Global Gay Rights

Lorraine Devon Wilke Tells Us How Much To Publish; Global Gay Rights; Kim Davis Back At Work; Tom Hardy Aggressively Dodges Sexuality Question

Lorraine Devon Wilke Tells Us How Much To Publish

I normally don’t go near things like this, however, because so many newer writers get so much bad advice I wanted to post something short. And readers are a part of this, too, and they usually don’t get all the information they should have.

A writer I don’t know, Lorraine Devon Wilke, wrote a piece for Huff Po telling authors….actually, self-pubbed authors…they shouldn’t publish more than four books a year. The first red flag for me is that she most likely wrote this post for Huff Po, for free, without any compensation…no money, not even twenty five bucks and a pat on the back. I don’t know that for certain. Maybe she’s on staff and they did pay her. However, my bet is she wrote it for free in an attempt to get publicity. And I have posted several times about how I feel about writing for big publications like Huff Po and not getting compensated. It’s just shabby of Huff Po, or any *huge* publication, to treat writers this way, and I feel sorry for any writers who fall for this gimmick.

With that said, I think that if Ms. Wilke had written this piece with regard to her writing and how many books she feels comfortable publishing each year, I would not find a single issue. And that’s because I’ve been in publishing for over twenty years, both trad pubbed and indie pubbed, and I’ve worked for and written for more magazines than I remember. I have never once seen a writer who falls into a set mold. In other words, all writers work differently and at different paces. And there’s absolutely nothing that’s ever going to change about that. No one can pigeonhole the creative process.

Unless they’re four gorgeously written, painstakingly molded, amazingly rendered and undeniably memorable books. If you can pull off four of those a year, more power to you. But most can’t. I’d go so far as to say no one can, the qualifier being good books.

After reading that, my first thought was should we tell her? Last I heard it’s not really possible to distinguish good books or good writing because that’s so subjective. That’s why books like “The Help” are rejected numerous times before they get picked up. Subjective. You can spot bad writing at a glance, however, good writing is a completely different issue.

Then, after she refers to some indie writers hacks, she talks more about “good” books, as if she’s become the expert of all books ever written that are “good.”

As you move down, Ms. Wilke gives out more advice about how terrible it is to write  and publish too many books a year. I’ll admit that there’s a great deal of exaggeration in the example she gives about publishing in volume, however, it’s not totally false either. The plain fact is that unless you’re in the ranks of Jonathan Franzen, volume does, indeed, make a big difference, especially with search engines. The more books you are able to publish each year the better your chances are. It’s called competition. In fact, publishing is changing so much, and so fast, there’s an author who actually publishes his first drafts, unedited, and his readers LOVE him. They can’t get enough of him. I wouldn’t do that, but I’m not going to judge him or his readers.

In between all this advice from Ms. Wilke, there’s a lot of nonsense about “fine-tuning one’s craft,” and her book being a “work of art.” In other words, water is wet and fire his hot. 

I could continue, with examples, but I don’t want to waste your time. My main point in linking to this post is that she’s not totally wrong and she plays it safe for the most part, but it’s not the kind of advice I would give to new authors, trad pubbed or indie pubbed. You can’t tell a writer how to write. It won’t end well. So once again, take this advice and all future advice like this with that proverbial grain of salt. Actually, don’t even take my advice. What works for me might not work for you.

Oh, and one more thing no one ever mentions. Not to sound like Donald Trump calling bullshit on other politicians, but Ms. Wilke did do something very clever and seductive with this post. What did she do? She got attention and free publicity, which isn’t easy to get. I’m posting about her right now and I don’t even like Huff Po’s content in general and I rarely ever link to it. So in a way I’m helping endorse her book. But I know I’m doing that. And it might be a “good” book for all I know.

You can read it all in full here. The comments are amusing.  

Global Gay Rights

I know a lot of these things don’t have anything to do with a lot of people who read this blog, but I do have a lot of LGBT social media readers who message me from time to time about books, gay rights, and other things directly related to the LGBT community, on a global scale. I send them arcs when they can’t buy my books, and I listen. I think it’s important to address these issues globally as well as nationally.

Here’s an article about where gay rights are internationally.

We have a US president who supports gay marriage, and now a pope who, if not exactly signing up to equality for all, is at least starting to talk in language less inflammatory than his predecessor. “If someone is gay and he searches for the Lord and has goodwill, who am I to judge?” he told an assembled group of journalists on the papal plane back from his tour of Brazil. Then he went on to criticise the gay “lobby” and said he wasn’t going to break with the catechism that said “homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered”. Still, for a brief moment it looked like a minor breakthrough.

You can read more here. Of course they fail to mention that it wasn’t until recently we had a US President who supports gay marriage. I often fail to see how they forget these things so quickly. Up until very recently our President was on record stating it’s up to the states to make their own decisions, which was the same stand both Clintons took. But I think that just proves how hard we’ve had it, and how much harder gays in other countries still have it.

Kim Davis Back At Work

I’m going to try to sum this up fast.

Kim Davis went back to work today.

She claims that she has an impossible choice…following her conscience in her quest to discriminate against same sex marriage, or not.

She agreed to this “emergency stopgap.” Her clerk issued marriage licenses to gays without her name or endorsement.

She hid in her office while they worked all this out and Deputy Clerk, Brian Mason, worked on giving a marriage license to the one gay couple who showed up.

When he finally finished the license, he handed it to the couple and shook their hands. The document, a template issued by the state and filled out by each clerk, had been altered. Where the name of the clerk and the county is typically entered, it said instead “pursuant to federal court order.”

You can read the rest here. 

Unfortunately, we still don’t know if the licenses are valid without Davis’ consent. I’ve read varying opinions on this and I’m going by what I just read in that article.

Tom Hardy Dodges Sexuality Question

I’m not always sure where I stand on this topic. I’ve mentioned up front that Tony, my husband, worked in corporate America for a long time and no one ever knew he was gay. He couldn’t take that risk. And each time someone made reference to his sexuality he responded much the same way Tom Hardy just responded to a reporter who tried to bait him. It’s an offensive, not defensive, approach, calculated and planned, to intimidate the person questioning.

It’s a difficult issue because it involves someone’s livelihood and how they make their living. Tony was worried he’d lose his job if they found out he was gay. He had a great job; we have a mortgage. In Tony’s case he eventually came out and stopped caring when he wound up dealing with life threatening pneumonia in 2007. When you’re that close to death, being authentic counts more than ever. If he’s had any regrets about coming out to work or to his family he’s never mentioned them to me. And, while he was in the closet with work and family I never put any demands on him. I knew he had to be ready to come out, on his own terms. It wasn’t up to me, not even his partner. We didn’t discuss it and I never held it against him.

So in many ways, even though I respect everyone’s right to privacy, they way Tom Hardy answered this reporter may have been clever, and he may have come off looking like a cool dude, but he’s also supporting the age old passive aggressive shame that has always come along with being openly gay…or admitting, in public, to being openly LGBT. The shame is still there. Why else would he get that angry about the question? He just didn’t want to be questioned about it. And in Hardy’s defense, if my own husband still felt the need to keep his sexuality a secret in his professional life I would probably still support him. I wouldn’t like it, but I’d understand it.

When the reporter started asking questions about Hardy’s sexuality, this is how he replied:

“I don’t find it difficult for celebrities to talk about their sexuality,” Hardy answers Coleman before asking, “Um, are you asking me about my sexuality?”

“Um…sure,” says Coleman.

Hardy responds, “Why?” to which Coleman comes back with an inspiring “Um.”

“Thank you,” Hardy says, moving on to the next question.

I think the reporter was being kind and I would have done the same thing if I’d been in his place. He must have realized he wasn’t going to get anywhere and Hardy would continue to aggressively shoot him down.

You can see the video here, and read more. 

And Hardy comes off as the hero…and no one even questions it, not even the gay people who left comments. It’s just a good thing that people like Tom Hardy don’t really make that much of a difference in the world or the LGBT community with regard to equality and discrimination. If they did, we’d all be in a shitload of trouble.

New Release

 

Free Gay Excerpt: The Scottish Duke; Five More Things About Gay Sex; Gay Rights, Global Scale

Free Gay Excerpt: The Scottish Duke

I’m posting a quick excerpt today from the most recently pubbed book in The Rainbow Detective series, The Scottish Duke. 

Here’s the blurb, and here’s a link to Amazon. I’ve already posted more links to places like Smashwords, here. 

In this installment of The Rainbow Detective Agency, Blair and Proctor’s passionate relationship has moved forward to the point where they begin a small family and don’t even realize it. And that’s because they’re busy trying to solve the case of a well-known gay romance author, E. Q. Montana, who was so obsessed with Proctor he lined the walls of his unkempt West Hollywood apartment with Proctor’s photos. 

But E. Q. Montana wasn’t just any best-selling gay romance author. E. Q. had a few deep dark secrets and enemies of his own that Proctor and Blair have to figure out, one of which has to do with The Scottish Duke of Huntley. It’s a peculiar case of dangerous literary subterfuge, with sudden twists and vicious, ambitious authors, that has them both stumped emotionally and intellectually, and in the end Proctor’s worst nightmare comes true.

I promise, no spoilers.You can scroll down to the bottom of this post for the excerpt.

Five More Things About Gay Sex

Supposedly, here are five more things about gay sex “you didn’t know.” No need to get your smelling salts with this one. It’s another Queerty advertorial, but it’s funny…I think.

Here’s one “fun filled fact you didn’t know.” 

Gentlemen prefer kissing (and BJs) to anal sex

Researchers at George Mason University and Indiana University conducted a sex study with nearly 25,000 gay and bisexual men. Participants were asked about their most recent same-sex encounters. 75 percent reported giving oral sex compared to 74 percent who reported receiving oral sex. 74.8 percent reported kissing on the mouth. But only about 35 percent reported having full-blown anal intercourse. The takeaway from the study? Apparently the question, “Are you a top or a bottom?” only matters one-third of the time.

Someone should tell this to all the guys I dated when I was single. That wasn’t my personal experience. The moment they pin you down, you know exactly what they want, and they are eager to get it.

Here’s the link. As usual, with anything printed by Queerty, you’ll want to read the comments with this one. And I’m not knocking Queerty. It’s free content.

Gay Rights, Global Scale

I always think it’s important to know…and care…about LGBTI people in other parts of the world. Mainly because so many don’t have the rights we have here in the US. It’s the only thing I ever get political about.

Here’s an article that talks about the best and worst places for gay rights, on a global scale.

Where are LGBT rights improving?

Parts of Latin America remain the standard for equality for LGBT rights. Argentina‘s Gender Identity Law 2012 allowed the change of gender on birth certificates for transgender people. It also legalised same-sex marriage in 2010, giving same-sex couples the same rights as opposite-sex couples, including the right to adopt children. Uruguay and Mexico City also allow equal marriage and adoption, and last week Colombia recognised its first legal same-sex civil union (not “marriage”).

And it’s still a concern here in the US, too. I had a conversation with someone recently about the Republican debates. Granted, this is someone older and not as informed because he doesn’t have access to Internet news, so I did make an allowance for that. When I stated that I wasn’t fond of a few Republican candidates because of their stand on gay marriage, he said, “You can’t base your vote on one issue.” Clearly, he didn’t get it and I didn’t bother to explain. That one issue, however, is what I base my votes on these days because that one issue is one of the most fundamental aspects of my life.


You can read more here.

The Scottish Duke…

Here’s the excerpt. It’s hard to post anything longer because I would be giving out spoilers. With a book like this a lot matters in that department. This comes from the middle of the book and I don’t think it gives away too much. But if you’re worried, you might want to skip it. And, Constance, of course, is a large Bengal cat, and Snowden is a new puppy that I introduced in this book.



When they pulled up to the house, Blair climbed out of the car without waiting for Proctor to invite him inside. Proctor didn’t say anything that night. It was almost ten o’clock, they hadn’t eaten anything all day, and Proctor was planning to make salad. Although he loved pizza, and he joked about eating pizza on Twitter with his fans, he didn’t have it often. He was model who always focused on his body and his weight. And although eating pizza and doughnuts tempted him every day of his life, he knew that it was salad that would keep him in skinny jeans and skimpy tight swim trunks.

He also knew Blair wouldn’t complain. He’d eat anything as long as he didn’t have to cook it himself. Blair seemed to have this attitude toward food in general that always amazed Proctor. Blair ate to live. He didn’t live to eat. It wasn’t even something he focused on consciously. If there was a lot of food around Blair would eat it. If there wasn’t, he didn’t seem to mind. 

Proctor unlocked the front door and he entered first, with Blair in tow. Before Proctor even switched on the hallway lights he looked down and saw Snowden at his feet, wagging his little tail. Then he heard a growl and saw Constance sitting on the bottom step.

Proctor turned to Blair and said, “Why isn’t Snowden in his crate in the kitchen?” Constance had free run of the entire house, but he knew Jane would never have allowed a small puppy to roam freely that way.

Blair seemed to sense something unusual, so he headed toward the living room and flipped on the main light switch.

Proctor picked Snowden up and glanced into his living room. He gasped and said, “What happened?” The tables were turned sideways, chairs and cushions rested upside down all over the place, and one of his best crystal lamps had been shattered into a million little pieces.

Blair put his arm around Proctor and said, “Either you’ve been burglarized or we missed the earthquake.”

Proctor held Snowden tighter. His first thought was relief, knowing that Constance and Snowden were safe. Then he looked at his crystal lamp again and sighed. “Why would anyone do this to me?” He had an alarm system, but Jane rarely activated it at the end of the day because she naturally assumed that Proctor would be home by seven o’clock. He preferred not dealing with alarms and code numbers. Now he was sorry he’d been so lazy about it.

Before Blair could answer him, a nasal voice spoke from a dark section on the other side of the living room. “Where’s The Scottish Duke of Huntley?”

Blair blinked. “The Duke of what the fuck, man?”

The Scottish Duke of Huntley,” said the nasal voice, again. “I want to know where he is this minute. I know you’ve got him here and I’m not leaving without him. Release him to me this instant.”

As a short, thin man stepped out of the shadows on the far side of the room, Proctor saw he was pointing a handgun at them. The guy had short red hair, with tight kinky curls, and a long thin neck. Proctor held Snowden tightly to his chest and said, “I don’t know anything about this Scottish Duke. Who are you and what do you want?”

Blair stared at the gun and said, “Just stay calm, man. We don’t know anything about a Scottish Duke. You’ve mistaken us for someone else. I think the people across the street are Scottish, you should check that out.”

Proctor’s first thought was the man pointing the gun at them was unhinged and possibly dangerous. He obviously had an unrealistic delusion that Blair and Proctor had kidnapped The Scottish Duke of Huntley and they were hiding him somewhere in the house. Proctor had a great uncle once who thought he was Napoleon. He decided the only way to keep this man calm was to placate him and ask more questions. “I’m sorry, but we don’t have the Scottish Duke. We’ve never even seen him. What does he look like? Why would you think we kidnapped him?”