Case study: The man-baby submitter

Last night I relayed to my partner an incident that had just happened to one of my editor friends.

This friend had rejected work by a male writer, and she reported that he replied immediately with an acidic critique of both her mental health and her hair.

My friend mentioned this in a social media post, and she included the name of the writer, himself the editor of a casually thrown-together online journal. The response was immediate.

Several editor and writer friends, all female, reported that this editor had corresponded with them to comment on their rejections. One noted that this writer withdrew his submission from her journal before she had a chance to reach a decision because he claimed she was a person of color who would not have the proper experience to understand his work.

And the writer’s bad behavior wasn’t limited to his actions as a submitter. Someone I know reported that she had submitted to this fellow’s journal, only to be rejected and told that her work was incoherent and possibly came from an unstable mind. And yet another writer reported that this person, in his capacity as an editor, had critiqued her appearance in her author photo, which he adjudged to be insufficiently “honest.” She subsequently withdrew her work.

My partner was shocked at all of the accounts of this writer-editor’s behavior. “People do that?” he asked.

No. “People” do not do that—but certain guys do. Ask around. Most woman editors have stories of men insulting or even threatening them upon rejection.

Why would a writer lash out at an editor because of hair color? The obvious answer is that he is a big diaperbaby—unable to take rejection, unserious about his art. But let’s be clear; this is also about a power dynamic—an assertion of male dominance, which is threatened by rejection.

I debated sharing the name of this writer, and I opted not to, since I received the information secondhand. But I did reach out to him for an interview, and if he gets back to me, I will provide his name and share his perspective. Indeed, I am curious. What makes a writer respond abusively to an editor? And what specifically makes a male rejectee pick on a female editor’s appearance? This behavior is beyond my understanding.

Critiques of hair? That sounds original, but it’s really not. Women who present themselves as anything but conventionally attractive may as well expect wrath and censure from males they threaten with rejection.

It’s also telling that this male submitter and editor offers assessments of mental health and competence, based upon the limited evidence provided in a submission. There is a long history of patriarchal claims of women being “hysterical” or weak-minded. It’s just an odd thing to see in 2016.

My partner admitted that he had heard of this sort of bad behavior, but he didn’t want to believe it was as widespread as my non-male editor friends know it to be. I don’t want to believe it, either—but the evidence presents itself, again and again and again.

Sometimes I write here about what I see as mistakes on the editor side of the submitting relationship. Frequently, I take loose rejection language to task; just yesterday, I wrote critically about a specific strategy editors often use to soften the rejection blow.

But it must always be noted that editors do vital work, and many do it for no more than a love of literature and the desire to contribute to the life of letters. I stand in solidarity with these editors—especially against whiners who can’t deal with rejection.

Rejection is part of publishing. Don’t like it? Be a better writer. Or do the rest of us a favor and step aside.