How much do you take away from readers comments or suggestions?

[KeithD]

Wow, really? That's tremendously saddening.

There might be examples of it happening, which I'd like to be pointed to. No, the reality here is that anything with GM content that's put anywhere other than GM, Transgender & Crossdressing, or Novels stands a good chance of being slammed and downvoted for "being in the wrong category."

 

[CyranoJ]

There might be examples of it happening, which I'd like to be pointed to. No, the reality here is that anything with GM content that's put anywhere other than GM, Transgender & Crossdressing, or Novels stands a good chance of being slammed and downvoted for "being in the wrong category."

I guess I shouldn't be surprised. I'm sorry to hear it.

 

[LexxRuthless]

Not by a long shot. I've gotten comments like that, as have others.

I'm a committed non-purist. Or maybe anti-purist. If I read a story and feel like it doesn't fit the category, then I might let the author know in a friendly way in a comment that the story would do better if it was posted elsewhere. But I would never downvote a story just because it doesn't fit.

There's a mindset I don't understand that sees category descriptions and contest parameters as cages. I see them as springboards. If somebody's imagination leads them to blend BDSM and nonconsent, so be it. Let the imagination run free. It's completely unimportant whether a fantasy Literotica BDSM story conforms to the so-called "rules" of real-life BDSM enthusiasts. The category should be seen as an opportunity to explore every dimension of BDSM that the author's imagination can come up with, without regard to whether it fits another's idea of BDSM.

Okay. So what kind of content wouldn't belong in BDSM, if the author wanted to put it there?

I think the problem there stems from a community for whom BDSM is their lifestyle. Some of what they do is potentially very dangerous, so it is important to have a consistent set of rules. They look at stories like 50 Shades and it concerns them because it misrepresents what the community is all about. It makes them look bad, and it draws predators to their community that they want no part of. To those readers and authors outside that community, the reaction is unfathomable.

I don't know if it's helpful, but you could compare it to writing a story about a sport. Let's say you wanted to have your protagonist score the winning goal in a soccer match. If you have never played the game, you might think it would be cool to have the character pick up the ball and throw it into the net from thirty meters out. Anyone who has played soccer knows you can't do that. Soccer fans would be all over you in the comments section. And if you posted that story in a "sports" category, readers there would assume you were doing it intentionally to troll them.

Posting a story to BDSM that fails to recognize that there is a community, that there are recognized rules for keeping everyone safe, will be seen by members of that community as a terrible affront and they will respond appropriately.

 

[CyranoJ]

There's a mindset I don't understand that sees category descriptions and contest parameters as cages. I see them as springboards. If somebody's imagination leads them to blend BDSM and nonconsent, so be it. Let the imagination run free. It's completely unimportant whether a fantasy Literotica BDSM story conforms to the so-called "rules" of real-life BDSM enthusiasts. The category should be seen as an opportunity to explore every dimension of BDSM that the author's imagination can come up with, without regard to whether it fits another's idea of BDSM.

Honestly, while I kinda sympathize with this, I get where the BDSM community is coming from. Having witnessed real-life relationships where there were fundamental misconceptions about what a "dom" and a "sub" is, and seen them deteriorate into real-life abuse, I don't think it's much of a sacrifice to restrict non-con stories to their own category.

There's a conflict about norms going on, basically. There was a time -- many of us grew up in it -- where finding extreme NC/R-type content on BDSM boards was perfectly normal and accepted. If you haven't known actual practitioners, it's easier to discount the possibility of that norm leading to actual abuse. But I wouldn't ultimately compare it to something like the "violent videogames cause violence" controversy: most people who have known IRL practitioners, or especially those who have known amateur or undereducated practitioners, could give you examples of its going horribly wrong. I know I could.

Many in the BDSM community are actively trying to change those norms to protect IRL people from abuse and advance "safe, sane and consensual" (or more currently, "risk-aware consensual kink," thank you Bramble) as its own norm. I feel like that's what Bramblethorn is about... and what's normal in how the community fantasizes about itself is inescapably a part of that. Also, while I grew up with a totally different set of norms, I don't really think that set of norms is all that. It was just a historical accident.

BDSM originated as a venue for non-con kink at a time when that subset of kink simply didn't have its own venues for talking about it and people had little language for it that didn't involve opprobrium or shame (or, conversely, that actually recognized the crucial importance of demarcating fantasy from reality, something the Incest community on Lit continues to struggle with). Today, it's different, or at least getting to be different. Literotica has played its own role in that.

Ultimately, I personally think we should support them. There's nothing stopping NC/R fantasies from incorporating BDSM elements, after all, which is perfectly common and comes with the benefit of clearly demarcating those fantasies from IRL practice.

 

[AvroAnson]

The reality here is that anything with GM content that's put anywhere other than GM, Transgender & Crossdressing, or Novels stands a good chance of being slammed and downvoted for "being in the wrong category."

The inescapable truth of this statement is a sad commentary on the mentality of many readers -- or at least commentators -- here. I've never posted in T&C and the only thing I ever submitted to Novels was posted in EC. But things like brothers giving one another a hummer are absolutely hated in I-T. While all women are assumed to be bi -- you can post F-F anywhere, maybe even non-erotic -- readers, even in Group, have a bizarre reaction to M-M contact.

 

[NotWise]

Has anyone ever put gay male content in the BDSM category and not had it torn apart? I include the BDSM content in some of my GM stories, but I wouldn't even begin to consider putting them in the BDSM category.

Do you tag them with BDSM or some more descriptive variant?

 

[gunhilltrain]

Part of the issue, at least for me, is that my stories are what I want to tell. Not what I think will get me a high mark in a creative writing class or another more lucrative book deal. It's my hobby, I already have a job.

I have written hundreds of stories that are based in my own RL history. Basically I have spent my adult social life in a GROUP as the sexual property of the Alpha Male of our group whom I SUBMIT (1/4 of BDSM) to without condition, he uses me and he decides whom else is permitted to (LW without misogyny) it's CNC, which is not NC. Either I have agency and can "gift" myself or I don't and all sex is NC.

"'I hope it at least seems plausible.'" It is, as well as most pleasurable. All scenarios depicted have been beta tested over, and over again for decades.

"Romance category, however. My attitude towards all this is, 'It's a work of fiction ...'" I have never posted in Romance, but where I think a story should go isn't the final word. Whatever category I request, its just a request.

Most of my work doesn't fit a particular category well. If Zane has me service two women it may be put in Lesbian, if I get cuffed or spanked it may be posted in BDSM, lately NC-R because it isn't "formula." I always find it funny when CNC is moved to NC-R. Some stories went to Mature, Ex-Voyeur, or (Incest)Taboo if I get too introspective about daddy issues.

A lot is in Group, that is where I request placement now-a-days, most goes to LW, which was my prior default placement. That's a bit funny because although Zane proposed and I accepted we never did in an effort to placate both families, maybe LW should be renamed LWGBFFUMC/CLSO&NB/CFWB. Oh, the trolls would love that.

I doubt I am the only writer who gets comments that the story just read doesn't fit the category it was posted in perfectly.

I agree with almost everything you said here. Probably "pleasurable" is a more apt word than "plausible." Is there any sexual activity that some human being hasn't already tried? I'd have to think about that one.

Crash is a novel about people who are turned-on by auto accidents. I don't know if there is actually anybody like that, but J.G. Ballard definitely thought about it.

 

[Bramblethorn]

Has anyone ever put gay male content in the BDSM category and not had it torn apart? I include the BDSM content in some of my GM stories, but I wouldn't even begin to consider putting them in the BDSM category.

Yeah, I can believe that and it shouldn't be that way. I've seen Fdom/msub stories get the same kind of reaction. There seems to be a contingent who are very hostile to anything depicting a male character in a submissive role. I suspect there's a lot of spillover from LW there.

Those GM/msub elements should never disqualify a story from being posted in BDSM, especially considering how much gay male subcultures have influenced BDSM.

Unfortunately those toxic masculinity cases are hard to get rid of.

 

[Bramblethorn]

Many in the BDSM community are actively trying to change those norms to protect IRL people from abuse and advance "safe, sane and consensual" as its own norm. I feel like that's what Bramblethorn is about... and what's normal in how the community fantasizes about itself is inescapably a part of that. Also, while I grew up with a totally different set of norms, I don't really think that set of norms is all that. It was just a historical accident.

Yep, pretty much. I think RACK (Risk Aware Consensual Kink) is a slightly better framing than SSC, but the distinction is pretty much moot for me personally and doesn't matter much for the sake of this discussion since they're both in agreement on the 'C'.

BTW, nice to see you back! It's been a while, I think?

 

[Bramblethorn]

Do you tag them with BDSM or some more descriptive variant?

That's what I do for mine - "BDSM" and "lesbian BDSM" when those are major aspects of the story.

 

[CyranoJ]

BTW, nice to see you back! It's been a while, I think?

A pleasure to see you, too. I was appalled to realize I hadn't posted a story here in like five years. I'm fixin' to rectify that.

(And thanks for defining RACK. That is better. I knew I'd wind up behind the curve eventually. )

 

[KeithD]

Do you tag them with BDSM or some more descriptive variant?

Tag them, yes. There are 85 sr71plt GM-category stories tagged with BDSM and 21 KeithD stories. So, about 10 percent of my stories in each account.

 

[KeithD]

Yeah, I can believe that and it shouldn't be that way. I've seen Fdom/msub stories get the same kind of reaction. There seems to be a contingent who are very hostile to anything depicting a male character in a submissive role. I suspect there's a lot of spillover from LW there.

Those GM/msub elements should never disqualify a story from being posted in BDSM, especially considering how much gay male subcultures have influenced BDSM.

Unfortunately those toxic masculinity cases are hard to get rid of.

It doesn't give me that much heartburn that the only comfortable category to place GM stories is GM. What gives me heartburn are the few comments on a GM story saying "this should be in anal" or "BDSM." Yeah right, you certainly don't understand how it works here.

One lesbian category, one GM category, one-half transgender/Crossdresser (doesn't have to be gay) and 26 categories for straights--with category monetary awards given.

 

[CyranoJ]

One lesbian category, one GM category, one-half transgender/Crossdresser (doesn't have to be gay) and 26 categories for straights--with category monetary awards given.

Yeah, that's gross. And it really shouldn't be the case.

 

[KeithD]

Oh, and no bi category at all. To work, I think there'd have to be two categories for this--female-perspective bi and male-perspective bi. But even when it was proposed and supported by what was purported to be sanctioned discussion, it was rejected by the site.

So, the Web site is gay tolerant but certainly not gay encouraging. Gay tolerant is enough for me to post here, though. I'm posting my bi stories elsewhere mostly.

 

[SimonDoom]

Okay. So what kind of content wouldn't belong in BDSM, if the author wanted to put it there?

There are three different issues at work here. They are distinct, but in these discussions that pop from time to time in this forum about "does this belong in this category?" the separate issues get mixed up.

The main issue is Laurel's rules. I think having categories makes sense, but whatever I think she has her rules and ultimately she is the arbiter of what goes where. I respect that. It makes sense as a practical matter for authors to know what those rules are so they don't get confused and find the story being put somewhere they didn't want it put.

Beyond that, there's the practical matter of wanting to put your story in the category where it will get the "best" response, whatever that means to the author, whether it's highest score or most views. It's perfectly appropriate for authors to give other authors helpful tips on this issue, in a supportive way.

But there's another issue, which is a more judgmental, almost moralistic attitude about what goes where. It's this attitude I take issue with. So long as the story complies with Laurel's rules, whatever those rules are, it's purely a practical and prudential decision where it goes. I don't see much use getting upset about a story going in incest or nonconsent or BDSM that violates somebody's concept of what those categories are "supposed" to mean. Let Laurel handle it. If something gets past her screening, I don't get worked up about it. It's an aspect of the content cop/hall monitor attitude I want nothing to do with.

So, for example, regarding your question about BDSM, the only real question is whether it will satisfy Laurel's rules. My understanding, based on my reading of her rules and TX Tall Tales' helpful essay, is that if nonconsent is a major theme of the story that's where it's going to go, even if it has BDSM elements. But that's a very different matter from whether the story complies with what are considered acceptable practices in the "official" BDSM community. I don't think that matters much, and Laurel has no obligation to take her cue from it.

I don't feel as an author of stories at Literotica that I have any responsibility to the IRL BDSM community. I just don't. I don't think that way about art. I am pretty much of the "anything goes" school of erotica stories, as I am about art in general. If you disagree, and I think you do, then I applaud any effort you make to insert norms regarding BDSM activity in your stories that will advance the norms you believe in. I don't believe in using those norms to try to limit what other people can write and where they publish it.

 

[KeithD]

I don't feel as an author of stories at Literotica that I have any responsibility to the IRL BDSM community. I just don't. I don't think that way about art. I am pretty much of the "anything goes" school of erotica stories, as I am about art in general. If you disagree, and I think you do, then I applaud any effort you make to insert norms regarding BDSM activity in your stories that will advance the norms you believe in. I don't believe in using those norms to try to limit what other people can write and where they publish it.

Yep, this is where I am.

 

[NotWise]

The topics on this thread have certainly become wide-ranging.

 

[SimonDoom]

The topics on this thread have certainly become wide-ranging.

They have. You've been around long enough, though, to know that this thread is not unique in this respect.

 

[SimonDoom]

I don't know if it's helpful, but you could compare it to writing a story about a sport. Let's say you wanted to have your protagonist score the winning goal in a soccer match. If you have never played the game, you might think it would be cool to have the character pick up the ball and throw it into the net from thirty meters out. Anyone who has played soccer knows you can't do that. Soccer fans would be all over you in the comments section. And if you posted that story in a "sports" category, readers there would assume you were doing it intentionally to troll them.

.

This analogy only works if I'm writing a BDSM story about people involved in a BDSM community engaged in activities that BDSM community enthusiasts participate in. It doesn't apply just because I'm writing a story about fictional individuals who are involved in activities that fall broadly within the range of bondage, dominance/submission, and sadomasochism. In many activities, there are no preexisting rules, other than what the characters make up as they go.

If I choose to write a story about a group of people who decide to make up a new sport that's kind of like soccer, but different from soccer in certain respects, it's not a legitimate criticism for a soccer fan reader to cry, "But they're not playing by soccer rules!"

The vast majority of people who read 50 Shades were not members of BDSM communities. They didn't know anything about them, or their rules. Most of them have probably never in their lives engaged in BDSM activity. It's just a fun fantasy for them.

And those readers matter every bit as much as the readers who are members of the IRL BDSM community. Nobody gets to dictate the content of another person's fantasy, and that's all this Site offers -- fantasies.

To your point, I will say this: I'm working on a story about a couple that gets involved in a BDSM group, and verisimilitude matters for the effectiveness of the story. After reading this thread I'll probably do more research on how these groups work (I've dabbled in BDSM and read some books but am not a member of any community) before publishing a story. In that particular story, it WOULD matter to me whether members of BDSM communities would find the story realistic or not. The issue of consent and how it's given is very important in that story.

 

[LexxRuthless]

This analogy only works if I'm writing a BDSM story about people involved in a BDSM community engaged in activities that BDSM community enthusiasts participate in. It doesn't apply just because I'm writing a story about fictional individuals who are involved in activities that fall broadly within the range of bondage, dominance/submission, and sadomasochism. In many activities, there are no preexisting rules, other than what the characters make up as they go.

If I choose to write a story about a group of people who decide to make up a new sport that's kind of like soccer, but different from soccer in certain respects, it's not a legitimate criticism for a soccer fan reader to cry, "But they're not playing by soccer rules!"

The vast majority of people who read 50 Shades were not members of BDSM communities. They didn't know anything about them, or their rules. Most of them have probably never in their lives engaged in BDSM activity. It's just a fun fantasy for them.

And those readers matter every bit as much as the readers who are members of the IRL BDSM community. Nobody gets to dictate the content of another person's fantasy, and that's all this Site offers -- fantasies.

To your point, I will say this: I'm working on a story about a couple that gets involved in a BDSM group, and verisimilitude matters for the effectiveness of the story. After reading this thread I'll probably do more research on how these groups work (I've dabbled in BDSM and read some books but am not a member of any community) before publishing a story. In that particular story, it WOULD matter to me whether members of BDSM communities would find the story realistic or not. The issue of consent and how it's given is very important in that story.

I get what you're saying, and I wasn't even disagreeing with your earlier comment. Anyone who wants to write a BDSM story and submit it to the site should be able to write about those themes however they like. It's just that if you "fail to conform" to the established rules, those people are going to figuratively kick you in the nuts. For some writers, the response will catch them off-guard. I merely intended to explain why that particular group of readers will feel justified when they kick you in the nuts.

 

[KeithD]

I get what you're saying, and I wasn't even disagreeing with your earlier comment. Anyone who wants to write a BDSM story and submit it to the site should be able to write about those themes however they like. It's just that if you "fail to conform" to the established rules, those people are going to figuratively kick you in the nuts. For some writers, the response will catch them off-guard. I merely intended to explain why that particular group of readers will feel justified when they kick you in the nuts.

Sort of like those bitter men in Loving Wives who want to control how women treat their man in stories posted to that category and who claim the right to devise and enforce "the rules" on what can be written and posted there.

 

[PennameWombat]

The inescapable truth of this statement is a sad commentary on the mentality of many readers -- or at least commentators -- here. I've never posted in T&C and the only thing I ever submitted to Novels was posted in EC. But things like brothers giving one another a hummer are absolutely hated in I-T. While all women are assumed to be bi -- you can post F-F anywhere, maybe even non-erotic -- readers, even in Group, have a bizarre reaction to M-M contact.

This. I've included F-F (FF, FFM and other combinations) across multiple categories without issue. But where I've had multiple males in the group they avoided direct contact with each other.

Oh, and no bi category at all. To work, I think there'd have to be two categories for this--female-perspective bi and male-perspective bi. But even when it was proposed and supported by what was purported to be sanctioned discussion, it was rejected by the site.

So, the Web site is gay tolerant but certainly not gay encouraging. Gay tolerant is enough for me to post here, though. I'm posting my bi stories elsewhere mostly.

I enjoy that I have the freedom to include F-F aspects in stories without it having to be a trump aspect. I wouldn't want the fact there is female-perspective bi activity to force me into such a category, unless that aspect was the central theme (e.g., I've included light bondage scenes occasionally but never had to post in BDSM but if it were the key theme then into BDSM it would go.) But it's clearly not a fair situation that male-perspective bi doesn't get the same pass.

 

[Bramblethorn]

Sort of like those bitter men in Loving Wives who want to control how women treat their man in stories posted to that category and who claim the right to devise and enforce "the rules" on what can be written and posted there.

Sometimes people do a thing for a bad, invalid reason. Sometimes different people, in a different context, do a superficially similar thing for a good and valid reason.

People who flame stories in LW for containing cheating are wrong. It doesn't follow that people who flame stories in a different category, for containing a different kind of content, for different reasons, are wrong.

 

[KeithD]

Sometimes people do a thing for a bad, invalid reason. Sometimes different people, in a different context, do a superficially similar thing for a good and valid reason.

People who flame stories in LW for containing cheating are wrong. It doesn't follow that people who flame stories in a different category, for containing a different kind of content, for different reasons, are wrong.

Yeah, I get that. If it's something you (the generic you) do, it's justified; if someone else does it, it may not be justified.