Question Why does BMR allow underage characters?

[whitechapel]

What's good, gang?

Since the other thread was locked with the suggestion to move the discussion to an appropriate subforum, I figured this was the most appropriate subforum for its own thread as this is technically a question and a suggestion. You can find the previous thread here.

The question is: Why does BMR allow for underage characters to engage in sexual activities and is it possible to raise the age limit to 18+?

Several other members chimed in on the previous thread supporting the idea of lifting the character age limit from its current 15 to 18. The reasoning behind this is that this is an adult oriented writing site where you have to be 18 or older to even be a member. Why should what amounts to written pedophilia/ephebophilia be allowed to exist here in any capacity?

So, let's have a discussion about this, get some viewpoints, and take the temperature of other members feelings towards this issue.

Thanks,
chap

 

[Mitsu]

The site has traditionally allowed it, because it was established as a hedonistic, anything goes role-playing forum. There used to be no age limit, either on this forum or the previous one, but it was raised to 13 and then to 15. As new staff members took over the running of the site, this age thing has been a constant headache. As a consequence of this, a large section of the users come to this website, because of the lax rules. It has probably stood for so long to avoid backlash and a mass exodus of such users from the website.

I've already given my two cents about this issue, but in the other thread. I'm going to re-post it here as a supplement to the answer I've given above.



I think there's often a clear distinction between literature and smut. Many of the arguments made in this thread would very much apply to literature. A coming of age story that explores the sexuality of teenagers is a thing many people enjoy and don't have much of a problem with. We've all seen teen dramas to some extent, and many feature those teens engaging in adult behavior to some extent. Even a movie like Leon the Professional has some borderline themes of pedophilia, but it doesn't feel like smut or porn or filth. There's an eye test that many people give to content, and that eye test determines whether or not something is art.

Due to the overwhelmingly sexual nature of this website, I scoff at many notions regarding the sexualization of minors as being a creative outlet. Most of the time it's outright porn. It is extremely difficult to find a role-play on this website that doesn't slant towards the sexual within ten posts. I think it is abundantly clear that it is very possible to tell stories featuring minors and children in adult or abusive situations that make for a good story. American Gigolo, a recent show staring Jon Bernthal, features a male child that is essentially pimped out by his mother. This is character building, and while you watch the show you understand that it is not written or filmed to be provocative in the sexual sense. I do not believe the same can be said for the vast majority of the writing on this website.

This place is full of people that want to get off to minors being fucked and abused.

While I usually will advocate for the idea that you don't throw the baby out with the bathwater, I think at some point you have to put your foot down. I do not believe this change was made solely due to the preferences of the administration team. This isn't solely some kind of moral crusade with crosses on shoulders. I've been here a long time and I've been familiar with the various admins and mods over the years. I'm well aware of how pedophilia and pedophiles like to infest this website. They create alternate accounts, they evade bans, and do whatever it is they can do to find people to help them write their smut. To me this is a inevitable and long coming step in the right direction to start to crack down on that sort of content.

If you can't handle the idea of not being able to write about children being fucked and abused, perhaps it's time to look inside of yourself and question why that's bothering you so much. Is it so integral to your creative process that those elements be explored so deeply in your writing? Why? Are you lacking in the creative ability to create engaging characters without explicit childhood trauma?

I'm also in favor of steps to even push the age limit up, as others have suggested.

 

[whitechapel]

The site has traditionally allowed it, because it was established as a hedonistic, anything goes role-playing forum. There used to be no age limit, either on this forum or the previous one, but it was raised to 13 and then to 15. As new staff members took over the running of the site, this age thing has been a constant headache. As a consequence of this, a large section of the users come to this website, because of the lax rules. It has probably stood for so long to avoid backlash and a mass exodus of such users from the website.

I've already given my two cents about this issue, but in the other thread. I'm going to re-post it here as a supplement to the answer I've given above.



I think there's often a clear distinction between literature and smut. Many of the arguments made in this thread would very much apply to literature. A coming of age story that explores the sexuality of teenagers is a thing many people enjoy and don't have much of a problem with. We've all seen teen dramas to some extent, and many feature those teens engaging in adult behavior to some extent. Even a movie like Leon the Professional has some borderline themes of pedophilia, but it doesn't feel like smut or porn or filth. There's an eye test that many people give to content, and that eye test determines whether or not something is art.

Due to the overwhelmingly sexual nature of this website, I scoff at many notions regarding the sexualization of minors as being a creative outlet. Most of the time it's outright porn. It is extremely difficult to find a role-play on this website that doesn't slant towards the sexual within ten posts. I think it is abundantly clear that it is very possible to tell stories featuring minors and children in adult or abusive situations that make for a good story. American Gigolo, a recent show staring Jon Bernthal, features a male child that is essentially pimped out by his mother. This is character building, and while you watch the show you understand that it is not written or filmed to be provocative in the sexual sense. I do not believe the same can be said for the vast majority of the writing on this website.

This place is full of people that want to get off to minors being fucked and abused.

While I usually will advocate for the idea that you don't throw the baby out with the bathwater, I think at some point you have to put your foot down. I do not believe this change was made solely due to the preferences of the administration team. This isn't solely some kind of moral crusade with crosses on shoulders. I've been here a long time and I've been familiar with the various admins and mods over the years. I'm well aware of how pedophilia and pedophiles like to infest this website. They create alternate accounts, they evade bans, and do whatever it is they can do to find people to help them write their smut. To me this is a inevitable and long coming step in the right direction to start to crack down on that sort of content.

If you can't handle the idea of not being able to write about children being fucked and abused, perhaps it's time to look inside of yourself and question why that's bothering you so much. Is it so integral to your creative process that those elements be explored so deeply in your writing? Why? Are you lacking in the creative ability to create engaging characters without explicit childhood trauma?

I'm also in favor of steps to even push the age limit up, as others have suggested.

Well said all around.

I suppose, in regards to the fear of a mass exodus, what matters more? The members who would leave who get off on sexualizing children or the members we could gain because we no longer allow sexualizing children?

Pretty easy pick, if you ask me.

 

[Jericho Z. Barrons]

I'll add my voice to the pool again that I think if the site is looking to present a certain culture that doesn't include depictions of harm or exploitation of minors, then being one of the big adult rp sites that allows under 18 characters to be in adult situations is probably a big draw for those types of people.

 

[Retrojapan]

I'll add my voice to the pool again that I think if the site is looking to present a certain culture that doesn't include depictions of harm or exploitation of minors, then being one of the big adult rp sites that allows under 18 characters to be in adult situations is probably a big draw for those types of people.

I'm not surprised. I mean, I had a look around and as far as I can tell, BMR is one of the only places one can go to discuss, solicit and even publicly collaborate over the abuse of minors. I'm not going to sugar coat this. It literally says this an erotic adult roleplay site at the bottom of every page looking to abuse (at least) 15 year olds. If you find yourself defending this rule then I really have to ask you why your attendance here is so dependent on underaged characters. Is it because no other fetish and kink community will let you. I dunno. The Retro dollar is low today but that's my two cents.

 

[Bouncing Babes]

A rule I feel very uncomfortable with.

 

[Vekseid]

When it was founded a number of sites didn't have such a restriction. Effectively no fiction is illegal under US law, and there are some infamous examples of this - Stephen King and GRRM's works to name a couple. I used other story sites to set the age limit when I hosted this place, which was usually 13. RPoL was 14.

Too many pedophiles used 13-14 as a telegraph, so it was raised to 15 and this solved most of our issues. People who write high school stories are generally fine with writing others, so the pedo angle hasn't been a problem.

(There are some people still using 15/16-year olds to telegraph and if you see this happening you should absolutely report it.)

A major factor at the time was of course Hogwarts stories. With Rowling's antics that seems to have died down a bit.

---

As for why it hasn't increased since, there have been a few factors.

The Cloak of Fiction

The most important of these is a number of the stories here are survivor's accounts, in one fashion or another. Some people write their stories directly. Others seek out a partner to explore it. The site provides these people anonymity, along with the ability to explore and confront. Making it wrong for people to describe their own rapes is one of the most vile legal barriers I can think of.

Looking at you, Tories. I'm not saying there is a correlation between them attempting this and their votes to shut down investigations of pedophilia, but no I actually am saying there is.

The cloak of fiction this site provides survivors is an important asset, I feel, and so far no one has ever responded to this when I bring it up.

So if you're going to argue for the site to be 18+ in particular, you will need to address this.

Everything Else

The second of these is pretending teenagers don't have sex is a dangerous degree of ignorance and I don't believe it remotely positive. Some people may want to relive missed opportunities or some other situation in their high school life. A part of fiction is exploring our pasts, and exploring growing up. And sex is a part of that.

Next, there is the simple issue with 18 being the cutoff. It's a legal artifice, not a biological one. Cutting out 13-14 got rid of most of the pedophiles and the reason it worked was pedophiles aren't attracted to higher ages.

Meanwhile there is little biological difference between exploiting someone at 18 versus 17. This itself is an enormous problem and why shouldn't the cutoff for abuse be say, 25? At some point it cuts too much off. At some point you need to be fine with the transition.

Finally, the fact is we stopped having a major problem with pedophiles when we raised the age limit to 15. It's difficult to explain how night and day it was. Pedophiles are not attracted to developed people. Everyone else is usually looking to explore something mentioned above, otherwise.

 

[whitechapel]

When it was founded a number of sites didn't have such a restriction. Effectively no fiction is illegal under US law, and there are some infamous examples of this - Stephen King and GRRM's works to name a couple. I used other story sites to set the age limit when I hosted this place, which was usually 13. RPoL was 14.

As it stands now, Blue Moon and Elliquiy are the only sites that I know of that allow for characters under the age of 18 to engage in sexual acts.

The most important of these is a number of the stories here are survivor's accounts, in one fashion or another. Some people write their stories directly. Others seek out a partner to explore it. The site provides these people anonymity, along with the ability to explore and confront. Making it wrong for people to describe their own rapes is one of the most vile legal barriers I can think of.

Here's a survivor story.

When I was 16, I was predated on by a 28 year old woman in real life. It wasn't my first sexual experience, but I digress. In the folly of youth, I went along with it. This experience left me with long lasting trust and intimacy issues that continue to this very day. I'm 34 years old now. It still fucks me up when I stop and think about it. The last thing I want to do is write about it on a fucking smut site.

You can argue that this is the Cloak of Fiction or an attempt at providing survivors with a safe space to confront their most terrible experiences, but let's be real here: While that may be true and well and good, it also provides pedophiles with the means to get off to children.

That's the crux of the argument here. If you feel comfortable with BMR playing host to pedophiles, then this argument is already a moot point. That being said, I'm fairly confident in saying that the majority of the site members are uncomfortable with this rule. I take that back; most are probably ambivalent. However, I guarantee you the ones that are defending writing about fucking children aren't doing it because they survived rape.

The second of these is pretending teenagers don't have sex is a dangerous degree of ignorance and I don't believe it remotely positive. Some people may want to relive missed opportunities or some other situation in their high school life. A part of fiction is exploring our pasts, and exploring growing up. And sex is a part of that.

Yes, teenagers have sex. No, adults shouldn't be writing about it to derive pleasure and arousal.

Next, there is the simple issue with 18 being the cutoff. It's a legal artifice, not a biological one. Cutting out 13-14 got rid of most of the pedophiles and the reason it worked was pedophiles aren't attracted to higher ages.

This is a matter of semantics. Ephebophiles are attracted to teenagers. They fall under the pedophilia umbrella. Pedophilia is defined as an attraction to children. Developed or not, teenagers are still legally considered children.

Meanwhile there is little biological difference between exploiting someone at 18 versus 17. This itself is an enormous problem and why shouldn't the cutoff for abuse be say, 25? At some point it cuts too much off. At some point you need to be fine with the transition.

I'm fine with that. Let's raise it to 20 and up instead. Get rid of teenagers entirely. Let's only abuse adults, okay?

Finally, the fact is we stopped having a major problem with pedophiles when we raised the age limit to 15. It's difficult to explain how night and day it was. Pedophiles are not attracted to developed people. Everyone else is usually looking to explore something mentioned above, otherwise.

Well, considering you still have people writing about fucking underage characters, I'd say you still have a pedophile problem, Veks. At the very least, if we're still worried about semantics, an ephebophile problem.

I guess the question is changing: Why is writing about having sex with children so important to you, Veks?

 

[Arrowesque]

Hey, I can appreciate being uncomfortable with what other people chose to write, but can we not go around lobbing nasty accusations at other people? Especially staff? Especially staff who host this site for us to use for free at cost to themselves?

You seem really angry about this issue, and while it's valid to hold anger about bad things that have happened to you, I think you need to ask yourself if debating this issue while angry is beneficial if you're going to do stuff like that :/

 

[kckolbe]

As someone whose stories often feature teens, I'll weigh in. First off, let's consider the wide variety of kinks that feature on this site that, if done in real life, would be illegal. Incest, bestiality, snuff, vore, non-consensual sex acts, physical abuse, and likely a great deal more. Some of those kinks I can get uncomfortable with as well, but I also believe that at least most of the people who write about it wouldn't actually do it.

 

[Bejeweled]

Very much in favor of the age limit being raised to eighteen. I don’t think it should be as strict as some other sites - I was once a member of one where characters couldn’t even have children if the RP involved sex at any point, even if said children were nowhere near the sex scenes - but 18+ would be awesome.

 

[Lydia]

The Cloak of Fiction

The most important of these is a number of the stories here are survivor's accounts, in one fashion or another. Some people write their stories directly. Others seek out a partner to explore it. The site provides these people anonymity, along with the ability to explore and confront. Making it wrong for people to describe their own rapes is one of the most vile legal barriers I can think of.

Looking at you, Tories. I'm not saying there is a correlation between them attempting this and their votes to shut down investigations of pedophilia, but no I actually am saying there is.

The cloak of fiction this site provides survivors is an important asset, I feel, and so far no one has ever responded to this when I bring it up.

So if you're going to argue for the site to be 18+ in particular, you will need to address this.

I am in favor of raising the age to 18, and I would like to discuss this a little.

It is true that there is research suggesting that exploring traumatic situations through writing can have some therapeutic value. However, I think very few professionals would endorse doing it on a platform like BMR, where many - if not most - of the users are looking for some type of personal sexual gratification. The person seeking to explore their trauma might find a partner for this, but it's very unlikely they'll have the tools to properly vet the potential partner to assure that they won't be further traumatized by the interaction. This avenue - writing about trauma - is safest alone or with a professional who can assure that it's actually beneficial to the victim and isn't making things worse, rather than better. Many people can't afford professional guidance, but anonymous people on an adult-oriented website are not a proper substitute.

It is not IMPOSSIBLE that someone may actually benefit from exploring their trauma here, with an anonymous partner, but it is unlikely enough that I don't think that reason stands up to the potential harm.

 

[Tinkerer Nadia]

I can take it or leave it. The question is, what else would be removed? I mean if we are talking about the rule change to mitigate some kind of evil, what about gore porn? Beastiality? I'm not even trying to be shitty, just would we want to remove that as well? When is bad, bad enough?

To be clear, I am fine with changing the rule, but I do like to explore weird and wild themes (like for example state-funded sex workers) but eventually all fetishes could be issues for users. Like for example, mind control. I love it but MC would be pure evil irl.

 

[Saber]

I can take it or leave it. The question is, what else would be removed? I mean if we are talking about the rule change to mitigate some kind of evil, what about gore porn? Beastiality? I'm not even trying to be shitty, just would we want to remove that as well? When is bad, bad enough?

To be clear, I am fine with changing the rule, but I do like to explore weird and wild themes (like for example state-funded sex workers) but eventually all fetishes could be issues for users. Like for example, mind control. I love it but MC would be pure evil irl.

I don't think you'd have to worry about that since this is just focused on underage. If those kinks don't involve underage characters you should be fine.

 

[kckolbe]

I don't think you'd have to worry about that since this is just focused on underage. If those kinks don't involve underage characters you should be fine.

I disagree. Where I live, acts with 17 year olds are legal, but rape is not. So if we are going to remove underage rp, both legal and illegal, because some find it inappropriate, I would expect BMR to remove depictions of illegal behaviors.

 

[Mitsu]

I am in favor of raising the age to 18, and I would like to discuss this a little.

It is true that there is research suggesting that exploring traumatic situations through writing can have some therapeutic value. However, I think very few professionals would endorse doing it on a platform like BMR, where many - if not most - of the users are looking for some type of personal sexual gratification. The person seeking to explore their trauma might find a partner for this, but it's very unlikely they'll have the tools to properly vet the potential partner to assure that they won't be further traumatized by the interaction. This avenue - writing about trauma - is safest alone or with a professional who can assure that it's actually beneficial to the victim and isn't making things worse, rather than better. Many people can't afford professional guidance, but anonymous people on an adult-oriented website are not a proper substitute.

It is not IMPOSSIBLE that someone may actually benefit from exploring their trauma here, with an anonymous partner, but it is unlikely enough that I don't think that reason stands up to the potential harm.

I was going to post something very similar to this, but I doubt I could have done it better.

I don't think BMR is the place for that. Perhaps a very visible onsite resource on how to find professional help, even free professional help, might be a better idea. The cloak of fiction starts to sound weak when there's so little messaging on the site to actually help traumatized people in any significant way (a single, out of the way thread in BMA). Is a place where a publicly posted story might just be masturbated to, or a seemingly sympathetic stranger might just suddenly send you a dick pic really the best place for this cloak of fiction?

Can BMR provide the users of this website any actual reassurance that this is a safe place to heal? Can you, @Vekseid, promote and endorse that BMR is an adequate and safe place to utilize a cloak of fiction, solo or with another person, to sort through their trauma? What kind of qualifications do you have to make the claim if you think it is? In what way would you take responsibility for endorsing BMR as such, and then someone finds that the safe place suddenly made things worse?

Personally, I'd never make the claim that I can guarantee the behavior of a few hundred, mostly anonymous people.

 

[Saber]

I disagree. Where I live, acts with 17 year olds are legal, but rape is not. So if we are going to remove underage rp, both legal and illegal, because some find it inappropriate, I would expect BMR to remove depictions of illegal behaviors.

Luckily in fiction it is not illegal. Irl is very different from this site. If you're writing rape right now against a character under 15, yup, that's against the site rules.

 

[kckolbe]

I was going to post something very similar to this, but I doubt I could have done it better.

I don't think BMR is the place for that. Perhaps a very visible onsite resource on how to find professional help, even free professional help, might be a better idea. The cloak of fiction starts to sound weak when there's so little messaging on the site to actually help traumatized people in any significant way (a single, out of the way thread in BMA). Is a place where a publicly posted story might just be masturbated to, or a seemingly sympathetic stranger might just suddenly send you a dick pic really the best place for this cloak of fiction?

Can BMR provide the users of this website any actual reassurance that this is a safe place to heal? Can you, @Vekseid, promote and endorse that BMR is an adequate and safe place to utilize a cloak of fiction, solo or with another person, to sort through their trauma? What kind of qualifications do you have to make the claim if you think it is? In what way would you take responsibility for endorsing BMR as such, and then someone finds that the safe place suddenly made things worse?

Personally, I'd never make the claim that I can guarantee the behavior of a few hundred, mostly anonymous people.

Okay, now take all of that logic and apply it to rape. Does Vek now need to justify that this is a safe place for rape survivors or does all nonconsent RP need to be made forbidden as well?

 

[Saber]

Okay, now take all of that logic and apply it to rape. Does Vek now need to justify that this is a safe place for rape survivors or does all nonconsent RP need to be made forbidden as well?

I'm sorry, but I don't get why you're getting off topic? If you're not writing about rape against underage characters you're fine. As stated before, you can't equate writing fiction to irl situations unless you're breaking the rules of the site.

Spinning out into other areas takes focus away and causes an uproar over things that aren't being discussed. Are you writing about raping a character 15 and under? Then you are breaking site rules and there will be repercussions. The main focus of this discussion is pertaining to underage characters.

 

[Lydia]

Okay, now take all of that logic and apply it to rape. Does Vek now need to justify that this is a safe place for rape survivors or does all nonconsent RP need to be made forbidden as well?

These are two separate issues. Not all people writing NC are processing trauma. We’re merely addressing it as a possible reason to allow <18 characters on BMR.

 

[hades.]

A few sites allow characters under eighteen, ecchi and Iwaku, to name two. Probably the reason they don't have the traffic and volume is because blue moon is better maintained and allows lighter restrictions on creativity.

As for it being a way to explore trauma, it has for me. Writing characters, often doing things that directly happened to me to other fictional characters, helps me talk about things anonymously that I simply wouldn't tell anyone and dive into the minds of my abusers. Not that I self-insert, just take small things that bothered me, and being able to put them down is very relieving in an anonymous way.

Most survivors don't want to talk to a professional, or anyone for that matter. I'm frustrated I have to speak about it in its defense; actually, it's rather embarrassing and personal to me, and it's no one's buisiness. But if feeling embarrassed is the price of preserving free speech, then so be it.

For me, I think adding regulation when you can easily opt not to read those stories is quite fascist. It's saying, in my opinion, that others shouldn't do it because you don't understand it. Sort of like book burning/banning. My stories tend to have themes I'd never support in real life, yet I get lots of story views, ironically.

Veks made many valid points.

My question: if y'all up the age, what happens to my hard work and stories? They get deleted because someone didn't like the content? Because that's quite shitty. I worked really hard on those.

 

[kckolbe]

I'm sorry, but I don't get why you're getting off topic? If you're not writing about rape against underage characters you're fine. As stated before, you can't equate writing fiction to irl situations unless you're breaking the rules of the site.

Spinning out into other areas takes focus away and causes an uproar over things that aren't being discussed. Are you writing about raping a character 15 and under? Then you are breaking site rules and there will be repercussions. The main focus of this discussion is pertaining to underage characters.

We aren't talking about the CURRENT rules of the site, though. We're talking about CHANGING them. And there is no logic for making underage RP banned while continuing to allow non-con to take place here.

And @Lydia they aren't separate issues. Not all people write underage to process trauma.

A good way to test the logic of a decision is to apply it across the board. In the end, I see no better argument than some individuals wanting it gone because they don't like it, which just isn't a good reason.

 

[Arrowesque]

I'm sorry, but I don't get why you're getting off topic? If you're not writing about rape against underage characters you're fine. As stated before, you can't equate writing fiction to irl situations unless you're breaking the rules of the site.

Spinning out into other areas takes focus away and causes an uproar over things that aren't being discussed. Are you writing about raping a character 15 and under? Then you are breaking site rules and there will be repercussions. The main focus of this discussion is pertaining to underage characters.

... because changing one rule about something on the site because someone doesn't agree with it opens the door to changing other rules on the site because people don't agree with them.

This is a common tactic used. OP has already expressed that they believe the age limit should be 20, not 18.

 

[Mitsu]

Okay, now take all of that logic and apply it to rape. Does Vek now need to justify that this is a safe place for rape survivors or does all nonconsent RP need to be made forbidden as well?

Okay, man. I'll spell this out for you.

How about we just go with actual kid diddling then? By your logic, we should just allow open role-play and discussion about the wonders and joys of fucking six-year-olds. Zero age limits whatsoever.

This is about drawing a line and deciding which content should be permissible. At some point you either draw a line or everything is permissible. You can't possibly take everything off the table, because then you can find a reason why all but the most banal of subjects is troublesome. So, you have to decide what can stay and what can go. That decision ultimately lands at the feet of the guy that runs the website, and all the users can do is make appeals to what they find crosses the line.

This conversation, in particular, is about the character age. The results of this conversation doesn't mean the needle will move any further in either direction. The snowball effect does not need to happen. If you have a problem with some other, particular subject matter then you can start your own crusade about it. How the logic affects the topic at hand has no baring on another discussion, because cultural and societal ideas on morality and acceptable "content" differ-- even on a person to person basis within those cultures and societies.

In the United States it's okay to view violent stories about muscled men mowing down dozens of men in actions scenes. It is not okay to show the titty. Just because it's not okay to show the titty doesn't mean it's not okay to show the violence. There are levels to this shit.

The same logic does not apply to all things. We are irrational beings.

 

[Lydia]

... because changing one rule about something on the site because someone doesn't agree with it opens the door to changing other rules on the site because people don't agree with them.

This is a common tactic used. OP has already expressed that they believe the age limit should be 20, not 18.

This slippery-slope fallacy is used in all discussions like this. Considering one rule change (to align with general societal viewpoints - 18 is the age of majority in most places) does not mean all rules will be changed. Each is its own discussion.