Defensive readers and how to not piss them off

[LaRascasse]

I've had this problem with BDSM (almost always), Gay and, to a lesser extent, Lesbian stories. Bramblethorn and I talked about it at length recently, but I thought it would be wiser to see what the collective wisdom on the topic is.

Take one of my lesbian stories - the main character is a lawyer with questionable morality who makes it her mission to make her crooked client win by intimidating a witness. One particular reader took this to mean that ALL lesbians are inherently evil (totally not my intention). Same with my solo Gay story when some of the gay men were less-than-nice folks (drug dealers, pimps etc.). Shockingly, there is no compulsion on homosexuals to be overly upstanding members of society.

And let's not even go to the BDSM category. You can treat somebody like discarded cat turd and people will be hooting and hollering for more, but God forbid someone dies by accident... that automatically means I'm out to demean and debase the entire BDSM community.

It's not that I'm playing to generic stereotypes either. If I wrote a Lesbian story about two perfectly straight women who just happen to fall into the sack for no good reason, I see your point about trivializing someone's sexuality, but there is no reason why Gay and Lesbian characters can't be evil. I don't see someone running after me with a virtual skillet because one of my straight characters is a sociopath, but I bet there will be at least a few hackles raised if a Gay sociopath features in something I've written.

...And if a domme is a sociopath?? I'll be cleaning up hatemail for days.

How do you deal with this pitfall?

 

[sr71plt]

I think there must be something broader than this in your writing to be getting those comments. I write some pretty unsympathetic characters and don't get comments suggesting I'm maligning a whole group of people.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

I've had this problem with BDSM (almost always), Gay and, to a lesser extent, Lesbian stories. Bramblethorn and I talked about it at length recently, but I thought it would be wiser to see what the collective wisdom on the topic is.

Take one of my lesbian stories - the main character is a lawyer with questionable morality who makes it her mission to make her crooked client win by intimidating a witness. One particular reader took this to mean that ALL lesbians are inherently evil (totally not my intention). Same with my solo Gay story when some of the gay men were less-than-nice folks (drug dealers, pimps etc.). Shockingly, there is no compulsion on homosexuals to be overly upstanding members of society.

And let's not even go to the BDSM category. You can treat somebody like discarded cat turd and people will be hooting and hollering for more, but God forbid someone dies by accident... that automatically means I'm out to demean and debase the entire BDSM community.

It's not that I'm playing to generic stereotypes either. If I wrote a Lesbian story about two perfectly straight women who just happen to fall into the sack for no good reason, I see your point about trivializing someone's sexuality, but there is no reason why Gay and Lesbian characters can't be evil. I don't see someone running after me with a virtual skillet because one of my straight characters is a sociopath, but I bet there will be at least a few hackles raised if a Gay sociopath features in something I've written.

...And if a domme is a sociopath?? I'll be cleaning up hatemail for days.

How do you deal with this pitfall?

LIT is awash in folks who demand validation of their race, sexual orientation, etc.

 

[lovecraft68]

You have the answer in your title. People are defensive about their lifestyle and get pissed when they feel it is portrayed incorrectly.

The BDSM crowd especially is pretty paranoid. Look at the malice directed at 50 Shades, its insulting for that book to be labeled BDSM because it couldn't be more inaccurate if the author tried.

Why? Well in addition to just a bunch of stupid misconceptions the fact Gray was an abused kid and is now into "hurting" women portrays BDSM as a haven for mentally ill people, you mentioned someone dying. I can just imagine their reaction to that.

But like a lot of other things this falls down to are you writing for you or others? Every story will offend someone. If you know you are not intentionally setting out to upset someone then don't worry about it.

For every idiot that paints you as some form of "hater" there are many who enjoyed the story. As is the case in most aspects of life the haters always seem to be the loudest and stick out the most.

Your stories are original and well written and thought out. Above all they are different and different in itself will get a rise out of people here who are happy with the same cliches over and over again.

Like people say about the vicious comments in LW take them and wear them well. Controversy is a badge of honor for a writer.

 

[TxRad]

How do you deal with this pitfall?

It's fairly easy if you look at the audience you have here at Lit. Most are here for a good time with one hand and a happy ending.

 

[FlyAwayFromHere]

I have only been writing this stuff for a couple of weeks, so i havnt come across that from an authors viewpoint yet.

As a reader, i don't really get effected by this =-/ i think if anyone assumes all gay men are assholes because you wrote about one gay man who is an asshole, it is their loss.

I think that if someone can believe that, it makes them judgemental about gays/lesbos/bdsmees anyway and they probably would have reached that conclusion without help from one literotica story.

If it is someone who is offended because you wrote about a lesbian and they are a lesbian... and they dont want to be portrayed as inherently evil or with bad morals... i would ask them what their hair colour is and point them to a story with a bad person with the same hair colour that is nothing to do with sexuality and ask them if they think all people will that hair colour are bad just because the protagonist had that hair colour.

Its stupid people still think like this *rolls eyes*. i wouldnt know how else to deal with them. its such a stupid view to have. Its hard to reason with someone who has no good reasons *_*

 

[lovecraft68]

I have only been writing this stuff for a couple of weeks, so i havnt come across that from an authors viewpoint yet.

As a reader, i don't really get effected by this =-/ i think if anyone assumes all gay men are assholes because you wrote about one gay man who is an asshole, it is their loss.

I think that if someone can believe that, it makes them judgemental about gays/lesbos/bdsmees anyway and they probably would have reached that conclusion without help from one literotica story.

If it is someone who is offended because you wrote about a lesbian and they are a lesbian... and they dont want to be portrayed as inherently evil or with bad morals... i would ask them what their hair colour is and point them to a story with a bad person with the same hair colour that is nothing to do with sexuality and ask them if they think all people will that hair colour are bad just because the protagonist had that hair colour.

Its stupid people still think like this *rolls eyes*. i wouldnt know how else to deal with them. its such a stupid view to have. Its hard to reason with someone who has no good reasons *_*

Good post couldn't agree more with it. If a person sees Lesbians as inherently evil over one story that prejudice most likely already existed.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

I have only been writing this stuff for a couple of weeks, so i havnt come across that from an authors viewpoint yet.

As a reader, i don't really get effected by this =-/ i think if anyone assumes all gay men are assholes because you wrote about one gay man who is an asshole, it is their loss.

I think that if someone can believe that, it makes them judgemental about gays/lesbos/bdsmees anyway and they probably would have reached that conclusion without help from one literotica story.

If it is someone who is offended because you wrote about a lesbian and they are a lesbian... and they dont want to be portrayed as inherently evil or with bad morals... i would ask them what their hair colour is and point them to a story with a bad person with the same hair colour that is nothing to do with sexuality and ask them if they think all people will that hair colour are bad just because the protagonist had that hair colour.

Its stupid people still think like this *rolls eyes*. i wouldnt know how else to deal with them. its such a stupid view to have. Its hard to reason with someone who has no good reasons *_*

Somewhere along the way you gotta choose a team to play for or a gang to join. You can be a gang of one, too.

 

[lovecraft68]

Somewhere along the way you gotta choose a team to play for or a gang to join. You can be a gang of one, too.

I prefer the term a life long friend branded me with back in High School "Rogue Wolf"

 

[patientlee]

Each reader reads through his own lens. If you are striking a chord, it's likely that you are reaching the reader's own prejudices and insecurities. If you are arousing such strong emotions, I'd chalk it up to powerful writing.

 

[soflabbwlvr]

If you write one LBGT character who is a murdering psychopath and you get hate mail for it, you shrug it off and question the motives of the readers. If all your LGBT characters are murdering psychopaths, then you have to take a step back and take a look at your own belief system.

 

[LaRascasse]

If you write one LBGT character who is a murdering psychopath and you get hate mail for it, you shrug it off and question the motives of the readers. If all your LGBT characters are murdering psychopaths, then you have to take a step back and take a look at your own belief system.

I have only one murdering psychopath so far and he's straight

Look at it this way - about 75% of my characters are off - amoral lawyers, drug dealers, pimps, emotionally blackmailing lovers, fanatic cult leaders, bipolar artists and more. They are more or less uniformly spread over my stories. It's not like I save them up for my LGBT efforts because I think they caused Hurricane Katrina (no wait, that was someone else, right?)

The point being, no one seems to mind a straight, non-BDSM character being a total tool. On the other hand... you get my point.

 

[RichardBacula]

People are just oversensitive, and they get confused between what's actually offensive, and what they think is supposed to be offensive.
You could write a gay version of James Bond, and somebody, somewhere, would say, "Oh, so all homosexuals are slutty, alcoholic, assassins?"
You write a gay version of Superman, and somebody out there will say, "You know, we can't REALLY fly. This story is SO offensive!"

As long as it's the small percentage of people complaining, and you're meeting your own conscience, you're probably fine.

 

[MSTarot]

There is a silent comment you're not listening to or hearing. You hit an average score in the mid to high 4s. So you have a readership that really likes your work. They may not comment often but they do enjoy your work and give you good votes.

Then you have those that give you really good comments about your writing.

So there is two groups that like and enjoy your stories for what they are. They see that your writing show people about without blinders on. That people are people no matter what they do under the sheets.

Then there is the third group. A group that will take offence if the wind blows a leaf wrong.

Think of this like high school. Paying attention to their crap and changing your stories accordingly loses you your friends (readers). Do it long long enough and you will be the 'use-to-be-friends' with guy.

Then the people that gave the bad comments, they will start demanding your lunch money and stuffing you into lockers.

 

[StrangeLife]

... drug dealers, pimps, emotionally blackmailing lovers, fanatic cult leaders, bipolar artists and more...

That shouldn't upset anybody...

... lawyers...

YOU PERVERT!



But seriously, as a predominantly Loving Wives writer I have long given up attempting to placate any one group of readers. The Lit audience is very broad and diverse and no matter what you write there will be somebody out there who appreciates your work and others who hates it for one reason or another.

 

[lovecraft68]

YOU PERVERT!

I did a series where not only was the male lead a lawyer, but was a Satanist and was in love with his sister-with whim he practiced hardcore bdsm sex- I got a great feedback from someone that said

"Mark is the sickest fuck I have ever read about! Totally disgusting and deplorable! I mean really, a lawyer?

 

[MSTarot]

I did a series where not only was the male lead a lawyer, but was a Satanist and was in love with his sister-with whim he practiced hardcore bdsm sex- I got a great feedback from someone that said

"Mark is the sickest fuck I have ever read about! Totally disgusting and deplorable! I mean really, a lawyer?

It's and almost universal feeling and yet most of our politicians are former lawyers. Strange world.

 

[sr71plt]

The point being, no one seems to mind a straight, non-BDSM character being a total tool. On the other hand... you get my point.

Can't say that I get your point yet, no, as I haven't experienced that from commenters--not taking how I've exhibited one character as representative of all characters of that orientation. So, It's possible that somehow you are building a universal bias in how you are presenting your characters.

 

[lovecraft68]

It's and almost universal feeling and yet most of our politicians are former lawyers. Strange world.

and as the recent shut down proved, most are deplorable.

 

[hylas_]

there is no reason why Gay and Lesbian characters can't be evil. I don't see someone running after me with a virtual skillet because one of my straight characters is a sociopath, but I bet there will be at least a few hackles raised if a Gay sociopath features in something I've written.

(...)

The point being, no one seems to mind a straight, non-BDSM character being a total tool. On the other hand... you get my point.

Ok, long rant:

I haven't read your stories, I'm only reacting to what you've posted here.

I think the kind of criticism you're facing is valid when it comes to mainstream narratives. This is changing for the better now, but queer people (or people of colour, or kinky people) are still underrepresented in mainstream narratives. So the few characters that actually are queer/kinky/of colour automatically take on a representative role, whether the author wants that or not.

Let's think back to 1992. How many queer female characters in mainstream cinema pre 1992 can you think of? Not many, I bet. So if Basic Instinct depicts Sharon Stone's queer character as a murderous sociopath, it's a problem.

Director Paul Verhoeven may not think that all queer women are murderous sociopaths. But he was fully aware that queer women were barely represented in the world of mainstream cinema at the time. And he decided to introduce a queer female character... who happens to be a muderous sociopath. That's a problem.

Think how a queer teenage girl in 1992 might have felt about that. Everywhere she looks, every story she sees on the silver screen, is about people that are different from her. She doesn't see herself, her feelings, or her kind of love represented anywhere. Finally, there is a character who she may be able to relate to, a queer female character. And she's a murderous psychopath.

Or think about how an average straight person in 1992 might have taken that. Perhaps he lives on the contry side. Perhaps he doesn't know any out queer people. He doesn't know anything about queer life, or queer realities. Then he's asked to have an opinion on whether or not queer people should be allowed to adopt children, and one of the few associations he has with queerness is: a murderous sociopath.

If a straight, white, male character is a sociopath, the situation is fundamentally different. Because straight, white, male characters are everywhere, and they are allowed to be everything. They are heroes and villains, they are sane and crazy, they are smart and stupid, they are strong and weak, they are lead characters and supporting characters, they die and survive, etc. Any one straight, white, male character doesn't represent masculinity, or heterosexuality, or caucasian people, because there are so goddamn many of them.

"Straight, white men can be everything in life. Queer, white women are sociopaths. Queer women of colour don't even exist (or matter)." That may not have been the opinion of Verhoeven, but it's the message that mainstream cinema in 1992 was sending out to the world, and Verhoeven contributed to that, intentionally or out of carelessness.

(btw, I'm taking an example from the past, because it illustrates my point more sharply. Things have gotten better since 1992, but the overall point is still valid.)

And all of that doesn't even take into account that queer people are much more vulnerable than straight people. There are tons of negative misconceptions attached to queerness, and practically none to heterosexuality. Another negative portrayal of queerness can seriously hurt queer people by feeding into existing preconceptions, and further delaying equality. Another negative portrayal of heterosexuality won't hurt anybody, because straight people, being in power more or less everywhere, are not vulnerable that way.


Aaaaaanyway, I personally think the rules are different for "hobby erotica", as we have it here on literotica, than they are for mainstream narratives (cinema, tv, video games, books). I think on literotica, everybody should just write what they want, and if I don't like it for whatever reason, I just move on. And I can deal with a certain amount of subliminal homophobia or racism in erotica, because taboos are often what fires up our erotic imaginations. So it seems to me that the criticism you got was unfair.

But I just went on a long and elaborate rant because I just hate the kind of argument I quoted above. Yes, queer people (or kinky people, or people of colour) can be everything. That includes evil and psychotic, but it also includes heroic, courageous, and strong. And as long as there's a dearth of the latter, it's problematic to use the former. Please reconsider your thoughts.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

I just submitted a tale about a 65 year old man and a 56 year old woman, cuz someone suggested the age group is rare at LIT.

I wanted to one-bomb every story with folks less than 30, cuz they aint like my reader.

 

[RichardBacula]

Ok, long rant:

I haven't read your stories, I'm only reacting to what you've posted here.

I think the kind of criticism you're facing is valid when it comes to mainstream narratives. This is changing for the better now, but queer people (or people of colour, or kinky people) are still underrepresented in mainstream narratives. So the few characters that actually are queer/kinky/of colour automatically take on a representative role, whether the author wants that or not.

Let's think back to 1992. How many queer female characters in mainstream cinema pre 1992 can you think of? Not many, I bet. So if Basic Instinct depicts Sharon Stone's queer character as a murderous sociopath, it's a problem.

I don't see why, since Jeanne Tripplehorn's bisexual character wasn't a murderous sociopath.

 

[lovecraft68]

@ Hylas. Your bitterness is duly noted, but your rant has no where near the bite it would have had ten years ago.

Despite what people who want to use gender/sex preference/ and race as a crutch seem to think the playing field is a lot more level than it used to be and people are far more accepting of everything these days.

A certain "type" crying foul about a character portrayal is from the Al Sharpton school of "Yes we want to be treated equally, but don;t you dare do it if its negative in anyway."

If all types of people want to be treated equally the bad comes with the good. Gay equality means we get to portray gays as assholes and psychos just like straight people.

The people who complaining have a persecution complex and want people to pay attention to them.

Stop setting yourself back and be happy you're included in the fun like you allegedly want to be.

Okay, now my rant is over.

 

[A_Little_Show]

[deleted]

 

[patientlee]

Sharon Stone's character was queer? I had no idea. I haven't seen the movie in decades, but seriously? I either didn't pick up on it at the time or it wasn't a memorable detail. Are you sure?

I was thinking the same thing.