Simplified Acceptable Content Guide

I know it said no drugging, but does that mean just illegal ones or drugs that can make someone horny, and aroused also are not allowed?

I might be wrong, but I believe it's primarily about consent. You can't have characters drug someone without their consent and full knowledge. Ensorcled wrote a phenomenal story that contains consensual drug use here.

Quote by seductivebeast76

I know it said no drugging, but does that mean just illegal ones or drugs that can make someone horny, and aroused also are not allowed?

Drugs, within certain, adult contexts, are permissible. However, responsibility and consent are a must and need to be established prior to anything happening. For example, slipping somebody a roofie and taking advantage of them is not only morally despicable, but it's forbidden on Lush for good reason, but people taking an aphrodisiac of their free will and then having wild sex is perfectly fine.

Thank krystalg and I don't want to write anything forced just put someone in a position that is fighting against their desires and while under the effect of the drug finally give in to it.

As long as that person takes the drug knowingly and willingly, it's okay.

What do you consider relationships between first cousins?

Quote by aznlyon

What do you consider relationships between first cousins?

Blood relatives go into fantasy

Is it still the case that emojis are banned within stories, even where exchanges by text message are depicted? Generally, I think it’s a good rule. But emojis are so ubiquitous in text messages these days that it feels like a forced error to omit them. 😖 For many people, emojis are part of natural text speak. In a couple of cases recently, the lack of emojis in text messages, where it feels like a character would use them, has actually pulled me out of the story.

You should be able to use old school text emojis, even if not the modern graphic ones. So : ) ; ) and so on. Interested in the mod ruling on this one since I have dialogue over text occasionally myself

Emoticons (sequence of symbols) are okay.

We avoid using emojis (the images) because some systems don't recognise them and for some they may appear like a square.

Quote by Safryzer

Is it still the case that emojis are banned within stories, even where exchanges by text message are depicted? Generally, I think it’s a good rule. But emojis are so ubiquitous in text messages these days that it feels like a forced error to omit them. 😖 For many people, emojis are part of natural text speak. In a couple of cases recently, the lack of emojis in text messages, where it feels like a character would use them, has actually pulled me out of the story.

As Seeker said, text emojis are fine when used in text messages as long as you don't go crazy with them, then they become distracting. The graphical ones sometimes show up as empty squares on some devices/browsers. Plus they don't work for screen readers

Edit to add:

Quote by AvidlyCurious

Emoticons (sequence of symbols) are okay.

We avoid using emojis (the images) because some systems don't recognise them and for some they may appear like a square.

Yes, this. She was faster than me.

Yes, I echo the above. And also, graphical emoji don't translate well into a screen reader or other assistive tech experience, as MollyDoll said.

Some might argue that "colon close parenthesis" isn't very meaningful either, but at least screen reading software has a chance of interpreting ASCII sequences and converting them to something meaningful when reading them aloud.

That is not the case with graphical symbols which, on a technical level, tend to occupy the upper ends of the Unicode character space, or be custom graphics for particular applications, and may be interpreted as garbled multi-byte sequences depending on the user's locale.

It's all a bit of a mess, so we err on the side of caution. Text-only emoticons please and, like all literary devices, sparingly.

Ah, okay; thank you for all of the insights, which make perfect sense.

I’ll think twice about using texts in the story in question, as there doesn’t seem to be a way to reflect how people text in the real world, without causing such issues.

It’s helpful to know that emoticons are allowed, but they often can’t replace emojis, and purely using them might date an exchange misleadingly.

I agree writers should be judicious with such devices. But, as I say, their omission can also be a distraction.

It seems to be a Catch-22. 🤷🏼‍♂️ [Shrugs-shoulders emoji.]

I have an idea for a politically motivated story floating around my head and didn't want to get started until my understanding of the rules were crystal clear

To my understanding, we are not allowed to use real people? Assuming that is correct, what is the criteria for avoiding crossing the line of a story rejection? I.e, if I used similar names and attributes which would make the subjects of my story crystal clear without mentioning names directly, would that still be against the rules?

Quote by carlsnap12
if I used similar names and attributes which would make the subjects of my story crystal clear without mentioning names directly, would that still be against the rules?

As long as it's woolly enough that nobody sues the site, you're good. So it's better to steer clear of names that sound too similar.

What, I can't have actor Tod Cruze hook up with singer Tyler Fast?🤣

Nicola, censorship is the essence of evil. Did you not read Orwell's '1984'?

Plato asserted that censorship of fiction is essential: the young should never be shown depictions of the immoral being successful, only depictions of them being caught and punished. Aristotle called bullshit on that, saying that when a play depicts heinous behavior, the audience experiences catharsis, because everyone has such impulses from time to time.

Plato, and evidently you, regard the audience as children who have to be restricted and manipulated.

Sure, having sex with a minor is a crime in a lot of places. So are assault, theft and embezzling, but we don't censor those things from fiction, because writers are not supposed to treat adults as if they're "monkey see, monkey do" retards. Just writing about something is not the same as actively encouraging that behavior in the audience.

Everything is offensive to someone. I can say that it's great that the sun is bright today. Innocuous, right? But the guy whose wife died from skin cancer is going to be offended. The world currently is in an orgy of absurd whiny victimhood mentality. Being offended is a choice.

If what someone expresses is incorrect, feel free to state the actual facts, but you have no right to silence anyone. You are not perfect. To have freedom, it is necessary to give freedom.

Prohibiting "nonconsensual" content is asinine, a lame attempt at emasculation.

Show some intelligence. Show some respect for readers. Go ahead and put a Tipper Gore "warning label" on content you don't like, so the snowflakes won't have to read it, if you really think that's going to be beneficial. Then let the rest of us indulge in any and all types of content like adults are supposed to.

Every single story on this site is just as offensive to fundamentalist christians as "nonconconsensual" or "hate" content is to you. Should they be able to shut this site down because it's "harmful" to their idea of the way the world should work? Or should stories reflect the full spectrum of real human behavior?

This is not your site, so you have no say in its rules and strictures. The solution to your outrage is quite simple: build your own and open the flood gates wide. The results might prove amusing.

I do have a say; I just expressed it. In fact, the site invited me to do so. The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing. I choose to stand up anywhere and everywhere censorship rears its ugly head. Those are my ethics. What are yours?

Perhaps you should spend some time learning to read. "...you have no say in its rules and strictures." Please feel free to blather all you wish about your ethics, but do not expect anything to change simply to placate your moral outrage.

Again: build your own site. I believe there is a gentleman in Paris who can offer pointers.

Censorship of any kind, under any circumstances, is dangerous. Everything posted on this site would be censored off by Christian fundamentalists, because the stories don't match their delusions of how life should work. Your woke/snowflake delusions should not restrict writers from publishing any content, whatever you choose to name it. Real adults don't practice censorship.

Quote by kistinspencil

Perhaps you should spend some time learning to read. "...you have no say in its rules and strictures." Please feel free to blather all you wish about your ethics, but do not expect anything to change simply to placate your moral outrage.

Again: build your own site. I believe there is a gentleman in Paris who can offer pointers.

Semantics. You choose to use the term "no say" to mean "no legal control" while, as you obtusely ignore, I use the term as SAYING SOMETHING. I do have a voice, a say, and the site is consciously designed to give me one. Why are you so anxious to bully me off the site? Does the truth hurt? You can't refute my logic, so instead you lamely say "if you don't like it, leave".

How is anything ever going to improve if you pretend the flaws don't exist?

Again: build your own site.

Please forgive me everyone for feeding the troll. I will retire now and do penance.

(He wasn't that interesting anyway.)

Quote by kistinspencil

Please forgive me everyone for feeding the troll. I will retire now and do penance.

(He wasn't that interesting anyway.)

So you admit you're dishonest, can't / won't refute my logic. Just you being a troll saying in essence " don't try to improve this site, go away". You support censorship here, which means you support ALL censorship.

A Christian fundamentalist state prosecutor could file to have this site taken down for "obscene content transported over state lines". That has happened before.

Kistin is correct. This site is privately owned, and the site reserves the right to enforce its own regulations and standards of conduct among its members. It has no obligation to publish the speech of any of its members, especially when that speech violates the terms of service for the site. Call it censorship if you must, but if you feel that the site guidelines are too restrictive, publish elsewhere or self-publish.

Quote by Just_A_Guy_You_Know

Kistin is correct. This site is privately owned, and the site reserves the right to enforce its own regulations and standards of conduct among its members. It has no obligation to publish the speech of any of its members, especially when that speech violates the terms of service for the site. Call it censorship if you must, but if you feel that the site guidelines are too restrictive, publish elsewhere or self-publish.

What he said. A site having rules for what content it wants to publish is not the same as censorship. It is in the same league as a science site having a rule that they won't accept a science fiction story. It's simply a site wanting to publish a certain type of content and having a particular vision for what it is about.

Quote by EAM6690

So you admit you're dishonest, can't / won't refute my logic. Just you being a troll saying in essence " don't try to improve this site, go away". You support censorship here, which means you support ALL censorship.

A Christian fundamentalist state prosecutor could file to have this site taken down for "obscene content transported over state lines". That has happened before.

Elon? That you, bud? Everything okay?

Quote by EAM6690

So you admit you're dishonest, can't / won't refute my logic. Just you being a troll saying in essence " don't try to improve this site, go away". You support censorship here, which means you support ALL censorship.

A Christian fundamentalist state prosecutor could file to have this site taken down for "obscene content transported over state lines". That has happened before.

These are the terms of your membership here whether you have read them and understood them doesn't matter. They are there in writing, nonfiction and completely enforcable. If you vehemently disagree with the terms of your membership below you should not have agreed to them by creating an account.

https://www.lushstories.com/legal/acceptable-use-policy