SillySilenia

Members
  • Content count

    276
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    11

Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    SillySilenia got a reaction from BronxWench in Mistrust of Good Reviews   
    What I'm saying is not that I won't leave a negative review, but that I won't leave a review that crosses the line from constructive criticism to destructive criticism. I am willing to say negative things, but I'm not willing to say only negative things without at least a single positive or neutral point. Because, whether intended as constructive or destructive, it'll only come across as destructive then.
    There is a difference between "The idea behind this story was certainly interesting. However, I did not feel any real connection with the characters and the spelling and grammar mistakes jarred me out of the story at times. Perhaps you would benefit from acquiring a beta-reader? A couple of examples of what I mean are 'a' and 'b'." and "Sadly, the number of spelling and grammar mistakes made it difficult for me to get into the story. The characters seemed flat, with exception of "Character", which seems a bit of a Mary Sue to me. You contradict yourself on the time-line here, here and here, on the settings here and here, on the character background here and here. The basic plot you used has been overdone already and none of your plot-twists were creative or original."
  2. Like
    SillySilenia got a reaction from Kurahieiritr in Myths and Facts of Homosexual Relationships   
    Myth: If a gay guy hangs around with other guys, they must be gay too.
    Uh, no. I'm sure it happens -sometimes- especially in locations/situations with a vivid gay/lesbian scene, or in areas where the majority of straight people persecutes them, but generally speaking, no. I used to be part of a group of friends. One guy was gay, three were straight, one was bisexual with no preference either way, and another just didn't know, then the females, one was bisexual with slight preference for females, one (me) bisexual with no preference either way and the other five were straight or didn't know/care/etc.
    Oh, and one was an asexual, hetero-romantic female.
    Myth: If a gay guy spends a lot of time with a straight male, he must be trying to turn him gay.
    That assumes a lot of things, such as that gays only hang out with males they're (romantically or sexually) interested in. Which is not true. It also assumes that someone can be turned to a different sexuality, or that all gay guys believe it's possible. I highly doubt that.
    Myth: If a straight guy spends a lot of time/is friends with a gay guy, it means they're always secretly bi-curious, bisexual or gay.
    No. Just plain no. Not to say that it never happens, but always?
    Myth: Lesbians fall in love with every female they come across, and if said female is in a (heterosexual) relationship, they'll attempt everything to break that relationship so that they can get the girl.
    No more than that a gay guy would fall in love with every male he comes across (unfortunately, that myth seems to be going around a lot too), or that every straight person falls in love with everyone of the opposite gender they come across with.
    Myth: If a girl hangs out with a lot of guys, she's either a slut or lesbian.
    Gotta hate that stereotype. Why are females apparently not allowed to get along better with males than females without immediately being a slut or lesbian? -sigh-
    Myth: Bisexuals want sex with every person they come across.
    Nope. I am bisexual. Does that mean I want sex with everyone I come across? Hell. No.
    Myth: There is no such thing as a stable, long-term lesbian or gay relationship.
    False. My former neighbours are a lesbian couple who have been together for over twenty years now and married (gladly, that's possible here in the Netherlands) for over ten.
  3. Like
    SillySilenia got a reaction from devoid in Why Do We Hate Mary Sue?   
    One of the problems with Mary Sues is that we're mainly told about them, rather than see them do something. We're told they're smart, witty, good in strategy, perfect, beautiful, strong, independent, social, friendly, etc.
    Yet with exception of beauty (a lot of Sue-writers do tend to describe their pet Sue's appearance with huge amount of detail), we never see that proved. Okay, maybe the Sue wins a game of chess in the story's background somewhere (not that that immediately makes someone a strategy wiz), and maybe some people laugh at a witty remark of them (though often, the remark itself isn't shown and if it is, it's usually not all that witty), but that's it.
    Sometimes, we hear about them doing things that prove those points, but even then, the actual action is rarely shown. "Mary Antoinette Raven Tara Susan "Sue" Blackwood smiled as the strategy she had convinced the others of proved to be working." vs. "I think," Mary said, "that we should reinforce the troops here, because the intelligence we have suggests the enemy will likely come ashore nearby. Perhaps we could set up a trap there for them."
    The first only tells us she's good in strategy, the second shows it (or disproves it, depending on the result later in the story).
    Of course, it's not a problem if some things are told rather than shown; however, the problem with many Sues is that we almost completely have to rely on things the author tells us, rather than shows us, which makes Sues boring - perhaps even moreso than their supposed lack of flaws, or the sheer predictability of the character and events it stars in. (It also basically makes most Sues a form of unreliable narrating)
  4. Like
    SillySilenia got a reaction from Cuzosu in What's you Yaoi or good old fashioned M/M OTP - Any fandom/original   
    Goodness, I really don't have any OTPs, whether slash, femslash or het. I mean, there are pairings I'm more fond of or less fond of than others, but true pairings... Give me two characters from any of my fandoms and I can probably write it, so yeah. (Then again, my title should be Queen of the Ultra-rare Pairings, I think, considering I manage to write stuff like Basilisk/Hogwarts' plumbing )
  5. Like
    SillySilenia reacted to JayDee in OCs... what do you think of them?   
    As a gamer, I was going to write a C.O.D. C.O. O.C. with O.C.D but my eyes crossed.
  6. Like
    SillySilenia got a reaction from Dean_Wax in Content code suggestions   
    I would like to suggest RapeFic be changed to Rape, because RapeFic insinuates that the story is centred around rape, while a good amount of stories include rape but are not centred around it, which makes RapeFic an awkward fit. On the other hand, Rape fits rape-centred stories as well.
  7. Like
    SillySilenia got a reaction from JayDee in JayDee's (Originals) review reply, story discussion and additional notes thread   
    You're welcome, dear. Stupid of me to forget logging out and give you a scare, but at least you didn't get an actual heart-attack.
  8. Like
    SillySilenia got a reaction from BronxWench in Mistrust of Good Reviews   
    There was a time--on different sites, though, I'll readily admit that--where I did bother leaving reviews on such sub-standard works. To the best of my knowledge, not a single one of those reviews was listened to. Indeed, in a few cases I've had authors call "flame!", in another few cases I've had authors send their fluffy fanpoodles after me. That does not bother me as much as it does to some people, and indeed, would not have stopped me if at least one of the authors I left reviews for actually listened.
    Unfortunately, the people you describe, who will assume that their story, with all it's flaws, is the best thing since sliced bread solely because they see their view count jump up, tend to also be the people who assume that anything less than sugary sweet reviews are flames and that the reviewer, honestly wanting to help them improve, is just jealous of them and their great story.
    Of course, that is just all my experience. However, what I am speaking of in such cases are not just "bad" fics. They're the borderline-troll fics. Anyone who can upload, say, a whole chapter of sentences like "n den i flied on top f teh coluds, wif mai beatyful prefectly whit wings & my fifthy ft long black-blu-blond hare was rifled bye teh wind. Den my pruple-gren-blu eyes spoted............................................... somting weeeeeeeeeiiiiiird. n den jake flied 2 were i am nd puled his 18 ins long fat rod off manmeet outta him lether pans nd stated makin luv 2 me form behin" (not a quote of any specific work to the best of my knowledge, but yes, some inspiration for this... style was drawn from the infamous 'My Immortal') and actually believes their work is perfectly acceptable for uploading will not be likely to start scratching their head and think, 'hey, I could improve some' because of a review. Or twenty.
    Like I said, generally speaking, if I come across stories like that, I hit "previous page" before ever reaching the point where I can leave a review. The exceptions is if I'm trying to figure out if someone is a troll or just that bad a writer. Of course, now that I am staff, there'll be more stories I'll have to read for obvious reasons that I normally would have clicked away after a few lines because it's giving me a headache.
    There are writers who just have no real interest in writing, just in the fluffy fanpoodles. They see writing as a way to get their attention fix, without any love for the written word, for the stories they've read or the stories they're telling and without any wish to improve, because that would take effort. They don't want to do something that takes effort, they just want their daily/weekly/monthly dose of attention.
    There are people that believe whatever they do cannot be anything less than perfect--whether they're people singing for talent shows that honestly believe they're talented, amazing singers and that everyone who dares say different is just jealous, even though that would mean that 99% of the people around them are jealous, whether they're the people that honestly think they're the next great baseball star, even though they can't run or hit a ball or whether they see themselves as awesome writers.
    Yes, some of these people do grow a love for writing and a realization that they're not as perfect as they think they are at some point, as well as a wish to improve. However, that requires them to open their eyes. So long as they've gotten their eyes closed, their fingers in their ears and singing loudly "I'm amazing! I can't hear your criticism, because I'm too amazing to improve!", it quite honestly is not worth the effort in my opinion. They might hear what I say, but they will not listen. Especially not if there is not a single point I can mention that is positive.
    Now, I don't say this goes for all or even most of the writers whose writing is below "outstanding" or even "acceptable". However, when there is quite literally nothing positive to say about their fic, that tends to be a VERY big clue pointing in that direction. Combined with some other factors--like tone of voice in ANs, certain kinds of snark in disclaimers, etc.--there just are cases where I know there is no way they're going to actually listen.

    However, that does not mean I do not care for the future of the written word, or that I want to see sub-standard become the new standard. It's just that, as BronxWench put it, I have no desire to waste time tilting at windmills. If I figure in a case that there is some chance, even if but a small chance, that the author will listen, if not to all I have to say, then at least one or two points, I will be likely to leave a review anyway.
    (Though I must admit I have been slacking here at AFF, for a good part because I haven't read as much as I would like. Will be working on that, though.)
  9. Like
    SillySilenia got a reaction from Kurahieiritr in Mistrust of Good Reviews   
    @ Tigro Spottystripes:
    It certainly doesn't hurt to say something like that in a review. It just would be even better if you at least give a bit of an idea what exactly it is you like so much, or of what could have been done better. Perhaps you don't have specific criticism, nothing that stood out like a sore thumb. Maybe it's difficult to exactly pin-point what made the story so enjoyable.
    However, even just saying something like "this and this line/scene/conversation made me laugh", or "I cried a little when this/that happened" in an otherwise "plain" review makes it special. Hell, even a line like "I wonder how [character] is going to react to [other character]'s action/revelation/etc." could be enough.
    It shows that you read the story and considered it worth another few moments of your time to leave a review, whereas a review like "I liked it. Please update. I wanna read more!" could be meant for any and every story. Nothing in it refers to the fic you just read. It reads like a copy-and-paste response, even when heartfelt by the person leaving it, because it's so generic.
  10. Like
    SillySilenia got a reaction from BronxWench in Mistrust of Good Reviews   
    What I'm saying is not that I won't leave a negative review, but that I won't leave a review that crosses the line from constructive criticism to destructive criticism. I am willing to say negative things, but I'm not willing to say only negative things without at least a single positive or neutral point. Because, whether intended as constructive or destructive, it'll only come across as destructive then.
    There is a difference between "The idea behind this story was certainly interesting. However, I did not feel any real connection with the characters and the spelling and grammar mistakes jarred me out of the story at times. Perhaps you would benefit from acquiring a beta-reader? A couple of examples of what I mean are 'a' and 'b'." and "Sadly, the number of spelling and grammar mistakes made it difficult for me to get into the story. The characters seemed flat, with exception of "Character", which seems a bit of a Mary Sue to me. You contradict yourself on the time-line here, here and here, on the settings here and here, on the character background here and here. The basic plot you used has been overdone already and none of your plot-twists were creative or original."
  11. Like
    SillySilenia got a reaction from BronxWench in Mistrust of Good Reviews   
    Like phoeyay, I tend not to leave a review if I have absolutely nothing to say that's even vaguely positive. That's not because I am afraid of retaliation, but because in most cases, I will have hit the "back" button before even reaching the end of the first chapter.
    In the cases where that is not the case, I will usually have at least one positive thing to say. Be it that the story has an interesting premise, that I smiled at a witty remark or joke or sarcastic line, that there was some description somewhere that I liked, or a character I liked or (in case of fanfiction rather than original) felt was portrayed well, or even just the title or a chapter title, the use of proper grammar, spelling and punctuation, an interesting piece of dialogue or a neat plot-twist.
    However, if absolutely none of these apply; if I have even searched for something I like but came up blank, then I will not leave a review unless that person specifically asked me for feedback.
    Because frankly speaking, at that point, the story isn't worth even more of my time.
    Especially because the chances of an author honestly welcoming an in-depth concrit review, rather than deleting it or crying "FLAME!", when in their story, the spelling, grammar and punctuation were off, the titles cliché, the plot twists absent or visible from ten miles distance, the characters completely and utterly boring, OOC or Mary Sues, the descriptions not evoking anything, the storyline not interesting and not a single sentence in sight that I liked... yeah, those chances would be practically zero.
    EDIT: For clarity's sake, with "the spelling, grammar and punctuation were off", I do not mean the occasional typo, homophone-switch, a single missed capital or similar problems.
    I mean the kind of story where it's very clear that the story has seen neither spell-check nor beta and most likely hasn't even been re-read once by the author before uploading it.
  12. Like
    SillySilenia got a reaction from BronxWench in Mistrust of Good Reviews   
    There was a time--on different sites, though, I'll readily admit that--where I did bother leaving reviews on such sub-standard works. To the best of my knowledge, not a single one of those reviews was listened to. Indeed, in a few cases I've had authors call "flame!", in another few cases I've had authors send their fluffy fanpoodles after me. That does not bother me as much as it does to some people, and indeed, would not have stopped me if at least one of the authors I left reviews for actually listened.
    Unfortunately, the people you describe, who will assume that their story, with all it's flaws, is the best thing since sliced bread solely because they see their view count jump up, tend to also be the people who assume that anything less than sugary sweet reviews are flames and that the reviewer, honestly wanting to help them improve, is just jealous of them and their great story.
    Of course, that is just all my experience. However, what I am speaking of in such cases are not just "bad" fics. They're the borderline-troll fics. Anyone who can upload, say, a whole chapter of sentences like "n den i flied on top f teh coluds, wif mai beatyful prefectly whit wings & my fifthy ft long black-blu-blond hare was rifled bye teh wind. Den my pruple-gren-blu eyes spoted............................................... somting weeeeeeeeeiiiiiird. n den jake flied 2 were i am nd puled his 18 ins long fat rod off manmeet outta him lether pans nd stated makin luv 2 me form behin" (not a quote of any specific work to the best of my knowledge, but yes, some inspiration for this... style was drawn from the infamous 'My Immortal') and actually believes their work is perfectly acceptable for uploading will not be likely to start scratching their head and think, 'hey, I could improve some' because of a review. Or twenty.
    Like I said, generally speaking, if I come across stories like that, I hit "previous page" before ever reaching the point where I can leave a review. The exceptions is if I'm trying to figure out if someone is a troll or just that bad a writer. Of course, now that I am staff, there'll be more stories I'll have to read for obvious reasons that I normally would have clicked away after a few lines because it's giving me a headache.
    There are writers who just have no real interest in writing, just in the fluffy fanpoodles. They see writing as a way to get their attention fix, without any love for the written word, for the stories they've read or the stories they're telling and without any wish to improve, because that would take effort. They don't want to do something that takes effort, they just want their daily/weekly/monthly dose of attention.
    There are people that believe whatever they do cannot be anything less than perfect--whether they're people singing for talent shows that honestly believe they're talented, amazing singers and that everyone who dares say different is just jealous, even though that would mean that 99% of the people around them are jealous, whether they're the people that honestly think they're the next great baseball star, even though they can't run or hit a ball or whether they see themselves as awesome writers.
    Yes, some of these people do grow a love for writing and a realization that they're not as perfect as they think they are at some point, as well as a wish to improve. However, that requires them to open their eyes. So long as they've gotten their eyes closed, their fingers in their ears and singing loudly "I'm amazing! I can't hear your criticism, because I'm too amazing to improve!", it quite honestly is not worth the effort in my opinion. They might hear what I say, but they will not listen. Especially not if there is not a single point I can mention that is positive.
    Now, I don't say this goes for all or even most of the writers whose writing is below "outstanding" or even "acceptable". However, when there is quite literally nothing positive to say about their fic, that tends to be a VERY big clue pointing in that direction. Combined with some other factors--like tone of voice in ANs, certain kinds of snark in disclaimers, etc.--there just are cases where I know there is no way they're going to actually listen.

    However, that does not mean I do not care for the future of the written word, or that I want to see sub-standard become the new standard. It's just that, as BronxWench put it, I have no desire to waste time tilting at windmills. If I figure in a case that there is some chance, even if but a small chance, that the author will listen, if not to all I have to say, then at least one or two points, I will be likely to leave a review anyway.
    (Though I must admit I have been slacking here at AFF, for a good part because I haven't read as much as I would like. Will be working on that, though.)
  13. Like
    SillySilenia got a reaction from BronxWench in What one thing do you most regret in relation to one of your fandom's fanfic culture?   
    The fact that on the one hand, HP fans will read just about anything, but on the other hand tend to be extremely judgemental about other people's pairing and character preferences.
    (Speaking about the HP fandom as a collective, not about any specific members of the community)
  14. Like
    SillySilenia got a reaction from BronxWench in What one thing do you most regret in relation to one of your fandom's fanfic culture?   
    The fact that on the one hand, HP fans will read just about anything, but on the other hand tend to be extremely judgemental about other people's pairing and character preferences.
    (Speaking about the HP fandom as a collective, not about any specific members of the community)
  15. Like
    SillySilenia got a reaction from BronxWench in What one thing do you most regret in relation to one of your fandom's fanfic culture?   
    The fact that on the one hand, HP fans will read just about anything, but on the other hand tend to be extremely judgemental about other people's pairing and character preferences.
    (Speaking about the HP fandom as a collective, not about any specific members of the community)
  16. Like
    SillySilenia reacted to Kurahieiritr in Enough is Enough!   
    I am not a politically correct person, so do not expect me to mince words in this rant. I have plenty to say about the frauds who plague this and other sites. :sarcasm: is now in session because I have already read all of the favorite nauseating, too often written, worn out excuses that have triggered this overwhelmed frustration induced rant. I do apologize in advance for this being such a tactless tirade. I really need to get this off my chest because I am so frustrated with things I continue to read every time I come here.
    What is the point of writing if the document is a thoughtless piece of slop without merit pounded out willy-dilly on a whim, and posted without revision? Why do some people insist upon placing such infantile things in the archives, and then get angry when someone with a basic grasp of English structure mentions a few of the problems that need addressing to create a better reading tale? Why do some individuals whine incessantly about contrit feedback, instead of considering that there might be a real problem which can be corrected with a little expended effort? If one does not understand the foundations of proper grammar and spelling, why insist upon being vile to those who seek to give actual valid aide? When did writing become a place for cop outs and egotists? Who ever said that everyone should be patted upon the head simply because they bothered to put something up at a free site like AFFnet, or FFnet? What have the lazy done to earn a touch of praise and accolades for the illiterate slop they insist upon posting?
    Absolutely nothing gets done when a poorly written piece is added to the archives is my response. Give feedback to such frauds, and they delete the reviews, or proclaim concrit reviews to be trolling! Such frauds are too infantile to accept that they can improve if they get off their lazy butts and do a little research! YE Gods Forbid that such individuals ever face the wrath of a genuine editor. I can see the suicide rate escalating fast if they ever had to remove the blinders from their eyes. Such people are the bane of the writing hobbiest, and professional alike. What is the point of giving reviews if the writer is unwilling to consider critical mistake portions of an honest review? Why do lazy, insecure asses bother to beg for reviews while remaining too immature to give such reviews any thought toward self improvement? How can people call themselves writers when they are so obstinately unwilling to learn how to take a fair reading story, and make it into a genuinely beautiful tale that is memorable? Why do such frauds feel so compelled to provide a plethora of meaningless excuses for their mistakes, instead of attempting to change for the better?
    The reason for my ranting questions: I am so sick and tired of the whining, lame excuses that the vast majority of writers like to pull out of their asses. People seem to love bellyaching, and giving excuses to avoid improving anything they slop together and post. To me, people are flat against learning the diverse aspects, and complex elements involved with writing style. I am also fed up with jerks who refuse to pull their heads out of the asses when it comes to a reasonable review meant to give genuine help. Nobody is attacking when they send a review that something was messed up when they mention grammar/spelling problems.
    Any idea why I might be so angry about the plethora of bull I read in forums, and in author's notes in the main archive? Reality Check: I had a massive stroke a few years ago. It took two years to get to the point I could use my right side again. Then, I had to reteach myself from the foundation up how to read and to write a second time. Everything that I know I should recall from my time as an employed editor in the 90's was locked behind a wall of damage that I struggle to break down every single day of my life. I also have Dyslexia problems complicated by fine motor skill nerve damage. Do I use these difficulties as a knee jerk excuse for instances of personal, poor writing? THE ANSWER IS HELL NO!
    To my way of thinking, real writers strive to overcome their disabilities, not use them as a crutch to languish within their flaws! I bought grammar based books and read them repeatedly to recover my lost knowledge. Due to a little thing called effort, I regained the vast majority of the information I once lost due to a life threatening medical crisis. Therefore, I do not give crackpot reviews whenever I take time to read over and consider the most glaring problems I see within a story's structures. I fine comb everything I write repeatedly to get rid of every flaw before I post anything. Yes, I do miss things, which I correct as I get a chance. A person who reads my work can return seven months later to find a lot of mistakes are corrected. I abuse my edit chapter button every few weeks, based upon the errors I get told about when someone reviews my stories.
    Whenever I give a review to someone, I always endeavor to point out the strengths, and the weaknesses of each story I have read. The reviews I give carry my hopes that the input will help complete strangers to revise their stories to add strength to plots and characters that were devised. It is a real insult to all reviewers who give thoughtful feedback when the reviews get deleted by such frauds who pretend to be writers. Very few writers I have personally reviewed have retained my concrit reviews. Those who have kept their reviews, I am grateful to you for doing so. Your strength in keeping my review prevents me from becoming completely sick and tired of the constant flow of disrespect given to those who take reviewing for others seriously.
    Put bluntly, I have seen the signs of a real epidemic of fraudulent whiners begging for reviews that are insincere. The ongoing blasphemy of it all has finally tweaked my last nerve. The majority of said frauds beg for reviews in every single chapter's author notes. My conclusion is that such begging for reviews is a form of blatant "stroke my ego or else" guilt tripping. "Please review because I live for reviews," is a blatant lie 9 times out of 10 in my personal experience with giving reviews. That type of bullshit line now reeks of the biggest attention seeking ploy in existence to me, as a reader. In the vast majority of cases I leave very tame comments compared to my actual reactions to such writer's stories. I refrain form taking every single line and pointing out the problems. If the writing is atrocious enough, I am reduced to perhaps you should use your spell/grammar checking features before posting in the future. Getting reduced to such a flippant response really hurts because I would not be writing a review at all if I did not see some kind of merit within the story. I would simply back click and be done with the author, and everything else they may have posted. I do keep a list of the unreadable slobs so I do not have to hurt my eyes by accidentally clicking on anything the royal stink writers have added.
    During the last three weeks, after seeing how often that line accompanies a deletion of my reviews, experience tells me to avoid such authors as if they have the Black Plague. To date, seven out of every ten concretely focused reviews were erased because my input was not a fanpoodle. My honor code from my previous career as a "shred the writing to get it corrected in time for the sales team to make a profit from it" variety editor experience does not condone "I love it so keep writing" variety pat upon heads. I do apologize for this being such a tactless tirade. I had to get this off my chest because I am so frustrated with "poor me syndrome" type commentaries.
  17. Like
    SillySilenia reacted to JayDee in 'gives you hell'   
    Oh, you're adorable! Starting a post like that with the line:
    Too funny. You Sir and/or Madam have made my day. The whole post is so expertly crafted. I especially like the bit where you give an opinion that folks on discussion forums should only give opinions if asked for opinions... when not asked! But it's pretty much all high class 'net flamewar bait (heck, vintage - I recall variations of "I'm not sure you have the mental capacity to understand it" on usenet). I salute you! And you should totally write riddles. I'm gonna have to risk being interpreted as peevish again and echo that wishing well in the future to you. I know it's hard to tell on the internet but this is totally not sarcasm, or even snark. G'luck!
  18. Like
    SillySilenia reacted to Kurahieiritr in I'm a Homophobe 'cause WHAT?   
    Somewhat Rant Oriented thoughts, so feel free to answer or ignore. I have many people to answer with this post. Complicated topics always take time to untangle also so please bear with me if you do read this thought provoking post.
    After reading all three pages of this topic, I must say there is a plethora of concepts getting touched upon. What homophobia is, and the way it is diversified is the core problem in coping with the subject matter. Many people lump too many variables into the definition without forethought. Homosexuality is an irrational fear of same sex male relationships as I understand the concept. Yet, as a whole, there is a massive double standard involved. Much of it is religious dogma based and smacks of the Organized religious sector's need to brainwash those too lazy to crack their own bibles and read them cover to cover so they get the inconsistencies of their own religions. Evangelical bible thumping variety Christianity tends to be the biggest hypocritical forum of this bad habit. They pick and choose forums to preach as their only truth from the Bible and rarely even know the full spectrum I have found. Those alone are the brainwashed variety, so I am not bashing the whole spectrum, just the moronic types who make the rest of us miserable by preaching we're all condemned to hell. I believe God himself said "Judge not lest thou shalt surely be Judged". Would this classify as automatic certainty that those hypocrites will never make it to heaven since they love to judge others which willfully breaks God's own reserved laws?
    My youngest son, 21 years old, is bisexual. Due to his torment, I began writing yaoi, or homoerotic fan fiction to help him come to terms with his sexuality. Since he is too shy to sit down and talk about things openly, I put up fanfiction that he reads when he is at a friend's house. It helps him without forcing him into any corners. He recently thanked me for my insight to his specific uncomfortable problem. (His words, not mine) Because my younger son is a bisexual, he feels he is inferior thanks to the ignorant, and brainwashed element within our society. How does a mother with children age ranged later twenties down to recently turned drinking age cope with such a gentle, yet deeply conflicted soul? I've had to walk a few miles within my suffering son's shoes! I never gave any thought to what is or is not homophobic before my youngest hit puberty and almost had a full blown mental breakdown over his multiple faceted conflicting sexuality. In spite of his homophobic and vicious Father, my son has found stabilizing ground because I accept, and still love him regardless of who he chooses to settle with when the time is right for him.
    My Point: The Bible is frequently invoked by those who hate same sex male relationships. Even here I saw such points made as if to validate those who practice blind hatred. The Jewish laws spoken of were squarely based in Hygiene Safety measures. It is called the Kosher Laws for a reason. Kosher more or less should be equated with cleanness or Hygiene measures to promote longevity in an unhygienic place. I have read them over and do understand the underpinnings very well. All of those laws are about preventing everything from food poisoning (hence the different cooking pots for different things like meat and vegetable) to premature sickness induced deaths of other scope.
    Before soap and water, gay sex led to premature death because they did not have modern plumbing etc. However, we have evolved to a point that we have these wonderfully designed bathrooms and plumbing so that specific fear of death rarely holds valid meaning in our modern era. Soap and water work very well to promote good hygiene which makes that part of an irrational fear of being around a gay person idiotic. Condoms prevent scat related illnesses, and STD problems. As to staying clean, Soap is that oh so ingenious evolution since the Old Testament was written to preserve the Kosher laws of the Jewish people who did not have baths, nor soap, nor condoms to keep their bodies clean so they would not get sick.
    Historically there were "pro same sex" religions, mostly found in ancient "Gentile" nations before the overwhelming spread of, at the time excessively militant, Christianity. Reason for mentioning this; those religions that accepted same sex relationships believed that their God(s) had exempted the gay or lesbian from breeding duties to fulfill a vital role somewhere else within their community. Such religions thought parenthood would stifle the important roles such gays and lesbians were meant to fulfill for the whole community's benefit. Most people blindly clump over 300 faiths into the category of (Neo or classic) Pagan/Wicca. However, these faiths are very diverse. This systemic lumping of religions is another form of the hypocrisy disease that has infected so much of the human race.
    My point is this: Religious organizations should be the ones who determine who can and can not get "Married" as it were. If a religion has Government Tax exemption, then the government should grant those "married" under any "Christian" "Muslim" "Jewish" "Buddhist" "Pagan" (and into infinity) church that has exemption status identical legal rights. IF the Church has legal stats, it is only fair to treat all separation of Church and State rules equally. That means validating all heterosexuals, homosexuals, and lesbian couples married under the different recognized religious churches without drawing lines in red tape. If a church believes in same sex couples, then the government that gave it exemption stats ought to recognize all the couples who get married there without making any specialized exceptions.
    Next Thread topic: As to men who are terrified of getting attacked by other men, . . . I've known three during my longish life. The underlying problem with 2 was that they were actually bisexuals afraid they would convert to gay if they allowed the opportunity to arise so knee jerk hated all gays as a self defense mechanism. Their greatest fear was being alienated by their peers and family if they stumbled. The fear of being isolated plays a fairly strong role in many gay basher's actions. They are prayed upon by an often irrational fear of abandonment by their longest standing friends, and/or family is one thing I have discovered over several decades. My bisexual son is hated by his homophobic father. Never mind that the homophobic father is a "closet gay" terrified of facing his honest sexuality because his mommy and buddies might dump him for daring to step out of line with the group mentality. Daddy can't tolerate the notion of being reviled by his rather brainwashed buddies.
    Shedding light on the double standards involved in this specific phobia and prejudice realm is such a huge underlying problem. How can anyone define genuine Homophobia from Hypocrisy and Prejudice in this day and age? I have met several men in the last thirty some odd years whom are extremely violent haters of same gender male relationships. Here's the Kicker; those same men insisted on anal sex with girlfriends or wives! Who has guts enough to explain that irrational, inconsistent hypocrisy within this forum?! These are men whom cop out with "it's a woman so it is therefore fine to do it to her whether she wants it or not." Some of these same men have been known to rape gay men in brutal ways to prove themselves superior in their own minds. I was pleased to see one go to jail for his twisted logic that raping another man who was gay was a richly deserved punishment. HE went so far as to justify his actions with the Bible no less. I divorced such a "Woman hater" man eighteen years ago. Excuse me, sticking your dick into someone's butt is the same no matter which gender you happen to be banging. Stop attempting to rationalize doing the very thing you have condemned in others who decide that they like the anal deal.That is the height of hypocritical bull, and I think it should be revealed as such.
    Also, we have the straight man who adores watching lesbian Pornography. Still happens to be same sex, only it is condoned because the hetero leaning man gets his nut bust. Far as I'm concerned, that equals another double standard that should not exist. Men can enjoy masturbating to girl on girl, but women are not supposed to masturbate to guy on guy is another double standard hypocrisy I am sick of seeing. I abhor such behavior.
    Hypocrisy is my biggest pet peeve in case anyone missed that. IF a person is uncomfortable or turned off by gay sex, that should be fine. I'm not into BDSM, and find pain a huge turn off. Does that make me BDSM phobic? Not at all. It means I do not like pain, so refrain from placing myself into a painful relationship. It does not make a person a hypocrite if they are turned off by same sex ideals, nor does it make them homophobic. When people screech that nonsense, they cross into the hypocritical zone. If you do not want to watch a stupid movie, then don't watch it. I watched part of Brokeback Mountain and thought it among the most dull things I had ever seen. Then again, I though the same of Twilight number one. Could no more finish watching that movie than Brokeback Mountain. Torturing others to prove yourself superior is wrong, Immoral, and tyrannical. People are diverse in their thoughts, feelings, sexual orientation, and cultural heritage. Intolerance is the ultimate communicable disease. IT is found everywhere, and it is the only thing that genuinely needs to be eradicated from the world! Homophobia, and all other forms of group hatred are Intolerance disease masked with polite little tags such as Alternate Universe in fan fictional writing.
    I apologize that this is so long, but like Mary Sue/Gary Stu, Homophobia is one of those topics I have been studying for some time and have formed a very strong opinion about due to all the stupidity so many spout in it's defense.
  19. Like
    SillySilenia reacted to BronxWench in who they picked for the 50 shades of gray movie!   
    I think Melrick's summed that up nicely. It's my understanding that there has already been a petition to add this to movies banned by reason of the Geneva Convention when choosing films for prisoners of war.
  20. Like
    SillySilenia reacted to Melrick in who they picked for the 50 shades of gray movie!   
    I think I'd rather staple my scrotum to the bottom lip of a rabid, starving tiger than to watch a 50 Shades of Gray movie. That's what I think.
  21. Like
    SillySilenia got a reaction from Kurahieiritr in Back history   
    I wish I could like that post more than once.
    Yeah, or complete, furious rage. Anger can result in sarcasm. Rage so bad a character is willing to torture another character to death is usually not a fitting moment for a dry remark. Most of those who can't tell the difference between sarcasm and whining are also those who can't tell the difference between descriptive and purple prose or between witty and boring. (-cough- Hey, those sound like key-characteristics of Sue-writers... how surprising-cough-)
    Aw, thanks for the compliment.
  22. Like
    SillySilenia got a reaction from Kurahieiritr in Back history   
    You had me smirk at that bit of dialogue, Cuzosu.
    I agree, sarcasm and snark are wonderful in almost any circumstances. Pity that there are some people out there who apparently never got the key-word: almost. (That, and people who confuse 'sarcasm' with 'whine').
    I like it as a writer, because I know it gives my characters backstories and a past without me having to info-dump. I like it as a reader, because it means someone actually thought about their story and what way they want to write it - means they've put in effort.
    Ah... but is wisdom not exactly that anyway? Paying heed to life's lessons, I mean.
  23. Like
    SillySilenia got a reaction from Kurahieiritr in Back history   
    Exactly. If for some reason you have to introduce a skill not long before the skill has to be used, it's better to not do it by having the skill-possessing character mention it out of the blue. (There are exceptions, of course. Can be humorous if done well, especially if followed up by a deadpan snarker along the lines of 'anything else you should have told us about before?', but it's just as easy to do it wrong.)
    Perhaps my favorite way is dropping some small hints here-and-there a bit earlier, simple sentences that don't necessarily attract attention but that do hint at the skill (at the very least, hint at it in hindsight), however, that's not always possible - especially when earlier chapters/books/episodes/cartoons/name-media-form-here have already been released.
    When not possible, I agree that the ways you mentioned would work very well. Or have it be a skill closely linked to one the readers already know the character possesses. (Say, you have a character that has a lot of experience with potions. It wouldn't be much of an issue to reveal they also have knowledge about poisons. Or, like you said, picking pockets and picking locks.)
    Though basically, I guess this all comes down to, "before you tie your plot into a nice pretzel-shape, at least have a clue how to get it straight again". It's difficult to pull something off as anything else than an Ass Pull when it is an Ass Pull. (Also, I apologize for using tvtropes terminology. )
  24. Like
    SillySilenia got a reaction from JayDee in SillySilenia's Review Reply & Updates Thread: HP General One-shots & Drabbles.   
    Furious has finally gotten its first review. =)
    Review by Jaydee:
    Funny, the thought in my mind while I -wrote- it was that someone had told the school about his stash of gay porn. Not the same thing, but close enough. XD
    Yes, your reaction is quite natural. I think about 75% of the reviews I got for this over at FFN (mind you, 75% is what? 4 reviews or so?) had the same thing. I'm glad you feel it's complete, because that's always the hard part when working with a word-limit.
    Nah, that's okay. Different communities, different definitions. In this case, it was written for a challenge on one of the many HP forums at FFN, which defined drabble as "below 500 words", if I remember correctly - but I know of the different definitions, which is why I call it a drabble/one-shot. For the FFN forum community I spoke of, this would be too short for a one-shot, for the AFF definition, this would be too long for a drabble. This way, both have a definition they can be alright with. (And one they disagree with, but hey. That's life.) Regarding the messed in the head... possibly, but then again, that goes for me as well.
    Harry's Poem also got a new review.
    LadyFireCrab
    Glad to have been of service. Though I have difficulty imagining how you needed a piece of squid coming out of your nose.
  25. Like
    SillySilenia got a reaction from Raymy in The A.C.R.O.N.Y.M. game   
    Oops. Change 'not' to 'rarely', then. (Though the neither would then be grammatically incorrect. Oh well)
    Demon Rapes Ancient God, Queen Upset, Ends Everything Now.
    S O C I E T Y