As one of the people who wrote the 1x1 regulations, I probably had a lot to do with legitimizing erotica here, instead of pretending that it's terrible and needs to be stamped out, like we're running a convent or a seminary.

I felt it was important for people not to mug each other with surprise smut on RP plots -- being honest about what you want makes it easier on everyone, I feel. So in a sense, I wanted to destigmatize and decriminalize asking for smut in the 1x1 interest checks, because I felt it was the best possible way to legitimize it and make it less of a pain in the ass for everyone -- the people that want it can openly advertise and the people who don't can sort out partners according to that as well.

I realize that's a digression into the policy side of it, but in OldGuild, erotica was verboten...and that didn't mean a thing to anyone because it was just driven underground. Now we let people advertise but ask that they keep it in PM largely for reasons of maintaining the Guild's revenue. So far, so good.

In any case, I really think it's a matter of personal tastes.

I just kind of found it weird that people used this site instead of certain other ones that are a lot more geared toward smut rps.

I actively include 'smut' into my RPs, as many of them involve relationships and romance and a lot of the focus is on those areas (while including an overall plot line).

I'll be honest, a lot of why I do it is because I straight up enjoy it. It's fun. It's creative. And it can get kind of sexy. I'm not ashamed of that.

But another part of why I do it is because personally for me, intimacy is a important part of any relationship I'm in. Physical acts of love are just as important as emotional acts. So it translates further that intimacy in my character's relationships tend to be important, even as their sex drives vary and are radically different.

Do we actually have a definitive (or thumb-based) rule on what 'smut' constitutes?

Do we actually have a definitive (or thumb-based) rule on what 'smut' constitutes?

Anything sexually graphic or overly sexually suggestive.

Or: anything that'd get us in trouble with Adsense.

Anything sexually graphic or overly sexually suggestive.

What is 'sexually graphic' in literary terms and how far is 'overly' sexually suggestive? In visual media, it's pretty clear: if you see genitalia in a sexual context, or people actually engaged in intercourse visible on-screen, it's sexual content, but it doesn't translate.

A film would get a very different rating for showing two people hard at it on a bed than if one of those characters recalled "I remember the time [Mary-Jane] and I were hard at it on a bed", but, in writing, there's actually very little difference in terms of what appears on the page in the context of:



I presume that the latter is acceptable, while the first is not. But then, where are we left with genitalia in general? Genitalia appearing in visual media are not always considered 'sexual'; in the context of a medical documentary, for example. This would not get the same rating as genitalia in an overtly sexual context.

I feel like some clearer guidelines, if we have any, would be useful.

[/completely aware that this is a discussion about how members feel about use of 'smut' but it's a legit question and seemed relevant-ish]

<Snipped quote by Ruby>

What is 'sexually graphic' in literary terms and how far is 'overly' sexually suggestive? In visual media, it's pretty clear: if you see genitalia in a sexual context, or people actually engaged in intercourse visible on-screen, it's sexual content, but it doesn't translate.

A film would get a very different rating for showing two people hard at it on a bed than if one of those characters recalled "I remember the time [Mary-Jane] and I were hard at it on a bed", but, in writing, there's actually very little difference in terms of what appears on the page in the context of:

[Billy-Bob] and [Mary-Jane] were hard at it on a bed.

"[Billy-Bob] and [Mary-Jane] were hard at it on a bed," said [Barbara-Anne Third-Person].

I presume that the latter is acceptable, while the first is not. But then, where are we left with genitalia in general? Genitalia appearing in visual media are not always considered 'sexual'; in the context of a medical documentary, for example. This would not get the same rating as genitalia in an overtly sexual context.

I feel like some clearer guidelines, if we have any, would be useful.

[/completely aware that this is a discussion about how members feel about use of 'smut' but it's a legit question and seemed relevant-ish]

I'm sure @HeySeuss will follow this up, as the policy drafter, but I'll say if you have to wonder whether something might cross that line...don't let it see the light of day.

Use your common sense. If your common sense is broken, PM the questionable bit of writing to a Mod, and we'll use our common sense to make the determination for you.

See, from what I understand, that example wouldn't break the rules because it isn't direct and doesn't use overtly sexualized language. Just because something describes a sexual act does not mean it is automatically going to be picked up by Adsense.

When it comes to shit like that, you got to assume that it has to be dirty in a way a bot can pick up on. If you can't see how a bot can figure it out, it isn't going to get you in trouble.

See, from what I understand, that example wouldn't break the rules because it isn't direct and doesn't use overtly sexualized language. Just because something describes a sexual act does not mean it is automatically going to be picked up by Adsense.

When it comes to shit like that, you got to assume that it has to be dirty in a way a bot can pick up on. If you can't see how a bot can figure it out, it isn't going to get you in trouble.

Yeah, neither of those two examples would break the rule. But let's not post an example that would on this thread... ^_^

We'll all just think one collectively. Like, everybody imagine the smuttiest thing they can think of in their head and just hold it in your minds eye for a while.

It's like homework for this thread, so it is a legitimate thing to do.

I'm sure @HeySeuss will follow this up, as the policy drafter, but I'll say if you have to wonder whether something might cross that line...don't let it see the light of day.

Use your common sense. If your common sense is broken, PM the questionable bit of writing to a Mod, and we'll use our common sense to make the determination for you.

I probably will do if I can't find any explicit guidance but it's hard to second-guess whether something would cross the line if I don't know where the line is. ;)

When it comes to shit like that, you got to assume that it has to be dirty in a way a bot can pick up on. If you can't see how a bot can figure it out, it isn't going to get you in trouble.

That seems really odd; one could write an incredibly graphic, sexually-explicit passage while avoiding commonly-used terminology* that would presumably get past Adsense, or quite a tame one by contrast using the 'wrong words'* that would get picked up.

* I'm reminded of the catchphrase of Leigh Francis (an unfunny character comedian); to "Smash somebody's back doors in", which, to my mind, is hugely explicit language bordering on the violent, despite using non-standard terminology.

<Snipped quote by Ruby>

I probably will do if I can't find any explicit guidance but it's hard to second-guess whether something would cross the line if I don't know where the line is. ;)

<Snipped quote by Vilageidiotx>

That seems really odd; one could write an incredibly graphic, sexually-explicit passage while avoiding commonly-used terminology* that would presumably get past Adsense, or quite a tame one by contrast using the 'wrong words'* that would get picked up.

* I'm reminded of the catchphrase of Leigh Francis (an unfunny character comedian); to "Smash somebody's back doors in", which, to my mind, is hugely explicit language bordering on the violent, despite using non-standard terminology.

You might be overthinking this.

"Smash somebody's back doors in" wouldn't get you in trouble.

While suggestive, it's not out-and-out graphic. It's not smut.

I think overthinking things is in my nature :)

I'll just PM you with the passage. xD

Where do I stand on the matter?

Fuck 'em with a rake. Always.

Which end of the rake? Could get messy.

End? Wasn't that to be done sideways?

We like the idea of "if in doubt whether it'll be ok, don't post it.". Its nice, clean and most people should be able to figure it out. For those who aren't, they can use the idea of PMing it to one or more moderator(s).

I have other sites I can go to for straight up sex. Even there though, it's hard as a writer to just crank stuff out, without there being context and purpose.

Here, however, I'm very open to sex scenes and would encourage them if my partner didn't care either way. Why? Because it only happens when the pair is at that stage where it would mean progress in their relationship. I feel like outlining the intimate closeness (more emotional than physical) provides both characters and writers with a great insight into the story. Each character should react differently to sex, someone else's touch. To me, sex can do wonders for a RP but only if it's timed well. I have done less than five sex scenes on this site (I include the Old Guild too) and that shows that most RPs don't go that far.

I would never require a partner to write one with me however. If they're not comfortable, that's fine but in a way, if I know a character isn't going to have sex in even the far future, I can sometimes hinder my own writing. Fading to black feels the same way. How do you write that two people had became intimate when really, they didn't? After you approach the sex scene and skip over it, you need to sum up the consequences (good and bad) of having sex when you just faded to black and for me, without the act, the writing feels somewhat hallow. It can be uncomfortable for many writers to write sex. Some people don't feel it's "okay" morally while others are shy or not interested. That's acceptable, of course. But for me, I'd recommend it if for the sake of things developing more smoothly.

Either way, having a frank discussion about character comforts as writer comforts is something more people need to do, regardless of topic. Communication is key to a story going well, no matter the direction it may take.

Well, procreation rituals are quite common among organic entities, so I don't really see it as such a big deal if two characters get over-eager and embark on some steamy action ^^

Whether people want to Roleplay a celibate Paladin or a lewd, half naked barbarian, I'm okay with it; as long as they write well and cay stay in character.

As for me, I'll react like my character in that RP would, whether that be berating them for their sinful behavior, or asking if I could join, whichever would be the most fitting for the character :D

I am on the fence, smut can be OK though I have not done any of it since I joined the guild back in 2010. It has to be tasteful and thought out instead of "I take my clothes off and do action A until your brain melts and turns into Slush Puppies for five pages." What bothers me is when like 75% of plots is a guy raping or has raped someone. Women can rape too but no one really roleplays that, though I kind of want to do an RP on that now but probably won't take. I tend to tell people to fade to black due to some wanting to have something that lasts a single post to a novel of 50 Shades.

I did do a smut thing off the guild because that person liked the idea of it and the smut just went on and on. Why can I not find someone who like gore and violence that much but know it is purely fantasy. What really annoys me is when someone who is not 18 wants to do it, like why, you trying to do them in or something. So what if you think you have an adult mind, the law is the law. I have never had it happen but I have heard it happens time to time. Smut can be both good and bad and to end this I will repeat what I said before, I am on the fence.