I have written stories in a variety of categories, and they have received some criticism, some praise, and some no responses. However, I have been amazed at some of the responses to my stories about cuckolds. Even an essay about cuckolds with no plot and no characters got vicious attacks. The responses have been violent, angry, - raw, primitive, emotional anger. If you could shout in print, they were shouting.

To get a better idea of what was going on, I went to the Loving Wives section and looked for comments on other cuckold stories. I found a few, but surprisingly few compared to the comments on my stories. I have talked with several friends to get their opinions and I got three theories. I thought I would share them with you readers and ask what you think, so here they are. Please share your thoughts with me.

The first theory is that there is a dedicated, committed bunch of guys out there who regularly read cuckold stories, get mad, and leave ugly comments – but most authors delete the comments so I don't see them when I look at their cuckold stories. This leads to my first question. It is for the authors of cuckold stories. Do you get these ugly comments and delete them? Let me know – anonymously - if you wish.

The second theory is a bit more involved so follow me closely. There are out there a number of virtuous people who feel a need to criticize sin when they see it. Now I am sure there are many virtuous people in our world who quite justifiably criticize sin. But, help me to understand why they are such devoted readers of Literotica.com. Do they feel that getting angry will make sinners stop writing cuckold stories? So my question to people who get angry at cuckold stories is this: If you tell me you don't like stories about sinful people, do you think I'll stop writing them if you get angry with me?

The third theory is even more complex. Some people do not like cuckold stories. I can understand that – I don't like bondage stories. These people come in two flavors: the ones who don't read cuckold stories because they don't like them (like me with bondage stories) and the ones who do read them and then get angry. But why read the story if you know it will make you angry? And why get angry at only a few cuckold stories and not at all of them (assuming authors don't always delete angry comments).

This last question is a very interesting one for analysis. Some of my friends have suggested something like this.

It is analogous to the problem some homosexuals had many years ago when society made life hell for gays (before they were called gays). In those ugly days some gay guys might suppress their natural homosexual emotions so severely that these emotions would not be in their conscious minds. This was a time when Freud was much more respectable than he is today - when behavioral and biochemical psychiatry have undermined some of the fundamental tenets of psychoanalysis. Not to deny recent chemical theories of psychosis, Freud had some valid theories of neuroses, as anyone who has ever encountered hysterical paralysis will testify.

There are many published cases of what once was diagnosed as "homosexual panic" (Kempf, 1920) resulting from an individual whose repressed homosexual tendencies were brought close to the surface of consciousness by some event – say a repressed homosexual assigned to a male barracks. This threat, in turn triggered a desperate (almost psychotic) attempt to deal with this major unpleasantness and thus the "homosexual panic" syndrome.

Some of my friends have suggested to me that the big time anger at my cuckold stories may, in fact, be analogous to this panic syndrome in that the angry people are angry because a repressed cuckold fetish is brought to near consciousness by my writing. This, they tell me, is a compliment to my writing because most cuckold stories do not affect them as deeply and emotionally as mine do. I have corresponded with more than one reader and critic – very rational guys – polite and reasonable – each of whom, I think, has a repressed cuckold fetish.

If this is so – and I admit it may not be – then such guys must have a deep suspicion of their wives activities and a preoccupation with unfaithful wives. A preoccupation with fantasies of unfaithful wives who must be constantly watched, their faithfulness verified and rewarded – or their unfaithfulness discovered and punished.

All of us have met and enjoyed foot fetishists who are funny and boob fetishists who all guys understand. But wanting to watch your wife get fucked? Wow! That's different from wanting to sniff dirty panties. If it doesn't turn you on you say, "How the hell can a guy get off watching his ..." But think about it from the fetish point of view. Feet – do they turn you on? Dirty panties – do they turn you on? Ask enough questions like this and pretty soon you start saying "Okay – what turns you on just turns you on! It's all okay – I guess."

The problem is not that the cuck fetish turns some guys on – the problem is that in Western Society (in contrast to Inuit society, for example) men have deep feelings of property rights regarding their wives. Fucking his wife is analogous, in his mind, to stealing his Ford from his driveway. Of course men are required to forget that the Ford is a machine and the wife is a person (personhood for women being a recent addition to Western Civilization).

And so the repression. The cuck fetish, like homosexual desire, is repressed below the conscious level. A really good erotic story, like an all male barracks, brings the fetish too close to the conscious level of attention, resulting in: Threat! Anger! Strike back! Angry words! Shout! Scream! (No! Not scream! Girls scream – real men shout.)

Well, that's the theory. Now I expect the usual violently angry words from those threatened by the views of my friends. But what about those of you out there without a cuck fetish, or those with a cuck fetish who play with their dicks and enjoy it. Tell me dear readers – what do you think? Are there hidden, repressed cucks out there? You tell me.