A question about minors

[jts963]

"We don't allow posts that involve any form of images, clips, or story with a minor in them as a focus for tickling or other fetish behavior. Period."

Got it. No argument from me, I'm just looking for some clarification (and, yes, I did search first but the following circumstance seems to have been overlooked.)

It is fairly common for young adult actors and actresses to portray teenaged characters. And even though the character on screen may be a "minor", the image is provably that of an adult actor/actress in many cases.

So which applies, the age of the actor/actress or the "age" of the character?

Thanks.

 

[Bugman]

"We don't allow posts that involve any form of images, clips, or story with a minor in them as a focus for tickling or other fetish behavior. Period."

Got it. No argument from me, I'm just looking for some clarification (and, yes, I did search first but the following circumstance seems to have been overlooked.)

It is fairly common for young adult actors and actresses to portray teenaged characters. And even though the character on screen may be a "minor", the image is provably that of an adult actor/actress in many cases.

So which applies, the age of the actor/actress or the "age" of the character?

Thanks.

When in doubt,go with the age of the actor/actress.If that person is not at least 18 its not allowed here.And you can always pm a moderator for guidence,they will be glad to answer any questions.

 

[jts963]

When in doubt,go with the age of the actor/actress.If that person is not at least 18 its not allowed here.And you can always pm a moderator for guidence,they will be glad to answer any questions.

Actually it's a moderator or administrator whom I'm looking for guidance from. And I chose to not PM them because this issue is a general one and is bound to come up again if not openly addressed at this time. Given that there are no restrictions on cartoon/anime minors in the law, but there are restrictions here, it's best to not just assume that the age of the actor supercedes that of the character.

 

[Bugman]

Thats a good point,which i missed.It seems that there are some threads which address this issue,but i can't point you towards them i'm sorry to say.Someone here will know however.

 

[Ace Riley]

I think if Natalie Portman got dressed up like a middle school cheerleader, all dolled up, and got tickled for a movie, I honestly think it would still fly here.

The only time the age of a character is in question, is when that character is created by an author here (In the Post Stories section), or when the actual filming was taken when the actor/actress was a minor.

The aging thing was an awkward throw in, and mainly attacks cartoon based stories/art.

Your question though, it's fine, unless the actress/actor in question WAS a minor in the footage in question. Keep in mind, the TMF can be picky and flame ridden so this could change anytime whenever it's felt like it.

 

[Myriads]

When the image in question is of a fictional character (and this includes an actor portraying said character on film) then the age of the fictional character is the one that counts when we apply the rule.

So if you had an adult actress portraying a minor that would be non postable rules violation.

Myriads

 

[Bugman]

Keep in mind, the TMF can be picky and flame ridden so this could change anytime whenever it's felt like it.

Not really,i'm not sure where you get this idea from.The rules are pretty clear and enforced with an even hand from what i have seen....I just didnt understand the op's question and myariads cleared it up i think...

 

[Mitchell]

Actually, Myriads cleared up something I didnt know. I thought that the age of a person in real life is the rule, such as, if Hilary Duff, who is now 19, was tickled somewhere, it was legal to post. However, now I know differently, if Hilary Duff, who is 19 in real life, portrayed a minor in a movie, and her character got tickled in that movie, we couldnt talk about it, because it is against the minor tickling rules.
Thanks for the clarification.

Mitch

 

[jts963]

When the image in question is of a fictional character (and this includes an actor portraying said character on film) then the age of the fictional character is the one that counts when we apply the rule.

So if you had an adult actress portraying a minor that would be non postable rules violation.

Myriads

Thank you.

 

[jts963]

Can somebody tell me where the "report this post" link is? Thanks in advance.

 

[NeitherSparky]

It's this little dealie in the top right of every post:

 

[jts963]

It's this little dealie in the top right of every post:

Thanks

 

[NeitherSparky]

I just wish the members of my forum actually *used* the report this post feature instead of whining that we admin and mods don't handle issues fast enough. Lol.

 

[Sadistickler1]

But, at the same time, the rules don't apply to EVERYONE on here. I still see stories written in the true stories section that talk all the time about when they were kids. well, kids are minors are they not? yet the Mod Squad decided to delete some of my true stories about when I grew up, and actually a lot on this forum really liked those stories. But,Hmmm, as soon as someone nominated me for the Golden feather award for various true stories, All the good stories I wrote and posted here suddenly disapeared. And I wasn't even notified. Dopn't get me wrong, I didn't care one way or another whether i won or not, it wasn't a big deal to me, it was just a weird coincidence when it all happened. I think if you're going to delete peoples true stories because of having a minor involved in the story, you should apply that rule to EACH AND EVERY SINGLE story that has a minor in it. Babysitter stories, school stories(Unless it is College school), Anything ANYONE has to write about any time before they were 18 or the victim was 18. Now I think THAT would be fair. Now, I'm sure after people read this post, they're gonna start ragging on me for my oppinion, but I don't care what ANYONE thinks. Its just my honest opinion about fairness. It should apply to EVERYONE, not just a select few that maybe the mods don't agree with, or don't like, or for whatever reason.
And before you all start slamming on me, remember this. I am a member of this forum too. And I like the forum for the most part. And yes, I want to keep this forum open. So, if the minor rule is to apply so we can stay out of trouble with the "Big Brother" theorey of our government and not get shut down, Then by all means, lets do that. I've lurked here since they started this forum, and love the vast knowledge, stories, pics, vidclips and even the diversity of its members. So I want the forum to STAY. Ok. 'nuff said, my rant is over. Let the fur fly and all you nay sayers go crazy on this post. And if you DO understand my position and feeling about this, well... Thank you.
Happy tickles.
Vince

 

[jts963]

OK, here's a tricky scenario and it's not hypothetical, it's the movie Matchstick Men. The lee is apparently a 14 year old girl, played by 22 year old Alison Lohman. So at the time she gets tickled by Nicholas Cage, everybody in the audience sees an adult tickling a "minor". But at the end of the movie, it's revealed that she's part of a scam being pulled on Cage's character, that she's not who she claimed to be before and that she's almost certainly older than 14, but not necessarily 18 or older. Her "real" age remains unknown.

Now what?

 

[Myriads]

Regarding the stuff about true stories with minor content that is still active on the forum.

Report the damned things. We cannot, and do not, have time to read every thing on here. Since you have seen them, report them, and they will vanish. I just iced two true stories that were reported about an hour ago. We count on YOU, the users, to find a lot of stuff. We have nothing in for any one poster, or are playing favorites with any material. We simply have not seen what you have found. Do us a favor and point it out.

Regarding the movie question above.

I'm answering this, figuring your question is serious, and you are not looking for new ways to try and make dealing with the minor content issue even more annoying then it already is, by playing games with every damned word in the rules.

The character is judged on what she actully is in the portrayal. So if the character turns out to be an adult, then the character IS an adult for the entire film. The clip could stay.

If there is no conclusive age given for a character, we use a best assumption call when deciding if a clip can stay or go. She looks over 18? The actress playing the character is 22? She part of an adult sting ring? She's probably not a minor.

A good example of this policy in action is the famous Ferris Beualer clip. The character in question is a High School Senior, and her age is never given. Since many high School Seniors and even some Juniors are 18 years old we assume the character is also. Thus the clips stay.

Folks, we wrote these rules to protect our asses from possible legal actions, and to blunt negative public perception. They are pretty simple. Don't talk about kids here. We are an adult sexualy oriented forum. The mixing of minor content and our general sexual context is a bad mix. Don't do it.

Myriads

 

[jts963]

...

Regarding the movie question above.

I'm answering this, figuring your question is serious, and you are not looking for new ways to try and make dealing with the minor content issue even more annoying then it already is, by playing games with every damned word in the rules.

I'm not playing games, that's why I gave a real situation: Matchstick Men. Ask anybody who saw the movie; that's what happened.

The character is judged on what she actully is in the portrayal. So if the character turns out to be an adult, then the character IS an adult for the entire film. The clip could stay.

If there is no conclusive age given for a character, we use a best assumption call when deciding if a clip can stay or go. She looks over 18? The actress playing the character is 22? She part of an adult sting ring? She's probably not a minor.

A good example of this policy in action is the famous Ferris Beualer clip. The character in question is a High School Senior, and her age is never given. Since many high School Seniors and even some Juniors are 18 years old we assume the character is also. Thus the clips stay.
Myriads

Re: Ferris Bueller, the lee is a high school junior, and she's referred to as intelligent, so she almost certainly didn't flunk a grade. The chances of her being 18 are small. Mia Sara was barely past her 18th birthday when the movie was being made so playing a character a year or so younger would have been no big deal, except here where it makes the clip a rules violation.

Re: Matchstick Men, the lee passed for 14 during most of her on-screen time so she didn't look over 18, but otherwise real age undetermined. Your call on the validity of the clip.

 

[Myriads]

Re: Ferris Bueller, the lee is a high school junior, and she's referred to as intelligent, so she almost certainly didn't flunk a grade. The chances of her being 18 are small. Mia Sara was barely past her 18th birthday when the movie was being made so playing a character a year or so younger would have been no big deal, except here where it makes the clip a rules violation.


When we lack a stated character age we look at the context of the character and real world analogs.

I've known 18 year old Juniors. The movie is set in the spring near the end of the term, so she's closing on being a Senior, thus has a greater chance of being the average senior age of 18. The actress was 18+

We can't say she is NOT 18. Just as we cannot with your Matchstick man example.

When we have reasonable doubt that the character is not a minor we err on leaving the material up. When the actress portraying the character is of age that adds further strength to the call to leave the material.

If Mia was 17 at filming, then the clip would have died. If the character was said to be a sophmore it would have died.

We work hard to strike a balance with our rules to allow the maximum amount of media that we can. We believe that users would prefer to have us use the widest interpretations in cases like these, which allow for the maximum amount of material to remain on forum.

Myriads

 

[jts963]

Re: Ferris Bueller, the lee is a high school junior, and she's referred to as intelligent, so she almost certainly didn't flunk a grade. The chances of her being 18 are small. Mia Sara was barely past her 18th birthday when the movie was being made so playing a character a year or so younger would have been no big deal, except here where it makes the clip a rules violation.


When we lack a stated character age we look at the context of the character and real world analogs.

I've known 18 year old Juniors. The movie is set in the spring near the end of the term, so she's closing on being a Senior, thus has a greater chance of being the average senior age of 18. The actress was 18+

I've known a 15 year old college freshman. It seems like you're looking to rule by exception for convenience. The vast majority of high school juniors are 16 or 17.

We can't say she is NOT 18. Just as we cannot with your Matchstick man example.

When we have reasonable doubt that the character is not a minor we err on leaving the material up. When the actress portraying the character is of age that adds further strength to the call to leave the material.

In this case, you don't have a reasonable doubt, given that only a tiny fraction of juniors are adults, and now the age of the actress is a factor, whereas before it wasn't.

If Mia was 17 at filming, then the clip would have died. If the character was said to be a sophmore it would have died.

I found several websites that indicate that Mia Sara was indeed only 17. Unfortunately there is no official website to settle the matter:

http://www.80s.com/saveferris/cast/sara.html

http://www.answers.com/topic/mia-sara?cat=entertainment

http://www.entertainmania.com/celebs/s/mia-sara/biography.html

http://members.tripod.com/~RevealDementia/MiaBio.htm

We work hard to strike a balance with our rules to allow the maximum amount of media that we can. We believe that users would prefer to have us use the widest interpretations in cases like these, which allow for the maximum amount of material to remain on forum.

Myriads

The question is what matters more, erring on the side of caution or erring on the side of convenience.