Tag Archives: feminism

A Tale of Two Blurbs

Getting another promotion together for the first book in the Paradox Series. Hope to get some reviews, increase visibility, get readers to invest in the series–all the usual stuff.  Anyway, the outfit I’m working with rewrote my blurb, as part of their services.

To be honest, the existing blurb could be better. I didn’t slip in the time machine as smoothly as I should have, for instance:

Pete Bedauern began his life as a latchkey kid in a run-down trailer park with a single mom, living on stale hot dog buns and bleak prospects. Those were the cards Fate had dealt him, and Pete was on his way to becoming an angry young man. Then Pete’s estranged uncle burst on the scene to punch Fate in the mouth.

Uncle Si is scarred inside and out; he’s a hard drinker; painfully blunt; a little mysterious and maybe even scary, but takes an interest in his nephew that Pete’s father never took. Most of Uncle Si’s life is a secret, but through the part of it he shares, Pete undergoes a master course on life, love, and full-contact sports.

As it turns out, Uncle Si not only has tons of money, multiple businesses, and a fleet of fast cars–he also owns a time machine.

Paradox is one good-hearted-but-alienated boy’s odyssey into manhood, and Escaping Fate is the opening leg of that journey. Before it’s complete, Pete will learn the guarded secrets of history, take on a pan-continuum conspiracy, contend for a world championship, crack the code for success with women…and even save the world.

Well, one world, maybe…

And here’s the rewrite:

Plunge into the gritty reality of Pete Bedauern, boy marooned in the desolation of decrepit trailer park, his life monotonous echo of neglect under the care of beleaguered single mother. 

His days, blend of stale sustenance and dwindling hopes, seem destined to mold him into resentful youth. But destiny takes an unexpected turn with the explosive arrival of Uncle Si, figure as enigmatic as he is transformative.

Uncle Si, marked by life’s brutal trials with scars both visible and hidden, emerges as an unlikely mentor. He is unapologetically raw, man who’s tasted life’s extremes, from the depths of pain to the peaks of success. Beneath his gruff exterior and shrouded past, he harbors profound interest in Pete, offering the paternal attention Pete has long been starved of. Through Uncle Si’s guidance, Pete embarks on profound journey, masterclass in the nuances of life, the complexities of love, and the adrenaline of full-contact sports.

But Uncle Si is more than just mentor with worldly possessions and wisdom. He possesses staggering secret – time machine. As Pete steps into the realm of the impossible, he is catapulted into thrilling odyssey. “Paradox” is not just journey through time; it is Pete’s voyage into the heart of manhood. Along this electrifying path, he unravels history’s hidden truths, confronts sinister pan-continuum conspiracy, vies for world championship, and deciphers the elusive art of winning hearts.

As Pete navigates this labyrinth of adventures, he stands on the precipice of not just changing his own fate, but the destiny of an entire world. 

This is more than story of growth; it’s an exhilarating ride through time and transformation, where boy emerges not just as man, but as savior of worlds – at least one, perhaps more.

Me personally, I don’t see this as much of an improvement. Seems like they just jammed in as many SEO keywords, adjectives an “strong action verbs” as possible, without even knowing what happens in the book. In fact, I wonder if they used AI to come up with this.

“Plunge into the gritty reality of…”

“He possesses a staggering secret…”

“…labyrinth of adventures…”

Holy purple prose, Batman.

“…the nuances of life, the complexities of love, and the adrenaline of full-contact sports.”

Is that really better than simply “life, love, and full contact sports”?

Seems like change for the sake of change. When you look at something objectively, there is prose that works and prose that doesn’t work. The assumption here is apparently that absolutely nothing in the existing blurb works…that every single sentence needs to be cram-packed with adjectives and over-the-top verbs.

I don’t buy it.

Does this writing style really sell books?

With some changes, they’re trying to cast a wider net and attract every kind of reader. Note how they changed this line to avoid offending feminists, white knights and manginas:

My words: “…crack the code for success with women…”

Their words: “…deciphers the elusive art of winning hearts.”

But, see, my books are not for every kind of reader–especially feminists, white knights and manginas. This version of the blurb may not offend them, but what’s in the book still will. I learned from experience to intentionally put trigger words/phrases in product descriptions to scare the woketard Thought Police away. These folks are trying to undo that. And frankly, their version sounds lame.

“…beleaguered single mother”? Beleaguered by who or what? Why do they say that? I’ll tell you why: once again, they’re trying to avoid offending the Karens in our gynocentric culture. “See here, Henry! Single mothers are heroes and victims! In the problematic way you wrote it, you leave room for people to assume that being raised by a single mother might be less than ideal. You have to make it clear that any shortcomings of a mother raising a child in that scenario must obviously be somebody else’s fault!”

Maybe I should go ahead and run it close to how they wrote it, and see if it has an effect on sales. They may not know much about the book they’re trying to describe (in a voice completely unlike the voice of the narrator), but it might be a safe assumption that they know a lot more about SEO than I do.

If I were a reader/shopper, the existing blurb would have a much better chance of piquing my interest than the the version the professionals (or AI) came up with. But I also know not everybody thinks like I do.

Here’s the book in question.

Here’s the link to buy it outside of Amazon.

The US Armed Forces’ Mission Is Not to Fight Wars

Congress has forbid the Army from imposing physical fitness standards on its soldiers because it “discriminates based on gender.”

Single standards are sexist. (Probably racist, too–I’m sure somebody has already said so.) In our altruistic pursuit of equality, only heterosexual males should be held to standards.

Our moral/intellectual superiors have made the Armed Forces a hostile environment for white heterosexual males (especially if they love their country), so go figure: the very demographic that won the war that freed the slaves, and won two world wars, knows it is not welcome there, and is finding other ways to make a living that don’t suck as much. (And trust me–life in the combat arms sucks plenty, even without adding all the cultural Marxist idiocy.)

But now the favored demographic is leaving in droves because badass womyn warriors don’t want to take the Combat Fitness test. 84% of them can’t pass it. And that is a problem. (Not failure to be combat ready–the problem is not enough womyn, of course.)

But the answer is not to enforce standards and make sure slots are filled according to who is capable of fulfilling the mission. Oh no. Only some sexist science-denier who believes there are only two sexes (and that those sexes are biologically different) would propose such discriminatory policy. It’s not like combat could be physically strenuous or anything. Besides, every action movie for the last 30 years has taught us that womyn are stronger than men, anyway.

Actions speak louder than words. Whatever word salad the uniformed Yes Men (and womyn) regurgitate to justify this absurdity, what they are saying is: “Diversity and inclusivity are more important than combat effectiveness.”

Diversity and inclusivity, of course, mean anti-white heterosexual male.

The Globohomo Cabal wants to destroy America, and they’ve just about done it. Economic collapse is one method in their tool box. Pushing us into a pointless war with Russia (over Ukraine or whatever) is another way. And they want to guarantee we lose. But it might prove to be a double-edged sword for them–because they’re also provoking a civil war with the very white heterosexual males who are willing to uphold and defend the US Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic.

On a tactical level, I rather like our odds in a 3/4GW scenario going head-to-head against a bunch of fat dikes, entitled karens and gender-confused freaks who can be convinced to quit by the prospect of taking a PT test.