All Comments on 'The Georgia Peach Pt. 01'

Weak

For all the supposed pride that this bitch lieutenant wanted to inflict on her, he wasn't even strong enough to hold her down on his own and had to ask for help. And all that after he kept being lucky throughout the whole story. Author, you seemed to write yourself into a corner by bringing Sherman in just to make him a non-entity.

Usually the best thing about this silly rape gangbang fantasies is that they're short (mind you, I still hate the short ones, but at least they don't pretend to be anything more). This one had literary aspirations, that will never, ever reach.

Also, the hilarious ambivalent politics, on the one hand the slavist girl the author seemed intent to torture, but on the other hand the union soldiers are all rapist thugs. About the clumsiest "both sides can be bad" attempt I've read. If one is going to say that, one needs nuance: either give her redeeming qualities (other than being the helpless victim at the end, and by completely stacking the deck against her to make sure her politics really stop mattering whatsoever) or make at least one of the soldiers a decent person. Even the general is a doormat who somehow submitted to his own lieutenant.

But really, the most offensive thing about this is how long it is. It certainly didn't merit it.

I always appreciate feedback good, bad or indifferent. The comment from 06/18/20 certainly reflects the "bad" option. Whilst all are entitled to their opinion (and I do wonder sometimes what people reading "non-consensual" stories expect to find), I get the impression that this reader possibly has political sympathies that lie in a certain direction. The context of the piece is (pretty much) historically correct, Sherman is far from a non entity, as will be discovered over the remaining three Parts, and Union Army Foragers, or Bummers as they were known, were often "Rapist Thugs" taken from the criminal classes. I can only offer my apologies to the writer of the previous comment because if he/she thought it was too long then it is only 25% of the way through. Maybe over the forthcoming 75% some of the answers to his/her pre judged questions will be forthcoming.

You know what, author? After reading your comment I wondered if maybe I was too harsh before, so I decided to give the second part a chance.

... Couldn't even read it completely because it turned out even worse than this one by becoming completely monotonous: half torture that leads nowhere and half Sherman wallowing in self pity and also realizing that he's secretly a rapist too. Or at least it seemed like that was all the story was; can't know for sure, I skipped half the third and first pages ant the entire second page. I do amend my previous comment on one point, though: their politics actually don't matter to the story, I was mistaken there, this setting was clearly chosen just because it was a handy scenario where the "all men torturing a helpless girl" trope would fly as maybe "realistic". No more, no less.

Oh, I do know what to expect from noncon. Usually fantasies written by women—often of being dominated—and less commonly fantasies written by men—often revenge fantasies. By the by, all of them are sexual in nature; even in the revenge fantasies written by men, the protagonist himself doesn't take any pleasure in the woman's pain, only on the sex itself (which is what makes it clear that it's just a fantasy).

But there's a third very common story, the ones where a girl just gets abused by a group of guys with no rhythm or reason, which almost seem written as a way for the author to convince him/herself that every man has this fantasy; otherwise they wouldn't write every man as a monster. Among those, the worst ones are those where sex is just an afterthought and the star is the torture itself, as if the author were expecting torture to be enticing enough like it is for the men in the story; it isn't (specially when it's clear that it's NOT about BDSM).

Something else annoying about those stories is that it's impossible to tell whether they were written by incels who truly hate women—and trying to make themselves feel better by pretending every man thinks like them—or by radical feminists trying their hand at writing men—and trying to convince themselves that all men are monsters. Both groups are equally despicable, and very similar in their opinion of men, but it seems like neither is big on writing engaging stories. Now I'm not saying that author is part of either group, but this story certainly quacks like a duck.

To drive that point further, even Sherman in the second part of this story is turned on by Catherine's torture! I laughed out loud when he enjoyed her humiliation too because now there were no exceptions, even surrogate father figures will enjoy torturing their charges according to this story. As far as author puts it, every man will, at least secretly, enjoy the pain if any woman he comes across.

Unless, and do tell, author, was Sherman also recruited from "criminal classes"?

Actually, I've realized now that I was being too much of an asshole. Should have just accepted that this type of story isn't for me and moved on. I apologise.