Shadowknight12

Ah. How do I avoid it? Post quickly?

I *knew* I should've copypasted the error message. It was something about a security key not coinciding, asking me to go back and reload. That's about all I remember.

Huh. Today I've been getting a lot of "security code" stuff with my posts and PMs, which force me to be extra careful before hitting the submit button. Hasn't happened before, only today. The option to preserve the contents of the post was pretty awesome, I tell you that. Is it possible that it's timing out quicker than before? Or at random?

Hah, thanks. *shakes hand* It's really no big deal.

And that's exactly what he deserves. Look up tips online, I'm sure there's a ton of them that he doesn't even know about.

Yeah, intelligent, logical people in general (not just women) are a minority. Which is why this sort of thing works.

Depends on the woman. Usually the guy is smart enough not to try it on the intelligent, confident woman that radiates self-assurance. He goes for the scantly-clad one who's after his money or the shy one who was 'insecurity' written all over her face. In those, most of the time they do work. And in a disturbing amount of cases, some of them work because they're twisted in some way that makes the woman feel coddled and pampered like a princess, with the underlying misogyny carefully swept under the rug.

You'd be surprised. Some of them do veer straight into blatant asshole territory, but I have personally witnessed a surprisingly large number of those things myself.

Heh, awesome. I honestly forgot to ask him. We were having such a good time that the topic barely came up, but when it did, we talked about the guy he's chasing after, who plays coy and wages an innuendo war with him. To me, that's a bit frazzling, but there you have it: Something I hadn't said! To sum up the long list below: Treating the guy the way a lot of women are still being treated today, like a fragile, overemotional flower that's only good at being pretty, being fucked and handling the lesser caretaking roles in the relationship and society. What I'm about to say does not preclude the fact that there might be men out there who find this 'romantic' instead of 'insulting' and actually like this treatment. Don't think it's universal, because it's likely not. * Implying that the guy isn't able to do things for himself, such as opening doors for him, pushing his seat, saying 'dear, that activity is far too rough/harsh for you. You won't last a second there!' * Giving flowers, and all the implications thereof (delicate, sweet, pretty, etc.). * Possessiveness, as if the guy was so inept at life, he's merely an object that belongs (or SHOULD belong) to someone. * Tying to the above, fighting over that person with someone else, completely disregarding the guy's thoughts about this 'competition.' * Making decisions for him. Such as "He'll have the Merlot and the Caessar Salad." "But I don't drink." "Oh, don't be silly." * Implying that he's an emotional wreck that needs to be coddled all the time, lest they break down. This manifests in hiding bad news, making light of serious stuff, and overall patronising. * Implying that any financial success they've had is due to good looks and/or willingness to put out. Example: "Nice apartment. Must've cost a fortune." "I suppose. But I'm Senior Manager at Squiddledoodlefuck Inc. so I can afford it." "Oh, look at that. Well, no wonder, with such a pretty face." * Outright stating that there are things that they *shouldn't* do, for illogical reasons. It's very, very hard to apply this to men (Since the typical statement begins with "Women shouldn't..." and saying "Men shouldn't..." would be massively hypocritical), but with some work, some assholes can achieve anything. "Well, I don't think you should drive/work/learn how to defend yourself/play sports/do anything remotely manly." The principle of the matter is that the guy is implying that the other should be just a pretty decoration and that if they begin to do anything manly, their partner will be made redundant. Yes, this line of reasoning is fucked up. Yes, this could spawn a whole topic. * This one is a bit of a stretch, but complimenting them on their looks alone, or speaking only about their appearance when talking about them. This one can be explained simply as shallowness, so it's not as 'typical' as the others. I think that's about it. You get the picture. Just think of all the stuff that gentlemen are supposed to do for women, or the way 'ladies should be treated' and you'll see what I mean.

If I had to take a wild, wild guess, I'd go with emasculation. He probably thinks that if you outdid him at that, his ego would be shattered like the fragile glass it resembles.

I vary. Sometimes I'll wait until the whole thing is finished, sometimes I'll just post as I write. Each fic is different, I suppose. Some of them make more sense when they're posted in one go.

Instead of rambling on and on about guns and shotguns and rifles, I'm just going to offer you something more intuitively informative: Guns And Gunplay Tropes. It might not be written in a serious tone, but I find it easier to read and far better of an introduction to the subject than paragraphs and paragraphs of technical information. Every trope out there tells you if it's based on reality or not (and if not, how does shit work for real). If you prefer dryness, there's always Wikipedia. EDIT: As an aside, it works better for what you're looking for (adding realism to a fic), to focus on what matters to the audience. Just pretend you're at the supermarket, walking down the aisle, and that every trope is a product. Just pick and choose whatever you feel like adding to your story.

Well, every guy will tell you something different about orgasming. It also varies on what exactly brings the guy to orgasm. Some will say that a handjob can't hold a candle to anal, or that a blowjob is a million times better than vaginal intercourse, if the person giving it is skilled enough. Some will be reduced to a quivering, wrecked puddle if you can deepthroat, while others will tell you that they have the best orgasms while being assfucked (this is because a guy's orgasm begins with the contraction of the anal sphincter and the pleasure 'waves' travel all the way from there to the tip of the penis, therefore anal stimulation often enhances a guy's orgasm). Physiologically, what happens is that the guy starts combining the different fluids that make up his sperm, and then gathers them up at the base of the penis before shooting it at high velocity. Some guys will feel all the stages of this process, from the moment his balls withdraw to his body to the pooling of hot seed at the base, to each and every blast being forcibly expelled through his urethra. Some won't feel anything like this, only waves of undefined pleasure as he climaxes. If you look at a cock's underside while it climaxes, you can sometimes see (depends on the dick in question) how the urethra bulges in sections and returns to normal, then bulges and returns to normal, again and again, as the sperm goes through it. What you might have experienced before this stage is an increase in the flow of precome, which increases as the guy approaches orgasm (or as his arousal increases). Another explanation could be that right before an orgasm, there's an influx of blood to the organ (related to the diffusion of the neurohormone oxytocin, which is responsible for urethral contraction, needed to pump out the sperm). So any of this can be the explanation for what you feel in your mouth when you're giving head. Normally, all of this is not necessarily registered by the guy. The guy's brain is being bombarded by the extremely pleasurable sensations you're placing on his very sensitive cock, which kind of block out any subtler sensations. Normally, he'd only feel (clearly) two things during orgasm: 1) anything touching his cock, 2) the orgasm itself. Oh, and anything touching his asshole, too, because of what I explained above. In my case, it varies depending on how aroused I am, and for how long I've been in that state. Sometimes it'll take my by surprise. I'll go 'oh shit' and then bam, a lot of sudden pleasure that quickly subsides. But usually, I'll feel a certain 'tightness' in my groin, like that feeling you get when you're tethering at the edge of a cliff and you start leaning forward and you just know that you can't go back, that you're already starting to fall. That's pretty much the same. I feel a vaguely pleasurable sensation that signals it's all over. If I stop then, I still orgasm, it's just not as good (my cock twitches pleasurably once or twice and then it's over... but I still shoot a small load). If I keep going and embrace it, the pleasure starts rising and comes in sort of waves, usually synced to every shot of sperm. It's hard to describe because it happens too fast and sort of short-circuits the brain, you know? Pausing to analyse something like that is like asking someone to describe what they feel when they're on a roller-coaster. I think that what I can best describe is something like an electrical discharge, only instead of painful it's pleasurable. It's really that fast. And there's a lot of them, one after the other. If any guy out there has a better way of explaining it, go ahead. I'm no good with words.

Leaving the supernatural aside, what matters when consent is called into question is mental maturity as defined by the law. Modernly, biological maturity occurs far earlier than the legal age of consent (in most areas) and this is why we have teenage pregnancy cases. Each society regulates at which age they consider this maturing to happen, and that's what its citizens are supposed to abide by. Some make exceptions/modifications later on, as mores and customs change. The problem is that mental maturity is not a process that occurs in all persons equally, and so you have cases of very young people outgrowing their peers and jumping into sexual situations. It doesn't matter the reason this mental maturity occurs, if it's natural or because of external forces. What matters at this point is no longer the boy's mental state (which is, to put it academically, pretty fucked up), but what the law will think if he starts sleeping around. If I were you, I'd clarify in an Author's Note the boy's age and whether or not this is a problem in the story's universe. That way you cover the two possible 'views' of underage sex: The story's and the reader's.

Isn't that a normal thing? I thought every writer worth his salt was supposed to do that. Otherwise, your beta is nothing more than a glorified spell-checker. What's the point in having someone spend their valuable time correcting your work if you're not going to pay attention to what they say? Writers who don't take criticism seriously aren't going to get far. If a reviewer or a beta explains something logically to me and I see the point of their concrit, I'll do my best to fix it, even if I have to rewrite the entire story/chapter/scene. What's the point in hanging on to something that's been logically proven to be imperfect? Anyway, betas should be treated better. It's not like you're *paying* them to read your stuff.

Sorry if this sounds harsh, but you said she was a teenager. Unless she's a genius psychopath with perfect social skills, you honestly should have seen this coming. The people who do this sort of despicable things very rarely fail to give out warning signs. If you want to get some good out of all this, look back on your relationship with her and see if you can detect these signs. After all, hindsight is 20/20. Then, learn from that and keep it in mind for the future. The moment someone begins to follow the same path, you ditch them. And also, try to set up boundaries from the beginning next time. But don't beat yourself too hard over this either. You did your best and there's a ton of better and more mature writers that would beat each other up for a chance to have you as a beta. So yeah, just gain whatever wisdom you can from this and keep it up. Don't let a bad experience sour you or anything.

Muses, fickle and downright bitchy as they might be, are really awesome when shit doesn't go our way. Glad to hear things are looking for you, and that you have fans following you. That's an awesome incentive to get back on the horse. Best of luck in the future!

djackgirl, you're in a toxic relationship. Take her to the back and shoot her. All three above are absolutely right. Ditch the bitch and get an author who has not failed Human Decency 101. I think betas deserve credit for the job they do, and I make sure I include at the very least a thank you line at the end of every chapter they proofread for me. Also, ApolloImperium is right. She plagiarized your work. If you can somehow use that to screw her over while you ditch her, all the better. She deserves it for being such a fucktard. I sincerely hope you'll find someone who'll treat you right and help you get over this awful experience.

Hum. Same problem with Jewel of the Atlantis. Which is odd, since ApolloImperium submitted a high score. I'll just blame Chrome.

And isn't that the same attitude a writer gets when they get a review they don't like? "I put time into my story and someone flamed me because they had a sandgina over it." Some people don't want to improve. They think their style is fine the way it is. They like their Mary Sue characters and their contrived plots, they think that grammar is worthless and that what really matters is that their OC is getting it on with the awesome canon character. They don't take their writing seriously, because to them it's just a wish-fulfilment fantasy to pass the time, one that they just happen to post on this website. They enjoy getting only positive feedback. Forcing them to accept the eyesore of a review they dislike is just as immature as their deleting of negative reviews. You put effort into the review, yes, but the author is not going to listen to you if they dislike it, no matter what happens. So forcing the review on them is just petty revenge. What you propose not only sinks you to their level, it completely turns the situation around so that now the reviewer can exercise their immaturity instead of the author. For the record, the only time I'd delete a review would be if it was blatant spam or plain trolling. I keep (and reply to, via the forum) every single review I get, regardless of whether I like it or not.

[WARNING: Story as of yet unfinished. You might not get what the hell am I talking about.] I've set up a poll to get my readers' feedback on whether or not I should add an Epilogue that explains what's happened after the end. I personally feel utterly ambivalent one way or another, hence why I'm asking you all. If you like the current open ending, vote No, if you want a definite clarification on the fate of the characters, vote Yes. Either way, feel free to post and give me your opinions. You don't need to register to do so, and I'll definitely take it into consideration. Thank you all for your replies, they're awesomely inspiring. Thoughts_in_Chaos: Wow, a favourite? Excellent! Yeah, I get exactly what you mean, sometimes the little things can really grate on our minds. I think the story with the Redpaths is pretty sad, especially since Pamela seems to be unaware of what's happened and says she hears the strange whispers of 'bad people.' And the relationship is supposed to mature slowly, building up pressure until it all comes crashing down. Hopefully I've managed to reflect that. Anarchei: Hey, you're the 'Kindness to the Less Fortunate' guy! I have to say, the ending was something I really struggled with, hence why I'm making this poll. Glad to hear you liked the characters, they were pretty interesting to write. Lateralus: Oh, yeah, I should've clarified what I meant. WAFF stands for Warm And Fuzzy Feeling, it's supposed to be something sweet and cuddly. But since that's clearly not the case here, I'll probably be trying again sometime in the future. elexeNexele: Wow! That's awesome to hear! Good to hear the anticipation wasn't boring. I tried to give these two time to mature and develop their relationship slowly. And yeah, I try to stick as close to the lore as I can. I might take some liberties for the sake of the story, but I try to respect what the authors have created.

Can I just say that this is a great idea? I think this sort of thing should be widely encouraged in a FAQ somewhere.

Hmmm, I seem to have a problem submitting high scores in the Gem Shooter. I'm using Chrome, so perhaps that's why. I had scored something like 43K.

Well, that's your point of view and you're entitled to it. I'd just like to say that I can easily flip around a few words in that paragraph and you get the exact same reasoning writers would use to complain about unfair reviewers. You may dislike being told this, but the truth is that you're behaving just like them. If you truly had found it hilarious and moved on, you would not be this defensive, nor would you have a beef with the system. The system works because it's fair to all involved. What you seem to fail to understand is that there is no obligation for the writer to improve. If he or she chooses to remain stagnant and remove any reviews that dare to suggest that they're less than perfect, then the system supports their self-delusion. If you really weren't hurt by the writer's rejection of your criticism, you'd just shrug and move on, which was exactly what I suggested. Instead, you're here, decrying that the system doesn't work.

I can sympathise with both sides of the issue, but I honestly think this works the way it is right now. I mean, not allowing people to remove their reviews (unless it's spam/flame), is really the exact same thing as a writer deleting a review they don't like. Reviewers and writers need to get a thicker skin and just play the hand they've been dealt. If your story wasn't that awesome, you grit your teeth and work on improving. If someone deleted your review, you stop reviewing that author, period. Getting upset and playing the martyr in either case is just immature. And hypocritical, too, in the case of the reviewer. I think it all boils down to unappreciated effort. The writer puts effort into the story and they get upset when it's not appreciated. The reviewer puts thought and effort into his review, and as we can plainly see, gets upset when it's not appreciated. We can all empathise with that. The reviewer simply needs to keep on reviewing, making a mental note to stop reviewing the ungrateful fuckers, but without taking the martyr stance and saying "oh I don't care about reviews anymore! I don't leave reviews because nobody appreciates my genius concrit!" --> See any parallels with writers? If we, as writers, want to get more and better reviews, we need to start GIVING more and better reviews. I know we don't always have the time to read a story and then review it properly, but we all should do our part to foster the environment we want. Otherwise, you're basically asking to get something without doing anything in return.