Mikey’s review of Femme Feral > Likes and Comments
81 likes · Like
you tell em twin! 👏🏽👏🏽
Sidney wrote: "you tell em twin! 👏🏽👏🏽"
I'm seriously so disappointed, I really thought this was going to be an absolute banger! 😭
Oh no - I have this on my NG shelf. Can you tell me how you can find out if it’s written by AI?
Ashley (ashreadsitall) wrote: "Oh no - I have this on my NG shelf. Can you tell me how you can find out if it’s written by AI?"
The author wrote in the acknowledgements that she used chatGPT literally to come up with some AI gibberish, it was really weird. Like friend, you already came up with a menopause werewolf story, just imagine some weird stuff AI would say, I don't believe it's outside the realm of your imagination!
Authors who use chatgpt should automatically get 1 star you did the right thing
Thank you! This is disappointing and I will. It be reading or reviewing now. Appreciate your help!
AI in a traditionally published novel??????? Ughhhhhhhhh
banika wrote: "Oof disappointing"
Seriously disappointing! I just want people to do better 😭
That's the fastest I've ever added and then deleted a book from my tbr lmao
Same, Zana. The publisher sent me a widget but Imma pass!
Y'all I am SCREAMING, the publisher sent me a widget too when I clearly already read and hated the book 💀
Unfair! She only used ChatGPT to write the parts generated by AI in the book!
ay ay ay...are we reaaaaally going to excuse an author using chatgpt to write portions of her book??
She’s Stranger Than Fiction wrote: "Unfair! She only used ChatGPT to write the parts generated by AI in the book!"
Ok. My issue is that the author used ChatGPT period and included it in their book with no mention of it until the acknowledgements at the end of the book. As a reader against AI I'd like to know if an author has used AI prior to reading the whole book. Frankly WHAT the author used ChatGPT for is just rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic for me. If you don't care about it, that's fine. We clearly disagree on acceptable uses of ChatGPT and the book as a whole, which I didn't like that much outside of the issue I have already mentioned anyway, so please go interact with other reviewers who agreed with your review and rating.
That commenter saying that with her whole chest when the author couldn't just ... Use her imagination and skills and come up with AI slop herself??? Lmao GTFO
Where in the acknowledgements do you see her saying she uses ChatGPT? I was looking at my copy and dont see her mention it?
Karli wrote: "Where in the acknowledgements do you see her saying she uses ChatGPT? I was looking at my copy and dont see her mention it?"
Hey I was wrong, it's in the author's note, not the acknowledgements, so that's my bad. In her author's note she says "Because this is a book specifically mocking how banal and unhelpful AI Language Learning Models are in the context of mental health, I thought it would be useful and interesting (as well as funny) to have ChatGPT itself generate the nonsense meditation that appears in the chapter title "Generalized Anxiety"." I wanna echo Zana here, I don't really see how using ChatGPT outright is mocking it? (With another chapter meditation being used by Apple's predictive text.) And I also feel positive the author could have used their own imagination to create AI gibberish. Especially when the author goes on to say other AI mediations that appear in the novel are original creations. That defeats the purpose to me.
Ok thank you! I had thought maybe they had deleted it since I got my copy just yesterday but I found it in mine. But I totally agree with you, what a strange thing to do.
Zana wrote: "That commenter saying that with her whole chest when the author couldn't just ... Use her imagination and skills and come up with AI slop herself??? Lmao GTFO"
I don't understand coming onto other people's reviews to do this kind of thing. Someone last year said I must be fun at parties because in a review I said I didn't like a boy wizard mention in the year of our lord 2025. I saw someone get up in Sidney's comments about a book she didn't like that they loved. Please go away! I would have to be like, so beyond mad to comment on someone's 1 star review of something and personally I definitely wouldn't be defending the use of ChatGPT (no matter the context) but ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ that's the internet for ya
"This is, alongside many of the subjects in this book, a sensitive point, and I understand that some readers would have preferred I didn't use ChatGPT at all, but I just couldn't resist using the thing in this small instance to demonstrate its own ridiculousness"...she then goes on to say she doesn't want AI in literature & she urges her local representatives to push for better regulation on the use of it in literature. not 100% sure that using AI in parts of your book is proving a good point that you don't want AI in literature...seems like flawed logic if you ask me ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Karli wrote: "Ok thank you! I had thought maybe they had deleted it since I got my copy just yesterday but I found it in mine. But I totally agree with you, what a strange thing to do."
No, thank you for asking since I misremembered where I read the author stated their use of ChatGPT so it was good for me to double check! I've been thinking about it and puzzling about it since I reread their statement and I just can't fathom how using ChatGPT is mocking AI. Kind of feels like the author was cutting of their nose to spite their face, like I don't think you did what you were trying to do there bestie 😣
Sidney wrote: ""This is, alongside many of the subjects in this book, a sensitive point, and I understand that some readers would have preferred I didn't use ChatGPT at all, but I just couldn't resist using the t..."
Omg EXACTLY THIS!! Like omg if you don't want AI in books, THEN DON'T USE IT! Especially if you're "trying to make a point" about AI, hello???? Also this specific part "I just couldn't resist using the thing in this small instance to demonstrate its own ridiculousness" ok, have you tried trying harder to resist, if you're as against AI as you claim which, it feels like you're actually not?
Sidney wrote: ""This is, alongside many of the subjects in this book, a sensitive point, and I understand that some readers would have preferred I didn't use ChatGPT at all, but I just couldn't resist using the t..."
Rules for thee, but not for me 😒
Personally I don’t want to read books written with A.I. so I agree with you. The vague ideas of acceptable use for A.I. in publishing are really problematic. For example, here we have a white lady using A.I. for part of her book and the publisher is ok with that; but the poc lady uses A.I. and her book gets dumped by the publisher (Shy Girl). Seems to me there are a whole lotta rules around A.I. use that need clarification.
Justine wrote: "Personally I don’t want to read books written with A.I. so I agree with you. The vague ideas of acceptable use for A.I. in publishing are really problematic. For example, here we have a white lady ..."
Absolutely agree, I'm not sure if you're on NetGalley but interestingly Femme Feral has been reuploaded there and the copy seems to be different from the version that I read. However I'm only basing that on the fact that I have to request the new version; I'm wondering if the publisher had the author cut out the chatgpt parts in light of what happened with Shy Girl? But to your point, interesting that this author is allowed to correct the issue (if that's why it's being rereleased on NetGalley) prior to publishing when Shy Girl was not afforded the same opportunity. I've seen this happen a few times with indie books that get trad pub'd that seem like they don't undergo any kind of editing process? Why not? (Looking directly at the Dungeon Crawler Carl series.) And we don't even have time to get into other authors who have fully admitted to using AI to write books out of boredom and faced no repercussions of any kind that I have seen and I had never even heard about those authors doing it. Either way, you're right, we need to get very clear with what rules there are regarding AI in publishing and quickly because unfortunately, it's happening
Is it really a new version? I just assumed they ran out of arc copies for the first one and uploaded a second one
Zana wrote: "Is it really a new version? I just assumed they ran out of arc copies for the first one and uploaded a second one"
I'm not sure! I know I still have access to the first upload and I would need to rerequest the second one, I got that invite from the publisher you did a few weeks ago, I just clicked on that email to see which version it took me to and it's the old/first one. I'm curious to know if there are any changes, but frankly, not curious enough to request it again. I think you've been on NetGalley a lot longer than me, is uploading a second copy of a book for more people to read/review common?
Mikey wrote: "Zana wrote: "Is it really a new version? I just assumed they ran out of arc copies for the first one and uploaded a second one"
I'm not sure! I know I still have access to the first upload and I w..."
Yeah I've seen multiple uploads for popular arcs. They're probably trying really hard to get this book hyped up. Controversy sells, I guess
Zana wrote: "Mikey wrote: "Zana wrote: "Is it really a new version? I just assumed they ran out of arc copies for the first one and uploaded a second one"
I'm not sure! I know I still have access to the first ..."
Got it! I think this is my first time seeing it, which led to my confusion. Well that's super disappointing then, god forbid a publisher actually fix an issue when faced with public scrutiny & backlash. You said it best, controversy sells apparently 🙃
back to top
date
newest »
newest »
message 1:
by
Sidney
(new)
Oct 21, 2025 11:12AM
you tell em twin! 👏🏽👏🏽
reply
|
flag
Sidney wrote: "you tell em twin! 👏🏽👏🏽"I'm seriously so disappointed, I really thought this was going to be an absolute banger! 😭
Oh no - I have this on my NG shelf. Can you tell me how you can find out if it’s written by AI?
Ashley (ashreadsitall) wrote: "Oh no - I have this on my NG shelf. Can you tell me how you can find out if it’s written by AI?"The author wrote in the acknowledgements that she used chatGPT literally to come up with some AI gibberish, it was really weird. Like friend, you already came up with a menopause werewolf story, just imagine some weird stuff AI would say, I don't believe it's outside the realm of your imagination!
Authors who use chatgpt should automatically get 1 star you did the right thing
Thank you! This is disappointing and I will. It be reading or reviewing now. Appreciate your help!
AI in a traditionally published novel??????? Ughhhhhhhhh
banika wrote: "Oof disappointing"Seriously disappointing! I just want people to do better 😭
That's the fastest I've ever added and then deleted a book from my tbr lmao
Same, Zana. The publisher sent me a widget but Imma pass!
Y'all I am SCREAMING, the publisher sent me a widget too when I clearly already read and hated the book 💀
Unfair! She only used ChatGPT to write the parts generated by AI in the book!
ay ay ay...are we reaaaaally going to excuse an author using chatgpt to write portions of her book??
She’s Stranger Than Fiction wrote: "Unfair! She only used ChatGPT to write the parts generated by AI in the book!"Ok. My issue is that the author used ChatGPT period and included it in their book with no mention of it until the acknowledgements at the end of the book. As a reader against AI I'd like to know if an author has used AI prior to reading the whole book. Frankly WHAT the author used ChatGPT for is just rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic for me. If you don't care about it, that's fine. We clearly disagree on acceptable uses of ChatGPT and the book as a whole, which I didn't like that much outside of the issue I have already mentioned anyway, so please go interact with other reviewers who agreed with your review and rating.
That commenter saying that with her whole chest when the author couldn't just ... Use her imagination and skills and come up with AI slop herself??? Lmao GTFO
Where in the acknowledgements do you see her saying she uses ChatGPT? I was looking at my copy and dont see her mention it?
Karli wrote: "Where in the acknowledgements do you see her saying she uses ChatGPT? I was looking at my copy and dont see her mention it?"Hey I was wrong, it's in the author's note, not the acknowledgements, so that's my bad. In her author's note she says "Because this is a book specifically mocking how banal and unhelpful AI Language Learning Models are in the context of mental health, I thought it would be useful and interesting (as well as funny) to have ChatGPT itself generate the nonsense meditation that appears in the chapter title "Generalized Anxiety"." I wanna echo Zana here, I don't really see how using ChatGPT outright is mocking it? (With another chapter meditation being used by Apple's predictive text.) And I also feel positive the author could have used their own imagination to create AI gibberish. Especially when the author goes on to say other AI mediations that appear in the novel are original creations. That defeats the purpose to me.
Ok thank you! I had thought maybe they had deleted it since I got my copy just yesterday but I found it in mine. But I totally agree with you, what a strange thing to do.
Zana wrote: "That commenter saying that with her whole chest when the author couldn't just ... Use her imagination and skills and come up with AI slop herself??? Lmao GTFO"I don't understand coming onto other people's reviews to do this kind of thing. Someone last year said I must be fun at parties because in a review I said I didn't like a boy wizard mention in the year of our lord 2025. I saw someone get up in Sidney's comments about a book she didn't like that they loved. Please go away! I would have to be like, so beyond mad to comment on someone's 1 star review of something and personally I definitely wouldn't be defending the use of ChatGPT (no matter the context) but ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ that's the internet for ya
"This is, alongside many of the subjects in this book, a sensitive point, and I understand that some readers would have preferred I didn't use ChatGPT at all, but I just couldn't resist using the thing in this small instance to demonstrate its own ridiculousness"...she then goes on to say she doesn't want AI in literature & she urges her local representatives to push for better regulation on the use of it in literature. not 100% sure that using AI in parts of your book is proving a good point that you don't want AI in literature...seems like flawed logic if you ask me ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Karli wrote: "Ok thank you! I had thought maybe they had deleted it since I got my copy just yesterday but I found it in mine. But I totally agree with you, what a strange thing to do."No, thank you for asking since I misremembered where I read the author stated their use of ChatGPT so it was good for me to double check! I've been thinking about it and puzzling about it since I reread their statement and I just can't fathom how using ChatGPT is mocking AI. Kind of feels like the author was cutting of their nose to spite their face, like I don't think you did what you were trying to do there bestie 😣
Sidney wrote: ""This is, alongside many of the subjects in this book, a sensitive point, and I understand that some readers would have preferred I didn't use ChatGPT at all, but I just couldn't resist using the t..."Omg EXACTLY THIS!! Like omg if you don't want AI in books, THEN DON'T USE IT! Especially if you're "trying to make a point" about AI, hello???? Also this specific part "I just couldn't resist using the thing in this small instance to demonstrate its own ridiculousness" ok, have you tried trying harder to resist, if you're as against AI as you claim which, it feels like you're actually not?
Sidney wrote: ""This is, alongside many of the subjects in this book, a sensitive point, and I understand that some readers would have preferred I didn't use ChatGPT at all, but I just couldn't resist using the t..."Rules for thee, but not for me 😒
Personally I don’t want to read books written with A.I. so I agree with you. The vague ideas of acceptable use for A.I. in publishing are really problematic. For example, here we have a white lady using A.I. for part of her book and the publisher is ok with that; but the poc lady uses A.I. and her book gets dumped by the publisher (Shy Girl). Seems to me there are a whole lotta rules around A.I. use that need clarification.
Justine wrote: "Personally I don’t want to read books written with A.I. so I agree with you. The vague ideas of acceptable use for A.I. in publishing are really problematic. For example, here we have a white lady ..."Absolutely agree, I'm not sure if you're on NetGalley but interestingly Femme Feral has been reuploaded there and the copy seems to be different from the version that I read. However I'm only basing that on the fact that I have to request the new version; I'm wondering if the publisher had the author cut out the chatgpt parts in light of what happened with Shy Girl? But to your point, interesting that this author is allowed to correct the issue (if that's why it's being rereleased on NetGalley) prior to publishing when Shy Girl was not afforded the same opportunity. I've seen this happen a few times with indie books that get trad pub'd that seem like they don't undergo any kind of editing process? Why not? (Looking directly at the Dungeon Crawler Carl series.) And we don't even have time to get into other authors who have fully admitted to using AI to write books out of boredom and faced no repercussions of any kind that I have seen and I had never even heard about those authors doing it. Either way, you're right, we need to get very clear with what rules there are regarding AI in publishing and quickly because unfortunately, it's happening
Is it really a new version? I just assumed they ran out of arc copies for the first one and uploaded a second one
Zana wrote: "Is it really a new version? I just assumed they ran out of arc copies for the first one and uploaded a second one"I'm not sure! I know I still have access to the first upload and I would need to rerequest the second one, I got that invite from the publisher you did a few weeks ago, I just clicked on that email to see which version it took me to and it's the old/first one. I'm curious to know if there are any changes, but frankly, not curious enough to request it again. I think you've been on NetGalley a lot longer than me, is uploading a second copy of a book for more people to read/review common?
Mikey wrote: "Zana wrote: "Is it really a new version? I just assumed they ran out of arc copies for the first one and uploaded a second one"I'm not sure! I know I still have access to the first upload and I w..."
Yeah I've seen multiple uploads for popular arcs. They're probably trying really hard to get this book hyped up. Controversy sells, I guess
Zana wrote: "Mikey wrote: "Zana wrote: "Is it really a new version? I just assumed they ran out of arc copies for the first one and uploaded a second one"I'm not sure! I know I still have access to the first ..."
Got it! I think this is my first time seeing it, which led to my confusion. Well that's super disappointing then, god forbid a publisher actually fix an issue when faced with public scrutiny & backlash. You said it best, controversy sells apparently 🙃
