Author Post - SCP-7434
reserved. will credit them critters
i'll put a spoiler/explanation collapsible here if necessary or upon request
SCP-7434 / Discussion
Forum
» Per Page Discussions / Per page discussions
» SCP-7434
This is the discussion related to the wiki page SCP-7434.
Kinda confused here, does every already know that she is a cat? Or is it only people with a cvr of under or 15? Is she the anomaly and she is covering up here identity in some way? Is peopline even petting her the anomaly? Seems like normal behavior toward cats. Is she some type of sentient cat that makes her self looks liek a human??? I am really lost and your input would really help
of all the 'foundation employee is actually an animal' articles ive read, this one was the easiest to tell what the twist was going to be. the main issue is 'ginger hair', which would not be used to refer to a person in a clinical sense. the moment i read that, i said to myself 'this is a cat.' and i was right.
…did you ask a sensitivity reader to go over this, maybe check if its a-okay? im asking because my god the ick levels here are off the charts. barring that she is a cat, the setup here is that shes encountering sexual harrasment in the workplace. then a person comes in to question people about this. as the story goes on, it is revealed that this mystery woman likes the harrassment given to her, and that we already have animal researchers in our midst, asking the reader to draw a conclusion that it's okay because she is a cat. the final image reinforces this idea.
however, were you counting on the reaction of the reader to "this woman is being sexually harrassed in the workplace" be "oh it's fine because she likes it and she's a cat". even including the idea that she is a cat, why is she never interviewed at all? like were shown that she can talk, she can consent — why did you not write a dialogue with the main anomaly. its handwaved that this is a technique that our pov is using, but that makes it worst imo — you know that this will come off wrong, but you relied on the handwaving to absolve your work of the weirdness it gives off. overall just. just a downvote. the cat doesnt pass the Bechdel test.
EDIT: i have reread the article, and i completely forgot about the ending. i apologize for saying that you didnt write the interview with the anomaly.
Hi Skipreader, I didn't even think of a sexual harassment angle whatsoever here. Some harassment maybe, when personnel keep addressing her as 'baby' or like 'cutie-pie', or 'sugar' and stuff like that. But I honestly got no feel of anything remotely sexual involved. I know, people can all see things differently. I just wanted to mention it, for the record.
i've read a good amount of site-400 stuff and at this point idk what justifies its existence as a site in-universe bc the vibe i get overall is frat house with extremely low professional standards. i legitimately can't remember a site 400 piece where the people are actually good at their jobs. almost makes me wonder if "reassigned to site 400" is the "assigned to antarctica" or "assigned to keter duty" of the neololfoundation era.
I'm glad you took some of my suggestions at the first round of crit review, since it took out some of the less savoury parts. I'm still not fond of the harassment angle that remains.
As for the rest, I do hope you take a look at the second round of crit you asked me to give. I feel you might need another revision or two.
No-voting as of now, this starts out strong but the twist as it is now is pretty clear early on, yet gets reaally dragged out by the end. A lot of the second half seems redundant and has a very "do you get it? Huh? Do you get it yet?" Kinda feel. Honestly I think bulk of second half could be cut out or at least heavily abbreviated for an overall better article, especially in regard to employee interactions and convos (which others already have touched on).
I really like how the researchers who wrote this article never once considered that the anomaly was actually affecting people with a higher CRV rating, rather than a lower one. Even though they accurately recognize that the anomaly affects people’s perceptions, they still believe their own to be the accurate perception.
I think that’s a clever way at showing the bias researchers have for themselves, and against those they deem “lower.”
Good job OP!
Nimrod LXXVII
/forum/t-15846712/scp-7434#post-
page revision: 2, last edited: 15 Jan 2023 15:06
