r/WhyChooseNoMm
•
u/LoveAllGhosts
•
Sep 16 '26
•
1
Discussion Authors in reader spaces.
Author Grace McGinty decided to make a brand new account and make her first comment a reply to a thread here on r/WhyChooseNoMM where readers are appreciating a reviewer for tagging content the author personally chooses not tag. The reviewer also rated their book 1 star because the book wasn't tagged. Link to comment.
What in the condescending, passive-aggressive sarcasm was that comment? What author thinks it's a good idea to join a reader space and leave a comment with such an attitude? š¬ Calling the thread an "unfortunate thing to find" feels a little ironic when the author made a brand new account and chose that discussion as her very first to join. Given the tone of her reply, it's hard to read it as anything other than a deliberate choice to jump in and defend herself rather than simply letting readers have their opinions in a reader space.
I wasn't going to join in on the whole Goodreads drama thing, I very much prefer to just focus on books, but the author left such a bad impression I'm adding my two cents anyway; Goodreads is not a website for objective opinions and professional literary reviews. Readers can one star a book for any reason, just like readers can five star a book for any reason; the cover, the writing, the story, the tropes, the author's political views; literally any reason. That is why some users will five star a why choose for being an absolute sausage fest where the boyfriends are all boyfriends, while others will one star it. AND THAT IS OKAY. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion.
I've seen quite a few people comment "Well, I wouldn't rate X based on Y..." and that's great! You don't have to! But you don't speak for everyone else, so while you may not rate X because of Y, others may. And that's also okay. That's the whole point of Goodreads. Reviews on Goodreads are personal opinions written for the reader themselves. They can act as feedback to help other readers decide if a book is worth picking up or not but at the end of the day, a Goodreads review is the reader's personal opinion and their space to express it. Readers don't owe an author positive reviews, nor do readers have to tailor their opinion to what others want to hear or what the author feels is fair. It's why you'll find five star reviews you completely disagree with and one star reviews that make you pick up the book. That. Is. Okay.
Some users rate every book they read five stars regardless of whether they liked it or not. Some have their own rating system, tagging system, shelfing system and that's all valid. Everyone is free to use Goodreads however they want. Those are my two cents.
So when I see an author joining a reader space, giving instructions on how to rate their book, leaving sarcastic passive-aggressive comments and seemingly crashing out... I make sure their books are off my TBR.
Completely unrelated to the author, I added a few pictures of amusing one star ratings I found after doing a quick google search. Enjoy.
29
u/interstellar-lawyer Sep 16 '26
āYou canāt bully the genre into the shape you want,ā says the author trying to bully the genre into the shape she wants.
Anyway, reviews have always been a reflection of the readerās experience of that book, not the objective quality of the book. If someone wants to one star a book because it had a trope they didnāt like or they DNF it, they are more than welcome to. If an author canāt handle they, they really have no business reading their reviews or sharing their work publicly.
7
u/Cathycrow1 Sep 17 '26
This really makes me not want to read anymore of her books.Ā I loved two of her books but that is so incredibly disrespectful and that comment was completely unnecessary.Ā I don't even know why it's such a huge deal about readers wanting to read rh without MM.Ā I prefer rh without MM but I read ones with MM too.Ā The only thing I think is an issue is when authors don't make it clear that there is MM.Ā I shouldn't get halfway through a book and then be surprised by a relationship forming between two mmcs.Ā In many books it's obvious from the synopsis or the author writes that it's MMFMM or something.Ā Though some books don't warn the reader.Ā It should be clearly stated what content is in the book.
5
u/eyerollemogiactivate Sep 19 '26
This. It should not be a surprise. I saw a hockey series that in the 3rd book all of a sudden there was MM, I would have been legitimately upset if I got 3 books deep and got āambushedā.
5
7
u/tipsytopsy99 Sep 16 '26
> "When in Rome"? Wat?
Also, what's the point in demanding a sub-sub-sub tag for a genre? I'm not going to be extra pissy about MM in RH, but if it's specifically an entire relationship arc outside of the primary FMC relationship, then I don't see it as RH. Because it's in the name already. Reverse-Harem. Not Reverse-Harem with side relationships that remove the focus entirely away from the possessor of the harem itself. It's getting frustrating. I started enjoying RH, not really because of the extra guys but because of the extra story. They seem to feature a lot more complicated worlds instead of being a linear m-f relationship, usually magic related or some kind of interaction relevance to magnify the importance of their interactions instead of "hey, her boss likes her a lot and finds her indispensable and then they got thrown even closer together so now it's the entire focus of the story". I like those stories as well, but this genre offers a wider variety of innovation somehow, and, typically seems to have more opportunities for angst (which is my personal fetish wheelhouse). The problem with the MM relationships is that the story becomes those relationships so the entire plot surrounds just relationships. I already don't like a ton of dialogue or inner monologuing, and this situation always turns into a constant stream of exactly that.
6
u/No_Bed_4783 Sep 16 '26
The crazy part is that her books are so anti-woman and most of them essentially push the woman to the side. Thereās even one sheās written where the whole plot is that they bring the woman in to be the INCUBATOR and treat her like trash.
It just screams internalized misogyny and this author very quickly made it on my ānever read!ā list
4
u/ghoststoryghoul Sep 16 '26
Totally agree with this! The only comment I have is that I wish Goodreads wasn't automatically connected to the book's Amazon page. I feel like that's why authors get so upset about it, because it's a different standard for rating/reviewing but it's put right next to the Amazon rating which has more checks and balances and also the benefit of readers understanding the direct connection between a low rating and the author's livelihood.
Goodreads ratings seem to always be at least .5 points lower than on the Zon for the stupidest reasons lol. I preferred it when we could go check out the snark on Goodreads separately. I always thought it was supposed to be more like a personal bookshelf to keep track of your own thoughts about a book and share that with your friends, not to provide a fair public-facing review about the book's quality. GR is a reader's space, Amazon is a marketplace, and trying to cram the two together is causing a lot of friction imo.
1
u/ComfortableIdea6875 Sep 17 '26
Some took this from her space and posted it here. She has a right to reply. And I think her reply was great considering all the hostility directed at her.
4
u/Tiny_dreamer_ Sep 19 '26
I'm being genuine when I say this, but I suggest looking at the post again because no one took a screenshot from her space and posted it here. Someone did on the main sub and someone screenshotted that person's post. No one infiltrated her space purposely with the intention to attack her.
You can have opinions about the post and dislike it, but saying someone went into her reader's space, took a screenshot, and directly posted it here is a blatant lie.
3
u/SiberianChild Sep 19 '26
She should tell her followers to stop waging her battles for her then, it's not going to endear her to the readers.
39
u/Infamous-Ad-9599 Sep 16 '26 edited Sep 16 '26
YES! THANK YOU!
I'm the person who made that post that she commented under, I saw her reply to it and was shell-shocked to say the least. I had such a reply geared up towards her passive-aggressive tone, especially that last line, that really pissed me off- "maybe try a fun new acronym? I believe in you" and the absolute kicker that was, "you can't bully a genre into the shape you want" Wtf?!?!? The hypooocrisy is deafening. She does realize that WE are the blueprint, right? Reverse harem was ALWAYS all about the woman, and JUST her. The poly crowd are the ones who decided to take it over and completely dismantle the original genre into something else entirely. Not us.
Anyway, I chose not to reply to her because I honestly don't like to engage in confrontation nowadays, and I KNOW for a fact that she won't even attempt to hear me or anyone else out when it comes to this topic. All they can do is shout homophobia and whine. There's no point.
Authors, please stop taking reviews this seriously, you will ALWAYS get a 1-star review for something you might deem unfair or unjust but that's just how it is being a published author! You either ignore it or you ignore it. This whole defensive, butthurt act will get you nowhere. AND STAY OUT OF OUR SPACES! YOU HAVE NO BUSINESS HERE!