Ugh, everything keeps getting rejected

[MechaBlade]

I have 4 stories on Lit and have been here since before 2000, so I'm not some noob. But I recently got a rejection because I wrote a political story (consensual), so I changed all the names and facts so that it no longer stated it was a certain politician, and still got rejected. I gave up on that story, and submitted one of my best non-consent stories last night. That was rejected for not being mutual-pleasurey, although there are others like that here (including mine).

I feel like Lit just rejects anything that isn't inoffensive trite garbage now. I bet 50 Shades of Grey would be rejected for being too close to celeb non-consent.

/rant

 

[Bramblethorn]

I have 4 stories on Lit and have been here since before 2000, so I'm not some noob. But I recently got a rejection because I wrote a political story (consensual), so I changed all the names and facts so that it no longer stated it was a certain politician, and still got rejected. I gave up on that story, and submitted one of my best non-consent stories last night. That was rejected for not being mutual-pleasurey, although there are others like that here (including mine).

I feel like Lit just rejects anything that isn't inoffensive trite garbage now. I bet 50 Shades of Grey would be rejected for being too close to celeb non-consent.

/rant

Laurel mentioned around late 2016 that they weren't accepting overtly political stories, but I saw one recently that started with a page-long rant about politics, so I thought maybe that rule had been relaxed. Guess it's just inconsistent in application.

 

[MechaBlade]

Laurel mentioned around late 2016 that they weren't accepting overtly political stories, but I saw one recently that started with a page-long rant about politics, so I thought maybe that rule had been relaxed. Guess it's just inconsistent in application.

I think it's specifically Trump stories.

 

[RejectReality]

There were probably too many obvious references remaining in the story that pegged whatever politician you were referencing. The political ban is more about politicians and parties than political issues. Issues are on a more case-by-case basis, and there's certainly the one-woman-show factor where some stuff will slip through because Laurel has to speed read in order to keep up with the queue.

Non-con has always been a gray area unless the "victim" enjoys it. Some will get through, some won't. It depends upon whether Laurel sees it as a rape fantasy or a rapist fantasy, and again, the one-woman-show factor is there as well.

Non-con ( and incest concerning where the story is categorized ) is also getting a lot more scrutiny the last couple of years due to an avalanche of complaints from users according to Laurel.

There are plenty of alternate venues with different rules and readerships. Whenever something won't fly here, I just post it elsewhere. Locking yourself into one site either puts guard rails on your imagination or leads to frustration.

 

[MechaBlade]

There are plenty of alternate venues with different rules and readerships. Whenever something won't fly here, I just post it elsewhere. Locking yourself into one site either puts guard rails on your imagination or leads to frustration.

Would that there were. BDSM Library is shut down. I've tried lushstories for my political one, but they don't accept celeb stories. I tried sexstories (xnxx), but I got rejected: I think they also have a political ban.

I only can host my stories on my own site, which doesn't get a lot of visitors, because it's just my own site.

Lit is the main erotic story site on the web now unless I want to start my own competing site.

 

[Lady2020]

I'm curious. Would like to read the rejected stories. Can you pm me?

 

[MechaBlade]

Sure. I'll do you one better. Here's all my stories here: [Link Removed]

My last two submissions were Pink Box (hard rape) and Covfefe (politics).

[Links to offsite work should be confined to your bio, signature, and the designated "Authors and their Books" sticky at the top of the forum, or passed via Private Message. -AH Mod]

 

[Lady2020]

Sure. I'll do you one better. Here's all my stories here:

My last two submissions were Pink Box (hard rape) and Covfefe (politics).

Well, Covfefe was rejected basically because it's Trump screwing his daughter. I assume.

I like the idea of Pink Box, but I'm not into non-consent. If this one was rejected, I'm not sure why. Basically the writing's good, could be a little tighter. Maybe the mention of scat towards the end? Who knows with Lit sometimes. What did your rejection notice say?

 

[UsuallyPresent]

There are some topics they just won't publish here. As it's their site, it's their right. I've not found a 'good' alternative, personally, so there're several stories I've written that won't see the light of day. *shrug*

 

[lovecraft68]

Laurel mentioned around late 2016 that they weren't accepting overtly political stories, but I saw one recently that started with a page-long rant about politics, so I thought maybe that rule had been relaxed. Guess it's just inconsistent in application.

If the politics agree with Laurel's personal politics it can fly. Its that simple.

Lit's free speech stance has become free speech as long as I agree.

Its pretty much that simple, and as she owns it, she can run it however she likes, and I have no issue with that,

Until the double talk of how its still a free speech site starts because that's the only issue I've ever with lit. I don't care what you want the rules to be, but stop acting like you allow free speech, when you clearly don't and stop acting like you don't want certain material here when its to be found everywhere.

Owning your shit, as my grandfather used to say, is becoming an extinct trait.

 

[ruddygore]

Sure. I'll do you one better. Here's all my stories here:

My last two submissions were Pink Box (hard rape) and Covfefe (politics).

For The Pink Box, what thrill or enjoyment did the victim get?

From the guidleines "While we do accept submissions with graphic violence, we don't accept "snuff" - i.e. death & extreme torture with the aim of sexual titillation. We generally do not accept submissions of nonconsensual sex in which the "victim" gets absolutely no sort of thrill or enjoyment from the acts, or is seriously and /or permanently physically harmed/abused.

 

[lovecraft68]

For The Pink Box, what thrill or enjoyment did the victim get?

From the guidleines "While we do accept submissions with graphic violence, we don't accept "snuff" - i.e. death & extreme torture with the aim of sexual titillation. We generally do not accept submissions of nonconsensual sex in which the "victim" gets absolutely no sort of thrill or enjoyment from the acts, or is seriously and /or permanently physically harmed/abused.

Well first off....this person just linked off Lit stories. So...maybe they don't know where they're posting? But...on your question about 'did the victim enjoy it?

You really think Lit doesn't allow rape? You think they adhere to their guidelines?

Very naive.

Those 'guidelines' are here for two reasons.

1-it gives her the right to remove a story she doesn't personally like by saying it breaks one of those rules-or perhaps she just bans one out of 50 to look like she cares

2- certain stories bring certain readers, some not so decent. Almost every serial rapist has a ton of rape porn on their computers. Same for incest, which is why the underage rule is important. Now, of course you can't blame a story or video for someone acting on it, but it does draw that crowd.

Now...who follows that crowd? Feds/LE...want to catch a child abuser? Find a site that allows kiddie porn story or video...want to catch a rapist? Go where that material is

So its also CYA so if in the unfortunate event a dozen rape stories from lit are found on a rapists computer and the feds sniff around(not that lit is doing anything illegal, but do you want that scrutiny?) the site can just blame those pesky authors...I have rules dammit! These people just don't listen.

 

[lovecraft68]

Sure. I'll do you one better. Here's all my stories here:

My last two submissions were Pink Box (hard rape) and Covfefe (politics).

You just linked off lit stories...and the two you mentioned aren't listed on your lit profile.

Are you confused with where your posting your stories?

 

[lovecraft68]

Non-con ( and incest concerning where the story is categorized ) is also getting a lot more scrutiny the last couple of years due to an avalanche of complaints from users according to Laurel.

I wonder if this explains why so many rape/NC stories are littering BDSM...to escape the scrutiny.

 

[SimonDoom]

If the politics agree with Laurel's personal politics it can fly. Its that simple.

Lit's free speech stance has become free speech as long as I agree.

Its pretty much that simple, and as she owns it, she can run it however she likes, and I have no issue with that,

Until the double talk of how its still a free speech site starts because that's the only issue I've ever with lit. I don't care what you want the rules to be, but stop acting like you allow free speech, when you clearly don't and stop acting like you don't want certain material here when its to be found everywhere.

Owning your shit, as my grandfather used to say, is becoming an extinct trait.

Inconsistency isn't necessarily proof of bad faith. One thing we know for certain is that Laurel does not have the time to review stories in depth. She scans them very quickly and makes snap judgments, as a matter of necessity. That's why she rejected one of my stories, initially, but accepted it after I sent her a note and explanation why it conformed to her rules. I get the sense that she's trying to uphold the rules rather than using them as a cover for some sort of agenda.

I don't think she claims this is a free speech site in the sense that "everything goes." She has rules that clearly limit some things, and of course the application of the rules isn't consistent. I also think it's a problem not just of her limited time but the inherent fuzziness of the rules, which certainly could stand to be updated, clarified, and put in one place so everybody can know, once and for all, exactly what they are.

 

[SimonDoom]

Re MechaBlade's specific complaint: I didn't read the stories in depth, but I scanned some of them, which is what Laurel would do, and it doesn't surprise me at all that they would be rejected on content grounds. Pink Box, for example, read quickly, looks much more like a true rape story than a Literotica "nonconsent" story. That doesn't seem controversial to me at all. The story about Donald very clearly falls outside the rules.

As a reader trying to understand these rules, you have to put yourself in Laurel's shoes and imagine never having seen your story before and spending a very quick time scanning it for content violations. If you can put aside your personal investment in your creation and think of it from Laurel's point of view I think 90% of these cases of confusion over rejection become quite clear.

 

[lovecraft68]

Inconsistency isn't necessarily proof of bad faith. One thing we know for certain is that Laurel does not have the time to review stories in depth. She scans them very quickly and makes snap judgments, as a matter of necessity. That's why she rejected one of my stories, initially, but accepted it after I sent her a note and explanation why it conformed to her rules. I get the sense that she's trying to uphold the rules rather than using them as a cover for some sort of agenda.

I don't think she claims this is a free speech site in the sense that "everything goes." She has rules that clearly limit some things, and of course the application of the rules isn't consistent. I also think it's a problem not just of her limited time but the inherent fuzziness of the rules, which certainly could stand to be updated, clarified, and put in one place so everybody can know, once and for all, exactly what they are.

I understand what you're saying, but you're basing it on your experience here.

What I'll say in reply is I spent years also hanging around the General Board, which for a long time was laurel's clubhouse here until it became so toxic and offensive even she stopped posting there.

But seeing what went on there while she was active, and still goes on now(the GB has no mod, anyone banned or any post/thread removed is her) has given me a much different view of how the site is run.

So, I'm not arguing with you or being snarky, just saying I've seen a lot more here than you have which is why my perspective is different.

 

[SimonDoom]

I understand what you're saying, but you're basing it on your experience here.

What I'll say in reply is I spent years also hanging around the General Board, which for a long time was laurel's clubhouse here until it became so toxic and offensive even she stopped posting there.

But seeing what went on there while she was active, and still goes on now(the GB has no mod, anyone banned or any post/thread removed is her) has given me a much different view of how the site is run.

So, I'm not arguing with you or being snarky, just saying I've seen a lot more here than you have which is why my perspective is different.

No snark taken. You've been here longer and I rarely visit the General Board, which just seems like a joke and a total waste of time to me (question: why do people come to an erotica site to talk politics? Makes no sense to me).

In the limited time that I've participated in forums on this site (three and a half years), my perception is that Laurel's reject/accept decisions about stories are much less confusing than many people make them out to be. People just don't want to look hard at their stories in light of Laurel's rules and with an understanding of the very brief time she spends looking at them. But I have no idea what was going on before I got here and I pay little attention to the GB so if there's a bigger picture to this I don't know anything about it.

 

[loquere]

I think it's specifically Trump stories.

I can kind of understand that.

 

[BelleCanzuto]

I can kind of understand that.

Me too about Trump.
Because whether a story was favorable toward him or otherwise, it'd instantly be the nexus of a comment fight that could easily spill over and get unwanted outside attention. For Laurel, and for all the authors here.

 

[RejectReality]

I wonder if this explains why so many rape/NC stories are littering BDSM...to escape the scrutiny.

One of the major complaints is NC and Incest showing up in other categories, so not from the site's end. As to users attempting to use BDSM as cover, that's entirely possible. I can see how it would be harder to pick them out in that category with a quick scan.

As far as the GB goes, the right is as much to blame for the imbalance there as any moderation bias. Repeatedly, openly defying bans and spam is part of it, and the other part is a lack of reporting bannable offenses from the other side.

There's also a failure to acknowledge that Laurel does ban people on the left, like Rory. There are brief celebrations, and then the next day, complaints about the left being allowed to run rampant as if it never happened. I can think of at least 2 other prominent lefties who were banned, though their names escape me.

90% of the bans are acknowledged Busybody clones too.

The right has a martyr complex on the GB, IMO.

 

[lovecraft68]

One of the major complaints is NC and Incest showing up in other categories, so not from the site's end. As to users attempting to use BDSM as cover, that's entirely possible. I can see how it would be harder to pick them out in that category with a quick scan.

As far as the GB goes, the right is as much to blame for the imbalance there as any moderation bias. Repeatedly, openly defying bans and spam is part of it, and the other part is a lack of reporting bannable offenses from the other side.

There's also a failure to acknowledge that Laurel does ban people on the left, like Rory. There are brief celebrations, and then the next day, complaints about the left being allowed to run rampant as if it never happened. I can think of at least 2 other prominent lefties who were banned, though their names escape me.

90% of the bans are acknowledged Busybody clones too.

The right has a martyr complex on the GB, IMO.

Decided to delete my reply because it would only get deleted anyway and the thread closed. I'll send a Pm.

 

[lovecraft68]

Me too about Trump.
Because whether a story was favorable toward him or otherwise, it'd instantly be the nexus of a comment fight that could easily spill over and get unwanted outside attention. For Laurel, and for all the authors here.

I agree with you completely...do you know that many sites, even NFL dot com has disabled comments because no matter what the article is...could be about kittens, one person would make a political comment and then all hell breaks loose.

But your comment makes me think...why is it different from any LW story which no matter how its written just leads to a comment fight?

As for outside attention...you could have a point, but I'm not sure how a story here featuring Trump or Clinton etc...could get outside attention

In 2016 someone posted an E-book on amazon about Trump and Clinton having sex...I'm sorry, I'll wait while you go wash out your mind

It sold disturbingly well.

 

[Enchantment_of_Nyx]

In 2016 someone posted an E-book on amazon about Trump and Clinton having sex...I'm sorry, I'll wait while you go wash out your mind

It sold disturbingly well.

You, sir, are a sadist. Part of me just died.

 

[BelleCanzuto]

I agree with you completely...do you know that many sites, even NFL dot com has disabled comments because no matter what the article is...could be about kittens, one person would make a political comment and then all hell breaks loose.

But your comment makes me think...why is it different from any LW story which no matter how its written just leads to a comment fight?

Because (in my imagining that led me to write the comment), the comment fight would quickly cease to be about the story, and become about all the other things that Americans seem to be fighting with each other about.

As for outside attention...you could have a point, but I'm not sure how a story here featuring Trump or Clinton etc...could get outside attention

Because it would only take one person posting "did you see this story about Trump on Literotica" onto Reddit, or Facebook or whatever the kewl activitsts are using these days, to bring the hoardes. My larger point being, things with Trump are almost primed to go viral, because almost everyone has a hardened opinion about him, one way or the other. Much more so than any other political figure I can think of.

In 2016 someone posted an E-book on amazon about Trump and Clinton having sex...I'm sorry, I'll wait while you go wash out your mind

It sold disturbingly well.

Trump and Hillary? Or Trump and Bill?