(I’m a pantser!)

Ask if this scene really needs to be a scene or if I can just summarize it

Ask if this summary really needs to be summary or if I need more scene

Write a very focused, very pretty sentence

Circle back a couple scenes & ask if one of them is causing “symptoms” later in the book

Get in and get out (push through a tough scene as fast as possible & then run forward and fast like wind to the next bit)

Add an exciting element (a new character, a change of location, other… things ;))

Pause and revise if I’m feeling destabilized

Be specific about what I DON’T like (example: I can’t get past this scene because the dialogue is so mechanical instead of “ahhh I hate it all”)

Read what I last wrote aloud (to hopefully sink into some momentum) OR get a robot to read it to me

Try a teeny tiny writing sprint (1-5 minutes of nonstop writing)

Write a flashback (bonus points if it’s connected emotionally or plot-wise to the fictive present)

Read from a literary godparent (this is when you pull out the books/stories/poems etc that make you excited about writing!)

Write or brainstorm every possible direction of a scene (sometimes grueling, sometimes worth it)

Sit and think (in a bathtub, on a walk—try to immerse yourself in your story like you’re a random character who got plopped in there; what do you see?)

Method write

Find a word that excites you and use that in your next scene

Double check if you’re hitting the right story beats (or if you skipped one, spent too long on one, spent too little on one, etc)

Write “bare bones” and come back to fine tune it later (similar to get in and get out)

Write with your eyes closed (be warned of incomprehensible text if you can’t type with closed eyes)

Break down your causal chain bit by bit (even the boring parts) and see if there’s a broken link. Then delete the boring parts (sometimes we just need to see how EXACTLY we got to a place and how EXACTLY that leads us to the important bit–I find I missed something critical when I do this).

Rely on crutch words, boring details & trust you can edit it later (sometimes the idea of perfection in draft 1 can be unproductive)

Ask a friend to read the work & tell you what they think (sometimes we need help; writing is hard)

Ask a friend for a compliment read (sometimes we just need to be hyped up)

Change the tense (temporarily & be warned that different tenses may require different approaches when drafting, I only do this when I’m not sure what else to try)

Talk myself through the problem as if I’m talking to a friend (I pull up my notes and literally start typing: “so I’m struggling with XYZ scene right now for XYZ reason and I don’t know what to do. What if XYZ happened, or what if I changed XYZ?”)

Take a break—sometimes I’m just tired/burnt out/not in the mood to write (that’s okay!)

The “pacing” of a piece of media comes down to one thing, and one thing only, and it has nothing to do with your personal level of interest. It comes down to this question alone: Is the piece of media making effective use of the time it has?

That’s it.

So, for example, things which are NOT a example of bad pacing include a piece of media that is:

A slow burn

Episodic

Fast-paced

Prioritizing character interaction over intricate plot

Opening in medias res without immediate context

Incorporating a large number of subplots

Incorporating very few subplots

Bad pacing IS when a piece of media has

“Wasted” time, ie, screentime or page space dedicated to plotlines or characters that are ultimately irrelevant to the plot or thematic resolution at the cost of properly developing that resolution. Pour one out for the SW:TCW fans.

The presence of a sidestory or giving secondary characters a separate resolution of their personal arc is not “bad writing,” and only becomes a pacing issue if it falls into one of the other two categories.

Not enough time, ie, a story attempts to involve more plotlines than it has time or space to give satisfying resolutions to, resulting in all of them being “rushed” even though the writer(s) made scrupulous use of every second of page/screentime and made sure every single section advanced those storylines.

Padding for time, ie, Open-World Game Syndrome. Essentially, you have ten hours of genuinely satisfying story….but “short games don’t sell,” so you insert vast swathes of empty landscape to traverse, a bunch of nonsense fetch quests to complete, or take one really satisfying questline and repeat it ten times with different names/macguffins, to create 40 hours of “gameplay” that have stopped being fun because the same thing happens over and over. If you think this doesn’t happen in novels, you have never read Oliver Twist.

Another note on pacing: There are, except arguably in standalone movies, at least two levels of pacing going on at any given time. There’s the pacing within the installment, and the pacing within the series. Generally, there’s three levels of pacing–within the installment (a chapter, an episode, a level), within the volume (a season, a novel, a game), and within the series as a whole. Sometimes, in fact FREQUENTLY, a piece of media will work on one of these levels but not on all of them. (Usually the ideal is that it works on all three, but that’s not always important! Not every individual chapter of a novel needs to be actively relevant to the entire overarching series.)

Honestly, the best possible masterclass in how to recognize good, bad, and “they tried their best but needed more space” pacing? If you want to learn this skill, and get better at recognizing it?

Doctor Who.

ESPECIALLY Classic Who, which has clearly-delineated “serials” within their seasons. You can pretty much pick any serial at random, and once you’ve seen a few of them, you get a REALLY good feel for things like, for example…

Wow, that serial did not need to be twelve episodes long; they got captured and escaped at least three different times and made like four different plans that they ended up not being able to execute, and maybe once or twice they would have ramped up the tension, but it really didn’t contribute anything–this could have been a normal four-episode serial and been much stronger.

Holy shit there were WAY too many balls being juggled in this, this would have been better with the concepts split into two separate serials, as it stands they only had four episodes and they just couldn’t develop anything fully

Oh my god that was AMAZING I want to watch it again and take notes on how they divided up the individual episodes and what plot beats they chose to break on each week

Eh, structurally that was good, but even as a 90-minute special that nuwho episode feels like it would have worked a lot better as a Classic serial with a little more room to breathe.

How in the actual name of god did they stretch like twenty minutes of actual story into a four-episode serial (derogatory)

How in the actual name of god did they stretch like twenty minutes of actual story into a four-episode serial (awestruck)

If you’re not actively trying to learn pacing, either for literary analysis or your own writing…honestly? Just learn to differentiate between whether the pacing is bad or if it just doesn’t appeal to you. There’s a WORLD of difference between “The pacing is too slow” and “the pacing is too slow for me.” 

“I really prefer a slower build into a universe; the fact that it opens in medias res and you piece together where you are and how the magic system works over the next several chapters from context is way too fast-paced for me and makes me feel lost, so I bounced off it” is, usually, a much more constructive commentary than “the pacing is bad”. 

This is a very specific rule that has been taken dramatically out of context and is almost always used incorrectly.

“Show, don’t tell” applies to character traits and worldbuilding, not information in the plot.

It may be easier to “get” this rule if you forget the specific phrasing for a minute. This is a mnemonic device to avoid Informed Attributes, nothing more and nothing less. 

Character traits like a character being funny, smart, kind, annoying, badass, etc, should be established by their behavior in-universe and the reactions of others to them–if you just SAY they’re X thing but never show it, then you’re just telling the audience these things. Similarly you can’t just tell the audience that a setting has brutal winters and expect to be believed, when the clothing, architecture, preparations, etc shown as common in that setting do not match those that brutal winters would necessitate. 

To recap:

Violations of Show Don’t Tell:

A viewpoint character describing themselves as having a trait (being a loner, easily distractable, clumsy, etc) but not actually shown to possess it (lacking friends, getting distracted from anything important, or dropping/tripping over things at inopportune moments.)

The narration declaring an emotional state (”Character A was furious”) rather than demonstrating the emotion through dialogue or depicting it onscreen.

A fourth-wall-breaking narrator; ie, Kuzco in The Emperor’s New Groove directly addressing the audience to explain that he’s a llama and also the protagonist, is NOT the same! This actually serves as a flawless example of showing rather than telling–we are SHOWN that Kuzco is immature and egotistical, even though that’s not what he’s saying.

A fictional society or setting being declared by the narrative to be free of a negative trait–bigotry, for example–but that negative trait being clearly present, where this discrepancy is not narratively engaged with. 

(For example: There is officially no sexism in Thedas and yet female characters are subject to gendered slurs and expectations; the world of Honor Harrington is supposedly societally opposed to eugenics, yet “cures” for disability and constant mentions of a nebulous genetic “advantage” from certain characters’ ancestry are regular plot points that are viewed positively by the characters and are not narratively questioned.)

A character declaring that their society has no bigotry, when that character is clearly wrong, is not the same thing.

The narrative voice declaring objective correctness; everyone who agrees with the protagonist is portrayed as correct and anyone who questions them is portrayed as evil, or else there is no questioning whatsoever. For example: in Star Trek: Enterprise, Jonathan Archer tortures an unarmed prisoner. What follows is a multi-episode arc in which every person he respects along with Starfleet Command goes out of their way to dismiss the idea that he should bear any guilt, or that his actions were anything but completely necessary and objectively morally correct. No narrative space is allowed for disagreement, or for the audience to come to its own conclusion.

NOT Violations of Show Don’t Tell:

A character explaining a concept to another character who would logically, within that universe/situation, be the recipient of such an explanation.

An in-universe explanation BECOMES a SdT violation if the explanation fails to play out in reality, such as a spaceship being described as slow or flawed in some way but never actually having those weaknesses. Imagine if the Millennium Falcon was constantly described as a broken-down piece of junk…and never had any mechanical failures, AND Han and Chewie weren’t constantly shown repairing it!

Information being revealed through dialogue, period. Having your hacker in a heist movie describe the enemy security system isn’t “telling” and thus bad writing. Having information revealed organically through dialogue is what “show” means.

The “as you know” trope is technically a Show Don’t Tell violation, despite being dialogue, because it’s unnatural within the universe and serves solely to let the writer deliver information directly, ie, telling.

Characters discussing their own actions and expressing their motivations and/or decision-making process at the time.

The existence of an omnipotent narrator, or the narration itself confirming something. Narration saying “there was no way anyone could make it in time” is delivering contextual information, not breaking Show Don’t Tell. 

Keep in mind that “Show, don’t tell” is meant to be advice for beginning authors. Because “telling” is easier and requires less skill than “showing,” inexperienced authors need to focus on getting as much “show” in as possible. 

However, “telling” is also extremely important. Sometimes, especially in written formats, the most appropriate way to deliver information to the audience is to just say it and move on.

Keep in mind that a viewpoint character in anything but…a portal fantasy, essentially…is going to be familiar with the world they’re in. Not every protagonist needs to be a raw newcomer with zero knowledge of their new world! In most cases, a viewpoint character is going to know things that the audience doesn’t. Generally, the ONLY natural way to introduce worldbuilding in this situation is to just have the narration point them out. (It makes sense for Obi-Wan to have to explain the Force; it would make no sense for Han to explain the concept of space travel to Luke, who grew up in this universe and knows what the hell a starship is. So, if you’re writing the novelization of A New Hope, you need to just say “and so they jumped into hyperspace, the strange blue-white plane that allowed faster-than-light travel” and move the hell on.)

For that matter, in some media (ie, children’s cartoons) where teaching a moral lesson is the clear intent, a certain level of “telling” is not only appropriate but necessary!

The actual goal of “showing” and “telling” is to maintain a balance, and make sure everything feels natural. Show things that need to be shown, and…don’t waste everyone’s time showing things that would feel much more natural if they were just told.

Girls with a boyfriends

your boyfriend by bloxx

boyfriend by marika hackman

girlfriend by kitty

boyfriend by tegan and sara

girlfriend by ria mae

taking off all my clothes by heidi

Breakups

talia by king princess

0108 by nakala

strangers by halsey

me & her by heavens to betsy

curious by hayley kiyoko

sheet stains by lauren ruth ward

always this way by laura marling

heartbroken forever by tender forever

now im all messed up by tegan and sara

Bad Girls

goth girls are easy by lesbian bed death

dressed in black by gossip

lesbian vampyres from outer space

she’s a gun by the greeting committee

woman dangerous by doria roberts

rebel girl by bikini kill

P.U.N.K girl by heavenly

strong woman by jen cloher

Sex

sweet girl by nicole dollanganger

bitches by tove lo

bang me box by miley cyrus

box by siya

holy by king princess

i didn’t just kiss her by jen foster

Young love

be my leia by the dollyrots

red by miki ratsula

sappho by frankie cosmos

hold your hand by nicolette forte

no kings by the total bettys

say anything by girl in red

hot like the room by my body

gossip girl by grace vanderwaal

sweet girl by nicole dollanganger

Old Love

marry me by tender forever

with a girl like you by thao

eden with my eve by jen cloher

Bisexuality

boys by maris

carmen by lana del rey

bad at love by halsey

in or out by ani difranco

think about girls sometimes by amber

i wanna boyfriend with a car by kate nash

Lesbians

I’ll never want a BF by bec sandridge

i don’t do boys by elektra

dyke march 2001 by le tigre

dyke bars never last by sapphic lasers\

blue collar sex kitten by lauren ruth ward

the only dyke at the open mic by kate reid

Pining

sleepover by hayley kiyoko

jessie’s girl by mary lambert

bestie by sizzy rocket

daisy by zedd

like me by chely wright

veronica by daddy issues

i want her by blind fury

jenny by studio killers

i wanna be your girlfriend by girl in red

Confidence

B.I.G by caitlyn scarlett

shade by iamddb

ICY GRL by saweetie ft. kehlani

boinked the bride by ember swift

checking out your babe by tribe 8

Q.U.E.E.N by janelle monae

Real People/Characters/Media

edie windsor by zoë lewis

the ellen page by partner

marceline by willow

carol by jen cloher

fingersmith by jen cloher

Coming out/Homophobia

homo song by mara levi

room by palehound

LGBT by lowell

love is love by naz & ella

love is love by starley

married in london by janis ian

pride by grace petrie

this is me by jen foster

gay sex by be steadwell

not worth hiding by alex the astronaut

Butch/Femme

drag king bar by bitch and animal

femme bitch top by tribe 8

only straight girls wear dresses by cwa

dyke bars never last by sapphic lasers

butch in the streets by tribe 8

closet femme by kate reid 

Running away

greatness by jen foster

chelsea lets go join the circus by agent R

Hi :)

How to create a villain

A good villain is ultimately what makes a hero heroic and is therefore a very important part of your story.

Why do we need a villain?

opposite of the story’s hero

their goals and motivations oppose those of the hero

the hero is reacting to the actions of the villain

showcases the hero’s weaknesses

the character of the villain should be one of your priorities while planning the story

Types of villains

human villains

fantasy villains (with magical abilities, superpowers, etc.)

animal villains (e.g., Jungle Book)

abstract villains (an idea, a society, a corporation, etc.)

if you make your villain more abstract, it can have advantages, but it also makes it harder for your readers to relate to them and understand them

if you have an abstract villain, think about using human representations of that villain for your readers to project their feelings and thoughts onto

more specific types of villains:

likeable villain

unsympathetic villain

unpredictable villain

Characteristics of a villain

There are many different types of villains, but they also share a few similar characteristics:

own beliefs and morals – What do they believe in? What is morally correct for them? Do they see themself as bad/evil? How far will they go? Do they make exceptions for some people or do they not care at all? Maybe they want to do the right thing, but they go about it the wrong way.

goals and motivation – goals are things they wan to have or want to accomplish, but motivation is even more important, it explains why they want or need their goal to be fulfilled, you need to invest time into giving your villain a (at least for them) plausible reason for what they are doing

connection to the hero – the hero reacts to the villain’s actions, maybe their fates are intertwined, maybe the hero’s actions in the past led to them becoming the villain, the villain is interrupting and then furthering the hero’s character development the same way the hero is doing to the villain’s development

worthy opponent – being especially powerful, clever, a specialist in something the hero is not, seemingly unbeatable until the end

compelling backstory – people are usually not born bad, it’s something they’ve become over time, it explains the motivation, probably not just one defining moment, if you want one event that changed them, then also think about the reactions from others to that event or what happened afterwards that made them turn evil

similar characteristic to the hero – think about where it went wrong, where did they turn to the dark side? Like I said before, a tragic event does not automatically lead someone to become a villain. Losing their parents young for example can turn them either into the villain or the hero, decide why they turned in that direction that they did

More tips:

Make your villain interesting

your reader should love to hate, but also hate to love them in a way

give them their own character arc and show development

make them special the same way your hero is special

give them a magnetic personality

don’t make them too predictable or the readers will lose their fear of them

Humanise your villains

not born evil, maybe they were corrupted

nothing more frightening than seeing yourself in a villain

give them positive qualities

make the readers sometimes sympathise with them

give them moments of relatability

your readers should be interested in the villain, but not necessarily root for them (only if that’s your true intention), because it could undermine your hero’s actions and motivation

Make them lose

If your story doesn’t end with evil ruling over the world, you need to know how to make the villains lose:

give them weaknesses

let them be a slave to their own moral code

let them have fatal character flaws that in the end the basically defeat themself

give them a worthy ending, something appropriate for a great opponent

Good luck creating believable villains!

@trappedinfairytales asked:

Hi! Let me start by saying this blog is a god send for more than just writing skills, I even turned on your notifications 😂 Anyway, I apologize if you’ve already done a post like this, but I was wondering if you could do a post with different kinds of healthy relationships? I feel like it would help, because even though I am a bi girl, I’ve never been in a relationship so sometimes I don’t know where to start 🙈 

@magnificentcollectiverebel asked:

Bro bro I’m trying to write a cute lil romance do you have any tips please I didn’t realize writing needs so much planning also thank you for all the tips on characters both of my love interests are girls the tips help

Excellent questions!  Healthy relationships, particularly ones involving queer people, are something I’m pretty sure we all could use. 

Now, there has been a request for me to make a post about LGBTQ characters, so I will talk more exclusively about queer relationships then; sufficed to say this post applies to all types of healthy relationships.  Though most of the examples I use are admittedly queer – you could say I’m BI-ased on the matter.  (I’ll see myself out.)  

In the meantime, here are my personal rules of thumb for writing a ship-worthy romance. 

1.  Allow opposites to attract (but do it right!)

No, I’m not talking about two characters who have no common ground or core values;  I’m talking about two characters whose traits compliment one another.  

Maybe one’s analytical and the other’s impulse driven.  Maybe one’s a happy ray of sunshine and the other’s a grump.  Maybe one’s an idealist and the other’s a realist.

Do you see pattern here?  Not only do these proposed pairings balance each other out, but their mutually beneficial to each other:  an impulse-driven character will add spontaneity to the life of their analytical partner, while the analytical character will keep the impulsive one from leaping off cliffs;  the happy ray of sunshine will brighten up the life of the grump, while the grump will keep the ray of sunshine aware of life’s problems;  the realist will keep the idealist weighted in reality while the idealist will help them to get off the ground.

Moreover, as each of them has something the other lacks and needs, it creates a natural magnetism between them.  

Just think of it like the old Greek myth, in which mankind was split in two by Zeus and each of them are searching for their other half to become their best selves.  

In terms of writing romance, pretend your two characters are two halves of a greater whole, and allow them to complete each other.

2.  Create chemistry and attraction (but remember that it does not immediately equal love.)

If I had to pinpoint the source of my frustration with the depictions of attraction in literature, particularly YA romantic novels, I would say it roughly narrows down to the fact that the attraction, as it’s depicted, is largely extremely vapid and hollow. 

Two characters that hate each other are not going to have true chemistry or be compatible for a long-term relationship, even if one of them is equipped with excessive depictions of eye-color and can smirk like a champ.

To create true chemistry, the readers have to crave the characters’ interactions;  they have to root for them to get together, not role their eyes when they finally do.

So how do you do this?  Well, first and foremost, there are different and better ways to convey attraction than the tried and true “cerulean orbs” and obnoxious smirks and whatnot.

First and foremost, save strong, sensual language, like “she leaned in close, and I tasted her breath on mine,” “My heart thudded painfully in my chest as I felt her body press against mine,” et cetera for when your characters are actually about to do the deed.  That way, your audience isn’t desensitized to it and are more likely to root for your characters when they finally shack up.

When your characters first meet, keep the language light and playful.  Unless you’re doing a modern, queer reenactment of Romeo and Juliet (which sounds pretty awesome, honestly – so long as the ending is happier) most people aren’t righting sonnets about people they first meet.

Let your POV character check out her prospective partner if you so desire, but press hold on the purple prose.  

For instance, instead of something like this:

“Long lashes fluttered like the wings of the butterfly over peridot orbs, a faint gold dusting over the graceful slope of her nose.  Red lips as ripe as strawberries glistened in the sun, and a waterfall of gilded hair fell over her slender shoulders.”

Try something more along the lines of this:    

“She had striking green eyes framed with long lashes, a smattering of freckles over the bridge of her nose.  Her hair was a thick mane of unkempt gold, and when she saw me, she smiled.  Her lips were plump and strawberry pink.”

If you’ll notice, both passages convey basically the same thing (i.e. that this narrator finds her prospective gal-pal attractive):  one is just significantly less pretentious than the other, and in my opinion, a lot more readable.

As the story continues, you’ll likely want to build up the tension as the character’s attraction to one another grows.  Maybe your character starts to get butterflies in their stomach whenever their love interest is around, or there’s a tension-filled moment where their skin brushes together.  Maybe they’ve found themselves constantly looking at one another’s lips and mouths.

(I talk some more about building sexual tension in this post here.)

Keep in mind while developing your characters’ chemistry into something greater that contrary to what most YA novels will teach you, attraction isn’t love.  Finding one another’s meatsuits aesthetically pleasing isn’t reasonable merit for a long-term commitment.  Love, generally speaking, is often just that:  it’s a commitment.  It takes time to cultivate, and it isn’t fun 100% of the time.  But people stick with it anyway, because ideally, the payoff is worth it.

And that’s a good thing.  As an author, you get to build up on your character’s relationship, challenge it, make it stronger.  And that’s a lot of fucking fun.  Plus, you get to write all the cute romantic shit in the times in between.

If you are implying love at first sight (which, sappy bitch I am, I’m a bit of a sucker for) feel free to imply as such, but I’m still inclined to think short, sweet descriptions work best:  “Their eyes met, and for a moment, Ishmael could have sworn the earth had come to a stop while the world kept moving.”  Or perhaps, “Luna looked at Misery for the first time, and knew right away this was the woman she was going to marry.” 

Now keep moving.  Too strong language too fast weighs your story down, keeps the reader from relating to it, and detracts from the satisfaction of when your characters finally end up together.     

3.  Let your characters’ relationship be built on friendship.  

The other day, I got lunch with my best friend and her new girlfriend.  A year or so ago, she’d gotten out of a really toxic relationship that she’d been in since I’d first known her.  

I’d thought she was happy (because at the time, I didn’t have anything else to compare it to) but seeing her with her new girl was like seeing the proverbial sunrise for the first time.  (Pardon the floral language.  Even I’m not totally exempt from purple prose.)

We laughed, we made jokes, we all checked out the hot waitress together.  Overall, it was just like spending time with two close friends – just, y’know.  They happened to be in a romantic relationship with each other.  And that, let me tell you, makes all the difference in the world.

I’ve said this before, and I’ll say it again:  all the sexual attraction in the world will not make up for the lack of a strong basis of mutual respect, affection, and camaraderie.  

Sorry to burst your bubble, heterosexual authors of the mainstream publishing world:  even if they kiss in the rain till the cows come home, even if the music swells every time they make contact, even if it’s a love story for the ages, that means your characters actually have to be friends.

Queer authors, I find, tend to be a little more attune to this concept than their straight counterparts (perhaps because it’s in our nature to question preconceptions of what constitutes a healthy relationship) but it’s still good to keep this in mind when you’re writing your characters’ relationship.  

So ask yourself these questions:

Do your characters have any shared interests or hobbies?

Do they actively take interest in their partners’ hobbies?

Do they crack each other up, tell each other jokes?  Exchange playful jibes that aren’t pointed or hurtful?

Do they do the above more than they fight and bicker?

Would both your characters feel comfortable with their partner seeing them at their most comfortable (e.g. stuffing their faces with Nutella and watching bad reality shows)?

If so, would they join in?

If one partner feels hurt, neglected, or insecure, will the other partner take notice and attempt to comfort and reassure them?

Can they confide in each other?

Do they share the same goals, desires, and core values?

If you answered  ‘yes’ to most of these questions, congratulations:  your characters’ romance is more akin to Gomez and Morticia than most YA pairings today.  And believe me, that’s a good thing.

  4.  Make sure your characters are more or less equals.

She’s a ridiculously hot, intelligent, accomplished twenty-something.  He’s a an out-of-shape manchild in his thirties who makes lots of fart jokes and probably has a neck-beard.  

This pairing probably would raise quite a few eyebrows in real life, but it happens so much in movies and TV (particularly comedies) that no one even questions it.  Do I really need to remind you that the entertainment industry is largely male dominated?

Granted, I’m pretty sure you folks are both queer gals (like yours truly), so such a blaring example of male wish fulfillment is unlikely.  But it’s still good to remember that, one way or another, a ship-worthy pairing is probably going to be comprised of equals.

Okay, you get the picture.  It happens a lot.

This doesn’t always equate to characters being equal in conventional attractiveness:  movies such as Legally Blond and Hairspray, for example, both have adorable pairings featuring lovely plus-sized/chubby women and thinner, more conventionally attractive men.  Moreover, they don’t leave anything resembling the bad taste in my mouth that the aforementioned Manchild + Hot Girl trope does.  

Even the chubby, kindhearted hillbilly ending up with a much more conventionally sexy girl in Tucker and Dale vs. Evil didn’t particularly bother me (even though there were definitely some sexist tropes), especially considering the bad guy in the film was a quintessential privileged, entitled fuckboy with a white knight complex.   

But your characters will need to be more-or-less equals in terms of positive attributes.  Even if they differ significantly in conventional attractiveness or status, they’ll probably roughly even in out in terms of intelligence, good manners, kindness, conscientiousness, et cetera.  

It’s also best to avoid blaring power imbalances when writing healthy romances.  I’m inclined to avoid huge age differences (though there are instances where it can be healthy), and definitely avoid huge age differences where one of the characters is underage.    

Basically, if your pairing looks like they could belong in a Woody Allen movie, no dice.  (If you think I’m kidding, just look at his fifty-six-year-old self with a nineteen-year-old love interest in Husbands and Wives.)

Differences in wealth and status are also generally be okay, but be conscientious that they can easily become abusive if one person misuses their power (lookin’ at you, 50 Shades.)    

Last, and certainly not least, your characters will almost definitely need to be equals in terms of three-dimensionality.  No exceptions.    

Which brings me to my final point:

5.  Give your love interest purpose (outside of being a love interest.)

I’ve talked about this before, but why do you think there’s such a huge following for Kirk and Spock’s romance (besides that one episode where Spock gets super horny and the two of them role around in the sand for twenty minutes), when there are droves of female love interests for both?  

Why are Dean and Castiel AO3′s most popular pairing (besides their blaring sexual tension and the recurring prevalence of romantic tropes throughout their narrative, as well as the fact that both are based off of bisexual characters), when the following for their more canonically established relationships are practically nonexistent?  

What about Holmes and Watson (besides the blaring case of queerbaiting in the BBC version, and the fact that Doyle’s Sherlock really was extremely gay), or Steve Rogers and Bucky and Barnes (besides the fact that the writers somehow find the possibility of making Steve a Nazi less offensive than having him love a man)?   

Internalized misogyny and fetishization of MLM by straight women is definitely a factor.  But as an extremely bi gal myself who enjoys a lot of these male/male pairings, I’m inclined to think that it’s just plain easier to get behind a relationship when both parties are equals in complexity and charisma, rather than the conventionally attractive blank sheets of paper that unfortunately characterize most female love interests in popular media.  

It also works the other way: why do you think everyone hates Kara and Mon El’s romance so much? Because Kara is a wonderfully developed, benevolent character (surrounded with equally developed, benevolent characters who would work much better as love interests, I might add) and Mon El is a callous, entitled jerk who only wants to become a hero to woo his prospective girlfriend. 

This is also why heterosexual pairings with equally well-developed characters have no problem at all finding followings.  Just look at Han and Leia, Mulder and Scully, Booth and Bones, Monica and Chandler – both characters hold roughly an equal amount of weight in the narrative, so we give a fuck what happens to both of them. 

Healthy, well-balanced WLW romances with happy endings are difficult to find in media, but some of my favorite examples of ship-worthy pairings that fit this criteria are Korra and Asami from Legend of Korra, Willow and Kennedy from Buffy (even though I’ll never forgive them for what they did to Tara), Carol and Susan from Friends, and Alana and Margot from Hannibal.         

And of course, there’s these lovely ladies from Sense 8.

Bottom line is, make sure both your characters are important;  don’t follow the trend of meaningless, forced heterosexual romances in media in which one party could almost invariably be replaced with a sexy lamp or a dildo.

Make the love interest a hero in their own right, and the audience will root for them.

The angel nerd in me got inspired by this cool post by @darthnubnub, and I wanted to make my own angelic cheat sheet.  

Depending on the mythology, there are different types of angels than this, but these categories are acknowledged in most Abrahamic/Hebrew Lore.

Seraphim 

St. Francis’ vision of a seraph (fresco attributed to Giotto)

“Above him stood the Seraphim;  each had six wings;  with two he covered his face, and with two he covered his feet, and with two he flew.”  

- Isaiah, 6:1-3

Seraphim are:

The highest order of angels, and closest to God.Surround His throne.

Associated with fire, ferocity, and glory.

Seraphim have:

Six wings.Anthropomorphic/humanoid features. 

Seraphim in media:

Castiel from Supernatural.  

(GIF credit.)

Archangels 

Jacob wrestling with the Angel by Gustave Doré 1885

“Then he said to me, ‘Do not be afraid, Daniel, for from the first day that you set your heart on understanding this and on humbling yourself before your God, your words were heard, and I have come in response to your words.’ But the prince of the kingdom of Persia was withstanding me for twenty-one days; then behold, Michael, one of the chief princes, came to help me, for I had been left there with the kings of Persia.”

- Daniel 10:12-13

Archangels are:

God’s messengers and fiercest warriors.

Most of the angels named in the Bible (Michael, Gabriel, Raphael.)

Archangels have:

Their descriptions are ambiguous, but my personal theory is that they are probably Seraphim. 

Archangels in media: 

(GIF credit.)

Gabriel from Constantine.

Michael from Michael.

Michael, Gabriel, Raphael, and Lucifer from Supernatural.

Ophanim/Thrones

A traditional depiction of the chariot vision, based on the description in Ezekiel.

“As I looked at the living creatures, I saw a wheel on the ground beside each creature with its four faces. This was the appearance and structure of the wheels: They sparkled like topaz, and all four looked alike. Each appeared to be made like a wheel intersecting a wheel. As they moved, they would go in any one of the four directions the creatures faced; the wheels did not change direction as the creatures went. Their rims were high and awesome, and all four rims were full of eyes all around.”

- Ezekiel 1:15

Thrones are:

Massive, many-eyed wheels of fire.

Drawn by Cherubim. 

Dominions/Lordships

“Far above all rule and authority, power and dominion, and every name that is invoked, not only in the present age but also in the one to come.”

- Ephesians 1:21

Dominions are:

The managers of other angels.  

Said to appear as divinely beautiful humans.

Virtues 

“The name of the holy Virtues signifies a certain powerful and unshakable virility welling forth into all their Godlike energies; not being weak and feeble for any reception of the divine Illuminations granted to it; mounting upwards in fullness of power to an assimilation with God; never falling away from the Divine Life through its own weakness, but ascending unwaveringly to the superessential Virtue which is the Source of virtue: fashioning itself, as far as it may, in virtue; perfectly turned towards the Source of virtue, and flowing forth providentially to those below it, abundantly filling them with virtue.”

-  Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite’s De Coelesti Hierarchia

Virtues are:

Perhaps the closest mythological equivalent to guardian angels.

Responsible for miracles on Earth.

Probably most of the angels that pop up in movies (especially Christmas movies.)

Virtues in media:

(Image credit.)

Clarence from It’s a Wonderful Life.

Al from Angels in the Outfield.

Damiel and Cassiel from Wings of Desire.

Seth from City of Angels.

Powers:

“His intent was that now, through the church, the manifold wisdom of God should be made known to the rulers and authorities in the heavenly realms.”

- Ephesians 3:10

Powers are:

Heavenly warriors who supervise divine bodies and ensure the cosmos remain in order.

Frequently depicted as warriors in suits of armor. 

Principalities 

“Far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come.”  

- Ephesians 1:21

Principalities are:

Educators and guardians of earth and humanity.

Principalities have:

Typically crowns and sceptres, indicating their position of authority.

Principalities in media:

Aziraphale from Good Omens. 

Cherubim 

A cherub, according to traditional Christian iconography

“Each of the four cherubim had four faces: the first was the face of an ox, the second was a human face, the third was the face of a lion, and the fourth was the face of an eagle.”

- Ezekiel 10:14

Cherubim are:

Guards of Heaven, Eden, and sacred places. 

Cherubim have:

Four faces:  an ox (representing livestock), a lion (representing wild animals), an eagle (representing birds), and a man (representing humanity.)

Four wings.

For your convenience, a masterpost of all (or most) of my original posts so far.  It will obviously be updated as I create and add more!

Enjoy, and thank you for reading!  <3

The Basics:  Plotting, Descriptions, and More

The Dos and Don’ts of Beginning a Novel

How to Write Good Dialogue

How to Avoid Purple Prose

Tips for Visual Thinkers

5 Ways to Name Your Novel

Romance

How to Write a Kiss Scene

How to Write a (Healthy) Romance

Mythology 

Angelic Cheat Sheet

Irish Mythology Resources

Horror

My #1 Tip For Writing Horror

Characterization

How to Get to Know Your Characters

Male Protagonists to Avoid in Your Writing

Female Protagonists to Avoid in Your Writing

How to Write Strong Female Characters 

The Straight Person’s Guide to Portraying Queer People

The Traits of a Likable Hero

The Secret to a Relatable Villain

How to Write (or Avoid) Abusive Parents

Reference Masterposts

Marketing Masterpost

Worldbuilding Masterpost

Drug Addiction Masterpost

Depicting Deaf, Blind, or Mute Characters

Depicting Amputees

Depicting Jewish Characters

Depicting Black Characters

Depicting Characters Who Have ADHD

In hopes of inspiring younger generations, NASA created this series of gorgeous retro travel posters that encourage you to imagine a future where common space travel is a legitimate possibility. Source

A long while back, I typed up some posts ranting about characters and tropes I disliked.  These were Male and Female Characters to Avoid in Your Writing, and they’ve become my most popular posts yet.  Recently, I was struck by some topical inspiration, and decided it was time for a sequel!  

One again, these are my personal, subjective opinions!  No one dictates your writing or portrayals but you, and no one can or should decide how you consume fiction.  Also, as you may notice, I actually like most of the ladies below;  I just don’t like certain aspects of their portrayal.

Enjoy, and happy writing everybody! 

1.  The Daenerys (i.e. the spontaneous war criminal)

Image source

Who she is:

The formerly heroic Mother of Dragons, who randomly charbroiled a city full of innocent people.

Why it sucks:

I’m not even talking about this from a feminist standpoint, or how one of the most consistently heroic and powerful female characters took an abrupt and undignified backflip into the Dark Side.  I’m speaking from a writer’s standpoint.  

Regardless of whether you liked Daenerys, she was rivaled only by Jon and Brienne as the show’s most consistently heroic character  From locking away her dragon children to ensure the safety of her subjects, to freeing countless enslaved citizens, she’s spent a decade proving herself to be an altruistic and noble figure.  And then, in the final two episodes of the entire show, the writers dracarys-ed that shit.

For some comparison, just imagine how ridiculous it would be if Jon Snow suddenly went batshit and started hacking up citizens because he was feeling stressed.  That’s about as plausible as Dany’s sudden passion for genocide.

And for the record, I’m not opposed to Daenerys becoming Mad Queen.  If it was done properly. This would mean informing the actress far in advance so she could modify her portrayal accordingly (which they didn’t), and building up to it through foreshadowing and established attributes.  Not at the last fucking minute.

Honestly, the only characters who remained narratively consistent to the very end are Drogon and Ghost, who are both precious babies who did nothing wrong.  

How to avoid her:

Decide as early as possible where a character arc is going.  Contrary to what Game of Thrones seems to believe, the character arc is important.  It should have a beginning, challenges that incite development, and a satisfying conclusion that showcases how a character has changed and evolved.  

And if you didn’t decide early?  You still have to come up with a conclusion that makes sense for your character, and not slap on the most unexpected ending possible in the name of Subverting Expectations.

On that note?  Subverting expectations isn’t always a good thing, and a reader predicting your ending isn’t the worst possible outcome.  Focus on telling a good story.  

2.  The Rayon (i.e. the transgender Mammy)

Who she is:

A transgender woman (portrayed by the male, cisgender Jared Leto) dying slowly of AIDS in Dallas Buyer’s Club.  Her role in the narrative is to teach the supposedly heterosexual (more on that later) main character that queer people are human beings.  

Why it sucks:

Rayon is many things in Buyer’s Club, and most are firmly rooted in stereotypes.  She’s a sassy, flirtatious, clothing-obsessed, self-loathing, drug-addicted prostitute.   She’s hypersexual, but never treated as romantically desirable.  She’s tragic, but also one of the few consistently comedic characters in an otherwise bleak film. 

It’s her job to gently goad the main character into treating her with basic respect, but he never quite gets there.  He refers to her with male pronouns throughout the entire film, and never acknowledges her as a woman.  At one point, he aims a gun at her genitals and offers her a “sex change operation.”  Which, is supposed to be comedic.

This isn’t to say that there are no sassy, flirtatious, clothing-obsessed, self-loathing, drug-addicted transgender sex workers, nor is there anything wrong with “stereotypical” trans people.  It isn’t the job of the marginalized to dispel stereotypes.  And if real trans people had created and portrayed Rayon, she could have been a realistic, dynamic, and compelling character.

And I say “created” because Rayon is strictly fictional.  Outside of this film, she didn’t exist.  

“Well, at least they tried to offer representation!”  you protest.  “What else was it supposed to be about?  A straight dude in the AIDS epidemic?”

Well, no.  Though the main character, Ron Woodroof, is presented to us as a violently homophobic, transphobic, womanizing asshole, the real Woodroof was, by all accounts, kind-hearted, open-minded, and bisexual.  

What could have been a powerful story of a queer man defying his diagnosis, living joyfully and meaningfully, and helping to prolong the lives of countless AIDS-sufferers, was instead watered down to a story of a straight, pugnacious asshole and his stereotypical, long-suffering, transgender sidekick who dies to Teach Him Compassion.  

How to avoid her:

Read books by trans people.  Consume media they create or endorse.  

List of youtube channels created by trans people here, and 21 books for trans awareness month here.

Put out a special call for transgender beta readers to point out mistakes, misconceptions, and offer tips on an authentic portrayal.

Garner insight into their perspective and experiences, and give them personalities outside of being trans.  

3.  The Piper Chapman (i.e. the unflavored oatmeal)

GIF source

Who she is:

The “protagonist” of Orange is the New Black, and its least compelling character.  She and Larry are the sort of people who would ask me for a threesome on Tinder.  

Why it sucks:

Piper’s hook is that she’s a privileged, affluent white woman who unjustly finds herself in prison for – well, for crimes she committed.  But expected to get away with, because, Privilege.

This isn’t to say Piper is boring.  She’s far from likable, but being likable and being boring aren’t the same thing.  In another series, watching a relatively cushioned, naive, bourgeoisie woman string along various significant others, thoughtlessly incite violence, and navigate an unfamiliar prison setting would make for thought-provoking and hilarious satire.  

But when compared to her charismatic supporting cast, with richly developed backstories, motivations, and relationships, she’s painfully bland.  I would much rather watch a series centered around Suzanne, Nikki, Taystee, Poussey, or even Pennsatucky.  They’re just more developed, opulent, enjoyable characters. 

It could be argued that Piper is the viewpoint character, whom the audience is supposed to relate to.  But I can assert that I don’t relate to Piper.  At all.  Her lack of empathy towards others – such as leaving Alex after the death of her mother, cheating on her fiance, and inadvertently starting a *ahem* white power gang – alienated me to her.  

Which might not be such a bad thing, but Piper is (supposedly) the protagonist.  We don’t need to like her, but we should probably be able to relate to her.

Or maybe I’m just jealous that hot women aren’t inexplicably fighting over me.

How to avoid her:

Your protagonist doesn’t have to be the most likable character in your story.  They don’t even necessarily have to be the most interesting character in your story.  And certainly not the most morally good, powerful, or knowledgeable.  But the viewpoint character is the character who we spend the most time with, and from whose eyes we perceive the story.  It’s important that we understand and relate to them emotionally.

Look at examples like BoJack Horseman, Holden Caulfield, Tony Soprano, Beatrix from Kill Bill, Mavis from Young Adult, Nadia from Russian Doll.  All are complex characters, with varying degrees of moral ambiguity.  Yet we can empathize with them emotionally and identify with them.  Even if we’ve never been in their situation, we see where they’re coming from.

4.  The Charlie (i.e. the dead lesbian)

Who she is:

One of the few recurring openly queer characters in the incredibly long-running Supernatural.  A lesbian who’s journey was (sort of) brought to an end when she was killed and dumped in a bathtub to incite drama.

Why it sucks:

I love Supernatural  but it can be remarkably tone deaf towards queer people, women, and marginalized groups.  Which, probably merits fixing, considering its following is largely comprised of queer people, women, and marginalized groups.  

I probably shouldn’t have to explain why killing off women and queer people for drama is Bad, but I’ll delve into its history a little:  from what I’ve read, censorship laws of the twentieth century forbade the portrayal of queer people unless they were ultimately killed or “reformed.”  This is why so much LGBTQ+ fiction is essentially gay tragedy porn, and why gays are so frequently buried to aid in the emotional narrative of their straight counterparts.  

That’s not to say queer people can never be killed off.  I might not have an issue with Charlie’s death (especially in a show as violent as Supernatural), if she weren’t the only openly queer character at the time.  

And there’s plenty of room for representation!  If Dean was openly bisexual, if angels were vocally confirmed to be nonbinary, and if there were more recurring, respectfully portrayed female and sapphic characters, Charlie’s death might not feel like such as slap in the face.  But as it is, it feels like a contribution to an ugly pattern.

In fairness, Supernatural has since improved in its portrayal of queer people:  two gay male hunters were introduced and given a happy ending, an alternate universe version of Charlie was introduced to the cast, and God is portrayed as a bisexual man.  

Yes.  All of that happened.  You have to see it to understand.

How to avoid her:

Educate yourself on the history of censorship in the LGBTQ+ community, as well as hate crimes and decreased life expectancy.  Make sure you aren’t contributing to the suffering of queer people.

If you have only one confirmed queer character in the midst of a very large cast, I’m inclined to think you need more.  You could say I’m BI-ased on the matter, though.

Look up “fridging,” and think about how many stories use the death of female characters to incite drama for men.

5.  The Allison (i.e. the reformed feminine)

GIF source

Who she is:

She’s one of the most interesting members of the Breakfast Club, and that’s saying something.  A self-proclaimed compulsive liar who will “do anything sexual” with or without the promise of a million dollars (as well as one of the most quotable characters in the film) she demonstrates the emotional pain and complexity that’s often ignored or shrugged off as teen angst.  

And then she gets a makeover and a hot boyfriend, and suddenly everything’s better.  

Why it sucks:

It would be one thing if Allison’s problem was that she didn’t feel pretty or desirable.  But she never (to my recollection) offers any indication of that, and that’s part of what makes her such a refreshing portrayal of insecurity.  She’s emotionally neglected by her parents, and that is appropriately treated as devastating.  

It’s a complex and beautifully-portrayed problem that deserved far more than such a superficial, slapped-on solution.

Similarly, there’s no reason why Allison is paired up with the jock at the end of the film.  Neither showed any romantic interest in one another until her unnecessary makeover.  

A much better ending to her arc would be her finding acceptance among her newfound friends, and finally garner the recognition and acknowledgement she never got from her parents. 

I was torn between using Allison for this example, or Sandy’s makeover from Grease.  In both, girls are encouraged to alter their appearances to solve plot-related problems.  And both were “fixed” to conform to some standard of femininity or feminine sexuality that they didn’t meet before.

How to avoid her:

If a character feels the need to change their appearance to accommodate others or be respected, that should probably be treated as a negative thing.

Your character’s appearance can be a good tool to represent emotional changes.  If they alter their appearance, there should be a meaningful reason behind it – outside of fitting into societal norms or garnering the approval of others. 

So there was a list going around tumblr for a while that made it to my dash of literary journals that accept open submissions (and will pay!), but upon inspection about half of them were closed indefinitely, and I found quite a few other places that looked interesting through further research, so I wanted to post my own list. 

I tried to focus on things that paid professional grade (at least 6 cents per word), were friendly to speculative fiction, and specifically encouraged diversity and writing about marginalized groups.

(Please note that as of right now I have never submitted or been published with any of these, so if anyone has experience with them, good or bad, please feel free to message or reblog this with your experiences.)

Speculative Fiction

Strange Horizons — Speculative fiction (broadly defined) with an emphasis on diversity, unusual styles, and stories that address politics in nuanced ways. 8c per word. Up to 10,000 words, under 5,000 preferred. Responds within 40 days. LGBT+ positive.

Fantasy & Science Fiction Magazine — Sci-fi, fantasy, horror, etc. 7-12c per word. Up to 25,000 words. No response times listed.

Asimov’s Science Fiction — Primarily sci-fi but accepts fantasy and surreal fiction, but no high fantasy/sword and sorcery. Prefers writing that is character driven. 8-10c per word. 1,000-20,000 words. Responds in about five weeks.

Evil Girlfriend Media — Horror and urban fantasy centered on female empowerment and defying gender stereotypes. $100 flat payment. 4,000-7,000 words. No response times given. LGBT+ friendly.

Beneath Ceaseless Skies — Fantasy with a focus on secondary worlds and characters. 6c per word. Up to 10,000 words. Average response time 2-4 weeks.

Fantastic Stories — Speculative fiction with an emphasis on diversity and literary style. 15c per word. Up to 3,000 words. Responds within two weeks. LGBT+ positive.

Fiction Vortex — Serialized fantasy and speculative fiction. $300 for featured stories, $50 otherwise. 3,500 words or less. No response times given.

Shimmer — Speculative fiction with an emphasis on diversity, strong plots, vivid characters, and beautiful writing. 5c per word. 7,500 words or less (will consider longer words with query letter). Usually responds within two weeks. LGBT+ positive.

Clarkesworld Magazine — Sci-fi, fantasy, and other speculative fiction. 10c per word up to 5,000 words, 8c per word after. 1,000-16,000 words. Responds within days usually, gives a tracking number.

Apex Magazine — Speculative fiction of all kinds. 6c per word, +1c per word for podcast stories. Up to 7,500 words, all submissions over will be auto-rejected. Responds within 30 days.

Heliotrope Magazine — Speculative fiction of all kinds. 10c per word. Up to 5,000 words. Responds within 30 days.

Lightspeed Magazine — Speculative fiction of all kinds, with creativity and originality in terms of style and format encouraged. 8c per word. 1,500-10,000 words, under 5,000 preferred. LGBT+ positive. Submissions temporarily closed for their main magazine but is accepting for their People of Color Destroy Science Fiction special.

General Fiction

The Sun Magazine — General fiction, likes personal writing or writing of a cultural/political significance. $300-$1500 flat payment  and a one year subscription to the magazine for fiction (also accepts essays and poetry). No minimum or maximum lengths but over 7,000 words discouraged. Responds in 3-6 months. Physical submissions only.

One Story — Any and all varieties of fiction, “unique and interesting” stories encouraged. $500 payment plus 25 contributor copies. 3,000-8,000 words. Usually responds in 2-3 months.

Camera Obscura — General fiction. $1000 for featured story, $50 for “Bridge the Gap” award, no payment for other contributors. 250-8,000 words. Response time vary, running just over two months as of now.

Flash Fiction 

Daily Science Fiction — Speculative flash fiction (including sci-fi, fantasy, slipstream, etc.). 8c per word. Up to 1,500 words, but shorter stories given priority. Response times not listed.

Vestral Review — General flash fiction. 3-10c per word depending on length to a max of $25. Up to 500 words. Response within four months.

Flash Fiction Online — General flash fiction. $60 flat payment. 500-1,000 words. Response times not listed.

Novels/Novella

Riptide Publishing — Any LGBTQ manuscripts between 15,000 and 150,000 words. Currently especially interested in lesbian romances, trans stories, asexual/aromantic stories, romances with a happy ending, and genre fiction such as urban fantasy. Also has a YA branch.  LGBT+ positive.

Crimson Romance — Romance stories of all kinds, currently seeking LGBT+ stories with a focus on emotional connections and relationships, especially m/m romance. Novel (55,000-90,000 words) or novella (20,000-50,000 words) length.  LGBT+ positive.

Kindle Direct Publishing 

Kindle Direct Publishing — Allows you to set your own prices, create your own cover art, and make royalties off of each sell. Any and all genres are welcome and if you’re prolific and smart about how you’re publishing you can make pretty good money.

General Guide to Kindle Publishing — Gives a good rundown of the publishing process on Kindle.

101 Guide to Kindle Erotica — Great guide with lots of resources about how to make money publishing erotica on Kindle.   

Publishing Comics/Graphic Novels

Here is a list of potential comic companies and what kind of open submissions they accept.