NonConsent/Reluctance category guidelines

[velcrofist]

NonConsent/Reluctance category guidelines question

I was sure I read something when I first signed up that the "victim" in a NonConsent/Reluctance story has to end up enjoying it. I can't find it now. Did I imagine it or was it removed?

 

[ChuckWolf]

Nope, that is THE rule for NC/reluctance.

 

[jaF0]

I'm not sure there is a published list of all the rules for submissions. I think many of them are only noted when a story is bounced back.

 

[velcrofist]

Whew. Thanks. I was worried for a moment that I'd watered my stories down too much to meet criteria that might not exist anymore. I find it gets less exiting when the victim gets into it too much, but the trick might be to play it closer to the line so there's still an element of reluctance/helplessness.

I did find a forum post, which was indeed under the list of rejection reasons - http://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=175666

Added by Laurel for clarification: 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.

 

[horrorotic]

For a site that claims there are things they don't want here, their rules are buried to the point they are hard to find, and what's there is a link to a post by an old poster that the site endorses as their rules, because I guess it was easier to let someone else do it.

I could just give the link, but I want people to see the hoops needed to find it.

Click this

https://literotica.com/stories/

Then "FAQ"
which takes you here

https://www.literotica.com/faq/

Click submissions
which takes you here
https://www.literotica.com/faq/05235347.shtml

look down the list and click my story was rejected what now and that takes you here

https://www.literotica.com/faq/05235347.shtml#01043415

look for the paragraph for my story was rejected and click "This forum post" which goes here

http://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=175666

a 17 year old post

The non con rule is in that list somewhere and is pretty vague.

 

[ChromeCollar]

Still battling this with a story I'm trying to get posted. Honestly they need to just remove the Non-consent portion of the category completely. The things you have to edit to get the story published changes it from non consent to reluctance.

 

[jaF0]

I still can't understand why anyone would complain about rules prohibiting stories of violence or abuse of another.

Or why anyone would write them.

 

[ChromeCollar]

I don't feel like it's necessary to understand why someone may be aroused by a certain topic. Maybe it's their fantasy. Maybe it was a real experience and putting it to pen is cathartic.

What is truly hard to understand is why someone would take the time to read a story that upsets or offends them instead of just bypassing it and moving on to what they DO find appealing.

Our culture is far too concerned with what one another is doing, and how offensive someone's actions may be towards them. Just do you and if you don't like it don't look.

 

[KeithD]

Yep, it's the Web site owners who have the right to determine what's posted here. Others should be happy with what of their own fetishes can be found here and either mind their own business on what anyone else is writing/reading that's permitted here--or go someplace else for their writing/reading. Their understanding of what turns anyone else on is not a requirement here.

But then, that also applies to those who get butt hurt about not being able to fit their own fetishes into what is permitted here.

 

[ChromeCollar]

I would tend to agree with you, except the "rules" on nonconsent were very vague. Maybe I didn't look in the right place, I dunno.

 

[KeithD]

I would tend to agree with you, except the "rules" on nonconsent were very vague. Maybe I didn't look in the right place, I dunno.

You find out what they are on that day from the site owner who is also the sole submissions editor here. I agree that they are hazy--also that they are a bit unrealistic. But they are what they are. You have other options of where to post rather than railing about the rules here (I post what I don't think is going to fly here elsewhere). You're spinning wheels by showing any signs of entitlement on a free post/read privately operated story site.

 

[horrorotic]

Or why anyone would write them.

You could ask Stephen King or countless other best selling authors why someone would write stories about violence or some type of abuse.

That could be why people don't understand why there are rules, they get confused with what's lawful vs what a site can choose to publish on their venue.

I'm curious why they are difficult to find and why over the years I've read here I've found a ton of stories that portray everything that post I linked above says they don't allow.

Maybe the rules are fluid shall we say?

 

[Emirus]

Whew. Thanks. I was worried for a moment that I'd watered my stories down too much to meet criteria that might not exist anymore. I find it gets less exiting when the victim gets into it too much, but the trick might be to play it closer to the line so there's still an element of reluctance/helplessness.

I did find a forum post, which was indeed under the list of rejection reasons - http://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=175666

The get out word in this quote from Laurel is “generally” rather than saying “never.”

So I guess it depends on exactly how the non consent part of the story is written. All any writer can do is write it as they want to and then, if it’s rejected, either try and rewrite the offending parts and resubmit or dump the story.

There are stories published years ago which, under how the rules are interpreted by Laurel nowadays, would never be accepted now. There are stories, from years ago, with exceptionally brutal violence depicted which has nothing to do with sex and yet were accepted. One wonders why? Is it as she’s got older her own views have changed or is there another reason?

Will a more comprehensive answer than “generally” ever be given? It would certainly be helpful but if “generally” is taken to mean “every story is judged in its own merits” then all anyone can do is hope the non consent scenes are accepted as being integral to the story. That’s assuming the writer includes them as such and doesn’t just include them for the benefit of part of their intended readership.

**********

Added by Laurel for clarification: 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.


**********

 

[Stevewu609]

Still battling this with a story I'm trying to get posted. Honestly they need to just remove the Non-consent portion of the category completely. The things you have to edit to get the story published changes it from non consent to reluctance.

Agree. Or maybe make a separate category for the truly noncon stuff? Or some sort of required notice at the beginning?

I get that we all have different kinks and this is mostly for fantasy, and people who enjoy the fantasy don’t necessarily want it to happen IRL. So just because I really hate the forceful rape stories, I’m not going to insist the site not allow them. But they’re obviously a turn off for most people and even get close to not being allowed, so can we have a better way to help us with a bit of a reluctance or humiliation kink filter them out or at least immediately know when to skip it? I like stories with a slow build up, but it’s a huge bummer when I find out on page 4 that the character I want to see get pushed out of her comfort zone just gets physically overpowered and raped. Ugh. There’s 20 mins I’m not getting back. And my boner’s gone.

 

[greenbriefs]

I just had a story rejected.

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.

I knew this rule beforehand, and I thought I had accounted for it. By the end of the story, the "victims" are very much enjoying the act. There is no physical violence in my story. If my story does not conform to this rule, then I don't understand the rule.

I certainly wouldn't mind submitting it to an editor to get a fresh perspective, but I've seen numerous people on here saying they have a hard time finding an editor for non-con. And sifting through the list of editors looks daunting.

So I guess I have two questions:
Does anyone have any tips to finding an editor for non-con stories?
What other story sites would people recommend for submitting such a story?

Thanks in advance!

 

[AlinaX]

How long is it?

 

[Emirus]

I just had a story rejected.



I knew this rule beforehand, and I thought I had accounted for it. By the end of the story, the "victims" are very much enjoying the act. There is no physical violence in my story. If my story does not conform to this rule, then I don't understand the rule.

I certainly wouldn't mind submitting it to an editor to get a fresh perspective, but I've seen numerous people on here saying they have a hard time finding an editor for non-con. And sifting through the list of editors looks daunting.

So I guess I have two questions:
Does anyone have any tips to finding an editor for non-con stories?
What other story sites would people recommend for submitting such a story?

Thanks in advance!

My answer to your first question regarding finding an editor for noncon stories would be (1) ask in the editors forum and (2) search for writers who write a lot of noncon stories and ask if they would be willing to help.

As for your second question which, if I understand it properly, relates to stories with unjustified violence and/or unenjoyable sexual acts then perhaps others on this site will pm you with information but I certainly can’t. If you wish to write stories in which violence etc is not necessary for the plot then this is not the site for you.

As for Laurel’s definition, which was in response to an earlier comment by myself, I read a story not long ago in which the male was raped by two women. This was in punishment for him and his friends, earlier in the story, raping an innocent young (over 18) girl. He wasn’t beaten up and, apart from his anus being sore, it was his humiliation which was the worst for him. I assume this is where Laurel, in my opinion, has correctly used the word “generally.” There was a comment from someone who thought he shouldn’t have been punished and he and his friends should go back and rape the women as they had previously done with the young girl. It did make me wonder how the person who had made the comment viewed women in the real world.

An earlier story of mine was rejected because the “victim” was raped and didn’t enjoy it. The rape wasn’t described in graphic detail but that didn’t seem to matter. In real life I wouldn’t think any rape victim had enjoyed it. But if I had described the rape in graphic detail then I would have, in hindsight, seen why because I don’t want to write any story which would make any reader get enjoyment from someone being raped. I want them them to be sympathetic to the person raped and their anger directed at the rapist.

Another story was rejected because someone got killed and, as it wasn’t essential to the story, I changed it to them being chloroformed. That solved the problem.

I like to think that Laurel uses the same yardstick as I do in that any violence etc has to be an integral and necessary part of the story and that’s why the term “generally” is in her definition. If anyone disagrees with a rejection, and doesn’t want to change it, they should submit it again as countless others have doubtless done in the past and defend themselves. It is difficult for her because she has to consider hundreds of submissions each week, can only give them a cursory look, and will make a wrong decision now and again. She is only human ( )

But, as I’ve said before, all you can do is write the story you want to bearing her definition in mind and accept her decision is final because it’s her site.


***

 

[Emirus]

How long is it?

I second what Alina has asked. How long is the story? If it’s less than 10k words you’ve got a good chance someone will offer to look at it for you.

 

[greenbriefs]

Thanks for the feedback. The story is 6500 words.

I’m really not into the violence aspect. It’s really all about humiliation, embarrassment, and breaking down taboo barriers. The convention of non-con is simply one method I use to achieve those feelings in a story. And in the end, I never like a story where a character isn’t having fun by the end. I thought that would be perfect for here, but I’ll definitely seek out an editor for a second opinion.

 

[AlinaX]

You can PM me if you want. I can take a look.

 

[KeithD]

Suggest you just back up and, if you're sure you've covered for the "enjoyed it in the end" aspect required here, you just send it back with the statement in the notes box that you think the issue isn't an issue, pointing to the "enjoyed it in the end" part, and politely asking Laurel to point out what is thought to be off. She doesn't read the stories; she only has time to scan them. The rejection is worded in a "does it?" rather than "it does" way. I've had stories initially rejected, but they've all gone through as originally written when I've asked more specifically what the system thinks is wrong with it, giving her opportunity to zero in on it more closely.

 

[greenbriefs]

Suggest you just back up and, if you're sure you've covered for the "enjoyed it in the end" aspect required here, you just send it back with the statement in the notes box that you think the issue isn't an issue, pointing to the "enjoyed it in the end" part, and politely asking Laurel to point out what is thought to be off. She doesn't read the stories; she only has time to scan them. The rejection is worded in a "does it?" rather than "it does" way. I've had stories initially rejected, but they've all gone through as originally written when I've asked more specifically what the system thinks is wrong with it, giving her opportunity to zero in on it more closely.

Good advice, thank you.

 

[GuyandDoll]

I don't feel like it's necessary to understand why someone may be aroused by a certain topic. Maybe it's their fantasy. Maybe it was a real experience and putting it to pen is cathartic.

What is truly hard to understand is why someone would take the time to read a story that upsets or offends them instead of just bypassing it and moving on to what they DO find appealing.

Our culture is far too concerned with what one another is doing, and how offensive someone's actions may be towards them. Just do you and if you don't like it don't look.

I couldn't agree more. Well said. We're dealing with words and fantasies, fiction. I've had a few female friends, all feminists and "woke" people, who admitted to having rape fantasies. Their desires had nothing at all to do with any kind of real-life longing to be assaulted. I've never understood why there's so much piety out here on Lit, so much judgment.

 

[SimonDoom]

I'm curious why they are difficult to find and why over the years I've read here I've found a ton of stories that portray everything that post I linked above says they don't allow.

Maybe the rules are fluid shall we say?

I think the rules in general have tightened up over time. Some older stories, I believe, have been removed because of those changes. But with 500,000 stories there's no way for them to comb through every story and find those that don't comply with the new rules.

 

[starsong1977]

I couldn't agree more. Well said. We're dealing with words and fantasies, fiction. I've had a few female friends, all feminists and "woke" people, who admitted to having rape fantasies. Their desires had nothing at all to do with any kind of real-life longing to be assaulted. I've never understood why there's so much piety out here on Lit, so much judgment.

Because the context of the fantasy matters. Do you think women are having fantasies about going on vacation with their family and end up being gang raped while their husbands and children are brutalized? Having fantasies about their children (who are always just 18 because you know, a few days matter) being offered up to be deflowered because someone forgot to pay the rent, the wife or husband need a raise, or someone in the family looked at the rapist the wrong way while shopping at the mall? But hey, its all cool because she/victim/whatever liked it at the end, had 50 orgasms in succession and is now addicted to rape but it isn't really rape now because she has fallen in love with the guy(s) who raped. This doesn't even address the racist themes that are prevalent in so many stories here.

There are numerous reasons why people have fantasies about rape, not all of which are healthy. I understand why "enjoying in the end" is used, it's easy to police. The negative result is people (usually men) create stories where women are brutalized, humiliated, degraded and generally reduced to nothing more than sexual chattel. You don't even need to go to the noncon category. When a writer uses rape or sexual assault in nearly every single story as a means to either create conflict or damsel for male protags, it begs the question why when there are numerous ways to create conflict. And if you are always using rape or aexual assault to eroticise then again, why?

I realize this won't change and I recognize mine won't be a popular comment. I am not opposed to reluctance or nonconsensual fiction. There have been stories that I appreciated and even liked. Context matters however and even though it can't always be accurately discerned, sometimes a story is so blatantly demented that the Stewart Test applies: "I know it when I see it"