kais

I'd like to submit on the 24th if there is room.

This is a very interesting piece of Polish history. Thank you for sharing! I know that religions were taboo under communist rule, but you don't hear too much about how that played out in practice. In this context it makes your comments very clear, and I can see how you would have drawn parallels to marginalized groups. I think this has been a really great discussion, and highlights that there are still so many differences between western countries. Not every country, for example, has the extreme history of slavery that the USA has, so we have unique issues facing us with that level of marginalization that other countries just don't face (to the same level). So thank you, again, for sharing this information! A bit more on this. As we have established, Polish mores on this area are likely quite different. I do want to discuss this a little, not so much for you, @Ernei, but for those in the USA who might have a similar thought. Minorities have been very vocal as of late (well really, throughout history, but social media is really helping to amplify) about this idea of 'colorblindness', 'gender blindness', etc. I will not attempt to speak for ethnic minorities, as I am not one, but I have read quite a bit about not wanting this blindness, about wanting to be seen, and have differences acknowledged. I am sure this has many nuances, and quite possibly does not translate to other countries, but that is the current dialogue of the USA. As a white person, I am trying to remember this, and be respectful, and to allow these minorities to frame the conversation they want to have. I guess I am still a little confused here, because neither of these words are problematic in the USA. Are they in Poland? It sounds sort of like you're trying to address the concept of what we call 'affirmative action' here, wherein if, say, Sally and Johnny both applied for the same job, with equal qualifications and background (not necessarily the same, mind, but equal), Sally would be hired before Johnny (assuming we're talking about a field with underrepresented female population). In instances like these, it can very much seem like people are trying to tip the scales in favor of Sally at Johnny's expense. I don't know if I can adequately explain this process, as it involves concepts of privilege that might not translate well due to cultural differences, so I've pulled some links instead. Sometimes it can seem like one is giving more toys to Sally, but often times people don't realize that even if they gave a truckload of toys to Sally, she would never catch up to Johnny because Johnny benefits from privilege. Maybe the links below will help. Facts vs. Myths on affirmative action A very important comic on privilege On black versus white and privilege Basically here in the States, especially when it comes to ethnicity, institutional racism and white privilege mean that the scales are still tipped in a white person's favor. As a society we try to fix that with things like affirmative action, diversity hiring, etc. Looking in from the outside, from another country, I can certainly see why it might look like minorities are being 'handed' something at the expense of other people, who are not, as individuals, necessarily the root cause. So the bigger pictures of institutional racism and privilege are often ignored, but are key players for us in the USA. @Ernei I would love to hear your thoughts on how this all works in Poland, because I know very little about that country and would be happy to learn more. And it's great that you voiced them! We're sort of a melting pot of cultures in here, and its good to know the background of other cultures so we can all coexist. In this particular instance, as I know @neongrey, their response was the better of the two options. They really were trying to spare your feelings by pulling back from the conversation. We could get into a long and involved discussion about how minority groups in the USA are tired of having to defend their positions, but this post is long-winded enough and I think we've already well established that we all need to be better cultural listeners. I don't regret any of this happening, however, because I got to understand a new culture, and learn some things, and I think that is a gift.

Finally getting to this! Overall I can't really get a feel for Thalan. I feel like I need more of a character introduction. Savae seem more 'evil' in this one, if you could call it that, although perhaps they are merely more comfortable with someone gender fluid than gender binary. I like the sudden occurrence of plot for sure, but even with it, the conversation seems to drag. I can't put my finger on why though. It just seems like, for all the information being presented, the wording was too thick. I had to reread several times to catch everything. Murder of the goddess though- woo! As I go - He? Yes, he today <-- love - the second paragraph is redundant and disrupts the flow. Recommend cutting - the conversation between Thalan and the priest confuses me - page two, this line is redundant and could be cut: He doesn't need to be laughed at. He lands his foot on the lower step, skirt swaying around his calves. - page three: what ho? Plot? All of a sudden? Loving it - page three: even with the awesome information, this conversation drags - ending is more solid than the beginning

@Ernei So I think what we're hitting here is a cultural difference along with some 'lost-in-translation' bits. I will try to explain. The issue isn't so much arguing about whether or not religious leaders experience hate. Certainly every group will experience hate at some point in history. Marginalization deals specifically with historically underrepresented groups, of which women, queer people, people of color, all belong. Religious leaders do not fall into this group because they were not historically marginalized as a group. Some specific groups could claim more than others, but as a group, generally, religious leaders lived relatively well. Not across the board, and it did depend on which religion, but they were not categorically marginalized as an entire group. @neongrey (and feel free to correct me, as I am putting words in your mouth) reacted because you were comparing a marginalized group to a non marginalized group. In Poland, marginalized groups may differ (and since I don't know your country's history, it may be that religious leaders there are truly a marginalized group), but in the USA and Canada, saying that group A, who was historically marginalized and is still marginalized is the same as group B, who has experienced hate but not on a large scale, and not routinely, is, well, it further marginalizes and it can come off quite offensive. This can perhaps be further illustrated by your black versus white comment above. In the USA at least, 'black' is not currently considered an offensive term, nor is 'white'. But let's pretend that for a moment, using the word 'black' to refer to a group of people is offensive. When white people decry this sort of thing as 'unfair', they are speaking from a place of privilege. They feel discriminated against when in fact, all that is happening is that black people are trying to claim their fair space, their seat at the table as it were. As black people are a currently and historically marginalized group, their attempts to frame the conversation in a way that finally showcases them in a positive and more equal light can sometimes seem unfair. Things can seem unfair when you are in a position of privilege. A fantastic example below, not mine, and paraphrased: Sally and Johnny are playing with toys. Johnny has four toys, Sally has one. An adult comes by and gives Sally one more toy. Johnny cries that this is unfair, that he too deserves another toy because Sally got one. <-- often times attempts to balance the scales can seem like discrimination or generally unfairness if you are Johnny, who is used to having more. Now let's take this example and put in the priest scenario. The priests are Johnny, and the women are Sally. Maybe both got sand thrown in their face by a bully, but Johnny comes from a place of privilege and can recover faster. He has access to resources and more toys. He can bounce back. Sally is marginalized, has fewer safety nets and will not fare as well. To say that Johnny and Sally's situations are equal because both got sand thrown in their face is very hurtful to the Sallys of the world. Understanding marginalization and how it affects groups of people is difficult, especially when it is marginalization in another culture. In the tiff above, the issue was not so much your desire to have religious leaders showcased in a positive light. Making suggestions on other's works is what critique is all about. The issue was that you then tried to tie the plight of religious leaders to that of women--you tried to say that Johnny and Sally were the same, when they are not. For those of us who are parts of marginalized groups, this is very hurtful. @neongrey responded in a very mature way in her choice to not engage. She was hurt and knew that if she tried to respond she would say nonconstructive, hurtful things. She chose instead to step away from the conversation. I was also hurt by the comparison, but I want to thank you for taking the time to explain your point of view to me. I can see that this is very much a cultural difference and a language barrier issue, and I hope that my writing above has helped to explain where neon and I are coming from in terms of how we felt about your statement. (You may also want to note that the word 'feminist' actually just means a person who believes in equality between men and women. Nothing more. In this definition, I would hope everyone on this board is a feminist.) If I just sounded weird above, apologies. With the help of a librarian friend we have collected some links for reading that may better help you understand at least the North American issues related to marginalization, specifically female marginalization. I think this conversation has been very productive, and I want to thank you for taking the time to explain your point of view to me! On modern sexism (most of these have studies involved, so actual science) Gender and media Gender and corporate jobs and general workplace Women and speaking gender bias in literature from Australia (it's not just a North American thing) global issue of women in the workplace list of international links graphs! in scientific studies/drug trials creativity (and how women are just as sexist against women as men are) On marginalization in general or topics other than sexism for race, in fiction (we aren't talking about racism at all, but I could go on forever with links about racism and homophobia) general underrepresentation of marginalized groups in literature

If I had a soul sword I'd challenge you to duel right now. One of us had better not turn into a car afterwards though.

*crushed*

But @neongrey, you missed my subtle request for your Lost Girl ship. You can't be Canadian and not have one. Spill. (my wife maybe gave me an LG hoodie for my birthday because I am a giant nerd)

Hmm. Maybe not too heavy handed, just lacking context I think. There needs to be some grounding early on that tells the reader the intent of the piece. Maybe... maybe David has been assigned the AI therapist sessions because it's a condition of his divorce that he get some help? Maybe he can make a statement that is obvious to the reader (maybe over-the-top obvious), like 'his ex wife said he needed to grow up and stop acting like an entitled boy, but what did she know about being mature? She was always dumping the kids on him to go do errands or clean houses or whatever it was she did when he was off work. What kind of mother did that?' That'd be a 'woah, okay,' moment for the reader. Next thing to work on would be the assault scene. Your paragraph explanation is actually what needs to really be said. You could made have a little exposition from the AI about how she's programmed to (exactly what you wrote above). Although really, trying to give him a massage would work just as well, although his strangling of the AI would be less warranted then... hmm. That area might need more thought. Then the ending needs a tie up that's a little more solid. Maybe one of the boys could make some comment about how his mom finally got to quit her third job because she got a raise at the maid service, and David could have just a smidgen of breakthrough about what that means? Part of my issue with the piece is that it doesn't seem to have a resolution. David never really learns to not be a man-child, and is still thinking of running away at the end. Could he instead maybe... consider trying to start over with his wife and kids in space? That would show some growth for sure. Some of the best advice I ever got when drafting was that you can make evil or incompetent or whatever characters, but you shouldn't make wholly unlikeable characters. In order for people to want to read your story, they have to be able to empathize, even a little bit, with a POV character, or be invested in them somehow. I don't empathize with David but I do want to see him either get a slap or grow. If you can deliver either of those, and show to the reader that those are possibilities, you will certainly keep the reader. I hope that was helpful!

Well I mean, Canada has healthcare and better equality all around and hockey, but the USA has better Netflix and Amazon Prime and the best roller derby teams. Telecommunications is also kind of a racket in Canada. Those things aside, I consider it a pretty magical place. Canada also has the TV show Lost Girl. If that wasn't a magical fairy ride of a show I don't know what is (ignoring a few of the last seasons).

Can you help me understand your statement better, @Ernei? Are you referring to priests as in, priests of Christianity, or say, voodoo priests? There's a really big difference here, in that you are comparing marginalized groups that have been burned at the stake, killed for being raped, killed for simply existing, and most recently, bombed in a nightclub, to the leaders of a mainstream religion who traditionally have enjoyed a place of power and privilege, even when 'converting' native communities. BUT I could be making an assumption. Certainly voodoo priests would fall under a marginalized status, as well as wiccan leaders, etc. Druid priests... that might be a mixed bag. I'd like to better understand your statement because at it reads, it appears to come from a position of privilege and perhaps misunderstanding. If that is the case, perhaps we could work through that misunderstanding together (and learn a bit about each other in the process). This may be a country thing. You are not living currently in the USA, is that correct? I know that equality between the binary sexes is different even within western countries, and certainly quite different in other areas. It is best to avoid sweeping generalizations like this, because women are still quite marginalized across the world (honor killings, education, etc) and even here, in the USA (I say 'here' because I think the site is US hosted?). I used to live in Canada, so I know things are a lot different there. The marginalization is certainly less overt than it was say, fifty years ago, but it does still exist. Some recent examples from the recent past of my own life as a nonbinary scientist in a traditionally and currently white, cis, hetero, male dominated field: - female undergraduate comes to my office in tears because she asked her professor for a letter of recommendation for a job application and he told her no, because he doesn't believe women should work outside the home - at our department's accreditation review, a reviewer pointed to me and called me the department's checkbox. To my face. In front of my colleagues, who laughed and said nothing - A male professor told a female advisor that her masters degree didn't mean anything and that anyone could get one because it wasn't in a science We've made a lot of strides, certainly, in equality, and likely even in the USA in some fields there is not much or any, gap. It is important, however, to note that a gap does exist, because we do not want to be the ones to further marginalize someone. So I'd love to chat more about this if you'd like to. @neongrey hopefully won't mind us hijacking their thread. Dialogue about this is really good, and I hope others join in as well.

Let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater. After you explained your intent with the story, the writing made a lot of sense, overall. If it is meant as a criticism of this particular type of person, the sub does a good job. I think the area that needs work is making sure that the reader understands it is meant to showcase the inherent issues it portrays as negative, instead of its current appearance, which reads as a guy working through his issues in a not very great way. The sexual assault scene doesn't really fit with everything else. Could you clarify what you were trying to show with it? Maybe we can brainstorm another way for the same emotional movement under different circumstance. There are some neat areas of this story that I think you could tease forward. Your writing, generally, is solid, and the story arcs well for the most part. I think this story is well worth saving and editing. I do appreciate the apology, although honestly, aside from the not-labeled sexual assault, your sub wasn't really any more biased than most new subs we get here (not that this excuses bias, but we are all products of our societies and cultures). It's sort of running joke at this point. I want to make little badges for our siggys that read something like 'I survived my first posting on RE and learned how to keep women out of refrigerators'.

@Zay Wolfe we very much want you to stay! Crits can seem personal at first, but we are all just trying to help one another be better writers. There were some problematic places in your story, but there are problematic places in all our stories. We must persevere! You'll find, especially if you start subbing, that the menagerie of voices on this forum are almost perfect mimics of the feedback you get from agents. Part of being a writer is learning how to take te criticism, integrate it, and make your story stronger. You have it in you! Become a solid part of our community, embrace those edits, keep writing!

I will second that. As a survivor, this would be much appreciated.

@TKWade you are a stand up person and a writer I hope to someday meet in person. Thank you for being awesome, and handling critique with a grace that many of us aspire to.

Welcome to RE! Overall I... . This piece made me very uncomfortable for a menagerie of reasons that I don't know if I can fully explain. Let's start with what I liked. I liked the sort of Matrix in space idea. That was appealing. I liked the idea of the therapist dreamscape. That's a good way to deal with emotions in a safe place. I'm going to see if I can break down the areas that troubled me into distinct groups. Gender If David's gender changes to female, then you describe the character as female. Not male-turned female, or anything akin. This is akin to referring to a transgendered person as 'this is Sally who used to be Johnny', instead of just 'this is Sally'. It's... hurtful is too gentle of a word. It grates. In polite society we refer to people by the gender they identify with. You have chosen to have David identify as female for a few paragraphs in this narrative and as such, David should be referred to as a woman during this time. Not doing so sends a message to readers that you do not want to send. The Wife Strife-inducing from her first introduction, and later the apparent cause of all David's ills. I... there isn't enough backstory on either of the husband or wife to properly deduce what is going on, but I want you to know what it seems like from reading. It reads like David is whining. Like he is a man who hasn't learned how to time manage and thinks the world is unfair because his wife (ex-wife, yes?) demands he watch the kids so she can work. He dreams of running away from his responsibilities into space (where, conceivably, his wife and children could not follow). He reads like a whiney man-child. This type of character may not have been your intent. I understand that. But it is important to understand how your character reads across a broad demographic of people. Male readers may find a great deal to empathize with in David, but I suspect your MC will grate (most? some?) female and nonbinary readers in a very aggressive way. Consent (please note that this manuscript requires a full 'S' rating for sexual assault and attempted rape) The AI attempts to rape David, and so he chokes her to death. On the surface this is a reasonable reaction--I would try to kill something raping me as well. But in the context of the greater piece, where the AI is formed from David's experiences and reactive to his memories, this reads more as allegory/metaphor. David feels out of control with his wife. He feels his wife takes from him, pushes him into a role of subservience, forces him to do things he doesn't want to do. He wants to regain control and does so in a very aggressive way. This scene, in particular, cemented David's character for me as a current/future abuser. He feels he has no control with his wife (whom he shouldn't need to control to begin with) and/or his children, wants more time for himself (you don't get time for yourself when you have kids. That's how parenthood works), and has bottled up his emotions so that they are now moving to violence (against his children, already, and perhaps soon against his wife). David as a Character (please note that this submission requires a full 'V' rating) I have no empathy for this character as he is described in the text. None. I think he needs psychological help, yes, but from the context of the piece, if I were to meet him on the street and had this level of knowledge of him, we would have an altercation. A loud one. With all that said, edits make the manuscript! You've got a neat world presented, and editing makes one a better writer. Keep at it! As I go - your opening line needs more kick. As a general rule, the first and last sentence of the chapter should be strong and make the reader unable to put the book down. This is especially true of the opening line of a book. - 'one large black dune the length of infinity' doesn't actually tell me much. I'd prefer more specific descriptors. You are a little heavy on the adjective/adverb front though, just FYI. - page 1: David's life crisis here isn't very compelling to me at this stage. He's emotionally adrift in a desert. I need a hook to keep reading, and I haven't seen one yet. - page three has tense change issues - 'the man who is now a woman' - just say 'the woman. - end of page three: GAH with the 'woman who was once a man'. PLEASE do not do this. If she's now a woman, she's now a woman. Leave the man part out. The trans and nonbinary communities are begging you here. - page five: ooohkay so protag has some pretty serious issues. I'd suggest starting the narrative at "Yesterday, I murdered my son". Cut the rest above. This line is where the story starts and it's a good hook. - page five: 'the woman who was David'. No. Just 'David'. - page seven starts to meander again. It's hard not to skim. - page nine: "for when nature still ruled over man". Did it not also rule over woman? - page nine: mention of wife... broken glass... fridge sensors tingling.... (ETA: WHEW. No realization on this front at least) - page 11: The AI said he needed a friend, then became...a mother? A lover? I'm confused. - page 14: I'm interested in this external and internal world and keep wanting to be immersed in it, but the strange sexualization of the AI keeps turning me off - page 14: consent!!! Man says no, AI. - page 15: and now violence....

As a handy guide for those confused by the various tests available: Sexy Lamps Test < Bechdel Test << Mako Mori Test * In my time of subbing to agents, probably half listed 'manuscript must pass the Bechdel Test' on their sub guidelines. One highly favored Mako Mori passing. It became so prevalent that I started listing the tests my book passed in my query letter. Literally. I wrote in the first paragraph: This manuscript passes the Bechdel and Mako Mori Tests with flying colors. * (Furiosa Test purposefully left off the list)

Couldn't it be as simple as her telling/requesting him to do it because she also believes the letter needs to get delivered? I think the question you need to ask yourself is why is his wife's death the only thing that can motivate him? If he loves her that much, wouldn't a request or a command be enough? What about self sacrifice and protection and that other manly stuff? What is riding on this letter? Will he let down his country if it isn't delivered? Will billions of sheep die? What are the stakes, and how can those motivate him? I didn't mean to imply that only one gender gets to be an aggressor. But you described Lyzell as a scholar, not a mage scholar or a warrior scholar. Scholar, to me, means bookish, glasses, not super athletic. I'm a scholar. I've got some, shall we say, pudge to me. I have a black belt, too, but I'm no gym bunny. Pair me up with a woman trained in combat and you better believe I want her going out the door first to check on things. Now if I can use magic, that's a different thing, but I'd probably still send the person with better reflexes and situational awareness out the door first. That's just good sense. It's an issue because you're falling into another problematic area of women and how they are viewed through a male gaze. She's strong. Excellent. She's beautiful. Excellent. Certainly there is beauty in strength, but your actual dialogue has Lyzell only verbally commenting on her beauty. Women are more than their looks, and I would argue the great majority of them would like compliments that do not focus solely on the transient properties of their exteriors. This is a real issue in the western world (I can't speak for the eastern). There are gobs of psychological studies on how wording like this affects young girls and adult women, as it subtly teaches them their value is only in their physical appearance. So what can be done? You clearly have Lyzell admiring Allandria for more than just beauty. He just needs to vocalize. Even once would be fine. He could... comment on her quick reflexes. Admire her intellect and how he can have a solid conversation with her about his book reading even though she doesn't want anything to do with the dusty old tomes. Just straight up tell her that he finds her strength comforting, her musculature beautiful, or stunning, or some such. Just, don't make it all about her appearance. You've made her a fighter with a strong will. She deserves to see those strengths reflected in the gaze of the man who loves her. If this is confusing, swap Allandria's gender for a moment. Pretend Lyzell has a husband. How would Lyzell admire his husband? Guy is a beefcake, sure. Maybe he likes to wear those stretchy unitard things. What comes to mind? Perhaps how Lyzell feels protected? Appreciates the dedication the husband (let's call him....Chuck) shows to keeping the streets safe? Admires Chuck's dedication to...orphan kittens? Point is, would Lyzell admire Chuck only by calling him beautiful? Does that seem strange? If so, that's because men are generally allowed to be more than their looks (romance novels aside). You can do that for Allandria, too. To clarify, it's clear that Lyzell has more complex feelings for Allandria than just lovin on the beauty. There's no issue there. It does bother me, and may be a potential catch to future female and female-leaning readers, to only see that affection be expressed in terms of appearance. Allandria is so much more to Lyzell than beauty, and we see that as readers a bit, but much like with issues of consent, it's the verbal that matters, not what is in someone's head. Most of the other stuff I mentioned could be easily fixed just by mentioning Lyzell has some mage stuff going on. His actions make a lot more sense if you know he has some ability other than just reading books. This sub is leaps and bounds better than your last, for sure. You are doing a fantastic job with editing, and with working on understanding complex gender issues!

Overall Well I'm still engaged and entertained. I like the new plot thread with the war games, although the info dump in chapter got a little intense. Chapter eighteen seemed superfluous. Other than that, I really liked this. I also desperately want Sira and her grandfather to bond over woodworking. That would be amazing. As I go - page one: my heart is breaking for grandpa a little bit here with the train thing - OMG please tell me she bonds with grandpa through woodworking. I will buy this book. I will buy this book RIGHT NOW if that happens. - chapter 18 doesn't do much for me in terms of character development or tension. I'd like to see more tension with Ray, or her finding out about her family, or something along those lines. I also am starting to get antsy to get more information about the forest and where the suits came from - Ah, I see chapter 19 does all that I wanted above. Which leads me again to wonder what the purpose was of chapter 18 - page 15: getting a little heavy on new detail now. I'm not remember it all - last page: Huh. *nodding head, digesting*

Alright, LET'S DO THIS! Overall I appreciate and admire your willingness to edit your prologue/chapter one. It has definitely come a long way. There is still some adjective abuse and run-ons, but your world building is cleaner, and your characters more defined. With that said... you still have a fridging problem. It's better, definitely. Less textbook now and more, hrm, I don't know the word. If there was a 'fridge lite' version, you'd be hovering around there. Freezering? Fridging refers to not just death, but maiming and serious injury as well. Allandria's death/injury still motivates and affects Lyzell, and she still doesn't have any goals or motivation of her own (although she is MUCH more fleshed out). She still reads like your old character was just retconned, and I've noted several areas that should probably be looked at in the text. As a suggestion on where to go from here to address the fridging - at this point if it is necessary for you to kill someone at the end of this chapter, consider making Allandia a sword for hire so that it is his bodyguard's death. You wouldn't have to worry so much about backstory and then the death of a female wouldn't be a primary catalyst for a male. Other options would be changing Allandria a bit. Give her motivation that plays into her dying (like SHE is the one that has to get the letter delivered, and will go to any lengths to do it. Then her death would make sense, as would Lyzell's desire to get the letter delivered). Honestly though, I'm not sure what Allandia's death gains the reader at this stage. There'd be just as much tension in a full battle sequence where Allandria or Lyzell or the two together slay or maim the antagonist. If you are looking for motivation for Lyzell to sell his soul or whatever he does at the end here, maybe make it about destruction of the letter itself (demon thing is going to die and take the letter with it, maybe), instead of Allandria's death. Keep at it! Editing is the heart and soul of writing! As I go - nice hook sentence - letter full of prophecy? Huh? Confused - Alluren could have been seen - tense fail - second paragraph first page getting adjective/adverb heavy - getting worse in the third paragraph, and adding to it run-on sentences - by the end of page one we have transitioned from MC POV to author exposition entirely - page 2: write out numbers, don't use the actual number - page three: 'Allandria insisted almost defiantly' again tells me a great deal about your world. She can only be defiant if Lyzell is in command of her in some way - page four: if the women are fighters and he is a scholar, yet she has to listen to him about staying inside... this is a really strange dynamic. I'm not necessarily suggesting you change it, it's just... very confusing right now. She is reading more like a hired bodyguard or someone under his employ, or possibly a daughter. She is definitely not reading as an equal (and that's fine, if you don't want her to be). - page five: there is a lot of exposition about Allandia's strength, but Lyzell only ever admires her beauty. Very telling about Lyzell. Also triggers my fridge sensors. - page six. You have firmly established that Lyzell is a scholar and Allandria the warrior. So why is Lyzell the one to go first out the door and suggest that it is the safest passage? - page six and I'm pretty solidly against Lyzell at this point. You have a warrior here who is apparently in love with you. Let her do her job. - page seven reactions seem much more in-character for the roles you have stated for the characters - page 10: the antagonists lines are... they make me laugh. I don't find the character terrifying. The lines are really cliche. - end of page 10: I was okay with the battle until the antagonist went back to Allandria and we had the 'pain of the female motivating the male' pop back in. Fridge warning lights are blinking - top of page 11: ACK! NO! SOMEONE GET POOR ALLANDRIA OUT OF THE FRIDGE!

Right?? I took the women in the workplace one, as this issue is near and dear to my heart, and my results came back and I was all o_O WHAAAA? But hey, that's why its implicit bias, and not overt bias I guess.

If there is still a spot left, I'd like to sub too. Might as well charge forward.

To clarify - this is a long term study by Harvard to both educate people on various types of implicit bias, and to help better understand it. The tests were developed by sociologists and this is a very long running study. When you take one of the quizzes you become part of the study as well. They're a bit long, but VERY informative. I've taken a number of them. As an example, for the women in the workplace one, I actually have a mild implicit bias against women in the workplace, which was mind blowing to me. That's the neat thing about these quizzes - they can help you identify your bias even when you think you can't possibly have one. Link again, for anyone else who wants to take a few.

LOL @Robinski! Our characters will never be able to eat meat again! Butchery trope established!!

Ah. I was never a fan of Spider-Man. I do seem to recall his uncle dying from a ... mugging? Yes? Amusingly, the death of Peter Parker's first girlfriend is one of the major pillars upon which the fridge trope is based.

I can't do my own editing. I'm too close to the characters and the story to see the problems. I think this is why beta readers are so useful. If we could edit our own stories, we wouldn't need editors, either.