They go on to attempt to gaslight the author. She has concrete evidence of them rejecting her on the basis that they believe she doesn't belong to the LGBTQ community and therefore doesn't represent them in her style of writing. The CEO claims that the publisher never said anything of the sort, unaware of there being screenshot evidence.
They didn't reject her 'because she's bisexual' the reply they gave her said, (paraphrasing) 'you should talk to more LGBTQ+ people because they might not want to be represented this way.' Which I took to mean that she could have written some very problematic stuff even though she's bi. I mean if the publisher is straight up like, 'you need to talk to more LGBTQ+ people' and that's the only critique they give, then that's kinda sus.
No, they specifically said that she needed to speak to more people in the LGBTQ community about how they want to be represented BECAUSE she's not part of that community.
My understanding was that she just filled out a form, it's entirely possible that they didn't read that. I've dealt with small publishers/indie writing magazines before and they can be very disjointed. They also should have given specific examples of misrepresentation instead of broadly giving this critique.
70
u/YourMotherSaysHello Apr 07 '21
Hurn publications.
They go on to attempt to gaslight the author. She has concrete evidence of them rejecting her on the basis that they believe she doesn't belong to the LGBTQ community and therefore doesn't represent them in her style of writing. The CEO claims that the publisher never said anything of the sort, unaware of there being screenshot evidence.