In case new people are reading this, you should generally expect me to ramble on about whatever. I started the journal to be able to have a fangirly moment about the Adrien English novels -- that was when there were only three of them. On June 1st of whatever year that was, a day or so after that, I started to use the LJ for a gardening journal. I had been making entries into a few years' worth of copies of The Literate Gardener's Notebook, which has the day's date, provides lines to write on, and has quotes from one of my very favorite gardening writers, Louise Beebe Wilder. The LJ has pretty much replaced my entries in that.
One day, I posted about which authors I thought did good, realistically male characters in m/m romance. I learned much later that some of the authors I'd mentioned were genderqueer, which has nothing to do with how well they write. But I couldn't help thinking that perhaps that explained something about how masterful a touch they had in conveying male viewpoints. There are plenty of authors who identify with their physical gender and do fantastic jobs of portraying opposite-sex viewpoints. Then there are the female m/m romance authors who wouldn't know a male viewpoint if it bit them, and I freely mock them for it. I don't think I've really named names, but I know who they are. I try to stay with generalities when commenting on writing I think is crappy, and not mention specific books or authors.
I said that I would turn that particular post into a gardening entry if anyone commented. James didn't comment, but added me as a friend. Sometimes I post about characters and stories of James' that I really liked, though I will bitch about James not only deserving but needing good proofreaders. I'm really a fan of J.L. Langley's, too, and I've mentioned that some of her stories could have been proofread and edited better. I think Samhain's getting better with that generally. Ms. Langley still uses "may" instead of "might," though, and someone should have talked with her about that. I'm not faulting the authors here, I'm faulting the editors. I'm sure this post will be full of typos, since I'm complaining about poor proofreading.
Eventually, the journal became about half gardening journal and half about what I was reading. I don't say too much specifically about the books I proof or edit for a certain publisher, except to note things like, for instance, having done six werewolf stories in a row and getting a little tired of werewolves. I'm not sure if I said anything about still being bitter about the manticores. Having manticores was actually kind of a cool idea, and quite imaginative, but there were certain science questions we had to answer in editing the series. Remind me to e-mail James about the outcome of the manifold questions I had, because the final judgement on that was really funny.
I think I started using the "gay-related" tag when I began posting about m/m romances. I eventually switched to "m/m" as a tag for the romances, and used "gay-related" more often when posting about my volunteer job working with the historian of the GLBT group at [local university]. I believe my posts about that group evolved from just quoting the funny things M. said. He can get away with making gay jokes. S. cracked me up when he told me about a female friend of his who consistently fell for young men of the so-not-straight-acting variety. Apparently it wasn't just that they were somewhat effeminate. "They piss glitter!" S. said.
I joined the m/m romance fans Yahoo group when Jessewave (http://reviewsbyjessewave.com) mentioned it. I don't go to her site all the time because it takes so long to load. But she does a lot of interesting things on there -- reviews, contests, interviews. The group started out as slash fans, but now it's more than half authors, so you really have to watch what you say. It's not hard for me to be complimentary of some of the authors' books, considering who's on there, but I haven't read anything by certain of the authors, and others have written books I really didn't like. So it's not a place to freely give your opinion, I don't think. I'll say something if I really liked a book.
One of the posters on there got me hooked on Alles Was Zahlt (http://awz.parakaproductions.com), and now I post about that quite a bit. I've been watching a lot more TV than reading, though I have some good e-books in my "to-be-read" files, and some good print books to read, as well.
So in the spring, summer, and fall, I have a lot of gardening entries. I'm quite happy to post for days on end about which Old Garden Roses were blooming on what day in late May or early June, or which herbs I planted and how they're doing. This started as a gardening journal, and that's still a main purpose of the journal. It was always designed for my use that way, so I could look up what was blooming when. My rants on m/m romance are repetitive, my rants on editing and proofreading are repetitive, and I'm sure my rambling about the soap opera will continue to be repetitive. My views on gay rights haven't really changed in the last couple of years. I read posts on blogs or other LJs, and elaborate on my thoughts about them here. I don't know how to do that "ping-back" thing, but I'll put the links in. I figure the gardening entries are practically designed to be boring for anyone but me. Some of my entries may have interesting stuff, but generally because I found a good quote or post of someone else's. I'd recommend doing a lot of skipping around unless you have an avid interest in antique roses, or colchicums, or bronze fennel.