LJCC

YouTube knows you gay boy. It's time to come out. Also, if I'm filming something like a naked touchy-feely scene with a woman and I'm getting a boner, I may be straight. *glares at Taylor Zahkar-Perez* Just saying...

Now I want to read this. I'm a masochist.

William Shatner wrote a book? HAHAHAHAHA. Wiki says: TekWar is a series of science fiction novels created by Canadian actor William Shatner, ghost-written by American writer Ron Goulart... Uhuh. Makes sense now. 😂

This is actually great. Except the 10k limitation. That feels like 10k words. And my story is currently at 240k words. Haha. But the quality of the voice is exceptional.

True purple prose is so excessively ornate that it becomes unreadable. It’s generally considered poor writing unless used intentionally for humor, such as in the dialogue of a specific character. However, some people mistakenly label any writing that isn’t as simple as a newspaper article as purple prose. This has led to great writers like Cormac McCarthy, William Faulkner, William Shakespeare, and Virginia Woolf being unfairly accused of it. Not all writing needs to be minimalist! Variety keeps things interesting. That said, using complex language effectively requires skill. You must fully understand the words, use them correctly, clarify your meaning, and create an enjoyable style. For most writers, avoiding overly ornate language is a good rule. My friend is a trial lawyer, and she was taught to keep things simple—never use a "ten-dollar word" when a "two-dollar word" would do, or avoid words you wouldn’t use in casual conversation. In short, keep it clear and straightforward. But what works in court might feel dull in a novel. Flowery prose isn’t inherently bad. When done well, it can be as beautiful as calligraphy. The challenge lies in mastering it, and unfortunately, bad examples have given it a poor reputation.

I'd like to think that the current story I'm writing involves sophisticated smut, or literary erection, where the sex scenes tie into the plot, used as a plot devise not to arouse but to entrench a double-fisted lesson or meaning to the situation. Because at the onset and creation of Nifty, the majority of the stories that use SEX as the PLOT itself, written by authors pertaining to gay sex, it's very rare to find stories in the LGBT community where sex scenes are part of the entire narration, not used as a ''wank-off'' method but used to pertain to an essential character development or theme to the story. There are stories like that; make no mistake, I could name authors who wrote LGBT books with literary erections, but there's so few. Our hetero-counterparts have an abundant resource in that field because they love hiding the plot in sex scenes. For example: Roddy Doyle's The Woman Who Walked Into Doors, where Spencer (the protagonist) relates that at the beginning of her marriage with Charlo, she felt that they were in love. Soon, however, she became trapped in a vicious cycle of abuse, becoming too physically and emotionally weakened from being beaten to stand up for herself. J.G. Ballard's Crash, told through the eyes of James Ballard, a young man who, after being involved in a car crash, finds a friend in another man who is obsessed with accidents of this type. Ballard starts to idolize the man as he participates in his hobby, following him from one car crash to the next. Ballard becomes obsessed himself, as the effects of his own accident bleed into every aspect of his life, from his relationship with his wife to his pursuit of extramarital affairs. Michael Onjaatje's In the Skin of a Lion. Well, this author's a wizard with his words. Reading his sex scenes just makes sense somehow. Glenn Savan's White Palace, which was made into a movie, has my favorite sex scene, depicting in this scene how Max is infertile. If only gay writers wrote more where sex isn't used to ejaculate your readers, I swear, I'd be buying books like these on the market. I know smut exists, but graphic scenes after graphic scenes can be oh so exhausting. I want a Lord of the Rings quality of writing, with a sex scene of Frodo and Sam nuttin' on each other because they know it might be the last time they see each other, kind of sex scene. I don't even want a heavily graphic sex scene, just a SLIGHTLY graphic sex scene in a paragraph, perhaps. I mean, let's face it, those two hobbits were fruity gay. I remember reading this story—the end had the last sex scene between two lovers—and it was so graphic but heartbreaking at the same time because, as a reader, you know it was the last time they'd be seeing each other. Like, as a reader, you know it's final. If only they were two gay characters, I swear, I'd be wanking off and crying at the same time.

My story's also been featured: (Commercial incoming) Nearly a year later, I still haven't finished my story, The Third Longest Date. Haha.

The Unromantic Truth About Writing and Editing If you’re serious about being a writer, there’s one hard truth you must accept: mastering grammar and formatting is non-negotiable. These skills are not just helpful; they are essential, particularly when submitting your work to magazines, publishers, or literary outlets. Contrary to popular belief, an editor’s job is not to take your raw, unpolished manuscript and magically transform it into a publishable masterpiece. Editors, like gatekeepers of a well-ordered literary world, expect submissions to arrive in a state that’s nearly print-ready. In short, the bulk of the work is on you—the writer. It’s your story, after all. You must carry it across the finish line. Yet the industry doesn’t make it easy. The world of writing is fragmented into a dizzying array of subspecialties, each offering services designed to save you time and improve your craft—often at significant cost. But here’s the catch: much of what you’re paying for could be accomplished with the right investment in your own skills. If you already need to know the basics of grammar and formatting to complete your manuscript, why not go a step further and truly master them? Editors, for their part, are not there to handhold. Their roles are highly specific—developmental editing, line editing, proofreading, and the like. Beyond these defined tasks, their involvement is limited. They will not transform your manuscript into a polished, publishable piece, nor will they linger to answer a litany of questions. Expecting otherwise is a faux pas that will likely elicit a curt recommendation to seek other services. Even offering additional payment won’t change this dynamic. Editors typically refer out-of-scope tasks to specialists rather than straying from their clearly defined responsibilities. The manuscript you receive back from an editor may still be riddled with technical issues—spacing errors, misaligned tab indents, or inconsistent formatting—and it’s up to you to address these. If you’re lucky, you might get a brief explanation or two, but the deeper work of learning the craft remains firmly in your court. This isn’t to diminish the value of editors—they are indispensable collaborators in shaping a manuscript into its best form. But they are not finishers, nor are they personal tutors. A serious writer must approach the craft with both creativity and technical discipline. Master the mechanics. Learn the tools of your trade. Writing, in its essence, is a solitary labor that requires not just storytelling but also a willingness to shoulder the unromantic task of refinement. Therefore, we proceed to the next topic: The Many Hands Behind a Published Book. The journey from manuscript to finished book is far from straightforward. Along the way, several distinct professionals take part in shaping the final product, each with a unique role. Yet confusion persists, especially among new authors, about what these roles entail—and who should do what. An editor focuses on content. Their job is to refine the narrative, sharpen the arguments, and ensure coherence throughout the text. A copy editor, on the other hand, performs a meticulous pass to correct grammar, punctuation, spelling, and other technical errors. Then comes the typesetter, who prepares the text for publication, formatting it for readability, and ensuring it meets industry standards. In traditional publishing, all of this happens behind the scenes. Once a publisher acquires your manuscript, they oversee each step, covering the costs and coordinating the process. Your job, as the author, is to produce the manuscript—and then trust the professionals to polish and package it. But in the world of self-publishing, the onus shifts entirely to the author. Each step becomes an a la carte service, and none of it comes free. You’ll need to hire your own editor, copy editor, and typesetter—or learn to do some of the work yourself. For many, this is the unglamorous reality of self-publishing: not only must you create the story, but you also become project manager, financier, and, in some cases, technician. The result is a publishing landscape split between two realities. Traditional publishing offers expertise bundled into a package deal, while self-publishing demands entrepreneurial hustle and a willingness to navigate multiple skill sets. For authors, the choice often hinges on more than just creative vision—it’s about how much work and money they’re willing to invest in their dream. So how does this apply to Gay Authors where there aren't any professional editors or unpaid editors reaching out to offer their services? The responsibility lies on YOU, the author. You need to present a partially, near-finished manuscript to probable editors. It means the work has been PROOFREAD and edited out grammar-wise to attract lurker editors, sneakily reading snippets of stories on the site. Lay the cheese, set the trap, and I assure you...they will come. Or who knows? You might not need an editor after all since you have willingly transformed yourself into one. As for the final step, the Beta Reader. That's another mystical creature we'll set about for another day.

Dress like a computer. After dinner, say, "Encode me." I'm sure he'll start programming you. A 100%.

True. Alpha readers are generally your editor, in a sense, because if he or she is providing feedback on your partially finished or drafted work while constructing commentary regarding the overall theme of your writing/novel, then they're also an alpha reader. Like they'd give feedback on what's working or what feels weak in the overarching theme of your story. For example, the pacing at the start feels weak and needs to be more punchy, or the plot is great until you swing the story to the far left of the totem pole, where it suddenly shifts into a dramedy that feels off---stick to drama. On the other hand, beta readers are usually used near the end of the finish line. Like publishing companies would hire 3 or 5 Beta Readers then set up a panel interview to get feedback on the drafted manuscript. Their feedback is essential as the penultimate step before the last and final edit before the novel is set to production. It's also hard to find beta readers willing enough to provide constructive criticism on an unfinished manuscript, ESPECIALLY if they're unpaid. They approach your writing as casual readers, reflecting the entirety of your reader base, where their feedback revolves around inconsistencies and overall character mapping and story plotting like: Is X supposed to be dumbass? X keeps doing the same shit and it's pissing me off. X is great until B shows up. Is X meant to be written like this? If yes, then why? I have a friend who had a beta reader say to his panel feedback session, "Is your protagonist supposed to be an idiot? He keeps 'curling' his lips. Does he have a tick?" And then he realised upon inspection that he kept putting dialog tags and description as, "he curled his lips" 28x throughout his novel. 😂 Beta readers are meant to be brutally upfront. Otherwise, you're not getting what you paid for. Because the assumption is, what they're thinking is what your readers will be saying.

How dare you remind me that I'm getting older!

There's no espionage. 😢I can't see my story.

Two of my favorite things.

I agree. Sample of a Purple Prose: Your Basic Neighborhood-Friendly Prose:

Mr. Penguin looks like someone's divorced uncle who is going through his fourth divorce hearing.

Haha. Thanks for your patronage. That'd be $25.99 for my OnlyFans subscription. I'd probably finish this early next year.

I hate listening to this song. It makes me feel in love with someone I have yet to meet.

I wonder when I will finish my story.

I'm not expecting a 100% translation of the language since it's AI-based. But getting to hear the foreign language being said as though you're forming the words in your character's voice helps a lot.

The reason why I liked Google better... The reader AI will adjust to your writing's emotions. You can literally hear the AI giggling or laughing if you depicted the sentence as funny, or hear them being somber if the dialogue is sad, or they'll whisper if you said, he whispered. Plus, the AI isn't robotic sounding. At first, I was creeped out at how realistic they sounded because they sounded like real people conversing. They'll hasten their pace in talking if the writing depicts it as urgent or slow down if it's a very sad scene. And the narration when the AI reads dialogue is just chef's kiss. It's very uncanny valley. However, it only works on their multispeaker version, where a man and woman will interchange when narrating the dialogue. I wish they had this level of AI in their other voices because I wanted my story explicitly read by a man. But yeah, if you want the typical AI-sounding text-to-speech voice and copy and paste a boatload of text like an entire chapter, this isn't it. That's one for the paid version, I think.

https://cloud.google.com/text-to-speech/#demo In case anyone wants the added help out there, the free text-to-speech Google site is so good. It's literally like listening to a real-life conversation. And the caveat is, it automatically reads foreign languages like a native in the multi-speaker feature. For example: an excerpt from the current story I'm writing that's passed through the Studio, Multi-speaker output. "Lascia che ti chieda: Riccardo ti ha mai parlato del suo primo ictus?" (Let me ask you: did Riccardo ever mention his first stroke?) Aunt Sofia nodded sadly as she finished off her cigarette and lit another one. "Esattamente. Gli uomini tengono nascosti i loro problemi finché non è troppo tardi. E cosa è successo? Tuo marito è morto mentre faceva la cacca in bagno, leggendo il giornale. Quel secondo colpo avrebbe potuto essere evitato." (Exactly. Men keep their problems locked up until it’s too late. And what happened? Your husband died while taking a shit in the toilet, reading his paper. That second stroke could’ve been avoided.) Then the old woman puffing her curls suddenly noticed the well-dressed giant in front of them. She looked up and said, "E guarda questo ragazzo. Fissa il muro da anni. E' ritardato?" (And look at this guy. He’s been staring at the wall for ages. Is he retarded?) The Text-to-Speech translation will speak in Italian and then speak the English parts seamlessly. It's, amazing tbh, because now I get to hear the foreign language in my head while also getting the translated text. CONS: Limited to 500 words because it's a free version. Longer than 500 words, the page seems to lag heavily. Long paragraphs needed to be cut in the multispeaker option. Other voices don't seem to have this problem of lagging. Maybe because two speakers are doing the talking, PROS: The multi-speaker output (a man and woman speaking alternately) has the best translation quality, sounding like the most real conversation I've ever listened to. I consider passing my work on this site, the final phase of my editing process, by catching on nuanced errors like doubled-up words (example: He he went to school,) and other grammar errors like intrusive sentence structures that don't sound right. I remember spending an entire day just trying to get an entire long-ass paragraph right because there was something wrong with the phrasing of my writing. The paragraph also didn't sound right. It's free. Limited, yes. But free.

I also have issues like this with the current story I'm writing, where pockets of the narrative are set in the present tense. One line in a paragraph is written in past tense, so I have to be hyperaware. You might have some success passing your work on online editing software (like Grammarly, Quillbot, or Pro Writing Aid) for a quick touchup regarding tense issues, commas, or spelling, even. But treat it with caution. Using it critically can be beneficial. Tools like Grammarly are primarily designed for business writing, not creative work, so it’s important not to follow their recommendations blindly. It's the most basic form of editor's help you can get. It's not very succinct or particular, but it gets the job done.

The tense shifting is really jarring. In one paragraph you have, "Eric said softly, his voice full of sincerity." Then, on the next, the readers get, "I lean in and kiss you passionately, feeling the depth of our connection stir something profound within me. As I pull away, my voice is filled with sincerity." The tense switching is on and off throughout the story. It's really throwing me off .😐

Oh, definitely! The old romantic adage of torn lovers across the generational wealth gaps indeed works. I haven't read a gay novel (written masterfully) about that topic though. But putting it in a modern setting, especially in the 21st century, doesn't work anymore. Like Prince Daniel, Duke of Västergötland of Sweden was a former fitness trainer who was married to the Crown Princess of Sweden. Even Britain's Prince William is married to a commoner. But I guess the struggles of HOW said commoner is thrust into that life can be a notable novel written into paper, with how these commoners adjust to aristocratic life with their rules and processions that are very unrelatable to us peasants. Haha. I do have an idea for a novel in this genre though: A single gay, father, goes into a gay BIG BROTHER bachelor done live who tries to win the heart of a duke. Turns out they hate each other. Like, they'd punch each other's faces if they could have their way. But the cameras seem to capture their plastic fantastic moments only to pin them together, making the audience think they're the most compatible of the bunch. Instead of the Bachelor choosing who leaves, the audience decides. And, as much as the gay father wants out, and as much as the bachelor wants him out as well, they have no choice but to spend time with each other. Then as they settle out their differences, they realize this hatred may blossom into love. Until, the bachelor's real-life ex-boyfriend joins the fray, and what was not so complicated may turn out to be a mess, after all... But yeah, not ready to be writing that...maybe years from now. I don't want to write romcom after romcom after the current romcom I'm writing that I have still yet to finish.

Sadly, I think the problem with this kind of story is that it is not that these aristocrats (written in the modern age) are living in opulence and wealth but that their lives are riddled with processes, procedures, and rules that require thorough research and adamant knowledge through copious amounts of study—that I don't think a lot of people would have time for or would give their story the research it requires. That's why there are a lot of shite stories about this genre because the focus isn't on the people living in wealth or riches, which most novels written about this genre focus on. There are poor aristocrats, btw (like in England), who treat their castles as Airbnbs or tourist destinations in order to have an income. So the general consensus that all aristocrats are rich is questionable. The thing that makes aristocracy novels interesting is that regardless if one is living in a world of privilege, may that be given priority seats at a restaurant because you're the Vicount Dumarch, or whether you're given a guaranteed loan in a bank because you're the grandson of the Duke of Worthington, or, let's say, you casually dine with Taylor Swift and watch a concert later because you're Princess Sofia of (insert country), the RULES and the procedure of how those stipulations AFFECT your life and how you go about such a world is what makes this genre compelling. Like when King Charles the III (Prince Charles at the time) couldn't marry Camilla because she was a divorcee, aristocratic rules such as these are what made The Crown such an amazing TV to watch because they're literally a select number of people who are bound to live by such rules unless they abdicate their crown, stature, or renounce their position in public. But romcoms are more lenient, I think. However, any romcom in this genre would still require ample research. Unless one is making a Hallmark version with 0 budget or ZERO research. 😂