Loving wives: From violence to murder-suicide

[Bramblethorn]

... I saw it for what I think it was intended as: a story about a broken person pushed too far and did something unthinkable precisely because he's broken.

Valid. (Haven't read the story in question, but I'm happy to trust your interpretation.) But I don't think that's quite the end of the discussion.

Roleplaying culture has a term "My Guy Syndrome". MGS is when one player is obnoxiously disruptive and justifies it with "well, that's what my guy would do". The GM prepares an adventure where the town mayor recruits Our Heroes to deal with the town's giant rat problem; That Guy decides to stab the mayor and burn the town down instead. "Oh, my guy just has a long-standing hatred of authority and wattle-and-daub architecture, it's the only plausible reaction for him in this situation. You wouldn't expect me to go against character, would you?"

But deciding to play that kind of character is in itself a choice...the kind of choice that players make when they want to do disruptive shit. These days, when I'm running a RPG, I make sure the players know it's their responsibility to come up with a character concept that's not going to ruin the game for others.

Same consideration applies here. Yes, if somebody is abused and horribly betrayed and pushed beyond their limits, it may be plausible for them to react murderously. But the author chose to put them in that predicament in the first place. If they choose a premise where they know murder-suicide is the only plausible outcome, they've chosen to write a story about murder-suicide.

 

[NoTalentHack]

Valid. (Haven't read the story in question, but I'm happy to trust your interpretation.) But I don't think that's quite the end of the discussion.

Roleplaying culture has a term "My Guy Syndrome". MGS is when one player is obnoxiously disruptive and justifies it with "well, that's what my guy would do". The GM prepares an adventure where the town mayor recruits Our Heroes to deal with the town's giant rat problem; That Guy decides to stab the mayor and burn the town down instead. "Oh, my guy just has a long-standing hatred of authority and wattle-and-daub architecture, it's the only plausible reaction for him in this situation. You wouldn't expect me to go against character, would you?"

But deciding to play that kind of character is in itself a choice...the kind of choice that players make when they want to do disruptive shit. These days, when I'm running a RPG, I make sure the players know it's their responsibility to come up with a character concept that's not going to ruin the game for others.

Same consideration applies here. Yes, if somebody is abused and horribly betrayed and pushed beyond their limits, it may be plausible for them to react murderously. But the author chose to put them in that predicament in the first place. If they choose a premise where they know murder-suicide is the only plausible outcome, they've chosen to write a story about murder-suicide.

Sure, I think that's a fair take. I don't know that "My Guy Syndrome" is necessarily the right fit, as the usual prescription for that is "if you don't want to play with a group, go write a story about your character," though.

The analogy I think might be closer is the treatment of Superman in Man of Steel. At the end (spoilers for a ten year old movie), Superman is placed in a no-win position where he either has to kill someone or let them kill someone else. I disliked most of the movie, but I haaaaated that scene in particular.

My hatred, though, wasn't simply because of the scene as written, but of the way adherents of Snyder's laughably nihilistic sensibilities defended it. "What else was he supposed to do in that situation? Let the family die?" No; he shouldn't have been written into that situation at all.

So I get where you're coming from, I think. The difference there, though, is that... Mmm, let's say the movie had been about another flying brick superhero named... fuck it, pick something that sounds good. "Ultradude" does not, but I'm going with that.

If the movie had been about this Ultradude, even if it had been as a commentary about Superman or superheroes in general, I probably would have rolled with it and enjoyed the movie a lot more than I did. The problem was not the content; the problem was the context.

In making "nihilistic Snyder movie number six" with Superman as a protagonist instead of Ultradude, he said "this is the Superman you're going to have to deal with for the next however many years it persists." Much like your example of the "I hate authority and wattle and daub architecture" guy, he's chosen to do something antisocial in the name of what he wants to create, because washed out colors and juvenile obsession with grim and gritty are what he enjoys.

That's the difference here, at least in my opinion. If Snyder had made Ultradude, no problem; it's well-trod ground, but whatever. Well-trod ground can still yield interesting journeys. If the chaotic neutral murder hobo player wants to write a story about that character, good for him. And if the guy who wrote the story that started this discussion did... well, what we're discussing, then fine.

He's doing, imo, exactly what he should do if he wants to write a story about a broken, antisocial loser: write a story, then put it out there for others to read in a place that's appropriate for it. He's not inflicting it on a gaming group or sneak it into a children's story collection. I think the move to non-erotic probably is a good fit--although it was also fine where it was, given other stories that have been told in LW--but he's doing exactly what I wish more "my guy" players would do: write a story about their character, then let others engage if they want to.

 

[Bramblethorn]

Sure, I think that's a fair take. I don't know that "My Guy Syndrome" is necessarily the right fit, as the usual prescription for that is "if you don't want to play with a group, go write a story about your character," though.

Also fair; the parallel only goes so far. I was invoking MGS only to make the point that "it's what that character would do in that situation" invites the question "and who created that character and wrote them into that situation?"

 

[MajorRewrite]

Ooooooh, is it already time for the bi-monthly thread where everyone gets to complain about the downfall of LW? I honestly don't see what's wrong with the story.

I actually had a discussion about this with another author just a few days ago. If you write about betrayal, either you allow the faulted character some means to maintain their agency, or they'd have to fall into depression. Naturally, most stories then end up with the usual power-fantasies and clichés of the MC turning out to be some retired army specialist, or secret agent, or has connections to drug cartels owing him a favor, or whatever else they come up with to let the MC keep their sanity.

There are hundreds, if not thousands of stories on here where a character is being utterly and completely broken. The only unusual thing about this one is that said character then neither gets off on the humiliation nor has any means to turn their life around. So, he reacts like a human being in the real world would. You don't have to like it. But I also don't see how this is in any way concerning.

Normal, well-adjusted people simply move on with their lives after a setback. Older and wiser.

 

[MajorRewrite]

Literally no one but you thinks people are getting off to these types of LW stories.

I am also on the record as thinking people get off on violent revenge in LW stories.

The comments indicate a passionate and shall we say “ecstatic” level of enthusiasm from some readers.

 

[NoTalentHack]

Normal, well-adjusted people simply move on with their lives after a setback. Older and wiser.

But this guy isn’t normal and well-adjusted. The villain of the story had tormented him for years. And he had tried to move on; that ended up with him being crippled through his military service while the bully specifically targeted his wife back home, just to further fuck with him. From the telling, it sounds like the guy would have continued to torment him even if he left town again; he’d already bought up one business just to further the seduction.

It’s an inherently ludicrous premise; a ludicrous response is fine.

 

[NoTalentHack]

I am also on the record as thinking people get off on violent revenge in LW stories.

The comments indicate a passionate and shall we say “ecstatic” level of enthusiasm from some readers.

No more ecstatic than football fans, and I doubt they’re jacking it to every sack and touchdown. People get a thrill from things that are cathartic; that doesn’t mean it’s a sexual thrill.

 

[Lifestyle66]

I posted a violent story to LW, in which the potential rapist gets shot, and it's doing rather well (relatively for my shitty writing and 750-words) at 3.47 with 250 votes.

"Chasing Her in the Wild"
"The cock-tease deserves to be treated like an animal!"

So, it goes to show the LW audience are not all incel, women-hating misogynists getting off on violence against women.

 

[Lifestyle66]

No more ecstatic than football fans, and I doubt they’re jacking it to every sack and touchdown. People get a thrill from things that are cathartic; that doesn’t mean it’s a sexual thrill.

I agree with you.

They're not getting a sexual thrill out of those violent stories. It's more like a "wronged person getting 'justice' in a warped, over-corrected way."

For people who have felt wronged in their life, they relate to the underdog getting "even" with their abuser.

 

[lovecraft68]

[Heated discussions are fine, even welcome. However, personally attacking / kink-shaming a fellow author or reader is not allowed within the Author's Hangout. Threads which devolve into the exchanging of insults will be closed and repeat offenders will be given a timeout, per the AH rules.]

 

[OverconfidentSarcasm]

Normal, well-adjusted people simply move on with their lives after a setback. Older and wiser.

The MC in that story had been scarred and severely impaired by a roadside IED, then comes home to find that his wife and his long-term bully have financially ruined him, branded him a pedophile, and effectively left him homeless and without any kind of support. You can not call someone like that "normal" or "well-adjusted". And I also don't believe that this is the kind of situation you "simply move on" from.

 

[OverconfidentSarcasm]

I posted a violent story to LW, in which the potential rapist gets shot, and it's doing rather well (relatively for my shitty writing and 750-words) at 3.47 with 250 votes.

"Chasing Her in the Wild"
"The cock-tease deserves to be treated like an animal!"

So, it goes to show the LW audience are not all incel, women-hating misogynists getting off on violence against women.

Is that... I'm sorry if I'm too stupid to get it, but... Did you write a story about a squirrel's sex life, then posted it to LW, and are now using it as an example for the LW readers not being incels?

 

[NoTalentHack]

[Heated discussions are fine, even welcome. However, personally attacking / kink-shaming a fellow author or reader is not allowed within the Author's Hangout. Threads which devolve into the exchanging of insults will be closed and repeat offenders will be given a timeout, per the AH rules.]

That was fast. I didn't even have time to read this one before it got pulled.

Since I have you here, I have a question for you and @MajorRewrite. This is not a dig; I promise. I know you and I have gotten into it more than once over this, so I'd understand if you thought it was. It is, however, 100% sincere, so please take it in that spirit.

We now have two people in here who say they believe that people are getting off on non-sexualized violence in these types of stories. They both write often/primarily in Incest, which (I assume) means it's one of their kinks. Of the more mainstream kinks, it's also one of the more recent to become relatively mainstream and is still kind of edge-case, i.e., that there's mainstream porn targeting it (albeit only in "step" form) openly as opposed to the stuff that's still too taboo for that, because it's seen as wholly unhealthy/dangerous/disgusting, even as fantasy: zoophilia, underage, etc.

Do you think there's a link there? Again, I am being wholly serious here, because I think... I can kinda see it from your point of view, if that's the case.

The two of you write non-step stuff, which means you're just out past that edge of mainstream acceptance, and you've done it for a while, which means it's a space you're used to occupying mentally, i.e., "this fantasy is unacceptable to the world at large, but it's close, and I feel comfortable writing/reading it under a pseudonym." You're used to acknowledging that "yes, this is an unhealthy thing in the real world, but it's fluffy fantasy in here," I assume. I believe one of you (I'm sorry, I don't remember which) has said so in the past.

Do you think, therefore, that there are people that are just as into non-sexualized violence against women as a sexual fetish as you are into incest, and that they just don't comment because it's less accepted?

Because that's an interesting argument; if it weren't for the fact that we have anonymous comments on here, I might even buy it. But I've gotten plenty of comments from women on my NC/R and Fetish stuff--stories that are pretty ugly in places--that admitted, sometimes happily and sometimes shamefacedly, to getting off on them.

It's an interesting thought experiment; I'm not so close-minded to the possibility that there's SOME pervert out there that gets off to this stuff, but I don't think there are legions of them; the Roy Orbison clingfilm guy exists, after all, but that's just one guy.

But do you think that your acceptance of a borderline fetish as a part of your experience makes you more open to the possibility that there exists this vast, hidden network of people into revenge-stories-as-titllation? Because I think the answer might be both that it does, but that it also makes you more vulnerable to projection, i.e., "I know I like this thing that's sexually taboo, so other people that like a thing are likely to like it for sexual reasons as well."

 

[Lifestyle66]

I wonder about those authors here who strongly opine about the "LW incel, violent women-haters", and criticize all of the LW violent stories, and who don't post to the LW category.

Why don't they show some courage and write something BETTER to post to LW, instead hiding behind a quest for the Red-H and high ratings they demand elsewhere.

Could it be some have a second account where they may even be writing those violent stories to prove themselves correct?

If you find a story about a cheating wife with a lover abusing her husband, try writing your own version of that same scenario with YOUR preferred outcome and post it to LW! Several authors have even set up such open-ended stories inviting others to write their own endings. "Just Once ... If You Don't Mind?" and "February Sucks" are two such invitations to write a conclusion. Try it!

 

[lovecraft68]

[No personal attacks or trolling - including creating accounts for this specific purpose. Heated discussions are fine, even welcome. However, personally attacking / kink-shaming a fellow author or reader is not allowed within the Author's Hangout. Threads which devolve into the exchanging of insults will be closed and repeat offenders will be given a timeout, per the AH rules.]

 

[Lifestyle66]

Is that... I'm sorry if I'm too stupid to get it, but... Did you write a story about a squirrel's sex life, then posted it to LW, and are now using it as an example for the LW readers not being incels?

Go ahead and 1-bomb it.

I write to LW to try changing the trend many here criticize, regardless of the ratings and comments on my stories.

Try reading my story "What Were You Thinking?" "Husband discovers his wife's deception" to see how I fell about a cheating wife and a reasonable reaction. It's rated 3.35 with over 1.2k votes, which goes to show a majority of LW readers approved of the non-violent outcome. Others just object to the consensual extra-marital sex.

 

[lovecraft68]

[No personal attacks or trolling - including creating accounts for this specific purpose. Heated discussions are fine, even welcome. However, personally attacking / kink-shaming a fellow author or reader is not allowed within the Author's Hangout. Threads which devolve into the exchanging of insults will be closed and repeat offenders will be given a timeout, per the AH rules.]

 

[Lifestyle66]

...Someone is getting off to it, because on this platform, and in a category called non consent, its seen as arousing.

...

King wrote an underaged gang bang in IT(because he's a sick creep) and it flew no problem. You can't do that here or most other places because it portrays under aged sex in an arousing manner. People who read that on a sex site are doing it with one hand.

...

How do you know the audience here is "aroused" by what they read? Were YOU aroused when you read Stephen King's underaged gang bang?

 

[MajorRewrite]

I wonder about those authors here who strongly opine about the "LW incel, violent women-haters", and criticize all of the LW violent stories, and who don't post to the LW category.

Why don't they show some courage and write something BETTER to post to LW, instead hiding behind a quest for the Red-H and high ratings they demand elsewhere.

I have 2 stories in LW and both have high ratings, so I’m not sure what you’re going on about.

 

[AwkwardlySet]

That was fast. I didn't even have time to read this one before it got pulled.

Since I have you here, I have a question for you and @MajorRewrite. This is not a dig; I promise. I know you and I have gotten into it more than once over this, so I'd understand if you thought it was. It is, however, 100% sincere, so please take it in that spirit.

We now have two people in here who say they believe that people are getting off on non-sexualized violence in these types of stories. They both write often/primarily in Incest, which (I assume) means it's one of their kinks. Of the more mainstream kinks, it's also one of the more recent to become relatively mainstream and is still kind of edge-case, i.e., that there's mainstream porn targeting it (albeit only in "step" form) openly as opposed to the stuff that's still too taboo for that, because it's seen as wholly unhealthy/dangerous/disgusting, even as fantasy: zoophilia, underage, etc.

Do you think there's a link there? Again, I am being wholly serious here, because I think... I can kinda see it from your point of view, if that's the case.

The two of you write non-step stuff, which means you're just out past that edge of mainstream acceptance, and you've done it for a while, which means it's a space you're used to occupying mentally, i.e., "this fantasy is unacceptable to the world at large, but it's close, and I feel comfortable writing/reading it under a pseudonym." You're used to acknowledging that "yes, this is an unhealthy thing in the real world, but it's fluffy fantasy in here," I assume. I believe one of you (I'm sorry, I don't remember which) has said so in the past.

Do you think, therefore, that there are people that are just as into non-sexualized violence against women as a sexual fetish as you are into incest, and that they just don't comment because it's less accepted?

Because that's an interesting argument; if it weren't for the fact that we have anonymous comments on here, I might even buy it. But I've gotten plenty of comments from women on my NC/R and Fetish stuff--stories that are pretty ugly in places--that admitted, sometimes happily and sometimes shamefacedly, to getting off on them.

It's an interesting thought experiment; I'm not so close-minded to the possibility that there's SOME pervert out there that gets off to this stuff, but I don't think there are legions of them; the Roy Orbison clingfilm guy exists, after all, but that's just one guy.

But do you think that your acceptance of a borderline fetish as a part of your experience makes you more open to the possibility that there exists this vast, hidden network of people into revenge-stories-as-titllation? Because I think the answer might be both that it does, but that it also makes you more vulnerable to projection, i.e., "I know I like this thing that's sexually taboo, so other people that like a thing are likely to like it for sexual reasons as well."

And here we go again. I did get to read the posts before they were pulled, and while the one you quoted did warrant editing, these last two didn't. We are once again back to censorship on AH by the mod.

 

[NoTalentHack]

And here we go again. I did get to read the posts before they were pulled, and while the one you quoted did warrant editing, these last two didn't. We are once again back to censorship on AH by the mod.

I would really like to know what he said, to be honest.

 

[MajorRewrite]

But do you think that your acceptance of a borderline fetish as a part of your experience makes you more open to the possibility that there exists this vast, hidden network of people into revenge-stories-as-titllation? Because I think the answer might be both that it does, but that it also makes you more vulnerable to projection, i.e., "I know I like this thing that's sexually taboo, so other people that like a thing are likely to like it for sexual reasons as well."

Nah. I just think violent revenge fantasies aren’t cool.

 

[AwkwardlySet]

I would really like to know what he said, to be honest.

Well, shortly put, the one before the last was about the fact that there is plenty of violence and rape in the mainstream writing and media and it flies there because of the way it is being painted - as something horrible. On Lit, that same content is being eroticized just by being published on a platform where readers expect erotic and sexualized content. In my opinion, there is validity in what he says, although I wouldn't go full black and white here.

 

[SimonDoom]

Do you think, therefore, that there are people that are just as into non-sexualized violence against women as a sexual fetish as you are into incest, and that they just don't comment because it's less accepted?

Because that's an interesting argument; if it weren't for the fact that we have anonymous comments on here, I might even buy it. But I've gotten plenty of comments from women on my NC/R and Fetish stuff--stories that are pretty ugly in places--that admitted, sometimes happily and sometimes shamefacedly, to getting off on them.

It's an interesting thought experiment; I'm not so close-minded to the possibility that there's SOME pervert out there that gets off to this stuff, but I don't think there are legions of them; the Roy Orbison clingfilm guy exists, after all, but that's just one guy.

But do you think that your acceptance of a borderline fetish as a part of your experience makes you more open to the possibility that there exists this vast, hidden network of people into revenge-stories-as-titllation? Because I think the answer might be both that it does, but that it also makes you more vulnerable to projection, i.e., "I know I like this thing that's sexually taboo, so other people that like a thing are likely to like it for sexual reasons as well."

As an incest author, I'd say a) yes, it seems to me reasonable to suppose that some of the readers of hard core LW revenge against the woman stories enjoy a kind of sexual pleasure from them, and b) I think anyone who writes sex stories concerning unusual fetishes or taboos might be more sensitive or receptive to this possibility.

But I don't know. It's conjecture. The revenge against the wife stories have always bothered me, but I haven't seen any comments from anyone that prove that they derive sexual pleasure from them.

 

[Lifestyle66]

I have 2 stories in LW and both have high ratings, so I’m not sure what you’re going on about.

I've found (contrary to what some here opine) that stories of cheating wives, when written from the lover's POV, tend to rate higher.

IMO, the majority of the LW audience hate swingers, sharing, or consensual extra-marital sex. They want those men who approve of such behavior punished in some way. So, if you tell a story from the husband's POV where he says "go for it." they HATE his POV. But if you write that same scenario from the lover's POV saying "I'm fucking your wife, you worthless loser" they see that as justice for the husband BEING a loser.