sex scenes are part of the character or plot development and can't be cut without adversely affecting the story.
At one point, I'd create FS-versions of my sex-based chapter just after writing it--which made revising them trickier, which makes the process easier. Otherwise, it's almost impossible to backtrack and determining which chapters have which sex themes in them.
But having that information, makes it easier to add material to make the FS chapters more 'reasonably' sized, or if necessary, to combine chapters and adjusting the overall size of the story.
However, after a couple of books which were difficult to cut those scenes from, I basically gave the practice up. I really need to resume it though, as I liked posting stories to FS first, to get a feel how they were received, before posting them to the broader SOL audience.
In many stories just reducing the sex scenes from being graphic description to a line simply stating they had sex or implying it will still leave the story as a good story while making it more suited for the wider general audience.
It's interesting and amusing that the general topic swerved to this subject. I've had a reader post this comment:
another chapter with no sex except an indication he was going to get a blowjob. This story would be really something if was more real in that he has 8 women at his beck and call but they actually had some sex descriptions.
My reply to him was ... not necessarily nice, but that also wasn't the first time he'd made what I consider to be a snarky comment.
What I'm also hearing you say is that you're not aware of XNXX, XVideos, XHamster, or Pornhub, where you can [get] ALL of the stroke material you want for free. You might try that sometime. It might improve your disposition.
I find Keet's reply interesting, because I agree with it:
Some authors seem to think that graphic sex scenes must be included to be on SoL while most of those stories would be better by changing most of the sex to implied or hinted at.
My commenter replied:
I just want a real story where you have a teenager with 16 beautiful women around him and available and he can't even have a good sex scene. This story is rated "some sex" which is far beyond this story which is "minimal sex" and almost no sex. I think your afraid to actually do a sex scene you are so wrapped up in this magical world.
I may have gone a little overboard in my reply, but I'm on Book Three of this - total word count for all 90 chapters of the three books is 1.3 million, and quite frankly, I was pissed off.
Well, let's look at the five codes available.
No sex - can't say that, there's definitely sex
Minimal sex - can't say that, either. Just because it's not explicit doesn't mean there's not sex happening.
Some sex - Sure seems to fit. There's a lot of sex going on, between Cal and the girls. It's just not necessarily all 'on camera'.
Much sex - nope, they're more interested in saving the world that in screwing each other's brains out
Stroke Story - Definitely not that
Now, when I look at the Clitorides Awards, what's the award that ATH Book One won? Oh, yes - Epic EROTIC Story of the Year for 2020. Not Epic PORNOGRAPHIC Story of the Year, or Epic EXPLICIT SEX Story of the Year.
You did notice that this is written in the first person, didn't you? That means it's from Cal's perspective. You could sort of say, it's his journal of activities. What, and how, he feels is important.
Losing his virginity to Beth in Book One? Pretty damned important. Having a foursome with Beth, Eve, and Dora? Making Margie pregnant? Turning Jennifer physically 17 again? Yep, those are all, from HIS perspective, important sexual things.
Having sex with sixteen women? Not only was he be too busy to remember who did what to who, from HIS perspective, it's either raw sex or straight loving, but the actual act itself isn't worth writing about, just that it happened.
Oh, and one other minor detail. There's been a LOT of discussion on the author's forum about the topic of minimal/some/much in the past. Net conclusion? It's up to each AUTHOR to rate his story, AS HE SEES FIT. He's certainly having sex, that's for damned sure.
I know a couple of authors who post two versions of stories, well they used to as don't know if they still do. One had graphic sex description here on SoL and the other had no graphic sex description on Fine Stories - both did well.
Being an avid reader of your epic saga I think you handle the sex perfectly. It is described as much as it needs to be when needed, and, alluded to perfectly when a more concrete description isn't needed. A True History is absolutely in my top ten all time stories here in every possible category!
I see stories disappear all the time, or get switched from 'waiting to read' to pointing to an entirely different story, but there's never an actual reason given
If you have premier access you can look at the recently removed stories list under My Library, which does give a high level reason.
Mostly either:
Deleted at author's request
or
Deleted for Inappropriate Contents
Deleted for Inappropriate Contents is pretty much going to be an age rule violation as that's the only major content rule.
AFIK: The first time violation will get the author a warning from Lazeez. Repeated violations (I don't know how many) will get the author banned.
There is a way to avoid rule 7: be vague about the age, like in
She looked like she was in her early teens, which was old enough to marry or have children.
The MC didn't know her age and didn't care.
HM.
There is a way to avoid rule 7: be vague about the age
That doesn't necessarily avoid the violation if you have other clues that she's under 14, like putting her in 8th grade.
That doesn't necessarily avoid the violation if you have other clues that she's under 14, like putting her in 8th grade.
While placing someone in a grade of schooling can give you an idea of their age it isn't an exact measure. Most kids in my area start school at 5 years of age and must be that age on or before the first day of school. In my area lately school starts in the second or third week of August which means any child with a birthday in late August threw the end of the year will start school the following year which will make them the older students of that years class. Then there are the students that get held back in schooling for many reasons such as they fail the class or move into the area and their placement test puts them in a lower grade so they can catch up. So yes while in general the majority of 8th graders are 13 years of age not all of the student body is of that age and will be up to the author to decide what their age will be.
What you say is true, but, as you admit, the majority of 8th graders are 13.
If you put a sexually active character in the 8th grade while going out of your way to avoid mentioning the character's age, that looks like a deliberate attempt to violate rule 7 without getting caught.
If I came across such a story as a reader, I'd report it.
What you say is true, but, as you admit, the majority of 8th graders are 13.
Unless they're like me, and were 12.
My birthday is in December, so I should have been class of 1980. Instead, I started when I was four. That's the nice thing of rural schools in the mid-60's, they'd bend the rules if it made sense.
While placing someone in a grade of schooling can give you an idea of their age it isn't an exact measure. Most kids in my area start school at 5 years of age and must be that age on or before the first day of school.
Here, by contrast, typically 8 graders are 14-15 already, even virtually all 7 graders are 14 after the new year.
Our education law reads: "children start school the calendar year they turn 7 years old," unless exemptions apply (with include opportunity to start a year early through passing special admission committee). School starts September the First, traditionally, unless it falls in weekend, then the following Monday.
There's been like two attempts (and now rumored third in process) to bring that age down, one of those was adding a first grade bellow the Soviet 11 year school system around 1992, but the resistance won both times (producing much chaos).
Then, first graders here are expected to navigate city streets and public transportation without supervision, as well as be able to read and do basic math already. So in effect, the Before-School education for 4-6 year old is creeping to become in effect mandatory, but folded in kindergarten system.
Also, while they typically all live in the same physical building we split grades in formal "schools" as Beginning 1-4, Foundation 5-9, and Middle 10-12, where the "Middle Shool" have admission competition and aren't formally compulsory even if are seen as such in practice (yes, in Latvian we literally call secondary school "middle school" with the term "highschool" reserved to full grade University, not even merely colleges).
Graduates of 9 grade are expected to be at least 15 and so can legally work for wages (but can't drive a car, the formal adulthood for everything, driving rights, alchohol, sexual consent, etc, is 18). There's also so called "trade schools" they could attend instead; those are 4 year and give you a certain trade certificate at graduation in addition to 12k education equivalent. However good the idea might seem, with one notable exception (classic music and ballet school that can brag about world class stars in their alumni) those are extremely low prestige as usually mostly collect those who failed universal secondary school admission.
Here, by contrast, typically 8 graders are 14-15 already, even virtually all 7 graders are 14 after the new year.
Interesting. Where is here?
Yes, it's Latvia. That system is partially holdover from the Soviet Union education system, partially even older, despite perpetual reforms.
There are still some trade schools in the US. It's a good way to go for some people. Not because they are dumb, but because they have better job prospects. I personally work with one such school part time teaching machining and welding. One young lady I taught hired on with an aerospace firm making just over six digits her first year. Unless a rich connected parent or other relative is backing them, that doesn't usually happen with just a four year college degree. She was exceptionally talented.
The average is more like 15-20 USD per hour for graduates. As long as idiot business managers run equipment into the ground without keeping up with maintenance, they will have a job.
I think sometimes people forget the initial purpose for educating youth.
There are still some trade schools in the US. It's a good way to go for some people. Not because they are dumb, but because they have better job prospects.
I would completely agree, at least on paper it's beautiful idea. Isolated examples even here prove it can work indeed.
Unfortunately, it's badly broken here. Some of those schools haven't yet noticed Soviet Union cased to exist kind of broken. Sensible kids actually wanting to learn trade actively avoiding them knowing they won't get any kind of education at all there. The main problem being, at this point, cultural -- inside and out, in general public the attitude is extreme derision with sadly is repeatedly proven earned. The promise to rebuild the system from the ground up into something sensible haven't materialized in 30 years.
I have (will have; she hasn't entered the story yet) a character under 14 who is clearly curious about sex and is interested in having sex once she is 14 (it's tied to the age of consent, not to SOL's rules - she'd be putting her partner at legal risk). It is clear that she's done some experimenting prior to this, but completely off-page.
The conversation with her is not explicit or sexualized, but it's easy to read the rules as making it questionable. Checking with @Lazeez, it's within the intent of the rules, so I've left it as-is. It'd be easy to edit if necessary (I can simply shift her birthday a couple of months - I'd have to rewrite a number of things, remove some discussions about the subject, etc), and I made it clear I'd have been happy to edit if it was judged out-of-bounds.
I have another character who was clearly nearly raped at 13. Again, that's within the scope.
I don't particularly need to dance around these lines, so much as that, by starting my main character(s) at fourteen, they've got things that happened prior to that age, and they'll occasionally run into little sisters. That will drop off quickly; state law at the time had a within-two-years exception, and given that my MC is sixteen at the point where I'm writing, he's likely not going to get involved with anyone under fourteen simply out of self-preservation if nothing else.
I'd have to rewrite a number of things, remove some discussions about the subject, etc), and I made it clear I'd have been happy to edit if it was judged out-of-bounds.
Just for clarification is Kelly85 one of your pen names?
Kelly85 appears to be new to this site, but the stories she is posting are revised versions of stories she posted elsewhere a long time ago. I do not believe she has posted anything I have not seen before.
I also read them before. Most of the later stories in her 'diary" (after marriage) involve her, husband, dad and aunt having sex with preteens. Either "she" just won't post them or they will need to be completely rewritten.
I have another character who was clearly nearly raped at 13. Again, that's within the scope.
Those both fit within my understanding of the rules, dating back to when they were first implemented. The characters can discuss what happened, they just can't describe the actual acts. Its more 'I was raped' or 'we had sex' and less 'he grabbed by breasts and crotch and forced me to ...'. Those are mostly common-sense restrictions. They won't allow you to write about what's not allowed, but it still allows you to write a convincing back story.
Just to clarify the original question. The MC has a girl cousin who in the story Fooling Around With Cousin Tammy has just turned 14. There is a graphic lesian scene between Tammy and Kelly.
The next story in the series, First Time Sex With Uncle Jim takes place a week after the sex scene between Tammy and Kelly. Now, Tammy has just become 13.
If these were chapters in the same story it would violate the rules but only require a simple edit to make her 14 in the other parts of the stories.
Is the same change needed in this series?
By the by, I haven't done it lately, but for a long time, when crafting my first draft of a story, I'd create two separate versions for specific chapters, one for SOL and the other for FineStories (i.e. one 'clean' and one 'dirty' versions). I'd still include the exact same content, since FS is so good at automated grawlixs, but I'd find another way of updating readers on what happened while the sexier things were occurring in another room.
Generally, it helps both versions, and it's often easier have a 'go to' source when you want someone with more delicate sensibilities to read your work, or more often, you want to explore a new retail outlet that's slightly more restrictive than the others.
I watched a movie last night called "Birth." Nicole Kidman's husband died 10 years earlier and a 10-yo boy tells her he's her (reincarnated) husband.
She eventually believes him and there's a hands-holding-cheeks lip-locking kiss between them. Not a motherly kiss. Then they're in a restaurant and she tells him she has needs and asks him if he has ever had sex. And there's a scene where she's in the bathtub, he strips in the other room, enters the bathroom, and gets in the bathtub with her.
That story would not be allowed on SOL. For that matter, I wonder if Amazon would delete it if it was me who published it. But Hollywood can get away with stuff we can't.
Btw, the movie sucked. Don't watch it. The director was awful.
That story would not be allowed on SOL. For that matter, I wonder if Amazon would delete it if it was me who published it. But Hollywood can get away with stuff we can't.
You get dumb policies on sites (often because of payment processors) such as:
No 'underage' sex (where they mean 18, not the age of consent) but Lolita is OK. No incest, but Game of Thrones is OK. No nudity, but 'classical art' is OK.
I've pointed out this silliness every time I've encoutnered it, and the responses mostly have to do wtih payment processing rules (e.g. PayPayl, MC, Visa).
Then you get the crazy laws. In NSW and Australia it's legal for persons of all genders (not sure what the current legal count is) and ages to go topless on most public beaches and they can wear see-through tops with no bra in public and it's legal for the news media to show film footage of them in public places like that, but you can't possess a photo of them like that if, in the mind of the police officer involved, they look to be under 16 y /o and you can't send such an image on a communications system, if in the mind of the police officer involved, they look to be under 18 y/0 even if the person asks you to take the photo and send it for them.
In recent years one of the top models selected as the lead model for a major fashion house was a 14 y/o Israeli girl and the announcement PR activity had her in see through tops. The media here could legally transmit the images but it was actually illegal to watch the reports in some states.
Got to love governments who pass stupid laws supporting demonic doctrine.
had her in see through tops
How, exactly, is that picture of Sofia Mechetner standing in a white, translucent top such that you can blatantly see her nipples through it, at the age of 14, not considered child porn?
Damn, Dior, I knew you were a perverted company, but this is ridiculous. And then we have women bitching about sexualizing them - while they buy stuff from Dior - that sexualizes women.
ETA: No, I'm not posting the link, you perverts. Find her picture yourself.
How, exactly, is that picture of Sofia Mechetner standing in a white, translucent top such that you can blatantly see her nipples through it, at the age of 14, not considered child porn?
I never said it was or wasn't, I was simply pointing out the hypocrisy of the commonwealth and state governments allowing the very rich media companies to transmit the images but will then prosecute anyone they catch looking at them or saving a copy of them. Mind you, if a private person sent an image like that over the communications systems they'd face 10 years prison for disseminating child porn, yet the rich media companies are allowed to do it.
How, exactly, is that picture of Sofia Mechetner standing in a white, translucent top such that you can blatantly see her nipples through it, at the age of 14, not considered child porn?
I don't know what you consider the definition of porn to be but that's picture is not porn. It's a revealing outfit on a coincidently 14 year old (that looks older by the way). If she was topless on a nude beach nobody would care or give her a second glance. The girl+outfit did exactly what Dior intended: get huge attention. Compared to other models the girl is not even special in looks. I bet she was intentionally chosen for her age to be controversial and thus spike media attention.
I don't know what you consider the definition of porn to be but that's picture is not porn. It's a revealing outfit on a coincidently 14 year old (that looks older by the way).
US federal prosecutors went after a professional photographer (a woman) on child porn charges over naked baby on a bearskin rug photos of her own kids.
They have gone after teen girls with child porn charges for sending topless pictures of themselves to their boyfriends.
A picture of a 14 year old girl with visible nipples is enough for an ambitious prosecutor to go after someone with charges of child pornography.
US federal prosecutors went after a professional photographer (a woman) on child porn charges over naked baby on a bearskin rug photos of her own kids.
Some laws are too stupid to even consider. Laws don't make something porn, they just file it under porn for their own convenience.
Some laws are too stupid to even consider. Laws don't make something porn, they just file it under porn for their own convenience.
Agreed, and if you go back and re-read EB's comments, he was making essentially the same point. That won't stop the government from trying to stomp you though.
US federal prosecutors went after a professional photographer (a woman) on child porn charges over naked baby on a bearskin rug photos of her own kids.
Could you tell me where that case was. Mere nudity is not criminal under Federal law.
Even people like Sally Mann who used sexually suggestive photos of her kids to jump start her career were never prosecuted.
Some have been prosecuted by promoting and selling, as child pornography, sexually suggestive photos of their kids
Could you tell me where that case was. Mere nudity is not criminal under Federal law.
I read about the case many years ago. I don't recall the detail.
Don't under estimate what a prosecutor with political ambitions might do for a sensational case they can use to jump start a career in politics.
ETA: I did recall something else about naked baby on bear skin rug case, IIRC, the pictures weren't for sale but she did have them on display in a photo gallery she owned. It might have been a state rather than a federal prosecution.
You might find this supreme court case interesting.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/1988/87-1651_01-17-1989.pdf
Not the exact case I was thinking of, but similar.
The statute in question barring mere nudity was held unconstitutional by the Massachusetts Court. The statute was amended to require lascivious intent to be criminal.
The statute in question barring mere nudity was held unconstitutional by the Massachusetts Court. The statute was amended to require lascivious intent to be criminal.
It also mentions two other states with similar statutes to the older law.
The statute was amended to require lascivious intent to be criminal.
And that raises the problem of who decides when it's "lascivious intent". A good law only uses exact parameters, not something that is depending on personal interpretation.
A jury decides based on the evidence. Same as with knowledge or intent in other crimes in which scienter is required.
This is an "exact parameter".
It usually is not difficult to discern intent from the evidence surrounding the incident.
A jury decides based on the evidence.
Which isn't a bar against ambitious prosecutors bringing iffy/weak cases to trial if they think it will boost their political career.
ETA:
80%+ of criminal cases end in plea bargains and as a result never get put in front of a jury.
80%+ of criminal cases end in plea bargains and as a result never get put in front of a jury.
> 95% of federal criminal cases because it's the only way to escape mandatory minimums and the 'trial penalty' (you tend to get at least double the time if you force the government to go to trial).
Well over 90% are resolved by plea for a simple reason: there is no defense to the charges. Almost everybody arrested has committed a crime and there is massive evidence of guilt.
Well over 90% are resolved by plea for a simple reason: there is no defense to the charges. Almost everybody arrested has committed a crime and there is massive evidence of guilt.
As an observer of the legal system, many, many cases are weak, at best. The prosecutors pile on charges knowing a jury will convict because of the 'if they charged him with ten things he must be guilty of something' theory.
And here's the neat trick. Let's say you're acquitted of 9 of the 10 charges. The judge may, in sentencing you, used the acquitted behavior (and uncharged behavior) in determining the sentence.
In a just system, a good attorney could win those weak cases. The system is stacked against defendants at every stage.
I've been involved in the system for over 40 years handling thousands of cases. Very, very few cases are "weak" when it comes to evidence of guilt. Most times the defendant will happily supply the evidence that's missing: even after they are Mirandized they spill their guts to the cops.
I've been involved in the system for over 40 years handling thousands of cases. Very, very few cases are "weak" when it comes to evidence of guilt. Most times the defendant will happily supply the evidence that's missing: even after they are Mirandized they spill their guts to the cops.
Funny thing, these lawyers disagree with you and agree with me. This article appeared today, as Loki would have it...
https://reason.com/volokh/2021/06/11/legal-doctrine-and-conventional-criminal-law/
A third problem is that, in many cases, traditional legal checks that curb prosecutorial discretion break down. In many misdemeanor cases, defendants lack the right to counsel and to trial by jury. Many poor defendants, moreover, lack adequate money to post bail, leading them to languish in pretrial detention. Prosecuting weak or trivial cases "in the shadow of the jury" looks quite different when the prosecutor knows that the defendant cannot afford to sit in jail for months while he awaits a jury trial.
Read more in the article.
What, in that article, disputes what I said? I also sincerely doubt that a lawyer whose professional career was at a white shoe law firm has ever been involved in day-to-day functioning of criminal courts.
I also sincerely doubt that a lawyer whose professional career was at a white shoe law firm has ever been involved in day-to-day functioning of criminal courts.
I think my highlighted text demonstrates your biases, but most legal firms require a certain (minimal) level of pro-bono work. In fact, it's usually required before they'll actually hand a young attorney a case representing a paying customer.
Also, not ever 'white-shoe' law firm is even remotely involved in criminal cases. The vast majority have nothing to do with any aspect of criminal law (though most also have criminal lawyers names and numbers, in case their clients require one. So, defining law on the basis of 'white-shoe law firms' is more than a bit misleading!
He worked for Arnold & Porter. They are the epitome of a white shoe firm. The wikipedia article even calls them that in the opening paragraph.
Of course they do pro bono and court assigned work that's normally sluffed off on the lowest associates in the office unless it's a high profile case.
What they do not do and, I suspect, the author never did was sit for hours in a criminal court dealing with garden variety assaults, robberies, larcenies, drug dealing and other everyday crimes. I bet he's never spend hours interviewing defendants in county jails.
Most criminals tell the police everything - usually thinking they'll talk their way out of trouble. Most criminals aren't smart - otherwise they wouldn't get caught.
Of course they do pro bono and court assigned work that's normally sluffed off on the lowest associates in the office unless it's a high profile case.
That makes sense, giving the dramatic range between hourly rates. If you're working for free, it's cheaper going cheap all the way, which essentially makes your pro bono work worthless as well.
Also, the high-profile cases fall into separate categories, the 'obviously guilty' and the 'surprise innocent' verdicts. As you observed, the straightforward criminals in the middle don't venture much effort, as a plea deal is often the best you hope for and is essentially a slam dunk with little effort involved. (Says the non-lawyer who's watched too many episodes of Law & Order.)
That makes sense, giving the dramatic range between hourly rates. If you're working for free, it's cheaper going cheap all the way, which essentially makes your pro bono work worthless as well.
I don't know about worthless, but unnecessary. I have seen first year associates show up in our equivalent of traffic court with a 25 page brief.
What, in that article, disputes what I said?
Weak cases and overcharging forcing pleas? Pre-trial detention to force pleas? I mean, how much more direct could it be?
A jury
If there's one thing that's NOT an exact parameter than it's a jury. Take the laws match the evidence against it and it should clearly point to guilty or not. No 'maybe...', "I think...", "but...", or whatever comes up in a jury. Having a jury to decide if a suspect is guilty is just about the worst form of justice you can have. A jury is always biased by circumstances that should not be taken in consideration for determining guilty or not.
The saddest thing about the last five or six hundred years is the way the purpose of the jury system has been distorted an abused by the governments, especially in the USA.
The original purpose of the jury was to provide a mechanism for the local people of the same class as the accused to have a say as to their guilt. Remember, this was introduced at a time when some people were classed as nobility and they had a say over what was and wasn't legal in their areas of control. This resulted in varied laws and varied application of them, so when those in the highest power at that time decided to introduce a uniform set of laws they introduced the jury as a way for the different classes to have a say in how those laws were applied to them
One very important aspect of the jury system was that someone could be guilty of the offence as set out in the law but was seen as doing the right thing as far as the community was concerned. So while the judge would rule guilty as charged the jury would rule innocent of an offence against the community. Thus the community triumphed over the wording of the law. This resulted in many laws being changed to be more in line with what the community found acceptable. The most obvious results of these changes was the introduction of the laws on self defence that did not exist in the original laws. There have been many other laws changed or introduced by the results of jury decisions over the centuries.
Sadly, today many courts do not allow the jury to overrule the letter of the law because it diminishes the authority of the powers that be and increases the power of the people.
The last major case of the community overruling the letter of the law that I can think of was the court cases after the Eureka Stockade where the survivors were charged with treason and being rebels but the jury brought back a verdict of not guilty as they felt the people were justified in their rebellion.
...............
Another aspect of the courts where the jury has a significant say, and where you can get trial by media to provide the jury with a verdict is civil court cases have very different rules of evidence to that of the criminal courts. That's why O.J. Simpson was found innocent in a criminal court as it could not be proven beyond a shadow of a doubt he was guilty while a later civil case found him guilty based on the balance of probability. Because the jury thought he was guilty despite there being no clear evidence of him doing the deed he was found guilty.
Interestingly in the Simpson case a couple of different investigators have looked into the cases since then and followed up on the evidence and they've reached the conclusion that O.J. was innocent of the charges but was guilty of obstructing justice and as an accomplice after the fact as the later investigators are certain it was O.J.'s son who did the killings and O.J. acted like he was guilty to give him time to get away. Now we'll never know the truth of the matter.
Sadly, today many courts do not allow the jury to overrule the letter of the law because it diminishes the authority of the powers that be and increases the power of the people.
This is not true in the US. We actually have a term for it. Jury Nullification.
Per the US Supreme Court US juries have an absolute right to judge the law as well as the defendant and a jury verdict of not guilty can not be overturned even if nullification can be proven.
On the other hand, generally criminal defendants/defense attorneys are prohibited from mentioning or arguing for nullification in particular cases.
"Jury nullification" is a violation of their oaths and is almost always wrong. I say "almost" but can't think of a single case in which it was a good idea.
The jurors are bound by their oaths to judge the evidence fairly and impartially. In the US system the judge rules on the law and gives the jury instructions on how to apply the facts to the law.
The jurors are bound by their oaths to judge the evidence fairly and impartially.
And that is the basic problem of the jury system. The jurors should not be needed. The law itself should clearly determine a result solely based on the evidence. The evidence should prove guilty or not. If jurors are needed to interpret the evidence there's something very wrong with the law itself.
HUH? Somebody has to interpret and evaluate the conflicting evidence.
That's called a judge or a panel of judges. And there shouldn't be conflicting evidence because that would mean not all of it is genuine and/or verified.
There shouldn't be conflicting evidence?
You could beat somebody to death in front of 100 witnesses and have it all on video and you'll get 150 different versions of what happened.
There shouldn't be conflicting evidence?
You could beat somebody to death in front of 100 witnesses and have it all on video and you'll get 150 different versions of what happened.
Verified video is (real) evidence, 100 versions of eye witnesses are just that, 100 versions. There is probably a common thread seen from different angels. If 90% of the witnesses, independently interviewed, have seen something similar it can be accepted as partial evidence. The differences in what people saw is a well known fact, especially if there is too much time between the action and the interviews or when witnesses have had too much time discussing it among themselves.
Verified video is (real) evidence
There was video evidence of cricketer Ben Stokes punching someone unconscious. He was found 'not guilty' of affray!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?
AJ
"Jury nullification" is a violation of their oaths and is almost always wrong. I say "almost" but can't think of a single case in which it was a good idea.
That's your opinion. The US Supreme court has explicitly ruled that it is legal and the jury has an absolute right to do it.
No. The Supreme Court has not said that. One case from the 18th century that may have been misreported, contains a jury instruction apparently approving the practice. That was not a ruling by the court and numerous decisions subsequently have derided the jdea.
The Supreme Court has not said that.
Yes, they did.
Sparf vs US, 1895
Jury nullification is legal according to the U.S. Supreme Court, but whether or not juries need to be instructed on this right is a different matter. The Supreme Court has ruled that while the power of jury nullification exists, state courts and prosecutors are not required to inform jurors of this power.
A not-guilty verdict can not be appealed and it can not be overturned by the court, not even in a case of provable jury tampering.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/amendment-5/reprosecution-following-acquittal
Little or no controversy accompanies the rule that once a jury has acquitted a defendant, government may not, through appeal of the verdict or institution of a new prosecution, place the defendant on trial again.103 Thus, the Court early held that, when the results of a trial are set aside because the first indictment was invalid or for some reason the trial's results were voidable, a judgment of acquittal must nevertheless remain undisturbed.104
Also, even if the jury does return a not-guilty verdict in contravention of the law and the evidence, the jurors can not be punished for this in any way.
https://fija.org/library-and-resources/library/jury-nullification-faq/if-i-conscientiously-acquit-can-i-legally-be-punished.html
In short, it is not legal to punish a juror for their verdict. This well-established principle of trial by jury has been the case in the American legal system since its inception and, preceding it, English common law since Bushel's case in 1670.
Given that the verdict can't be overturned in a case of nullification and the jurors can't be punished for it, what is the basis for saying that it's illegal?
This is not true in the US.
Sorry, D.S., but my posts is true of the US. It's just that the bit in it about the abuse by the government to get rid of it has been stronger in the USA than anywhere else in the world. That's why the USA introduced laws to stop the juries from being told about the right to act to nullify the letter of the law in the case before them.
. It's just that the bit in it about the abuse by the government to get rid of it has been stronger in the USA than anywhere else in the world.
And you don't understand the relevant history in the US at all.
That's why the USA introduced laws to stop the juries from being told about the right to act to nullify the letter of the law in the case before them.
The problem is that nullification is a two edged sword and they can block just convictions under just laws just as easily a blocking unjust convictions under unjust laws.
Look into what happened in the former Confederate states in the post civil war period.
All white juries refused to convict white men of murdering black men.
The laws were just and the men guilty, but juries unjustly refused to convict.
This is why the US introduced laws to stop juries from being told about the right to act to nullify.
Juries existed long before the USA did, which is why I started my original post with the start of juries. I also mentioned how the governments have distorted the use of them. If you want to expand on how greatly the US has distorted the use of juries feel free to do so. However, none of that nullifies what I said in my original post, nor does it make any of it wrong.
The problem is the removal of jury nullification removes the original reason for introducing juries in the first place.
The mythical right to nullify law has nothing to do with the establishment of the jury system. It was established to prevent arbitrary punishment.
You argue for a system of arbitrary punishment based on the feelings of the mob - that's the argument for jury nullification.
I know this will come as a huge shock to you, but the history of the world and most things did not start with the USA. Go back and read the history.
As I previously said, in the time since juries started the use of the jury has been altered a lot by those in power and this is especially true in the USA.
I've not argued for or against anything, but simply stated the historical beginnings and some cases where they've been used.
The duty of a jury to follow the law isn't a US invention, or a recent invention. It's a common law principle that we inherited. Without that rule you have only mob rule.
The only way petit juries have changed in the US is to make them more representative of the population.
ETA
I just realized that you seem to be confusing grand and petit juries. Some of what you say is applicable to a grand jury but not petit juries. The two were separate in form and function by at least the 15th century.
I'm referring to the jury that sits on a court trial and how they came about, not the investigative body called a Grand Jury.
Then I'll repeat: you don't understand the history or the current status of juries. Also in the US grand juries are normally indicating, not investigative.
Also in the US grand juries are normally indicating, not investigative.
Actually, Grand juries in the US used to sit for months and they had investigative powers. They could open cases on their own power. They didn't need a government paid lawyer to present evidence to them.
I forget when, but the law was changed both at the federal level and at the state level across all 50 states to cripple grand juries and reduce them to a rubber stamp for prosecutors.
The reason this happened is that grand juries largely used that power to bring cases against government officials.
IF I had limit my comments solely to the USA since 1776, as you are doing, you would have some accuracy in what you say, but my comments are on the historical aspects which are a lot older than the USA and on the wider usage of juries in the world.
Except you made specific comments that the US has twisted or other wise made major changes to petit juries.
But the only significant change in petit juries since the founding of the US are the limits on the defense actually arguing for jury nullification.
And that change happened for some very good reasons.
So whatever twists you are talking about didn't come from the US government since you are now saying they happened before the US existed.
Outside of common law countries the jury system is a relatively recent development and the juries in civil law countries are not comparable to those in common law jurisdictions.
I am not limiting my comments to the US - the US jury system was inherited together with the common law in 1776. The form and function of the jury had long been established in England prior to that date. The jury system that has survived in the US is essentially the same jury system in England in the 16th, 17th and 18th centuries.
Other common law jurisdictions have greatly changed the system- the US hasn't.
Read the case in the link that Dominions Son posted. The opinion details that neither under common law nor any statute does the jury have the right to ignore the law. In the US with double jeopardy preventing appeals in criminal cases the jury has the power to violate the law with impunity, but not the right to do that. And that's been true for many centuries.
Everything in the post is wrong from the history to the current working of the system.
Everything in the post is wrong from the history to the current working of the system.
Everything I said is true, as there historical evidence for it is there. So I suggest you go back and do some research on it. The saddest part is the US government has tried to destroy the capability of the jury to act for the community when the law itself is not just or not being applied in a just manner.
Everything in the post is wrong from the history to the current working of the system.
Um, no, Ernest has been quite accurate in his descriptions.
So you want to get rid of jury trials?
Where I live we don't have jury trials. We're more civilized ;)
As we say comparing jury trials a d bench trials: "It's better to have 12 untrained minds than just one."
In the UK, the judiciary has become politicised and judges too often ignore the law and use their powers to enforce their preferred version of social engineering. So when the government floats the idea of 'speeding up justice' by doing away with jury trials, my reaction is "Hell no!".
AJ
And the Old Testament
In both my series I point out the very explicit descriptions which have been 'tamed' in English. The Bible can be VERY earthy. See Ezekiel 23:20 for one phrase which has not been 'cleaned up'. :-)
The Bible can be VERY earthy.
I was thinking of Lot and his 2 daughters. They got him drunk, screwed him, and their children were both Lot's kids and grandkids.
I was thinking of Lot and his 2 daughters. They got him drunk, screwed him, and their children were both Lot's kids and grandkids.
Tame compared to the verse I quoted...or Song of Songs.
The Bible can be VERY earthy. See Ezekiel 23:20 for one phrase which has not been 'cleaned up'. :-)
Fortunately, SOL isn't biblical. If it were, we would have to have more fratricides, patricides, matricides, and under aged sex. However, we can match it with war stories, incest, polygamy and erotic poetry. Maybe someday in the far future, someone will discover the "SOL Scrolls" and declare them to be the latest holy book!
If your character has sex with a statue, which may also be know as statutory rape, the statue need to be at least 14 years old. Various State laws may require the age to be at least 16, 18 or 21.
If you write a story about pirates, make sure none of your characters is named Ruth. In Swallows and Amazons by Arthur Ransom. Ruth was re-named Nancy, since pirates are ruthless. I am pretty sure Nancy was at least 14, but she didn't have sex in any of his novels, which were published starting in 1930 and aimed as juveniles.