Thoughts on NoTalentHack's essay "Loving Loving Wives"

[AchtungNight]

I didn’t read the essay before I published in LW. I’m sure I will find its advice excellent if I ever do read 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.]

 

[NoTalentHack]

Should be retitled how to suck up to incels and insecure males.

Which, as someone said above is consistent with his posts here.

LOL literally no one said that. But, hey, you’re good at making shit up when you don’t know a damned thing about a subject.

I went ahead and deleted the rest of your blather as it’s clear you either didn’t read or didn’t comprehend the essay.

You know, one of my favorite things about having written this? I don’t have to argue with you anymore. All I have to do is come in and throw a link, and people will be able to see how much you’re talking out your ass.

Feelsgoodman.jpg

 

[madelinemasoch]

I stand by what I said.

But, 1. I wasn't being dishonest, which you claimed I was, 2. People missed the end of the story because of the content of the beginning, which you're basically admitting, again.

You put stuff that belongs in trump categories outside of a trump category and got a bad reaction.

...but that isn't what you said.

That's completely missing the point of what I said in the essay, to the point where it almost seems willful.

I got the point of your essay. I was simply adding a point that you missed.
When one makes certain content choices, one misses out on high quality feedback in the category. That's probably true in other categories as well! Nothing I've said is an attack on LW, or on yourself, or on your essay.

At the very least, it would probably be right at home in interracial.

But by your own description of what the audience there has grown to want, it wouldn't fit there, either, and for the same reason: it isn't playing to the crowd.

In Interracial, the transition to mostly cuckolding stories has largely been embraced, but that's partially because the BBC type of story--the one where a sexually dominant black man comes in and "claims" a white wife or girlfriend--was always a part of that category's DNA.

a Black New World Order story, where a conspiracy exists to wipe out white men?" And, no, I'm not making that last one up. Go do a search for the "bnwo" tag."

The form is different in my story to the one you describe in the essay as popular for Interracial. Mine doesn't prioritize the black man or present his sexuality as "claiming" the wife: she isn't owned by any of the black guys she fucks. The wife is the key dominant party in the relationship. A lot of snowbunnies would blanch at this because they're too submissive.

Which brings me to this:

Your fetishes are fetishes, no matter how much you personally like them.

No, they are not. Let me quote myself in a prior post you drew from in this response:

It's about the erotic form; it's not even about sexuality, it's about who has power and what they use it for. It's about the intersection, the relation and how it's characterized.

What I write about is a lot more complicated than a fetish.
On a side note,

I don't care if BNWO is "a popular porn genre on the internet," although I doubt that it's quite as popular as you think that is; that screams "echo chamber fallacy" to me.

It was trending on Twitter this March. There are millions of tweets about it. There are Discord servers with 1000+ members dedicated to it. If it's an echo chamber, it has some pretty broad space between its walls.

However, it's not a popular genre on this site outside of Interracial and (maybe) Fetish, but you're still trying to shove it in a genre that doesn't want it.

You said yourself that cuckolding stories can still do well in LW. I really don't think the chances of this lessen when the other man is black.

You're simultaneously saying, "fuck what you like," and "why doesn't anyone get what I'm going for?"

Because both are true! Why would I write what I think a stranger would like? Higher ratings and more positive comments? I would already know what kind of comments and ratings I'd get if I did that. I'd rather just write what I want to. The problem is, when you make certain content choices, the quality of the comments you get is lower. Plus, people have it out for me in particular. And no, I don't think it's fair. Forgive me for wanting a readership that can appreciate what I'm doing, while not compromising what I'm doing just to please the readership that already hates me. They're two different groups of people. I've found them both, but the first in much smaller quantities than the second.

Meet your readers where they want to be met.

I knew you would say that.

I like things that I don't put in stories in LW, because they don't belong there.

Okay. I know you don't want to discuss the nuances and substance. You'd rather talk about genre conventions and how to write in accordance to what you think the most vocal of the crowds' demands are. Don't you ever think you're putting the cart before the horse in writing? I don't write for a category, I write for the idea in my own head, to do it justice. I don't like things that I do put into stories, because the idea calls for them. If so-and-so can't get past it then that simply isn't my problem. I had the stomach to write it, and I appreciate those others who have the stomach to read it.

I'd like better comments like you described in your essay, ones that you said only LW's commenters can provide, without compromising key aspects of the idea. If I do compromise, then I think I already know what a lot of them are going to say. I'd like insightful comments on what I actually wrote instead of insightful comments on some hypothetical thing that feels like a hackjob, written for the express purpose of getting positive feedback. I simply cannot do that.

I'm not taking an L, because there's no L to take. I'm talking about chess, and then you're complaining that you can't draw a straight flush, so obviously the game is rigged.

All I meant in saying that was that you wouldn't lose anything or look bad in any way to anyone if you simply conceded to me the fact that certain content choices get you lower quality comments. It's just demonstrably true. It wouldn't diminish anything you said in your eloquent essay at all if you had agreed with me there. I'm being serious. It would only add a caveat to your original argument, thereby making that argument stronger.

You should learn the same restraint, instead of treating it as though it's some massive injustice and/or that it invalidates the original point of what I wrote.

I wasn't really attempting to invalidate the original point of what you wrote in your essay. I was just sharing some things that you missed.

All that being said, I'm still not going to allow the Whackdoodles of this world to dictate my own stories. They can write their own.

 

[EroticCupcake]

The essay was great. Thanks for writing it. I'm more likely to write in LW now.

The absolute spirit of the article was to become a better writer, meeting the audience where they are, and then giving tools to do so.

I absolutely believe in writing what I want, but to pretend that genre expectations don't exist is counter productive.

 

[NoTalentHack]

The form is different in my story to the one you describe in the essay as popular for Interracial. Mine doesn't prioritize the black man or present his sexuality as "claiming" the wife: she isn't owned by any of the black guys she fucks. The wife is the key dominant party in the relationship. A lot of snowbunnies would blanch at this because they're too submissive.

You know? That's a very fair point. In your stories, the hierarchy at the top seems to be inverted from most the other BNWO stories.

What I write about is a lot more complicated than a fetish.

To you, maybe. Not to the vast majority of people. To them, it just looks like a variation on a theme.

On a side note,


It was trending on Twitter this March. There are millions of tweets about it. There are Discord servers with 1000+ members dedicated to it. If it's an echo chamber, it has some pretty broad space between its walls.

That's not particularly persuasive; if your metric is "a bunch of folks in Discord/Twitter are talking about it," we should have a whole damned Isekai harem section. Hell, the whole site should be an isekai harem site if the metric is "some Discords with 1K+ members."

You said yourself that cuckolding stories can still do well in LW. I really don't think the chances of this lessen when the other man is black.

Nope, they'll do just fine. Where you'll lose people is with the feminization/sissification and "black men are always superior" crap. BBC cuckolding works well enough there, but all the other stuff? Not so much.

Because both are true! Why would I write what I think a stranger would like? Higher ratings and more positive comments? I would already know what kind of comments and ratings I'd get if I did that. I'd rather just write what I want to. The problem is, when you make certain content choices, the quality of the comments you get is lower. Plus, people have it out for me in particular. And no, I don't think it's fair. Forgive me for wanting a readership that can appreciate what I'm doing, while not compromising what I'm doing just to please the readership that already hates me. They're two different groups of people. I've found them both, but the first in much smaller quantities than the second.

I knew you would say that.

That's because it's accurate. Yes, write for yourself. That's why you should write, to make yourself happy with what you've written. But when you publish, you're doing it... not necessarily for other people but towards other people. You're doing the Literotica equivalent of taking a dick pic because you're happy with your body, but then sending it to people that don't want it.

Okay. I know you don't want to discuss the nuances and substance. You'd rather talk about genre conventions and how to write in accordance to what you think the most vocal of the crowds' demands are. Don't you ever think you're putting the cart before the horse in writing? I don't write for a category, I write for the idea in my own head, to do it justice. I don't like things that I do put into stories, because the idea calls for them. If so-and-so can't get past it then that simply isn't my problem. I had the stomach to write it, and I appreciate those others who have the stomach to read it.

I don't write for a category either. If I did, I'd make a variation on After the Future is Gone or Unwanted Memories over and over until the end of time. They're proven formulas for me (at least until the next shift), but I've already written them once. Instead, I choose to write things that I know might not do as well as I'd like int he ratings, but that I can be proud of. But what I don't do is take a clearly LW story and go post it in Incest. You're taking a story that belongs in Fetish (no matter how much you hate that) and throwing it in LW, and people are voting with their feet.

It's not a question of "stomaching" it. They don't owe you their eyeballs. It is the most ridiculous statement in this thread to suggest that the reason that people don't want to read your Fetish story in LW is because they can't handle it. It's like saying, "Well, if the people that tuned in for romcoms don't see the reason I added My Bloody Valentine to the lineup--because, yes, it's about a serial killer with a pickaxe, but it happens on Valentine's Day, so obviously it belongs--then they're just cowards."

All I meant in saying that was that you wouldn't lose anything or look bad in any way to anyone if you simply conceded to me the fact that certain content choices get you lower quality comments. It's just demonstrably true. It wouldn't diminish anything you said in your eloquent essay at all if you had agreed with me there. I'm being serious. It would only add a caveat to your original argument, thereby making that argument stronger.

I understand your point, but it's so pedantic that it barely rates comment. Which, of course, makes me look like an idiot for writing this much about it. If it will make you feel better, yes, if you put things in front of people that don't belong int heir category, things that they will hate almost across the board, you will not get much in the way of readers or commenters, and most of the comments will be about how much your shit doesn't belong in the category and how wrongheaded putting them there was. Or how much they dislike you for having done so, possibly.

All that being said, I'm still not going to allow the Whackdoodles of this world to dictate my own stories. They can write their own.

Please don't suggest that.

 

[M_K_Babalon]

A prolific essay for our most prolific catagory.

 

[lc69hunter]

I have hung around here since 2008, and remember what LW was many years. My comment on your essay (quite good, BTW), was I wish that the BTB/"cuck shit" people would go back where they came from and give us back what we used to have there.

 

[SimonDoom]

I have hung around here since 2008, and remember what LW was many years. My comment on your essay (quite good, BTW), was I wish that the BTB/"cuck shit" people would go back where they came from and give us back what we used to have there.

I don't object to their being there and reading the stories they want to read; I just wish they wouldn't poop all over everybody else. There's room for everyone to have fun.

 

[Rob_Royale]

As I expected, parts of this thread are starting to resemble the pie fight scene from Blazing Saddles.

 

[SimonDoom]

As I expected, parts of this thread are starting to resemble the pie fight scene from Blazing Saddles.

True, but it's always the same handful of people who bring the pies.

 

[intim8]

>> Lots of variations on "I'm more likely to submit to LW now"....

This makes me wonder if the partisans over at LW are prepared for the flood of "newbies" they're about to encounter. Who knows, maybe that will trigger another phase shift in the long history of the category.

 

[NoTalentHack]

>> Lots of variations on "I'm more likely to submit to LW now"....

This makes me wonder if the partisans over at LW are prepared for the flood of "newbies" they're about to encounter. Who knows, maybe that will trigger another phase shift in the long history of the category.

Hey, that would be awesome, too!

 

[AchtungNight]

I didn’t read the essay before I published in LW. I’m sure I will find its advice excellent if I ever do read it.

Read the essay. Decent advice. Still not interested in publishing in that category again. I blame the score system here and people's toxic expectations.

 

[Lifestyle66]

I read NTH's essay "Loving Loving Wives" (A writer's guide to Literotica's most contentious category), and I thought it is a good summary. (And for those who don't know me, half of my stories are posted in LW.)

I particularly liked NTH pointing out: "... you can go over to Group Sex or Erotic Couplings to post those for ratings. Maybe you'll get a dozen comments if you're lucky. Or you can drop them in Loving Wives and get told everything wrong and right about what you've made, ..."

I think that about summarizes my experiences in LW, too. The audience in LW is highly polarized, and you get comments from both sides of every spectrum: Those who HATE extra-marital sex, and those who embrace it. Those believe in Burn-The-Bitch/Bastard (BTB) for any infraction, and those who believe in Reconcile-At-All-Costs (RAAC). So, I would echo that advice: If you aspire to achieve high ratings, avoid LW. If you want views and feedback (both positive and hateful), LW is the place to go.

I do have two critiques of the essay:
1. The term "cuck" is used quite often throughout the essay before alluding to a definition near the end. Does that term in this essay apply to EVERY man whose wife is involved with extra-marital sex? Or is it just those men whose wives are having extra-marital sex without the husband's consent or knowledge? The problem with such terms is we have different perceptions and take away different understandings without a common definition. Even terms such as BTB might have different nuisances to some people, with some thinking divorce is sufficiently burned, and others insisting on more extreme retributions. So, the essay might have conveyed a better understanding with some definitions at the beginning.

2. I appreciate the recommended reading list at the end of the essay. But now I'll need to look up each of those 24 titles to decide if any of them are stories I might enjoy reading. In the case of this LW essay, the list might have narrowed down my search time with some high-level divisions such as "Here are good RAAC stories, these are some BTB stories, and here are some good consensual sharing stories.

But overall, the essay is a good view of the Loving Wives category by putting a positive spin on something many authors in this forum criticize with absolutely zero personal experience.

 

[MillieDynamite]

WTF

[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.]

 

[Constories]

1. The term "cuck" is used quite often throughout the essay before alluding to a definition near the end. Does that term in this essay apply to EVERY man whose wife is involved with extra-marital sex? Or is it just those men whose wives are having extra-marital sex without the husband's consent or knowledge?

The word "cuck" means a great many different things to different people, and apart from acknowledging all the possibilities meanings, I don't think we can do much that.

I have a co-worker who has a husband and a boyfriend. She lives with her husband and sleeps with her boyfriend on the side. Her husband is aware of the arrangement.

I asked her point blank if she considers her husband a cuck, and she said:

"No! He isn't a cuck. He doesn't get off to me having sex with other men, he doesn't want anything to do with it. He just lets me get what I need from other places."

Most people (especially in the LW crowd) would completely disagree with her.

I would too, honestly, but I understand what she means. What does my definition of "cuck" matter to her? Or vice versa?

(Remember, cuck comes from cuckold, and the original definition of cuckold had nothing to do with the husband liking it)

 

[Lifestyle66]

The word "cuck" means a great many different things to different people, and apart from acknowledging all the possibilities meanings, I don't think we can do much that.

I have a co-worker who has a husband and a boyfriend. She lives with her husband and sleeps with her boyfriend on the side. Her husband is aware of the arrangement.

I asked her point blank if she considers her husband a cuck, and she said:

"No! He isn't a cuck. He doesn't get off to me having sex with other men, he doesn't want anything to do with it. He just lets me get what I need from other places."

Most people (especially in the LW crowd) would completely disagree with her.

I would too, honestly, but I understand what she means. What does my definition of "cuck" matter to her? Or vice versa?

(Remember, cuck comes from cuckold, and the original definition of cuckold had nothing to do with the husband liking it)

That's my point about writing and communicating.

We need a common language to get ideas across clearly. Those who throw out terms with their own insulting context just muddy the waters. So, I'd prefer such terms be at least defined in the context the author wants to best convey the ideas.

 

[NoTalentHack]

WTF

He insulted me and made up bullshit both about what I had posted and LW readers. I didn’t report him, so I assume someone tagged him for kink shaming.

 

[MillieDynamite]

Ah, I see.

He insulted me and made up bullshit both about what I had posted and LW readers. I didn’t report him, so I assume someone tagged him for kink shaming.

 

[NoTalentHack]

That's my point about writing and communicating.

We need a common language to get ideas across clearly. Those who throw out terms with their own insulting context just muddy the waters. So, I'd prefer such terms be at least defined in the context the author wants to best convey the ideas.

It was difficult to do in that context, because I was using “cuck” as tagged by authors. However, I think that’s further exacerbated by what Constories pointed out: even if I gave a very specific definition of “cuck” meant to either me or a “typical” reader or writer, it still wouldn’t meet everyone’s definition. I think, however, that fear things would get called “cuck shit” if it wasn’t for so much hardcore “cock cages and creampie cleanup” in the category.

 

[lc69hunter]

I read NTH's essay "Loving Loving Wives" (A writer's guide to Literotica's most contentious category), and I thought it is a good summary. (And for those who don't know me, half of my stories are posted in LW.)

I particularly liked NTH pointing out: "... you can go over to Group Sex or Erotic Couplings to post those for ratings. Maybe you'll get a dozen comments if you're lucky. Or you can drop them in Loving Wives and get told everything wrong and right about what you've made, ..."

I think that about summarizes my experiences in LW, too. The audience in LW is highly polarized, and you get comments from both sides of every spectrum: Those who HATE extra-marital sex, and those who embrace it. Those believe in Burn-The-Bitch/Bastard (BTB) for any infraction, and those who believe in Reconcile-At-All-Costs (RAAC). So, I would echo that advice: If you aspire to achieve high ratings, avoid LW. If you want views and feedback (both positive and hateful), LW is the place to go.

I do have two critiques of the essay:
1. The term "cuck" is used quite often throughout the essay before alluding to a definition near the end. Does that term in this essay apply to EVERY man whose wife is involved with extra-marital sex? Or is it just those men whose wives are having extra-marital sex without the husband's consent or knowledge? The problem with such terms is we have different perceptions and take away different understandings without a common definition. Even terms such as BTB might have different nuisances to some people, with some thinking divorce is sufficiently burned, and others insisting on more extreme retributions. So, the essay might have conveyed a better understanding with some definitions at the beginning.

2. I appreciate the recommended reading list at the end of the essay. But now I'll need to look up each of those 24 titles to decide if any of them are stories I might enjoy reading. In the case of this LW essay, the list might have narrowed down my search time with some high-level divisions such as "Here are good RAAC stories, these are some BTB stories, and here are some good consensual sharing stories.

But overall, the essay is a good view of the Loving Wives category by putting a positive spin on something many authors in this forum criticize with absolutely zero personal experience.

According to the trolls, any extra-marital activity is cuck/ho activity

 

[EroticCupcake]

This may be an odd question. I can understand the kink factor of a cuckhold humiliation stories in a power imbalance femdom kind of way. I actually can't understand what is erotic about your wife having sex on the side in a consensual, fun way. Is it that your relationship is so strong or you are so comfortable you can be happy for them getting pleasures from another?

I'm trying to write a "light" LW story where there is no power imbalance, and it went a strange direction.

 

[NoTalentHack]

This may be an odd question. I can understand the kink factor of a cuckhold humiliation stories in a power imbalance femdom kind of way. I actually can't understand what is erotic about your wife having sex on the side in a consensual, fun way. Is it that your relationship is so strong or you are so comfortable you can be happy for them getting pleasures from another?

I'm trying to write a "light" LW story where there is no power imbalance, and it went a strange direction.

There are several reasons for that, usually at least somewhat interlinked.

There's what's called "compersion," which is being happy that someone else is enjoying themselves, often because of something you did. In a story that I still have yet to finish, the husband explains it to an inexperienced bull comparing it to his experience as a foodie. He knows that he's very good with his fingers and tongue, that he's good in bed and of a decent size, but he'll never be able to give her something the bull can. But, on the other hand, he's a foodie, and while his wife is a great cook for an amateur, she's not a great chef. In addition to the extremely enthusiastic sex they have after the bull leaves, she always makes sure to indulge his love of fine food, going so far as dipping into her personal savings to take him in trips specifically to go to restaurants he's always wanted to try.

There's also the sort of "trophy" aspect. This is where the stag/vixen terms come from. Stags tend to be dominant men that like to show their dominance by sharing their wife as if she were an object. They might not see it that way, but that's always the bibe I've gotten from it. It's basically the inversion of the cuck kink. Whereas the cuck is humiliated and afraid she might leave him, the stag is doing it as a show of supreme confidence. "Yeah, look how hot my wife is. Wanna fuck her? She and I both know she'll always want to come back to my bed."

There's also the swinging/swapping aspects, where the man is presumed to be having his own fun; the fully open marriage where it's essentially "can't cheat if we're both honest about it, and why should either of us suffer if we have to be apart or want to play with someone else;" the polyamorous relationship, etc. There's also more esoteric stuff, but that should give you a bit to go on.

 

[djrip]

The word "cuck" means a great many different things to different people, and apart from acknowledging all the possibilities meanings, I don't think we can do much that.

I have a co-worker who has a husband and a boyfriend. She lives with her husband and sleeps with her boyfriend on the side. Her husband is aware of the arrangement.

I asked her point blank if she considers her husband a cuck, and she said:

"No! He isn't a cuck. He doesn't get off to me having sex with other men, he doesn't want anything to do with it. He just lets me get what I need from other places."

Most people (especially in the LW crowd) would completely disagree with her.

I would too, honestly, but I understand what she means. What does my definition of "cuck" matter to her? Or vice versa?

(Remember, cuck comes from cuckold, and the original definition of cuckold had nothing to do with the husband liking it)

With scenarios like that I always wonder if if goes both ways - is he free to pursue a gf if he wants? He may not want, but is it his choice? If so, it's poly. If not, I could see saying he is in a willing (not necessarily enthusiastic) cuckold relationship.