# What can I do to make my story less offensive to the reader in this case?



## ironpony (Aug 15, 2016)

Basically in my story, it's about several characters, who have had a hard time being accepted by society in various ways.  Hard to keep relationship, or hard to hold down jobs, because of conditions that they have.  One might be disfigured, one might be autistic, one might have schizophrenia, etc.  Things like that.

So they all form a group, overtime as one meets the other, and they decide to strike back at members of society for all the lack of acceptance, and judgment, that they feel has been done to them.  They will go out and kidnap women who they feel that they felt doesn't accept their kind, relationship wise, and they will rape the women, and perhaps even murder them to keep them from talking, as punishment.  They will also go out and kidnap and get revenge on people, who they felt have bullied people like them for being different, or being disadvantaged.   They also record all of their crimes, along with the victims, and make videos of it all.  They explain all their crimes on videos, who the victims, are and what people like them have done to deserve it.

They also upload all these videos to either an untraceable website, or a video streaming service in another country, in which the police cannot find where it's all coming from.  So it becomes a serial rapist/killer manhunt, kind of like in the movie M (1931) or the book The Silence of the Lambs for examples.

I finished about half the story, and written outlines for the last half, and asked for the readers opinions, and literally almost all of them said that the story was offensive.  Very offensive.  They said that they couldn't get behind the villains, and their cause, and just found it to be very offensive.

The readers who liked it will say things like that most readers are just being prudish, and that they cannot handle a story of dark and serious subject matter, and all.  But I feel that that's a problem.  I shouldn't dismiss most readers for being prudish, if this is the case. I feel that it's my job to satisfy the majority with a marketable and acceptable product.  So is their anything I can do to make the premise more acceptable, or perhaps there are certain guidelines I could follow to present the story more acceptably, that maybe I am not?

What do you think?  Thank you all for all of your help before and now.  I really appreciate it.


----------



## Jay Greenstein (Aug 15, 2016)

The idea of fiction is to place the reader into the story with the protagonist as their avatar. They _want_ to be made to feel what the protagonist _is feeling, in real time._ I suppose there are readers who want to vicariously rape and murder, but they're not the kind of people I want to know.

It appears that you're focused on the details of Story, with a deliberate capital S, and recording plot details. But story, the thing the reader comes to us for, lies in the heart and mind of the protagonist, in their aspirations, needs, and struggle. At its heart a story is about a problem our protagonist faces. Something has happened to throw predictability out of their life and they need to recover from that. But they can't, because bastards that we are, we keep screwing with their life, and sending disasters that test them and force them to dig deep—to change and grow. The plot is just the list of disasters they must be overcome. Plot matters, of course, but only in hindsight, because moment-by-moment, your protagonist is focused on what matters to them _right then. _And if that's not interesting enough to the reader that they want to turn pages they won't.


----------



## ironpony (Aug 15, 2016)

Okay thanks.  Well in my story, the protagonist is one of the rape victims and he gets revenge on the group for what was done to him.  So that is the protagonist's role.

But it's not the protagonist that the readers said they had a problem with.  It's the villains.


----------



## bdcharles (Aug 16, 2016)

Might the villains be getting represented too sympathetically? In your writeup here, when you mentioned autism and schizophrenia and so on, I thought these were your protagonists so felt a certain justification at their struggle. Then when you said they rape and murder I felt like I had been led to trust in bad people. Then I felt a little disappointed that ill people should be so negatively portrayed. By the end of it I wasn't sure what to feel nor what your intent was. Clarify that and you may have more luck.


----------



## T.S.Bowman (Aug 16, 2016)

All I am going to say is this...

I have been around schizophrenics and people with autism. You had damned well better do your homework on these disorders and make VERY sure that you are accurate in your depictions of them and their condition. There are MANY varying degrees as far as the effects these disorders have on the people who have them. 

Be very....VERY careful in writing them.


----------



## ppsage (Aug 16, 2016)

Well villains are always the hard part because they have to be both villainous and recognizably, sympathetically human at the same time. If nobody likes your villains, your story is probably too simple.


----------



## ironpony (Aug 16, 2016)

Okay thanks.  I have autism as well, and my brother does as well also.  So I can go with the autism part based on me and my brother's experience as well as doing additional research.  But I am not familiar with other conditions and will do my homework.  The thing is, is that most of the story is told from the detective's (the MC that is) point of view.  So the villains are kept as mystery characters for most of it, and it's the MC who is on the trail and figure out who their background.  But because of this, the villains do not get as much time to carry the story themselves.  The MC is also more interested in finding evidence on them, to get them convicted, rather than figuring out the psychological aspect of what they are doing.  The MC is much more interested in achieving punishment rather than establishing motives of why the villains did it.

So because of this, much more of the story time is concentrating on how they will be caught, and brought down, rather than why they are doing it.  The why is there, but it's not explored a lot in comparison.  But I feel my story is about how they are going to be brought down, rather than who they are, and why they are doing it.  So because of this, I feel that maybe the villain's background is put in the background somewhat.  But if I were to create a character study for the villains, than a lot of mystery/detective aspect will not be there, if that makes sense.

As far as the villains being represented to sympathetically.  They seem themselves as sympathetic, especially in the first act, which is sort of devoted, to them justifying their acts in their videos.  But just because they justify themselves, I do not want the reader to think that I the writer, am justifying it.  I want to create a separation between the story's message, and the villain's message to the world.

What do you think?


----------



## Darkkin (Aug 16, 2016)

How much of the readers' apathy is rooted in the idealogically justification of your villians?  Society and life screwed me over so now I get to do the same...Sorry, but no. Most folks with a moral compass is going to have a very hard time empathizing with that. 

 It seems like you have too many irons in the fire.  Not only implied narcissim, sociopathy, psychopathy, but complications of nonmoral based, organic disorders like autism and schizophrenia, as well.  Disorders that impare social interaction, but are not inherently violent and if violence does factor in, chances are it isn't done for pleasure or gain, but out of defense or fear.  In other words, mitigating factors that argue against the forming and viable stasis of such a group, when the inherent factors lend toward chaos and isolation.


----------



## ironpony (Aug 16, 2016)

Darkkin said:


> How much of the readers' apathy is rooted in the idealogically justification of your villians?  Society and life screwed me over so now I get to do the same...Sorry, but no. Most folks with a moral compass is going to have a very hard time empathizing with that.
> 
> It seems like you have too many irons in the fire.  Not only implied narcissim, sociopathy, psychopathy, but complications of nonmoral based, organic disorders like autism and schizophrenia, as well.  Disorders that impare social interaction, but are not inherently violent and if violence does factor in, chances are it isn't done for pleasure or gain, but out of defense or fear.  In other words, mitigating factors that argue against the forming and viable stasis of such a group, when the inherent factors lend toward chaos and isolation.



Okay thanks.  Well I am not sure how much apathy is intended for the villains' justification.  Basically the reader is suppose to see the villains as overall bad, and the police out to stop them as overall good.  So what can I do to antagonize the villains more, if there is not enough of it?  I mean they are already going around committing rapes and murder later on perhaps, so if that is not enough to antagonize them to the reader, than what else can I do?


----------



## Annoying kid (Aug 17, 2016)

Such a premise is always going to be controversial. You either have to accept it, and own the shock factor, or do a marketable, safe work. 

Trying for both is just trying to mesh two things that are never going to go together.


----------



## ironpony (Aug 17, 2016)

Okay thanks.  I was told that no person would be pushed to rape or murder because they feel mistreated and not accepted the same way by society, or considered inferior by the opposite sex.  That is the offensive part I was told, is that the motive to turn to rape and murder in order to send a message, makes no sense.  Is that a problem though, that it may be illogical, which is why the reader might not be getting behind the dark subject matter?


----------



## dither (Aug 17, 2016)

ironpony said:


> Okay thanks.  I was told that no person would be pushed to rape or murder because they feel mistreated and not accepted the same way by society, or considered inferior by the opposite sex.  That is the offensive part I was told, is that the motive to turn to rape and murder in order to send a message, makes no sense.  Is that a problem though, that it may be illogical, which is why the reader might not be getting behind the dark subject matter?



I'd go along with that.


----------



## ironpony (Aug 17, 2016)

Okay so then it is a problem then.  What can I do to either change the motive entirely, or improve it, so that the villains' actions make sense?


----------



## T.S.Bowman (Aug 17, 2016)

ironpony said:


> I have autism as well....



If this is true...

It explains a lot.


----------



## Ultraroel (Aug 17, 2016)

Well, Autism or any other issue one might have, may not need they have a correct moral compasss.
But it should be inherent to his/her nature. Not pushed by society. 

I don't think you can say anyone with this or that mental issue cannot do something.. everything is possible. Find a way to make it so


----------



## Phil Istine (Aug 17, 2016)

My own thoughts are more general.  They are more along the lines of this: until you're a more skilled writer, maybe leave the potentially more controversial stuff alone.  That stuff about "write what you know" seems like a good start.  I wouldn't normally try to put someone off writing their ideas, but I can foresee big problems ahead.  I don't know how autism affects you personally as there are many degrees of it, but maybe it would be better to keep writing less complex while you are honing your craft.
I came a cropper on this myself in a small way, and I would hate to see someone else possibly getting in a mess. (I once wrote a poem to express my negative feelings about racism and it came across as if I were being humorous about it - lesson learned!).


----------



## Schrody (Aug 17, 2016)

F the readers, write your story the way it needs to be written, offensive or not. If you don't do your best, readers will know it, and they won't be pleased. I'm not offended by your story's premise, rather, I find it quite interesting. Is it controversial? Maybe. But we all know that controversy in writing can only launch you to stars, but good writing, not shitty writing like 50 shades or something (which I did not read, and they style might be good, but the performance is poor) - do you want to be remembered or forgotten whenever a new trash novel sees the lights of the day? Point is, you shouldn't care who'll be offended.


----------



## Schrody (Aug 17, 2016)

ironpony said:


> Okay thanks.  I was told that no person would be pushed to rape or murder because they feel mistreated and not accepted the same way by society, or considered inferior by the opposite sex.  That is the offensive part I was told, is that the motive to turn to rape and murder in order to send a message, makes no sense.  Is that a problem though, that it may be illogical, which is why the reader might not be getting behind the dark subject matter?



The person who said that obviously lives in a dream land, not seeing all the shit that's been happening around the world (it's like massive shootings don't occur because of marginalization).


----------



## Annoying kid (Aug 17, 2016)

ironpony said:


> Okay thanks.  I was told that no person would be pushed to rape or murder because they feel mistreated and not accepted the same way by society, or considered inferior by the opposite sex.  That is the offensive part I was told, is that the motive to turn to rape and murder in order to send a message, makes no sense.  Is that a problem though, that it may be illogical, which is why the reader might not be getting behind the dark subject matter?



The subject matter is basically:
Elliot Rodger meets the Virginia Tech Shooter meets the Columbine shooters. What's unrealistic isn't their existence, or that they had autistic traits, as many of them did - for example Virginia Tech shooter had selective mutism. What may be striking people as off is the notion that they're smart enough to kill and rape and then avoid police and then kidnap and upload videos of it on untraceable websites. With each case, there was in actuality a long build up of frustration, and then they went out guns blazing in a day of revenge before being gunned down by police or more typically committing suicide. None of them actually raped or kidnapped people because they were fundamentally withdrawn, afraid of human contact, cowardly and weak. Which is why they could only either talk about it, or stack the odds in their favour with an arsenal or firearms against unarmed opponents. When the police came, people who could actually fight back, they took their own lives to avoid jail. 

What's striking people as gratuitous and offensive is that it's too elaborate. These are not pros. It shouldn't be shock for the sake of it. Making them like supervillains means audiences expects the conventions of genre fiction. If it's not grounded in reality, the completely made up story ends up feeling like an excuse to show the disturbing.


----------



## ironpony (Aug 17, 2016)

Okay thanks.  I was also told this by one reader as well, is that he felt that the violence would erupt in a fit of rage, rather than the crimes be premeditated and planned out so much.  However, I do want the villains to get away with it, for weeks or months overtime, for a long manhunt story.  So wouldn't the villains have to plan out their crimes intelligently, to avoid the police, and wouldn't they have to elaborate it all to do so?

Not all of them are autistic though.  Some may be mistreated for different reasons.  The leader of the gang particularly is normal, but has loved ones who are suffering, and it was this character who decided to form the group and lead it.  But he does most of the thinking for them.  I could write it so that maybe it is not autism and that they are being mistreated for other conditions if that is better.  I just that that autism can be one of them since it's one of the conditions that could cause a person to feel they are being treated as inferior.

But either way, I feel that in order to create a long manhunt of mysterious killings, that only one cop can figure it all out (the main character cop), that the villains would have to be smart and elaborate their plans in order to fool police intelligence and technology for that long.  Unless I am wrong?


----------



## Sleepwriter (Aug 17, 2016)

Hmm.  If the leader is "normal"  than he could be manipulating the other gang members.   He would be very charismatic and rather vile, to take advantage of those with Autism and or mental illness.


----------



## Gamer_2k4 (Aug 18, 2016)

What can you do to make the story less offensive? I don't know, maybe make it not about a bunch of disabled people kidnapping, raping, and killing?

You say readers just have trouble with "dark and serious" subject matter, but as far as I can tell, there's nothing serious about it - it's just dark for the sake of being dark, and therefore, trite and meaningless.  If the heart of the story is supposed to be how the criminals are caught, and it doesn't really matter what they're doing and why (as you say in another post), there's absolutely no reason to make the story about rape and murder.  You're just being intentionally provocative at that point, with no actual value coming from the provocative elements.

Figure out why it's so important to you to be so offensive, and perhaps that will help you determine how you can tone it down.


----------



## ironpony (Aug 18, 2016)

I wouldn't say them getting caught in the heart of the story, but if them getting caught is taking up too much time, than I could add more to their character development.  The theme of the story is how them being treated as inferior, by the opposite sex leads them to commit crimes which they then have to answer for and deal with, I would say.  Not exactly them being caught only, but the whole spectrum.


----------



## Annoying kid (Aug 18, 2016)

Dude, the crimes themselves isn't the most interesting part anyway. It's how they descend to the point of committing these acts that's most characterful. Understand the people who commit these kinds of crimes are those who aren't accomplished in life. They have no meaningful skills. So I would limit the amount of espionage and long manhunt type antics in favour of the psychological descent and the big unleashing of violence at the end. Because let's not forget, it's not the amount of violence that matters. It's about making what you do have count. Repeated violence gets old quickly. The value would be greater if you keep the audience guessing if they will or they won't actually do it, if they will finally back out. Of course they don't and it's horrifying at the end. I guarantee your story will have far more gravitas if you do it that way. 

If it's about the process of them getting caught, the story doesn't need that degree of pathos because it's really about the chase,  the crimes are just instigators to keep the chase going. They could just be  psychopaths who felt rejected so get off on strangling women and the story would  be less offensive and tighter. You wouldn't even need the rape or kidnapping. 
That just blows it. Imagining being a woman walking home at night when a couple of guys run up behind and start strangling you and laughing and you try to struggle but feel your life slipping away and all your dreams and aspirations will never happen. Your baby at home? You'll never see again. Do we really need to pile on rape and kidnapping on top of that? This is what we mean by simplicity.


----------



## Kyle R (Aug 18, 2016)

ironpony said:


> I was also told this by one reader as well, is that he felt . . .
> 
> . . . I could write it so that maybe . . .
> 
> . . . Unless I am wrong?



My two cents here: You need to stop doubting your story. You also need to stop questioning yourself.

Write the story the way _you_ want it to be—not how someone _else_ wants it to be. This is _your_ story, and nobody else's. Don't ask for permission or approval from anyone.

Figure out what excites you about your story. What do you like about it? What makes you eager to see it come alive on the page, or on the big screen? Write it like _that_. That's how your best story will come out.

Trying to write in a way that pleases others is like trying to hit a moving target—one that'll keep shifting with every reader you ask. Instead, focus on a stationary target: _yourself_. That's the #1 reader that you need to please.

Instead of asking other people for suggestions on your story, ask _yourself_ for suggestions. And listen to yourself above all others.

There's my advice. Take it or leave it. Best of luck! :encouragement:


----------



## ironpony (Aug 18, 2016)

Annoying kid said:


> Dude, the crimes themselves isn't the most interesting part anyway. It's how they descend to the point of committing these acts that's most characterful. Understand the people who commit these kinds of crimes are those who aren't accomplished in life. They have no meaningful skills. So I would limit the amount of espionage and long manhunt type antics in favour of the psychological descent and the big unleashing of violence at the end. Because let's not forget, it's not the amount of violence that matters. It's about making what you do have count. Repeated violence gets old quickly. The value would be greater if you keep the audience guessing if they will or they won't actually do it, if they will finally back out. Of course they don't and it's horrifying at the end. I guarantee your story will have far more gravitas if you do it that way.
> 
> If it's about the process of them getting caught, the story doesn't need that degree of pathos because it's really about the chase,  the crimes are just instigators to keep the chase going. They could just be  psychopaths who felt rejected so get off on strangling women and the story would  be less offensive and tighter. You wouldn't even need the rape or kidnapping.
> That just blows it. Imagining being a woman walking home at night when a couple of guys run up behind and start strangling you and laughing and you try to struggle but feel your life slipping away and all your dreams and aspirations will never happen. Your baby at home? You'll never see again. Do we really need to pile on rape and kidnapping on top of that? This is what we mean by simplicity.



Okay thanks.  But the way I wrote it, is that the story opens up with most of the rape crimes, already committed, and it's the aftermath, where the cops have to figure out who did it, while the villains law low and blend in mostly.  So I am kind of starting out with the aftermath, and the police have to figure out the 'why' as they go along.  Is that bad?


----------



## Mutimir (Aug 20, 2016)

I think the only way you can pull it off is with decent contrast of good vs evil. You obviously have the evil part down which is the offensive part. Now you have to define the good aspect of the story. You have to make the police worth cheering for because there is not enough people out there willing to cheer for psychopaths to actually make a living.


----------



## ironpony (Aug 21, 2016)

Okay thanks.  Well in my story I was having trouble writing the ending cause I was having trouble with the police being able to get enough evidence on them that would be admissible in court.

So since I was having legal system troubles to write around, some people have suggested on here before, that I should have the main character cop kill the villains out of revenge, since he keeps on not being able to get admissible evidence.

So the man character is out for revenge too, but on them.  I don't know if he is worth cheering for either, cause in his revenge, he gets other cops killed too in the process.  I intended this cause I wanted it to be dark and I wanted the villains to make a monster out of the hero as well.  But could this make it worse, if the good side is in the grey?


----------



## dale (Aug 21, 2016)

Schrody said:


> F the readers, write your story the way it needs to be written, offensive or not. If you don't do your best, readers will know it, and they won't be pleased. I'm not offended by your story's premise, rather, I find it quite interesting. Is it controversial? Maybe. But we all know that controversy in writing can only launch you to stars, but good writing, not shitty writing like 50 shades or something (which I did not read, and they style might be good, but the performance is poor) - do you want to be remembered or forgotten whenever a new trash novel sees the lights of the day? Point is, you shouldn't care who'll be offended.



^^^^^^^^^ THIS^^^^^^^^^


we live in a world of "the perpetually offended" now. it would be impossible not to offend SOMEONE today, no matter
what you say or write. so to worry about  it is pointless and stupid.


----------



## dale (Aug 21, 2016)

the only surefire way not to offend people with your writing would be not to write anything at all.


----------



## Gamer_2k4 (Aug 21, 2016)

dale said:


> ^^^^^^^^^ THIS^^^^^^^^^
> 
> 
> we live in a world of "the perpetually offended" now. it would be impossible not to offend SOMEONE today, no matter
> what you say or write. so to worry about  it is pointless and stupid.



Don't you think there's a little bit of a difference between not worrying if your writing offends people, and writing purposely provocative and offensive material?


----------



## dale (Aug 21, 2016)

Gamer_2k4 said:


> Don't you think there's a little bit of a difference between not worrying if your writing offends people, and writing purposely provocative and offensive material?



is there a difference? yes. but if an artist is trying to actually make a point, then i don't see that it matters.
why? because it's his work and his point to make. kind of like "burning an american flag" or placing a crucifix
in urine and taking a picture of it. sometimes spiritual expression is offensive. and art is very much "spiritual expression".
and unless you're just some "formula writer' who believes your work means nothing at all except a ploy to con
people into opening their wallets for you? then this spiritual expression will come out somehow. whether it's on purpose
or not, i already know i'm gonna offend someone. and to those offended? i'm sorry. and by  "i'm sorry", i mean sorry
about your fucking luck, because i really don't rightfully give a shit.


----------



## Annoying kid (Aug 21, 2016)

The more offensive the less believable these people would be working as a group. 

It's very difficult to find a group of like minded people who's actually willing to go through murder, rape and kidnapping because they want to get back at women. 

If the offensiveness weakens the believability of the premise, it's a problem.

I'd believe a single killer. Two killers at most. Any more breaks suspension of disbelief.


----------



## dale (Aug 21, 2016)

Annoying kid said:


> The more offensive the less believable these people would be working as a group.
> 
> It's very difficult to find a group of like minded people who's actually willing to go through murder, rape and kidnapping because they want to get back at women.
> 
> ...



like  the  old saying goes..."the enemy of my enemy is my friend."  and you see this all the time.
look at today's "liberal".  they defend muslims every chance they get, even though muslims represent everything
they are supposedly against. because they both have a common goal beyond their dogmatic beliefs.


----------



## ironpony (Aug 21, 2016)

Annoying kid said:


> The more offensive the less believable these people would be working as a group.
> 
> It's very difficult to find a group of like minded people who's actually willing to go through murder, rape and kidnapping because they want to get back at women.
> 
> ...



Well the kind of crimes they commit are not crimes that can be handled by just one person.  They need each others help, and types of crimes that happen in my story requires a villain to be in four different roles at once.  So I need four villains to fill each role at least.

Could I make it believable, on the grounds, that they are all believing in the same root cause?  One fictional franchise I can think of with multiple serial killers agreeing with each other are the Scream movies.  Each movie has two killers if I remember correct.  So if you add them all up, that is eight serial killers who all believe in the same passion, have the same M.O. and could probably work all together at the same time, if they had the chance.  Do you think I could make it believable more like that?


----------



## Annoying kid (Aug 21, 2016)

Yeah but scream was two at a time. Wasn't eight all at once. 

The issue is not that they all believe the same thing, it's how are they going to meet? Without anyone getting freaked out and reporting it? Look at the case of Armin Mewes the cannibal. He was discussing it in a forum for cannibals, but none of them actually wanted to go as far as him. And when he posted pics of his murder of Bernt Brandes, they reported him. You can't say this stuff on public forums without being reported and banned. Therefore you're not going to find it on search engines, or at all really. People willing to kill to get back at women are extremely rare. Two like minded people meeting on this issue is already a massive coincidence. More is pushing it to contrived levels.

The question is how are they going to find out they're all into the same thing, without risking being reported?


----------



## ironpony (Aug 21, 2016)

But I think since you have eight people who all agree, it could have been eight at a time.  Scream's villains just didn't have the fortunate timing, to all come together at the same time, as mine do.  As for how they meet and not get into trouble by trying to recruit new members, and fail, does this part of the story have to be explained?  A lot of thriller stories keep this part a mystery.  I saw the movie Extreme Measure (1996), but did not read the book.  In that movie --


SPOILER


 the main character finds out that a whole group of people have conspired together to kidnap people and use them as medical test subjects in an illegal way to try to find a cure for paralysis.  So maybe that story is a better example, cause there quite a few people in the group who have conspired to it.  But they never explain how they go together and recruited others without getting into trouble or having it backfire.  The main character cop investigates the case, and determines that these people all got together to do something about their cause.  Do I need more explanation than that?

Basically though the leader of the gang is a psychologist who has done studies on these people, so he talks them into all joining together with him, based on their psychological profiles and studies he has done on them.  So the leader is a psychological expert on them in that case.

But he doesn't do this on public forums at all.  The only time the villains use the internet is to broadcast their crimes to make their point to the public, rather than just going to the media.  Cause I don't think the media would air all their content, and give the public the same impact, which they can, from their own nearly website which would take a long time to trace.  Do I need more explanation or plausibility than that though?


----------



## Annoying kid (Aug 21, 2016)

> Do I need more explanation than that?



Probably. 

 Eight(?) People who think it's a better idea to do such experiments on humans instead of animals, coming together  is as weird as having eight people agreeing that it's a good idea to stick porcipines and hedgehogs up the asses of cops. 

You can't just tell the audience to accept that without explaining.


----------



## ironpony (Aug 22, 2016)

Well the story is told mostly from the main character cop's point of view who is investigating it.  He finds out that the leader is a psychologist who recruited the members, thinking that they would say yes, based on the psychological studies they have done on them.  Is that enough explaining from the MC's point of view of discovering it, or do I need more?


----------

