The Water Outlaws, by S. L. Huang won an
impressive list of award nominations and rave reviews. I hesitate to offer a
contrary opinion because it did not work for me. Fortunately, we do not all
enjoy the same books, so I offer these comments as solely my own.
I have a background of over 25 years in Chinese martial arts
and I often feature women warriors in my own novels, so I dove into The
Water Outlaws eagerly, confident that it would be just the kind of story I relish.
I enjoyed the opening, especially the protagonist, expert martial arts
instructor Lin Chong. Her personal prowess and teaching style were portrayed
wonderfully. Other, equally fascinating and sympathetic characters soon
followed. Lin Chong works for the Emperor, training his soldiers even when her
superiors are fine with sloppy technique and incompetent military strategy. She’s
unthinkingly loyal, but more than that, she has a profound ethical center.
About halfway through the book, it was clear to me that the
villains were two-dimensional caricatures of wealthy, powerful, manipulative
but ultimately insecure men. There was not just one, but three major villains,
for the most part interchangeable and acting in highly predictable ways. I have
no idea of the historical accuracy of this portrayal, only that I found them
extremely unpleasant to read about. The real world has enough hideous,
exploitive strong men in it without my giving free rent in my head to those
without any discernible redeeming virtues.
Before too long, Lin Chong fends off a rape attempt by a
corrupt, powerful official and finds herself in disgrace, tattooed as a
criminal, and sentenced to slave labor that amounts to a death sentence. In desperate
condition, she is rescued and then recruited by the women bandits of Liangshan,
mountain outlaws who proclaim their belief in justice. The outlaws are a mixed
group, some spiritual, others brutal, some leaders, some followers, and still
others out only for their own power. The way the story is set up, Lin Chong has
nowhere else to go, so she does her best to forge a new life. After a great
deal of power wrangling within the bandits, she gains a measure of trust and responsibility,
but at the cost of her own integrity.
The turning point for me happened when Lin Chong made a
decision that, in my mind, compromised her ethics and integrity. Here is where
I suspect other readers will disagree with me. I realized that I did not want
to know what happened next. Maybe she redeemed herself. Maybe she found safety
and power as just another outlaw leader. Maybe she used her remarkable skills
to take down the villains. I didn’t care, and most importantly, I didn’t want
to find out.
All this is my highly subjective opinion. I concede that I
might have missed out on a story that is ultimately about redemption,
forgiveness, and the triumph of sisterhood. I just couldn’t bridge the gap. From
the reviews, many other readers loved this book, and I hope that nothing in my
review dissuades someone from checking it out. I leave this review where I
began it: this book did not work for me.
When survivors of trauma recount their experiences, they are often questioned because of how they relay their stories. They may have problems remembering what happened, or their memories may be jumbled or even contradictory. People hearing those stories – attorneys, reporters, healthcare workers or friends – may expect a clearer, linear narrative.
Those unaffected by trauma may also be surprised to hear how the person acted in the moment. It’s easy to assume that someone experiencing a traumatic event would have a “fight or flight” response, instinctively fighting off a perpetrator or fleeing the scene – but that might not be the case.
Understanding the science of how trauma affects memory and behavior reveals why these responses can actually be expected and are not contradictory.
In both my academic and clinical work as a psychologist, I have witnessed the impact trauma has on people’s memories and behaviors, especially when an event in their present life triggers something from their past.
Research shows that taking a trauma-informed approach, which prioritizes understanding and curiosity about someone’s experience as opposed to judgment or critical evaluation, increases empathy for survivors’ thoughts, feelings and behaviors.
How trauma affects the brain
According to the World Health Organization, approximately 70% of people worldwide report experiencing a traumatic event in their lifetime. The majority of these people do not develop PTSD, a clinical diagnosis of symptoms, such as having nightmares and flashbacks about the event, avoiding places that are reminders of it, and increased arousal that can make concentration and sleep difficult. Many survivors don’t meet criteria for PTSD but struggle with feeling distressed, depressed or anxious.
In traumatic situations, people often respond in unexpected ways, and they may second-guess themselves. This may happen particularly when someone experiences a repeated trauma, which is more likely than not due to how many people experience traumatic events.
Research indicates that people experience traumatic memories differently than memories of other significant events, such as sad or positive experiences. Two of the main brain structures scientists believe are involved in storing traumatic memories are the hippocampus – responsible for memory storage – and the amygdala, which is responsible for processing emotions.
During trauma, the amygdala becomes highly active, processing emotions such as fear, and the hippocampus becomes overwhelmed by stress, leading to problems with memory storage.
Traumatic memories do not follow a neat, linear story. Instead, people may experience the memory as disconnected fragments of sensations, emotions, smells or images. Such memories cause the body to reexperience the past threat as if it is happening in the moment. This may cause a person to feel like running away or fighting back – flight or fight. Or they may freeze.
In other words, people don’t have the distant perspective they often feel with other memories from the past. Rather, they may feel they are reliving the original experience.
With this understanding, consider someone who experiences a trauma at the hands of a professional during an appointment. They may appear outwardly calm while it happens and then leave the session as they typically would – checking out, providing payment and possibly even scheduling the next appointment. While their response to act normally may seem odd, such behavior makes sense for someone trying to escape a threat.
Fight, flight or freeze responses have become widely known in popular culture. In a freeze response, a person’s mind goes blank and they may be unable to speak, leading to a “deer in the headlights” behavior.
On the other hand, a person may act paradoxically – perhaps by going on about their day as if nothing happened. They may not report the event or may question whether the incident even occurred. This represents another survival response – the lesser-known fawn response. This way of handling stress occurs when someone acts calm, appeases the threatening person and retreats to de-escalate the situation. Instead of literally backing away, in this example, the person metaphorically backs away by completing the session and exiting as expected without further conflict.
Outsiders may misconstrue these behaviors as evidence that a trauma did not actually happen or that a survivor lacks credibility. But that logic reflects common misconceptions about how people “should” remember or respond to trauma.
As the 2026 midterm elections enter the final stretch, it’s important to know your rights in case your vote is challenged.
The best way to ensure that your vote is counted is to advocate for yourself. I’m a an attorney and lecturer for the University of Southern California’s undergraduate civil rights advocacy initiative, Agents of Change. Here are several straightforward ways to ensure your vote is counted and two practical remedies for you to consider if your vote remains challenged.
A major part of ensuring that you are able to vote is doing the necessary preparation before you even get to the polling place. Read on to find out how and where to register, where and when you can cast your ballot, and what numbers to call for any information you can’t find online.
Are you registered to vote? Check it out
Before you vote, you need to ensure that you’re registered to vote. You can verify your registration status using this tool. If you can’t use an online tool, then call your local election office or a voter help line like the ones listed in the hotline section below.
If you find you’re not registered, you can use this tool from the National Conference of State Legislatures to find your state’s online registration application. If you need to do this in person, then call your local election office for instructions.
At this point, you may have missed your state’s deadline for voter registration. But it may not be too late to register.
Many states allow same-day registration at the polling site. You can find your state’s same-day voter laws detailed here. Ask the poll worker, at the correct polling location, for a same-day registration form; complete the form and then ask for a “conditional ballot.” A conditional ballot allows election officials to count your vote after verifying your voter eligibility. If you can’t research online, you can call your local election office to find out if you can register on Election Day.
Marchellos Scott, right, helps Morehouse College students fill out a voter registration form at a college registration booth on Aug. 19, 2024, in Atlanta.Elijah Nouvelage/AFP via Getty Images
Gather documents to verify your identity
If you live in a state that requires identity verification to vote in person, gather the required documents – which may range from a driver’s license to bank statements with identifying information – before traveling to the correct polling place. You can find your county election office’s contact information here. This webpage includes a table listing each state’s acceptable ID documents and possible exceptions for some people. You may also call your local election office to find out what’s required.
Absentee voters: Locate your state’s identity verification rules here.
Find the correct polling location
You can ensure that you’re headed to the right polling place with this tool. Or call your county election office to find your polling place and its hours of operation; you can look up your county’s election office contact information here.
Once you know your polling place and its hours, you can go there and check in. In most cases, you’ll be handed a ballot, shown where to vote and asked to put your ballot in a machine or a box, and then you can go merrily along your way.
But the moment of check-in is where things might go wrong.
Fake Query Letters by Dead Authors: A Satirical Craft
Guide to Writing Queries That Survive the Slush Pile, by David Brown
and Michelle
Barker (Darling Axe Publishing)
How-to books for authors abound in today’s market. Not
all the advice is worth taking. Indeed, much of it seems to be based on
outdated practices, flawed “conventional wisdom,” or is intended for novice
self-published authors. Very little is aimed at serious authors interested in
traditional publishing or established midlist authors scrambling to keep up
with today’s rapidly changing market. Much of it is contradictory and involves
a great deal of telling the author how to get an agent instead of showing
pitfalls and best practices.
The latest entry in this field is the delightful, highly
informative book, Fake Query Letters by Dead Authors: A Satirical Craft
Guide to Writing Queries That Survive the Slush Pile, by David Brown
and Michelle
Barker of Darling Axe. They open with this intriguing premise:
What if the greatest novels ever written had to
survive today's slush pile? No reputation to fall back on—just a cover letter
and first page... and an agent who's already read 200 queries before lunch.
Spoiler: most of them wouldn't make it.
Using five classic novels (Pride and Prejudice, Wuthering
Heights, The Scarlet Letter, Anne of Green Gables, and Jane
Eyre) they first demonstrate the worst possible way the authors could query
an agent and how to fix their disastrous mistakes.
Query guidelines for literary agents vary, but most include
a letter, synopsis, and sample pages, which are often the first chapter). We already
know (and, hopefully, love) the text, which gives us a foundation to evaluate each
horrible, rejection-guaranteed sample letter and synopsis. The authors invite
us to imagine ourselves as literary agents at the end of a punishing work week,
facing an Inbox jammed with queries. (So much fun!) What would tempt us to read
the entire query and then—oh joy!—request the entire manuscript?
Highly recommended for fiction writers at all stages of
their careers for whom a literary agent is appropriate. Also highly
recommended for indie (self-published) writers for invaluable insights into how
to craft a compelling novel and then present it at its best. After all, in
today’s overcrowded market, readers will decide to pick up a book on the same
basis of a dynamite pitch.
Whether in an Oval Office proclamation signing about commercial fishing or during a Fox News interview while discussing Iran, President Donald Trump finds opportunities to share his views on transgender people.
During a June 2026 signing event, Trump claimed, in response to a question about proposed legislation regarding election procedures, called the SAVE America Act: “We are talking about saving America, right? No men in women’s sports.” He continued, “And we have no mutilization of your children for transgender purposes … where your child leaves your house, and they take your child from you. … In six states, they take the child and do what they want to do. What they do is, is I don’t even want to talk about it. No transgender mutilization of your children.”
Meanwhile, public approval of Trump’s approach to trans issues is relatively high, as compared with his approval ratings on other issues.
A 2024 report by the Human Rights Campaign decried an “epidemic of violence” against trans and gender-expansive people. A 2025 Pew report found that 70% of trans adults have feared for their personal safety, and only 13% of LGBTQ respondents reported social acceptance of trans people.
Though the causes for changing trans views are complex, research suggests Trump’s rhetoric and policies have powerful influence, the ramifications of which are clear. Anti-LGBTQ+ laws and debates negatively affect young queer people, according to the Trevor Project’s 2025 U.S. National Survey on the Mental Health of LGBTQ+ Young People, and are associated with increased stress, discrimination and suicide attempts.
Trans people and their allies have pushed back against a recent wave of restrictions. Here, supporters rally for the Transgender Day of Visibility in March 2025.Kayla Bartkowski/Getty Images
Moral panic as political strategy
From the Salem witch trials in the 17th century to the war on drugs in the 20th century, moral panics have emerged across history to stoke fear against a perceived threat to a society’s values or well-being.
Moral panics, coined by sociologist Stanley Cohen in 1972, follow a similar pattern: a threat is defined, media exaggerates the threat, public concern increases, authorities respond with laws and policies, and society is transformed.
Moral panics elicit a range of negative emotions, but disgust and paranoia are especially potent. Originally a response meant to protect us from disease and spoiled food, disgust has evolved to also express social inappropriateness. Disgust asserts that its object is inherently bad. Since disgust is culturally dependent, it can also be used to marginalize groups of people.
Meanwhile, paranoia focuses on visualizing and preparing for future threats. When experienced as an emotion – outside of psychiatric disorders – paranoia has a righteous undertone, as it seeks to uncover perceived enemies.
Disgust and paranoia are a powerful combination for sustaining moral panics. While disgust produces an intense, immediate physical feeling, paranoia is long-lasting, stewing and existential.
Stimulating disgust and paranoia
Trump’s offhand remarks often invoke disgust and paranoia against perceived enemies – for example, toward immigrants, whom he has repeatedly described as dangerous criminals. These same patterns emerge in the Trump administration’s formal communication regarding trans issues.
The release asserts that former President Joe Biden’s 2024 Proclamation of Transgender Day of Visibility “desecrated Easter Sunday with a ‘transgender’ message that elevated radical leftist ideology over faith, family, and biological truth.” Rousing paranoia, “radical leftist ideology” (and later in the release, “gender ideology”) is portrayed as an existential threat that puts Americans and their beliefs in danger.
The release also claimed that “the Trump Administration is celebrating a decisive victory: the swift and unrelenting dismantling of subversive, woke policies that endangered children, eroded women’s rights, assaulted common sense, and dragged America toward moral and cultural decline.”
As a rhetoric scholar, I read these allusions to religion and war – using words like “desecrate” and “victory,” respectively – as implications that the U.S. is in a battle between good and evil. Schools, hospitals, bathrooms, locker rooms, sports facilities and military bases are spaces declared under attack.
The release also condemns “the chemical and surgical mutilation of minors” and “child mutilation programs” – revolting imagery that misleadingly depicts gender-affirming care and incites shock, concern and disgust.
Similarly, invoking images of nonconsenting, victimized children and women, the release denounces “the un-American indoctrination of schoolchildren” and “the unfair, demeaning practice of forcing women to compete against biological men in sports.” Stimulating anger and moral panic, these descriptions encourage anti-trans views and discrimination.
Recognizing these rhetorical patterns is key to understanding how politicians use inflammatory language to denigrate trans people and other marginalized groups, including women, Black people and immigrants.
