Underage Sex Topics & LPSG

[Drifterwood]

I'm one who is guilty of a great deal of discussion about my own sexual development and experiences growing up. I'd guess most contributions are in reply to guys who wonder if their own sexual development was "normal" or their experiences were shared by others, and how people processed those experiences. As a "support group", I think that is a valid role for this site to play.

I really don't think that those of us who are taking exception are missing the finer points of this issue.

I think it is fairly clear when someone is looking for support for an issue they had growing up and when they initiate a thread looking for responses that feed their fantasies, tastes etc.

If there is any doubt about motivation, then I don't see why the warning system can't be used and recorded for future violations.

People who start suspected SPH threads get pretty short shrift from the members and if they continue, presumably they get banned for trolling. SPH is hardly illegal and I know that the board takes the legal aspect of the paedophilia problem extremely seriously. It is sad that paedophiles pollute as they do, but there you go.

 

[borntobeking]

I'm one who is guilty of a great deal of discussion about my own sexual development and experiences growing up. I'd guess most contributions are in reply to guys who wonder if their own sexual development was "normal" or their experiences were shared by others, and how people processed those experiences. As a "support group", I think that is a valid role for this site to play. Perhaps there are members here that use some of my experiences as wank fodder, but I can't control how anyone here interprets or uses the experiences I share, no matter how amoral I think their motives are. The benefit of sharing our life experience before the age of 18 is too valuable to dismiss because we have concern about how those experiences are being used by people with psycho-sexual illnesses.

Very well put. I couldn't agree more. This is exactly how I feel about it.

 

[Countryguy63]

I'm one who is guilty of a great deal of discussion about my own sexual development and experiences growing up. I'd guess most contributions are in reply to guys who wonder if their own sexual development was "normal" or their experiences were shared by others, and how people processed those experiences. As a "support group", I think that is a valid role for this site to play. Perhaps there are members here that use some of my experiences as wank fodder, but I can't control how anyone here interprets or uses the experiences I share, no matter how amoral I think their motives are. The benefit of sharing our life experience before the age of 18 is too valuable to dismiss because we have concern about how those experiences are being used by people with psycho-sexual illnesses.

I have seen a great deal of moderator involvement in banning members who have crossed the line, and closing threads that wander into uncomfortable discussions. I think that's where we need to be. On the other hand, if we are going to start lists of thread topics that we would like to have removed, I'm sure I can develop my own list to submit.

My feelings exactly! I think the Admin and Mods have done an excellent job monitoring this subject.

 

[vince]

Some of us have, but we gave up. Why? Reporting posts of this type results in exactly nothing - no response at all. Because a majority of the mods seem to not take child sexual abuse seriously. Either that, or whoever was on duty on those days forgot to check the mod inbox.

Do we REALLY want to offer child abusers a nice cosy home at LPSG, complete with their first choice of wanking material?

Just where do you get off making a statements like those? Either we are incompetent or a majority of us don't take child abuse seriously? That is one of the most offensive things anyone has ever said to me. The past and current mods take child abuse very seriously and sniping, ignorant, offensive remarks like yours don't move the discussion forward and reflect badly on only one person. That was very unfair.

We generally follow the heads up, warning , ban procedure when dealing with content involving minors. Or we might go straight to ban, depending on how serious the infraction is. But usually, we give the benefit of the doubt and most of the time the responce from the member is, "sorry, thanks for the heads up, won't do that again".

Generally we have allowed discussion about sexual development as long as it is not sexually explicit for the reasons that exwhyzee put so well below.

For me, speaking personally and not as a moderator and not representing my opinions as board policy- This is an adult site. We discuss sex. We laugh about it, we get off on it, we talk about our successes and we talk about our hang ups and dysfunctions and we seek answers to questions about it. Like it or not, a big part of our sexual nature was formed when we were less than 18 years old. Probably the majority of it and many an answer to what we question will be found to be based in our childhoods. To preclude ANY discussion here of our sexual development would just cast a pall over the whole site. In that case it should be called the Large Penis Group. Forget about support or problem solving or any serious discussion. It can just be easy and fluffy and we can discuss dick size, who's a fake, who's hot and American Idol. LPG- a lot of gas and not much else.

I do think we could tighten it up. Discussions about how big your dick was at twelve are pretty much wank fodder IMO. Others skirt the line really closely and are policed by the mods and action is taken that members never even see. Posts often get reported and deleted and users get banned before most of you are even aware of them. It happens every day here. But we don't catch them all and rely on the membership to post reports about what they think might be rule infraction. Everyone of the reports gets discussed and a decision is made that tries to keep minors safe, the site legal and the supportive community alive.

I'm one who is guilty of a great deal of discussion about my own sexual development and experiences growing up. I'd guess most contributions are in reply to guys who wonder if their own sexual development was "normal" or their experiences were shared by others, and how people processed those experiences. As a "support group", I think that is a valid role for this site to play. Perhaps there are members here that use some of my experiences as wank fodder, but I can't control how anyone here interprets or uses the experiences I share, no matter how amoral I think their motives are. The benefit of sharing our life experience before the age of 18 is too valuable to dismiss because we have concern about how those experiences are being used by people with psycho-sexual illnesses.

I have seen a great deal of moderator involvement in banning members who have crossed the line, and closing threads that wander into uncomfortable discussions. I think that's where we need to be. On the other hand, if we are going to start lists of thread topics that we would like to have removed, I'm sure I can develop my own list to submit.

You are not guilty of anything except not realizing how hot you are.

This is exactly what I mean about how adults ought to be able to talk about sex without jumping down each other's throats or encouraging fodder for sick people.

 

[B_Hickboy]

Jackin' here

 

[midlifebear]

Well, I for one am tired of reading about Tea Baggers fondling unborn baby gay whales. Please! We've got to protect the children, regardless of species!

 

[Patchos]

I really don't think that those of us who are taking exception are missing the finer points of this issue.

I think it is fairly clear when someone is looking for support for an issue they had growing up and when they initiate a thread looking for responses that feed their fantasies, tastes etc.

If there is any doubt about motivation, then I don't see why the warning system can't be used and recorded for future violations.

People who start suspected SPH threads get pretty short shrift from the members and if they continue, presumably they get banned for trolling. SPH is hardly illegal and I know that the board takes the legal aspect of the paedophilia problem extremely seriously. It is sad that paedophiles pollute as they do, but there you go.

No one's ever been banned asking for SPH, why should they? What do SPH and pedo's have in common?

 

[Drifterwood]

What do SPH and pedo's have in common?

Is there a punchline?

I was just talking about member's reacion to threads. Vince has confirmed what I thought would happen with regard to warnings, but I don't think we have resolved the issue, of what seems to many, inappropriately termed and presented threads being tolerated.

How big were you at 12/13, is not the same as, Did your size cause you problems when you were still just a kid?

 

[B_subgirrl]

This topic is currently under discussion in the moderator forum with the owner of LPSG. This is one of the areas that is not so black and white and has numerous shades of gray insofar as the Terms of Service and how it is interpreted.
We are discussing all sides of this and hope to make the resolutions very clear in the near future. Thank you all for your contributions to this topic.

Thank you for letting us know what's going on. For me, part of the reason I get so upset about this issue (I can't speak for anyone else) is that from the outside, it appears that the mods are doing nothing and don't take our concerns seriously. Except in the most outrageously obvious cases, the most we see mods doing is posting that 'We are watching this thread'. The mod response to the 'Hung Before Puberty' thread was more proactive (and many of us were indeed grateful for that proactiveness, but that response only came after many, many posts. When we report a post or thread, we don't get a 'Thank you, we are discussing this matter' PM in return (or at least I didn't). It makes it appear as though the mods don't care and don't take objections seriously.

However, knowing that there is genuine discussion under way, that our concerns are recognised as at least partially valid, and that you (mods plus owner) are aiming for greater clarity on this issue, goes a long way to restoring my own faith in the mods as a group. In the past I have had great respect for the mods as a group and the job they do, and I hope I will continue to feel that way in the future.

Just where do you get off making a statements like those? Either we are incompetent or a majority of us don't take child abuse seriously? That is one of the most offensive things anyone has ever said to me. The past and current mods take child abuse very seriously and sniping, ignorant, offensive remarks like yours don't move the discussion forward and reflect badly on only one person. That was very unfair.

Vince, you have every right to be upset. I apologise to you and all past and current mods for not wording my feelings more sensitively. I acknowledge that it was offensive, and uncalled for.

However, my statement was more uninformed than ignorant. The general populace of the site are rarely informed as to what goes on in mod discussions or how the system works when dealing with bigger issues. Thus, any opinions we have in regards to the mods as a group (rather than as individuals) and the way they deal with certain topics, can only be based on assumption. In this case, I assumed that the decision to let such threads remain is based on a majority vote amongst the mods, which would mean that the majority were not voting in favour of child protection. I apologise for making an obviously incorrect assumption. I think this sort of assumption would be less likely to occur if there was greater mod transparency on the bigger issues (as in Nudeyorker's post).

Generally we have allowed discussion about sexual development as long as it is not sexually explicit for the reasons that exwhyzee put so well below.

I agree that there is a lot of value in talking about sexual development, nor is it abnormal in any way to WANT to talk about sexual development. However, not all posters are sensible enough to word their posts in such a way that they won't catch the attention of an abuser or pedophile.

No one's ever been banned asking for SPH, why should they? What do SPH and pedo's have in common?

I agree with you on this one Patch. I've never quite understood the hatred many on here feel for those who are into SPH.

 

[Pitbull]

I agree with you on this one Patch. I've never quite understood the hatred many on here feel for those who are into SPH.

Please!
Lets not get off topic and onto SPH in this thread.

It was brought up as an example as to how the membership can shut down a topic found to be distasteful.

I disagree with that.
I was the one pounced on when I objected.
No body merely disagreed with me.
Just read the posts.
Seems like discussing young weenies has a lot of rabid supporters and I don't think it would correct the problem.
Also, I know for a fact that a lot of members (myself included) do no wish to post anything in these threads because it "Bumps" them.

It is not the job of the members to decide what is OK and what isn't.
That is for the moderators administrators and owner.
Our responsibility is to report things that do not seem to belong.
We report - they decide.

Our other responsibility is to discuss this among ourselves and let the moderators know our feelings so they can be taken into account.
My reason for starting this thread.

 

[Pitbull]

Just where do you get off making a statements like those? Either we are incompetent or a majority of us don't take child abuse seriously? That is one of the most offensive things anyone has ever said to me. The past and current mods take child abuse very seriously and sniping, ignorant, offensive remarks like yours don't move the discussion forward and reflect badly on only one person. That was very unfair.

I am sorry you took subgirrls comments the way you did.
Incompetent or not taking child abuse seriously?
I don't think she meant to say either and you should add to your list of choices.

I think she was expressing a frustration.
A frustration that I share.
We report a thread.
We do not even get a computer generated acknowledgment that it was received. Then we hear nothing. And there is nothing done.
And when it seems like something should be done.

I reported this thread. I think twice.
http://www.lpsg.org/217998-how-old-was-you-when.html#post3189097

I mentioned it in this thread and referenced this post:
http://www.lpsg.org/217998-how-old-was-you-when.html#post3194881
which is still there.

I will say that perhaps the poster was just sharing childhood memories.
Maybe he was trying to be funny.
I don't think he is a pedophile or trying to entice one.
But I do think the moderators should remove a post that involves a 5 year old and a teddy bear in a compromising position no matter what the intent.

So we are trying to provide feedback to the moderators to help them.
So far 3 moderators have posted on this thread.
Nudeyorker posted a very businesslike noncommittal reply that I expect from the moderators.
Stan Marsh basically told me to STFU
and you were insulted and offended.
And started off first thing by telling us that you were.

I don't there was any intention to insult and offend. That is counter productive.
Sometimes people will get a little emotional in their posts.
As a member I hope that you can deal with it as a moderator.

I hope now we can get back to trying to cooperate with each other in a civilized manner.

 

[B_subgirrl]

I am sorry you took subgirrls comments the way you did.
Incompetent or not taking child abuse seriously?
I don't think she meant to say either and you should add to your list of choices.

I think she was expressing a frustration.

Thanks Pitbull :smile:. I certainly didn't intend for it to come out the way it did. I meant it pretty much the way you've said it, only you said it better :smile:.

 

[HappyBoi]

This is a grey area, and a hard one to judge at that.

The thing is, thoughts are never illegal, you can never think illegally. If I want to, I can think of murdering or robbing or whatever, it won't have any legal effects.

The other thing is, that a poster can't be responsible for what another poster uses/makes/thinks about their post.

Guns are legal to sell, but illegal to use to murder or damage innocent people. However, it's legal to use them to kill or damage people in war. The resource is legal, but it can be illegal to use in some way, but then legal in another situation.

Cars are legal to sell, but can be used to run over people with, which is illegal. The resource is legal, but it can be used in illegal means.

Therefor, a thread about development before the age of 18 for example, can't in itself do any damage, and we can't know in what way the poster was thinking when he/she created the post - it's just not possible. If a reader finds the thread sexually exciting because of its content, the poster or thread (the resource) can't always get blamed. The reader can turn the content to something the thread-starter had never planned. Just as cars and guns can be turned to resources for illegal activities.

I'm one who is guilty of a great deal of discussion about my own sexual development and experiences growing up. I'd guess most contributions are in reply to guys who wonder if their own sexual development was "normal" or their experiences were shared by others, and how people processed those experiences. As a "support group", I think that is a valid role for this site to play. Perhaps there are members here that use some of my experiences as wank fodder, but I can't control how anyone here interprets or uses the experiences I share, no matter how amoral I think their motives are. The benefit of sharing our life experience before the age of 18 is too valuable to dismiss because we have concern about how those experiences are being used by people with psycho-sexual illnesses.

I have seen a great deal of moderator involvement in banning members who have crossed the line, and closing threads that wander into uncomfortable discussions. I think that's where we need to be. On the other hand, if we are going to start lists of thread topics that we would like to have removed, I'm sure I can develop my own list to submit.

This is how I feel!

I agree that there is a lot of value in talking about sexual development, nor is it abnormal in any way to WANT to talk about sexual development. However, not all posters are sensible enough to word their posts in such a way that they won't catch the attention of an abuser or pedophile.

"(...) If a reader finds the thread sexually exciting because of its content, the poster or thread (the resource) can't always get blamed. The reader can turn the content to something the thread-starter had never planned." - A cut-off from my answer above.

Sometimes I'm sure the posters language-skills might play a part too. Everyone doesn't speak english well, and some might not know how to use their words, the outcome can look suspicous even though the poster never wanted it too, just because he/she don't know/can't put it in other(/better?) words. He/she can't be blamed for that.

Words also have different meaning for different people; for example if I write "Hi bitch!" to someone, to that person it might be a friendly, comic greeting. If I do it to someone else, they might get really upset and feel offended. Just as the words "Big Dick" might mean 7 inches to some, but 10 inches to others - we all have different values in words. That's really why we're even having this discussion.


I hope what I wrote made sense. :] :smile:

 

[Hoss]

IBut I do think the moderators should remove a post that involves a 5 year old and a teddy bear in a compromising position no matter what the intent.

.

A parenting sub section with restricted access like the Questions, suggestions, Comments area may be in order. I say this becauuse there may be a parental interest/concern in the child and the teddy bear. Essentially though there are parenting sites that can handle that and keep it where it would better serve.

While I don't think pedophiles would usually come here in search of children, search sites can and will send them here and the topics like
early masturbating, teen/preteen penis size, breast size, first pubic hair, age of 1st sex (and many have claimed willingly engaging pre-teen yrs) even parents discussing whether to have their son circumcised can all stir sickly sexual urges in a pedophile because they will visualize a child and then become desperate to act it out. Same as a rapist can take the bondage and rape tales here and get an uncontrollable urge to act out.( I checked there are threads which speak about rape fantasy which may cause a rapist to believe that there are those that do want it.)

I also think that given the nature of thiis thread and the links to posts whiich members are concerned about that this thread should be placed in the Questions, Suggestions and comments section keeping it less public.

 

[Pitbull]

A parenting sub section with restricted access like the Questions, suggestions, Comments area may be in order. I say this becauuse there may be a parental interest/concern in the child and the teddy bear. Essentially though there are parenting sites that can handle that and keep it where it would better serve.

Good Suggestion but there was no parent concern with the teddy bear in the post I referenced.


I also think that given the nature of thiis thread and the links to posts whiich members are concerned about that this thread should be placed in the Questions, Suggestions and comments section keeping it less public.
I had refrained earlier from posting links, however I felt it necessary to provide a concrete verifiable example.
As far as less public, the post and thread referenced are still there as I type.
Cannot get any more public than that.
If the moderators decide to remove it, that link will go to nowhere.

see above in blue

 

[nudeyorker]

Pitbull I've only just this minute had a chance to catch up with this thread since yesterday. I've suspended the thread from the board while we are discussing this issue in the moderator forum and how we are going to go forward with new guidelines for the site. If there are anymore posts or threads that cross the line either send me a PM or send a report to the moderators and we will add them to our discussion.

Thank you to everyone for taking the time to help improve the quality of LPSG.

 

[Pitbull]

Thank you :smile:

 

[wallaboi]

Well, i'm sure this is going to be a very difficult issue for the mods and site administrators. Whatever new guidelines that may come out of the discussion, it is not going to meet with the approval of all members. However, I suggest that further discussion from members might bring up some helpful suggestions. Maybe start with:

new threads specifically inviting discussion regarding underaged sex should be deleted and the OP should be advised of this and asked to rephrase the wording of their thread.

Anyway, I hope that this doesn't get relegated to the "too hard basket" and there are some guidlines put up by the site administrators. I imagine that this could take some time.

In the meantime, I suppose it is our responsibility as members to report threads or posts that we feel are inappropriate and mods will have to deal with each, on a case by case basis.

Please post any suggestions on what new guidelines you think should be implemented.

 

[deleted3782]

So now we have posters being banned for contributing to threads in which others have contributed posts that are now illegal? I have no idea what this poster contributed, but I am guilty of contributing multiple posts about my experiences before I hit American age of maturity over the past six years. If I continue to do what I've always done...then I will get banned? Its my life, my experience...I if I want to share it...I'll get knocked off the site?

May we suggest a few other topics that can't be discussed on this site? Adultery is illegal in my state, its wrong in the eyes of most churches and the public, and I think the whole cuckolding thing is ridiculous...so can we also ban that from being discussed on LPSG? It can result in far too many hurt families - including my own - and I don't think we should glorify it or promote it in any way in our discussion boards. Its illegal after all.

 

[nudeyorker]

^ The content was not what got him banned. The fact that he was a minor was his ultimate undoing here.