Editor needed for Rejected Story

[javawarrior]

So for the second time, a story of mine was rejected for its content. I suspected this one might, because it is indeed graphic, but I wasn't sure why. There's a lot of pretty graphic stuff on here, so its hard to tell what will be rejected and what won't. I actually welcome the challenge because I would rather know where the boundaries are.

It is a Mind Control story of a NYC lawyer who, together with his wife, use a drug to force her rapist to do things. It is actually not intended to be erotic, even though there is sex. It is intended to be adult fiction, and does not glorify the violence at all.

Maybe this sort of story has no place on Literotica? There is an erotic, non-violent masturbation scene (consensual, in as much as Mind Control can be consensual - it is hypnosis) at the beginning. But halfway through the rape happens, which is very brief, and then the rest.

I know I could make enough changes to make it a consensual "non-consent" story, in the kinky sort of way, but it would sort of defeat the intended purpose, which is to show the real psychological and emotional cost of a violent act.

Again, I am aware of how touchy this area is, I'm no fool. But I like to take risks, ask tough questions, push the boundaries and see what happens. Would anyone like to take a look at it?

 

[sr71plt]

What exactly was the reason (usually in the form of a question) given in the rejection notice? Nothing you write here sounds like it's a reason for rejection--and they gave a reason. What was it. Usually, we find, when someone posts here as you do, they didn't have the reason for the rejection correct, which led to a lot of wheels spinning.

 

[PennLady]

First, what was the reason given for your rejection? You say content, but what content specifically, or even generally, was mentioned as the reason for rejection?

Rape in stories is touchy here, you're right. The general rule in non-con, etc., is that at some point the "victim" must enjoy it. It could be that your scene, brief as it is, violates that rule.

Another thing to consider, presuming this is the reason, is that Laurel simply erred in rejecting it. The rape scene may have stood out when she was going through the story and she may have rejected it on that basis. However, that's only speculation and the only way to get her answer on that is to ask her directly, which is best done using the Private Message (PM) link at the top right of the page.

 

[javawarrior]

Here was the reason: "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."

The "snuff" part could only refer to the very last line of the story, in which the death of the rapist is not seen or said, but implied:

(he tells the rapist to light a cigarette after they both leave, and has the wife leaves first): "She had smelled enough stink that night, and he thought she didn’t need to add to the list of odors the overpowering aroma of methane."

Again, it is not a sexuallizing of the death. The torture is sexual in nature, but not erotic (at least, not intended to be). Otherwise, I'm still not sure.

 

[PennLady]

Here was the reason: "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."

The "snuff" part could only refer to the very last line of the story, in which the death of the rapist is not seen or said, but implied:

(he tells the rapist to light a cigarette after they both leave, and has the wife leaves first): "She had smelled enough stink that night, and he thought she didn’t need to add to the list of odors the overpowering aroma of methane."

Again, it is not a sexuallizing of the death. The torture is sexual in nature, but not erotic (at least, not intended to be). Otherwise, I'm still not sure.

Well, it sounds like your rapist didn't enjoy the sex (understandably) and torture, and then they killed him. Sounds pretty clear to me. You could PM Laurel and present your case, though.

 

[sr71plt]

A strange case, but It's quite possible that it was rejected because the violence involved didn't include sexual arousal. I'd guess the only way to fix it is to cut down on the graphic violence. It isn't just the death involved, I don't think. It may be that it just isn't erotic--and this is an erotica site.

 

[javawarrior]

Laurel didn't answer the question of what content should be changed, she just explained the protocol for resubmitting.

After much consideration, based on what I know, I concluded that there's no way to get a story like this submitted to the site in its current form. The second half is not meant to be erotic, and the site only posts erotic content. I don't want to bother submitting it as Non-erotic either, since the same rule will probably still apply.

So instead, I'm submitting the first half by its own. It's erotic, and only involves masturbation, but it can stand on its own.

Yay for testing boundaries!