I will come back and update this post as needed. I know it's not very nice, nor am I above saying stupid things, but I am nonetheless going to document. I swear to the almighty muse, these are true. I have experienced them *myself*.
STUPID THINGS "WRITERS" SAY/DO
1. (self-published author) "I have it published in every language!" Moderator of our writing group. "Wow, did you hire a service? How do we do that?" Response: "No, no, no. Google will do a translation for free."
~PRO TIP: Have you ever read a quote or small post from another country that has been translated by Google? Have you received instructions on packaging that read something like "put flame to up push through wire" and had no idea what they are talking about because there is no wire and you shouldn't be using flame? THIS IS HOW YOUR BOOKS READ TO OTHERS, LADY! Google translate is NOT for publishing in other countries. HAHAHAHA. She seemed to have NO IDEA what she had done.
2. "I have an idea for a book. I just need to write it."
~ Yes. You do. And then the hard work begins.
I mean, starting a book isn't that hard. Finishing it is an incredible feat people seem to forget. Then you have to reread it and realize that you just starting writing so you're not very good. Then you go to magazines or somewhere to find that what you thought were the rules of writing as discussed in high school English missed important details like passive sentences, using the word "just", and unnatural dialog will now need to be edited line by line. Eventually, you'll want feedback from someone honest because, frankly, we are all amazing in our own heads, even when we constantly think we are stupid people and terrible writers. You'll learn that feedback can suck, too, because other writers might want your work to sound like their work so you have to take everything with a grain of salt. I've seen authors who reject every edit offered because "They are wrong" and I've also seen authors who take every edit because "They know something I don't." What I do is look at every single edit individually and then decide by myself if it needs to be changed or not. Putting it back into your own judgement of whether or not you are a good enough writer to know what's best. Now if that isn't circular enough to make you crazy, then you aren't a real writer, yet.
3. "I'm going to write it and then I just have to get it in the hands of a publisher."
~Good fucking luck. You haven't even written it yet and you think that getting it into the hands of a publisher is, what? Being a barista at Starbucks and handing a customer a latte? First off, they didn't ask for latte. Secondly, they don't want your latte. Thirdly, someone already gave them the espresso they ordered. They won't be looking for another until tomorrow. Lastly, THEY AREN'T STANDING IN STARBUCKS WAITING FOR YOU!
I mean, my credentials are pretty low, but I've talked to people whose closest useful creds are "I graduated high school", "I can tell when someone used your instead of you're on Facebook", "I smoked weed last weekend and felt incredibly creative," "I am smarter than the other people in my yoga class"... I'll probably think of more, later, but ya know? Get real!
Thursday, May 31, 2018
Friday, May 25, 2018
Self-Publishing By Choice
Self-Publishing might be for failures and wimps. I won't deny it. I recently went this route for many reasons, though.
I did write and send out a dozen query letters. In the industry, a dozen is not very many. Rejections were form letters, one even printed and cut out into a four inch strip as though I didn't even deserve a whole piece of paper. It's harsh, but I was prepared so it didn't hurt. I did not stop querying because it broke me. I was just bored by the process and probably biased by the truths I had learned. Look at the author bio of most new authors (not new books from authors who have been writing for decades. Only brand new first-time authors.) The majority previously wrote for Vanity Fair, Oprah, HuffPost or are viral bloggers. I don't live in New York and have no desire to do so. My area of expertise is History, not fashion or (obviously) blogging. I realize that there are a million and one places out there telling you to get published in a literary magazine to launch yourself, but everyone has their strengths and their weaknesses and writing for someone else bores me.
So I have always written stories I want to read.
Believe me, I spend endless hours between thoughts wasting time reading about how to be a better writer, how to get published, what experiences others have had, or actually writing in my own blog (which is what I am doing right now. Wasting time between thoughts.) Things I have learned that are more or less discouraging:
1. People will tell you they didn't know anyone in the industry before they got involved. Often, upon closer examination, I will find that they forgot to credit a link where credit was due. In other cases, they won a contest. While that is completely awesome for them, I have to ask myself "what about the person who came in second?" You know, hundreds of entries and you judge them all and it's like modern game shows. They weed down the hundreds to ten good ones, like, say, Skin Wars or American Idol. Now they look at them again and again and narrow it down to, probably, three. Have you ever seen the last episode of these shows? (I have seen Skin Wars and Project Runway final eps. I assume Idol and others are the same.) You're watching and thinking these three are absolutely amazing! You hear the judges discuss for a moment and you think "yeah, I can see that, but really it's such a minor thing." In more than one case, it came down to the judges personal bias. You see the flaw they talk about, but you also see a flaw in the piece that won the contest and though it may have been discussed off camera, you realize there can only be one winner even if the three finalists were equal.
Now, I'm not saying I'd even be second, but I have full faith that my stories would not be in the first rounds of cuts. I have learned so much, I reread and edit myself to death, I take 100% of the responsibility of researching every tiny thing and try to make each page keep you wondering what's next. If I bore myself when I'm rereading, I rework or cut out what I can.
When I read other authors, I tend to see it from a writer's perspective. I find so many best selling authors who are boring or have plot holes. I tell others my frustration and while they see those things, they usually are capable of overlooking them. I am not. I see it because I use it to make myself better than I was yesterday. I practice. I put in so much time and energy, it overwhelms me a lot of the time.
I don't think I suck. I just don't think I'm going to be winning any contests anytime soon.
2. Yet I persist. I learn that people who try to publish stories with LGBT? etc characters are sometimes told to remove the character. I learn that the publishers looking for those characters want a story centered on their lives, crises, and written for a purpose.
Some of the characters in my head tell me their orientation, but it is only an aspect of who they are. Exploring those things ad nauseum is for someone else. I won't "out" a very significant person in my life, but when he said he was bi, my response was "I know." Because it was obvious to me, but didn't change how I felt about him in the least. Now it sounds like I just know the one person, but frankly we all know lots of people who are living alternate lifestyles and usually my answer is "Oh," because, like, what do I care? I like you because of who you are. The news doesn't change that for me. I don't set up people on dates so it's not really information that will change how we interact. Now it sounds like I'm trying to be all open minded and accepting and to prove it to you. It's not that, either. It's just that in my writing, you might see those characters, but it's because that's who they are and I won't change that for a publisher. I can't make them more or less of who they are to fit a standard.
But the orientation is just an example. My characters sometimes swear a lot. Some of them smoke more than they should. The stories may relate to what's out there, but is told differently. I like to read things that don't fit a formula, but agents and publishers want to sell A LOT of books so they are LOOKING for the formula. If a great idea doesn't fit the formula, they edit until it does. Yes, we think we are reading things that are unique all the time, but I find that unless the person has MAJOR credentials for the unique already built in (Quentin Tarantino) there are definitely codes that new authors follow.
I know the rules. I just choose to break them. (Variations of this quote are credited to the Dalai Lama and Pablo Picasso, but may have come from this quote: "Learn the rules before you break them." from The Bookman; a magazine from the early part of the 20th century.)
3. I learn that people don't read like they used to. Why should they? We have a steady stream of games, Facebook, movies, and more to divide our time. It has finally become acceptable to binge watch television and play endless hours of video games. Why on earth would people want to (gasp) read!? Don't care. I still read. I still write. I cannot stop. When I do, I feel dead inside. Who wants that?
Look, the point is that I *know* people don't think much of me because I self-published. I *know* that my friends are supportive because they are nice, but deep down they are thinking I'm not a "real" author. I *know* it's a cop out and I'll never be a best seller. Don't point out to me that the Fifty Shades lady defied the odds. I also know that the majority of self published is garbage, but I've also found a lot of amazing works out there! You might be surprised if you took a chance. They might have a typo or two (which I have found more often in large publishing house releases lately, as well. WTF is up with that?!) more than what you normally see, but I have also read really good, really unique stories.
And I hope that mine can live up to the top end of self-published works. That's all I really ask.
I did write and send out a dozen query letters. In the industry, a dozen is not very many. Rejections were form letters, one even printed and cut out into a four inch strip as though I didn't even deserve a whole piece of paper. It's harsh, but I was prepared so it didn't hurt. I did not stop querying because it broke me. I was just bored by the process and probably biased by the truths I had learned. Look at the author bio of most new authors (not new books from authors who have been writing for decades. Only brand new first-time authors.) The majority previously wrote for Vanity Fair, Oprah, HuffPost or are viral bloggers. I don't live in New York and have no desire to do so. My area of expertise is History, not fashion or (obviously) blogging. I realize that there are a million and one places out there telling you to get published in a literary magazine to launch yourself, but everyone has their strengths and their weaknesses and writing for someone else bores me.
So I have always written stories I want to read.
Believe me, I spend endless hours between thoughts wasting time reading about how to be a better writer, how to get published, what experiences others have had, or actually writing in my own blog (which is what I am doing right now. Wasting time between thoughts.) Things I have learned that are more or less discouraging:
1. People will tell you they didn't know anyone in the industry before they got involved. Often, upon closer examination, I will find that they forgot to credit a link where credit was due. In other cases, they won a contest. While that is completely awesome for them, I have to ask myself "what about the person who came in second?" You know, hundreds of entries and you judge them all and it's like modern game shows. They weed down the hundreds to ten good ones, like, say, Skin Wars or American Idol. Now they look at them again and again and narrow it down to, probably, three. Have you ever seen the last episode of these shows? (I have seen Skin Wars and Project Runway final eps. I assume Idol and others are the same.) You're watching and thinking these three are absolutely amazing! You hear the judges discuss for a moment and you think "yeah, I can see that, but really it's such a minor thing." In more than one case, it came down to the judges personal bias. You see the flaw they talk about, but you also see a flaw in the piece that won the contest and though it may have been discussed off camera, you realize there can only be one winner even if the three finalists were equal.
Now, I'm not saying I'd even be second, but I have full faith that my stories would not be in the first rounds of cuts. I have learned so much, I reread and edit myself to death, I take 100% of the responsibility of researching every tiny thing and try to make each page keep you wondering what's next. If I bore myself when I'm rereading, I rework or cut out what I can.
When I read other authors, I tend to see it from a writer's perspective. I find so many best selling authors who are boring or have plot holes. I tell others my frustration and while they see those things, they usually are capable of overlooking them. I am not. I see it because I use it to make myself better than I was yesterday. I practice. I put in so much time and energy, it overwhelms me a lot of the time.
I don't think I suck. I just don't think I'm going to be winning any contests anytime soon.
2. Yet I persist. I learn that people who try to publish stories with LGBT? etc characters are sometimes told to remove the character. I learn that the publishers looking for those characters want a story centered on their lives, crises, and written for a purpose.
Some of the characters in my head tell me their orientation, but it is only an aspect of who they are. Exploring those things ad nauseum is for someone else. I won't "out" a very significant person in my life, but when he said he was bi, my response was "I know." Because it was obvious to me, but didn't change how I felt about him in the least. Now it sounds like I just know the one person, but frankly we all know lots of people who are living alternate lifestyles and usually my answer is "Oh," because, like, what do I care? I like you because of who you are. The news doesn't change that for me. I don't set up people on dates so it's not really information that will change how we interact. Now it sounds like I'm trying to be all open minded and accepting and to prove it to you. It's not that, either. It's just that in my writing, you might see those characters, but it's because that's who they are and I won't change that for a publisher. I can't make them more or less of who they are to fit a standard.
But the orientation is just an example. My characters sometimes swear a lot. Some of them smoke more than they should. The stories may relate to what's out there, but is told differently. I like to read things that don't fit a formula, but agents and publishers want to sell A LOT of books so they are LOOKING for the formula. If a great idea doesn't fit the formula, they edit until it does. Yes, we think we are reading things that are unique all the time, but I find that unless the person has MAJOR credentials for the unique already built in (Quentin Tarantino) there are definitely codes that new authors follow.
I know the rules. I just choose to break them. (Variations of this quote are credited to the Dalai Lama and Pablo Picasso, but may have come from this quote: "Learn the rules before you break them." from The Bookman; a magazine from the early part of the 20th century.)
3. I learn that people don't read like they used to. Why should they? We have a steady stream of games, Facebook, movies, and more to divide our time. It has finally become acceptable to binge watch television and play endless hours of video games. Why on earth would people want to (gasp) read!? Don't care. I still read. I still write. I cannot stop. When I do, I feel dead inside. Who wants that?
Look, the point is that I *know* people don't think much of me because I self-published. I *know* that my friends are supportive because they are nice, but deep down they are thinking I'm not a "real" author. I *know* it's a cop out and I'll never be a best seller. Don't point out to me that the Fifty Shades lady defied the odds. I also know that the majority of self published is garbage, but I've also found a lot of amazing works out there! You might be surprised if you took a chance. They might have a typo or two (which I have found more often in large publishing house releases lately, as well. WTF is up with that?!) more than what you normally see, but I have also read really good, really unique stories.
And I hope that mine can live up to the top end of self-published works. That's all I really ask.
We Need To Change The Dialogue
We need to change the dialogue about adoption. Decades ago, a girl got pregnant outside of wedlock and the baby was shipped off for (closed) adoption, the grandparents raised the kid as their own, the girls are forced into marriage, etc, and often the girls had to drop out of school.
Now, they have lots of options to stay in school, take control of their own bodies, and if they decide on adoption, to have some contact so they don't feel so lost. Meanwhile, the shame is still there and people judge those who want to give babies up or sometimes judge those who don't.
I feel like we need to change the dialogue altogether. Is a teen/adult selfish for allowing her baby to be adopted? Absolutely not. Giving a baby to a family who wants to love and raise it is the most selfless thing a person can do! Believe me, I'm grateful for the birth mother of my beautiful daughter.
Can teens be good moms? Or adults without jobs? Absolutely. And if they don't want to be moms (or maybe just not yet) should they feel shame by that decision? Absolutely not! It doesn't make a woman less of a woman just because she doesn't want to have kids. Or get married. It also doesn't make her a crazy feminist (feminists are not crazy! but that's a whole other discussion!) It makes her exactly who she is and we have an obligation to embrace that.
And for the sake of equality, if the birth father wants to raise the kid, then he should. However, if the birth mother has reasons to think he shouldn't raise that kid, her voice should be heard (as should his). I mean, it took them both to make the kid, but the mom is the one who has had to do nothing except think about the well being of the child for nine months. In the end, a dad is not required to think about it at all, if he chooses, and even if he does, he will never think of it as constantly as the woman carrying that child. I know it's not very fair to put it that way and it's not very feminist to say that women are different, but they are! And thank the gods they are because intellect and growth cannot occur between two people who think exactly the same. Women are not lesser because of the way they think, they are simply the opposition. It's a generalization to say women think this and men think that anyway so let's just recognize both sides and agree to the reality which is the woman with this thing growing inside of her will have her POV colored by it in every situation she encounters for those months, but a man will not be up in the middle of the night with heartburn and wondering what it will be like someday when his kid gets heartburn and how are you going to take care of it, then sleep for ten minutes only to wonder what you're going to do if the kid doesn't like strained peas. Men, generally, think about the big things or about carrying on the family name or whether or not he can provide (in some cases, it's his ego saying he wants it to look like he can provide even if he cannot). A mom thinks about how that kid will feel, where the kid will be happiest, who can take better care of him/her, and what she'll be like as an adult.
Which is more important? The impression made upon the world of how the birth parents look or the well being of the child? If the birth parents are driven at all by how THEY look, then they need to stop it right there. If the birth parents are thinking about what's best for the child, then they will make the right choice between adoption or raising the child themselves.
Unfortunately I feel the former has been the drive for both parents more often that not. They let their parents shame them into keeping the kid or let their parents become pseudo parents who end up just spoiling the kid.
I've had an ever changing view on this subject so I'm sure I will be schooled and able to grow more, but it is important to see that the dialogue about adoption needs to change.
I know we hear about kids who feel lost because they don't know who their "real" parents are. Frankly, we all feel lost from time to time. If we weren't adopted, we figure out other reasons why we feel lost. In at least some of those situations, I wonder if it's not an abandonment issue, but is instead part of the process of finding out who you are. And yeah, who you are is something internal - it's not completely dependent on your DNA.
I don't think there is anything wrong with getting to know who your birth parents are, but tread carefully. The ones who raised you, loved you, sacrificed things they wanted to give you the things you wanted - these are your real parents and it's not unreasonable for us to ask that you don't say things like you want to get to know your "real" family or that you feel like less of a person because you were given up for adoption. You weren't given up. You were given love.
At the same time, adoptive parents need to remember that it might be a part of their child's journey to meet their biological parents so try not to be jealous or threatened of that. The bio parent might be awesome to your kid, sweet, and wonderful, but all sides concerned need to remember that we are who we are because of our experiences. Had that "wonderful" person been raising that particular kid his or herself, don't you think they would have been a different person 16 years later? We can't assume they would have the ability to be that wonderful person.
Things I think we shouldn't hear anymore:
You'll regret it
You'll miss out on his/her life.
You're selfish
That child is a part of our family and you have no right.
You don't know who your "real' parents are?
You need to know DNA and medical history!
I need to know where I come from in order to be a whole person
Sometimes kids are taken away from the parents without their consent.
Yeah, that's true... but laws are changing and updated constantly so that happens less and less often. I still see stories where the mother claims the baby was taken from her 5 years ago and she wouldn't have given her up if she had known. Sadly those are stories of our past, but they are not often the stories of the present. For more than twenty years, the paperwork, the conversations, and the requirements have made this incredibly difficult. This truth just needs to catch up with the people who still tell stories about articles they read in Reader's Digest 15 years ago about the mom who didn't know her baby was given up without her permission. At that time the story was probably 20 years old! It's outdated information.
While we still see things on the news, let's remember that we need to be advocating for the child to be in the best home for them, not worrying so much about the mom who changed her mind ten years later or the adoptive parent who wasn't perfect. Of course mistakes still happen, but that's not a reason to talk badly about adoption (or not giving up for adoption for that matter). It's no excuse to say hurtful things about these situations. You could be talking to an adopted child, an adoptive parent, or a birth parent in any conversation. Remember that they all have the right to their decision and that they deserve respect.
My perspective:
I also don't like certain things that have come up. Like "It's so great to love a child that isn't your own. I mean, by birth." Yeah, you tried to correct yourself, but all you did was make yourself look like a heartless fool. I'm not convinced that mothers love their children because they came out of them. Sometimes, yes, but I think it's also the emotional bonding, the growing, experiencing things with your child. This happens from day one so it seems like it's the birth process, but maybe it's just proximity. Maybe I can love my child as much as the one you popped out. Maybe I have a heart without prejudice.
The other one is a comment along the lines of it being great because it probably was a better situation for the mother... but stated in a way that implied she must be some drug addict or skanky drunk teen who doesn't understand consequences. I've gathered that a lot of people think the only way a person would give up a kid is if their life is a mess. This is a huge thing that needs to change. My niece was mature and responsible for her age. That's why she made the decision she made. It was a smart decision for her. I have learned that in a lot of situations, it's not that the mother is a mess, it's that she isn't. As long as we hold onto that myth, it also tells prospective bio moms thinking about adoption that they are messed up mentally, physically, or otherwise to consider adoption. No! We need to make sure they understand it can show they are intelligent, mature, and responsible.
Now, they have lots of options to stay in school, take control of their own bodies, and if they decide on adoption, to have some contact so they don't feel so lost. Meanwhile, the shame is still there and people judge those who want to give babies up or sometimes judge those who don't.
I feel like we need to change the dialogue altogether. Is a teen/adult selfish for allowing her baby to be adopted? Absolutely not. Giving a baby to a family who wants to love and raise it is the most selfless thing a person can do! Believe me, I'm grateful for the birth mother of my beautiful daughter.
Can teens be good moms? Or adults without jobs? Absolutely. And if they don't want to be moms (or maybe just not yet) should they feel shame by that decision? Absolutely not! It doesn't make a woman less of a woman just because she doesn't want to have kids. Or get married. It also doesn't make her a crazy feminist (feminists are not crazy! but that's a whole other discussion!) It makes her exactly who she is and we have an obligation to embrace that.
And for the sake of equality, if the birth father wants to raise the kid, then he should. However, if the birth mother has reasons to think he shouldn't raise that kid, her voice should be heard (as should his). I mean, it took them both to make the kid, but the mom is the one who has had to do nothing except think about the well being of the child for nine months. In the end, a dad is not required to think about it at all, if he chooses, and even if he does, he will never think of it as constantly as the woman carrying that child. I know it's not very fair to put it that way and it's not very feminist to say that women are different, but they are! And thank the gods they are because intellect and growth cannot occur between two people who think exactly the same. Women are not lesser because of the way they think, they are simply the opposition. It's a generalization to say women think this and men think that anyway so let's just recognize both sides and agree to the reality which is the woman with this thing growing inside of her will have her POV colored by it in every situation she encounters for those months, but a man will not be up in the middle of the night with heartburn and wondering what it will be like someday when his kid gets heartburn and how are you going to take care of it, then sleep for ten minutes only to wonder what you're going to do if the kid doesn't like strained peas. Men, generally, think about the big things or about carrying on the family name or whether or not he can provide (in some cases, it's his ego saying he wants it to look like he can provide even if he cannot). A mom thinks about how that kid will feel, where the kid will be happiest, who can take better care of him/her, and what she'll be like as an adult.
Which is more important? The impression made upon the world of how the birth parents look or the well being of the child? If the birth parents are driven at all by how THEY look, then they need to stop it right there. If the birth parents are thinking about what's best for the child, then they will make the right choice between adoption or raising the child themselves.
Unfortunately I feel the former has been the drive for both parents more often that not. They let their parents shame them into keeping the kid or let their parents become pseudo parents who end up just spoiling the kid.
I've had an ever changing view on this subject so I'm sure I will be schooled and able to grow more, but it is important to see that the dialogue about adoption needs to change.
I know we hear about kids who feel lost because they don't know who their "real" parents are. Frankly, we all feel lost from time to time. If we weren't adopted, we figure out other reasons why we feel lost. In at least some of those situations, I wonder if it's not an abandonment issue, but is instead part of the process of finding out who you are. And yeah, who you are is something internal - it's not completely dependent on your DNA.
I don't think there is anything wrong with getting to know who your birth parents are, but tread carefully. The ones who raised you, loved you, sacrificed things they wanted to give you the things you wanted - these are your real parents and it's not unreasonable for us to ask that you don't say things like you want to get to know your "real" family or that you feel like less of a person because you were given up for adoption. You weren't given up. You were given love.
At the same time, adoptive parents need to remember that it might be a part of their child's journey to meet their biological parents so try not to be jealous or threatened of that. The bio parent might be awesome to your kid, sweet, and wonderful, but all sides concerned need to remember that we are who we are because of our experiences. Had that "wonderful" person been raising that particular kid his or herself, don't you think they would have been a different person 16 years later? We can't assume they would have the ability to be that wonderful person.
Things I think we shouldn't hear anymore:
You'll regret it
You'll miss out on his/her life.
You're selfish
That child is a part of our family and you have no right.
You don't know who your "real' parents are?
You need to know DNA and medical history!
I need to know where I come from in order to be a whole person
Sometimes kids are taken away from the parents without their consent.
Yeah, that's true... but laws are changing and updated constantly so that happens less and less often. I still see stories where the mother claims the baby was taken from her 5 years ago and she wouldn't have given her up if she had known. Sadly those are stories of our past, but they are not often the stories of the present. For more than twenty years, the paperwork, the conversations, and the requirements have made this incredibly difficult. This truth just needs to catch up with the people who still tell stories about articles they read in Reader's Digest 15 years ago about the mom who didn't know her baby was given up without her permission. At that time the story was probably 20 years old! It's outdated information.
While we still see things on the news, let's remember that we need to be advocating for the child to be in the best home for them, not worrying so much about the mom who changed her mind ten years later or the adoptive parent who wasn't perfect. Of course mistakes still happen, but that's not a reason to talk badly about adoption (or not giving up for adoption for that matter). It's no excuse to say hurtful things about these situations. You could be talking to an adopted child, an adoptive parent, or a birth parent in any conversation. Remember that they all have the right to their decision and that they deserve respect.
My perspective:
I also don't like certain things that have come up. Like "It's so great to love a child that isn't your own. I mean, by birth." Yeah, you tried to correct yourself, but all you did was make yourself look like a heartless fool. I'm not convinced that mothers love their children because they came out of them. Sometimes, yes, but I think it's also the emotional bonding, the growing, experiencing things with your child. This happens from day one so it seems like it's the birth process, but maybe it's just proximity. Maybe I can love my child as much as the one you popped out. Maybe I have a heart without prejudice.
The other one is a comment along the lines of it being great because it probably was a better situation for the mother... but stated in a way that implied she must be some drug addict or skanky drunk teen who doesn't understand consequences. I've gathered that a lot of people think the only way a person would give up a kid is if their life is a mess. This is a huge thing that needs to change. My niece was mature and responsible for her age. That's why she made the decision she made. It was a smart decision for her. I have learned that in a lot of situations, it's not that the mother is a mess, it's that she isn't. As long as we hold onto that myth, it also tells prospective bio moms thinking about adoption that they are messed up mentally, physically, or otherwise to consider adoption. No! We need to make sure they understand it can show they are intelligent, mature, and responsible.
Wednesday, January 31, 2018
It's You, Not Them,
When it seems like everyone is out to get you, it's not them, it is you. When it seems like people will inevitably hurt you, it's not them, it's you. When you get that paranoid feeling that everyone is following you, it's not them, it is you. When it feels like everyone is abandoning you, it's not them, it's you.
You are the facebook stalker. You are the person driving others away.
Being proud of being called a bitch means that you are proud of the fact that you are disrespectful and demeaning to other people.
You want other people to help you out, but if they don't do or say something exactly the way you want them to, you criticize them. If they apologize, you kick them while they are down and harp on their mistake. That's YOU driving them away.
You turn innocent comments into attacks on yourself. You are always the victim. You take exactly zero accountability. You think because you have these flaws and challenges and mental issues that you get a pass, but if someone else dares say they have challenges, you jump down their throat and tell them it's nothing compared to your challenges. Believe it or not, your life is not as bad as you think. It's you.
You claim people hurt you, but most people who are truly sensitive to pain are also sensitive to hurting others and yet your swath devastates even the strongest people around you, the ones able to take more pain than most, the ones able to be hurt and still come back. Eventually a kicked puppy, tired of cowering, will turn.
*This is a rant based on some things that have happened with a couple other people, but it's an accurate observation of certain people on this earth. Just keep in mind if you have a toxic person behaving this way, you need to get out. It can hurt. The repercussions can haunt you, but there is a light at the end of the tunnel... at least until you meet the next person like this. Hey, hopefully I'll be smart enough to recognize it BEFORE I end up in emotional anguish...
You are the facebook stalker. You are the person driving others away.
Being proud of being called a bitch means that you are proud of the fact that you are disrespectful and demeaning to other people.
You want other people to help you out, but if they don't do or say something exactly the way you want them to, you criticize them. If they apologize, you kick them while they are down and harp on their mistake. That's YOU driving them away.
You turn innocent comments into attacks on yourself. You are always the victim. You take exactly zero accountability. You think because you have these flaws and challenges and mental issues that you get a pass, but if someone else dares say they have challenges, you jump down their throat and tell them it's nothing compared to your challenges. Believe it or not, your life is not as bad as you think. It's you.
You claim people hurt you, but most people who are truly sensitive to pain are also sensitive to hurting others and yet your swath devastates even the strongest people around you, the ones able to take more pain than most, the ones able to be hurt and still come back. Eventually a kicked puppy, tired of cowering, will turn.
*This is a rant based on some things that have happened with a couple other people, but it's an accurate observation of certain people on this earth. Just keep in mind if you have a toxic person behaving this way, you need to get out. It can hurt. The repercussions can haunt you, but there is a light at the end of the tunnel... at least until you meet the next person like this. Hey, hopefully I'll be smart enough to recognize it BEFORE I end up in emotional anguish...
Friday, January 26, 2018
The Church of Jenga
I was raised in the LDS religion. While I respect a lot of things I learn by being raised religiously, I have always had questions. In the land of the internets, I find most non-religious people accuse religious people of being stupid, yet many in my family more intelligent than I have strong faith. Trust me when I say they are WELL above average, but I can explain how if people doubt it.
Anyway, I had this moment last night where I saw this game of Jenga and it clarified a lot for me. Me and my siblings all started with this new game of Jenga. Everything was in a crisp, perfect block.
The thing is, as you grow and learn, a block carefully slides out. You ask the question and you look to scripture or a religious leader or your heart for an answer. Now two things can happen. I won't say only two, but I will say I see only two. You take that answer, an answer that may be logical or beautiful or fair, an answer "inspired by God" or maybe just made up by a fallible human and you look at that block in your hand and you have a choice. You can think it still doesn't fit or in your heart it just doesn't feel right and you set that block aside.
For others, for those in my family, I think they took those blocks and are building themselves a damned stairway to heaven.
Mine slowly wore away. I will probably get into examples in future, but when I couldn't come to terms with a question, my blocks got set aside. It didn't happen all at once, but eventually, the whole tower came down.
Anyway, I had this moment last night where I saw this game of Jenga and it clarified a lot for me. Me and my siblings all started with this new game of Jenga. Everything was in a crisp, perfect block.
The thing is, as you grow and learn, a block carefully slides out. You ask the question and you look to scripture or a religious leader or your heart for an answer. Now two things can happen. I won't say only two, but I will say I see only two. You take that answer, an answer that may be logical or beautiful or fair, an answer "inspired by God" or maybe just made up by a fallible human and you look at that block in your hand and you have a choice. You can think it still doesn't fit or in your heart it just doesn't feel right and you set that block aside.
For others, for those in my family, I think they took those blocks and are building themselves a damned stairway to heaven.
Mine slowly wore away. I will probably get into examples in future, but when I couldn't come to terms with a question, my blocks got set aside. It didn't happen all at once, but eventually, the whole tower came down.
Thursday, April 13, 2017
The Challenge of Being an Author, After the Writing
Editing
So, I read this article:
How Much To Pay For a Book Editor
And it's fine. Well stated. Gives some pointers.
Just to clarify what we are about to discuss (in lieu of reading the article) these are the estimated costs they suggest:
~~~
For a 70,000-word book, your editing costs could be:
For a 70,000-word book, your editing costs could be:
- Developmental editing: $.08 per word, or $5,600 total
- Basic copyediting: $.018 per word, or $1,260 total
- Proofreading: $.0113, or $791 total
It’s easy to extrapolate from this what your total expected editing cost could be. Fantasy, sci-fi, and epic novel writers should be forewarned.
For a 120,000-word book, your editing costs could be:
- Developmental editing: $.08 per word, or $9,600 total
- Basic copyediting: $.018 per word, or $2,160 total
- Proofreading: $.0113, or $1,356 total
~~~
Keep in mind, many authors want all three services to make sure their manuscript is as clean as possible. Even the best writers need someone else to edit. WE ARE NOT SUBJECTIVE!Then the comments. Why do we fall down this rabbit hole? It's awful.
It starts with a few people saying that those prices are way too high. Hey, if you want to shop around, more power to you!
Then there is this asshole:
- I can’t think of a world wherein I’d edit a 70,000-word book for $560. In fact, I would delete the email that asked me to do that, because the author either didn’t value my time and skill or didn’t have a clue what professional editing is worth.
It is completely within your rights to both act that way and feel that way, but...
- For editors who are charging pennies for what should be hours and hours and hours worth of work: I am saddened that you would ruin the market for those who have the expertise and ability to charge what it’s worth.
Ruin the market? It's called free market for a reason. People are free to charge different prices. I feel this bullying of "you must charge this much or you aren't being taken seriously as a professional" is bullshit. I've seen it in the world of photography and heard about it in the world of balloon twisting. There is a certain amount that covers cost of supplies. Presumably no one is going to charge less than overhead. That's just bad business. After that, we're talking intellectual property, non physical goods and people can charge LITERALLY whatever the want. I don't even think you have a right to an opinion about what they charge. You only have a right to an opinion about what YOU charge.
The thing is, maybe some of these editors actually recognize that writing requires "hours and hours and hours worth of work" for which an author has not been paid yet and may never BE paid.
- Here’s the deal, guys: editing is a tough job,
- and it’s worth every penny.
- If I’m going to edit a 70,000-word book, I know what I’m going to bring to the table that the cheap editors can’t.
Someone willing to charge less than $10,000 for a 120,000 word document isn't necessarily cheap. Just reasonable. Don't bash people just because it makes it hard for you to make more money per hour than an author will ever make as an author in their entire lifetime.
Same editor in another comment said this:
- I can assure you every reader knows you skipped out on professional editing while reading your books.
Which just pushes me toward seeing her arrogance. I absolutely believe that you know editing was skipped when the book has errors. I bet there are books that were not professionally edited that you CANNOT tell. Disclaimer: I am not one of those authors. Instead, my sister and I are learning a lot about editing (we both went to college, both write, and both enjoy learning) so that we can edit each other's work. I have that fortune...
I'll give you this, though:
- In fact, if you’re using a software for “editing,” that book is riddled with errors. Overflowing to the brim with them.
Some books almost make me cry. Editing software is STUPID, guys. Don't kid yourselves. If you don't know when the computer is wrong and you are right and if you're not willing to fight an inanimate object to prove your point, then you NEED an editor because you probably don't know as much about punctuation and grammar as you think you do and probably less about things like continuity and objectivity. Just saying.
It's like the time I was sitting in a writing group (which I have since left because, really, just... no) and there was this woman who had self-published in a dozen languages. Someone asked how many languages she speaks. "None," at which point her son jumped in to say, "You don't need to. You just use google translation services.
It's like the time I was sitting in a writing group (which I have since left because, really, just... no) and there was this woman who had self-published in a dozen languages. Someone asked how many languages she speaks. "None," at which point her son jumped in to say, "You don't need to. You just use google translation services.
The thing is, I've read a few books that went through an agent and a large publishing house and still escaped with multiple errors. What's up with that? It seems to happen more and more these days. Cringe! I've even found 3 in Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy, the eBook version I just purchased so I could start reading it again. It's a problem! I can see one or two errors making it through, but it's been more prevalent. Get it together, people!
Artists
This just reminds me of the entire subject. I have compared writing to other independent artistry before. For the sake of simplicity, I'm going to compare to a painter. Both are creative endeavors. Both make investments of time, education, and ripping out the heart to present it to people who may very well stomp on it, then set it on fire without caring a whit about the artists as human beings.
There have been a lot of things going around pointing out that an artist may charge $1,000 for a painting because you have to consider their time, their mistake, their learning process, their investments.
Yet they paint and then they sell. That's kind of it.
Authors write. They may spend a year on a novel. Even if they wrote a whole novel in one month (NANOWRIMO), they may have been putting in more than 40 hour weeks during that month and once the month is over, it's not complete. Smart authors will edit as much as they can themselves before heading to an editor. This can take 2-3 more months. And what if they have a day job? That's a long day, every day. Now they have to send it to an editor who complains that anyone who thinks it should cost less than a couple thousand dollars is not professional. They edit, return the book, probably in a month (because if I'm paying an assload, I want it to be FAST!) and now it's the author's turn to sell it.
Lest anyone complain that artists pay for paint and authors use a home computer (which, to be fair, they probably already have for other things, these days) the next step of the author's process isn't free. Take synopsis and query letters, mail them paying for return postage as well. After mailing out 50, let's say, someone wants to see the manuscript. Hooray! Now they have to pay the postage of sending a box AND return postage. The publisher or agent rejects manuscript, sends it back, and if the author gets another bite, they send it all again. This is not cheap, guys!
And authors pay all of it up front with no guarantees and everything to lose. Tell me again how we don't value you as an editor when you clearly see authors as a paycheck, not of value as the people who create the literature from nothing and give us all something to enjoy!
And authors pay all of it up front with no guarantees and everything to lose. Tell me again how we don't value you as an editor when you clearly see authors as a paycheck, not of value as the people who create the literature from nothing and give us all something to enjoy!
Wednesday, March 15, 2017
Women's Rights and Feminism which falls into a big Abortion...but it comes around again!
Wow. What a huge topic. Enormous. I can't address all my feelings or all the nuances at once, so let's go back in time a bit to the Women's Marches that happened all over this great nation.
And, of course, how it relates to viral Facebook posts. HAHA
What started to make me really lose my mind was when one viral post started about why this woman was not going to march because she basically felt uninvited. She claimed that the webpage's clear stance on being Pro-Choice excluded her, a Pro-Life person, from inclusion.
First of all, the march was supposed to be for EVERY woman's issue, not just abortion so if you felt attacked, maybe that's on you.
Abortion
Look, I have an opinion on this. I totally understand the opinion of others, but I still think I'm right. And I doubt myself most of the time.
You see, Abortion isn't this grandly abused issue where fully formed babies are being decapitated as they come from the womb.
And, of course, how it relates to viral Facebook posts. HAHA
What started to make me really lose my mind was when one viral post started about why this woman was not going to march because she basically felt uninvited. She claimed that the webpage's clear stance on being Pro-Choice excluded her, a Pro-Life person, from inclusion.
First of all, the march was supposed to be for EVERY woman's issue, not just abortion so if you felt attacked, maybe that's on you.
Abortion
Look, I have an opinion on this. I totally understand the opinion of others, but I still think I'm right. And I doubt myself most of the time.
You see, Abortion isn't this grandly abused issue where fully formed babies are being decapitated as they come from the womb.
The question arose as to whether or not this was true. A recent Catholic blog tried to explain how PP could get away with it. Several other forums brought up ways in which they could do it however FactCheck.org, a page which has had a high rate of trust when challenged because their sources are well sited and well reviews, says "Abortions represent 3 percent of total services provided by Planned Parenthood, and roughly 10 percent of its clients received an abortion. The group does receive federal funding, but the money cannot be used for abortions by law."
This information may be slightly outdated as it was written in 2011, however, the LAW would have had to change - which it did not - and if anything it should lend some credibility because it was long before Trump entered the political scene and people started to question this.
In a perfect world, we wouldn't need abortions. Frankly, and parent who doesn't teach their child PROPERLY about birth control is a contributor to the entire problem. It is not the school's responsibility, however a more comprehensive sex ed curriculum has been shown to be insanely effective so WHY DO RELIGIOUS NUTS CONTINUE TO RUIN GOOD DATA!?
That said, being Pro Choice doesn't automatically mean I think everyone should run out and get abortions every time they get pregnant inconveniently. It means I RESPECT the CHOICE that other human beings have to make about having babies. To assume that women will have the intelligence and support system to make the right choice between keeping a baby and giving it up for adoption AND believing they don't have the right to make the choice about their own bodies is a paradox.
I know people are worried about the death of these babies, the end of this clump of cells, and there is a certain "moral" issue. The thing is, my moral opinion on the matter is also different. A woman is here, on the earth, living with her choices. A baby who has not been born may not have a choice, but they also don't have the capability of choice. "What if I had been aborted!" Is a stupid argument because, you know, you never would have had the comprehension to know differently. Neither would your parents.
And what about late-term abortions? Well, they are nearly non existent, despite what Pro Lifers will have you believe, and those that do happen are due to medical necessity. While the numbers for "Medical Necessity" over "Convenience" are vastly different, the "Convenient" numbers drop dramatically as pregnancies progress whilst the "Medical Necessities" pretty much take over by the time you reach the point when a life outside of the womb can be saved.
I couldn't have babies of my own. My daughter is adopted. I often find women in my position who feel strongly Pro Life, but me? I see children who need to be loved and adopted. Maybe they aren't babies, but is your love really conditional? If so, you probably shouldn't be having or adopting babies anyway. The world is over populated and the society we are creating feels pretty hateful. If ALL the babies who are aborted in a year were NOT aborted, HOW MANY HUMANS would Earth have to provide homes and food for?!?!?
Feminism
The thing is, I felt this woman was saying that because she is Pro Life - a stance which does NOT respect other's opinions, btw, by its very nature, she isn't welcome, then isn't she doing the same things the rest of the world does? Trying to define WHAT feminism IS?
Feminism is complicated, too. The majority of feminist women I hear from - the ones who speak the loudest - would have you believe you are not a true feminist unless you are breaking glass ceilings, working 60 hour weeks, raising children (because you're super mom. "Trust me. The kids aren't suffering!" LIKE HELL THEY AREN'T) and basically putting down other women. Maybe that's not the perception they have, but it's the one the exude. So many of them don't take into account the stay at home moms who stay at home for mental reasons. The non-type-A personalities who just CANNOT. The women who have made a different choice.
While I think a feminist is a woman who is strong of character and can do things for herself (change a tire), I also don't think I'm a weakling because I don't change the engine on my car by myself. (I do, coincidentally, go to an auto repair shop that is owned and operated by a woman, but that's because A - she is awesome, B-the seem honest, and C-they never talk down to me or any other woman I've seen come in. This is not that case at many mechanics, so BONUS)
And people sometimes have perceptions of religious women who are obviously patriarchal. While I don't find Mormons to be particularly encouraging of the feminist agenda, they aren't quite as misogynistic as portrayed. They simply believe men have one responsibility and women have another. Women are not supposed to be looked down upon by their husbands (forget what happens. Corruption of every system happens so any examples made could be made about ANY group) and women aren't made to serve their husbands. The idea is that men hold the priesthood to help tune them in to the spirit while women tend to already be in tune. In the general, stereotypical ideals, women ARE more sensitive so this idea makes sense.
But I probably shouldn't act like an expert about that since I no longer consider myself a part of that religion and I don't really believe in it. It's just that I think it gets a bad rap. There are way bigger things they deserve to be criticized over. Putting family first should not be one of them.
And recently. an Islamic woman brought to our attention their idea of feminism. Covering up isn't a way to suppress women from the world, it is a way to protect them. Despite my opinion on the matter, women in that faith and similar faiths do not feel oppressed. They often feel respected.
Feminism doesn't have one face. Thinking that we should all have the goal of getting to the same place as women does not allow women to get there. In reality, it holds them back because they are forever conflicted about what they want and what they are supposed to want. Isn't creating conflict exactly what we are trying to get MEN to stop doing to us? So let's take a step back and respect other women's choices and call THAT feminism. THAT should be the focus of these marches; not the goal which, currently, seems to be trying to say "Unless you do this, this, and this, YOU are not a feminist!"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)