From: thelastearthman@gmail.com   
      
   I've encountered a situation with a magazine that I've never experienced   
   before.  This is despite the fact that I've been submitting stories to SF mags   
   since 1997!   
      
   April 20 of 2015 I submitted a story to Ideomancer.  The submission was within   
   their stated March-April reading period.   
      
   Market sources Ralans, The Black hole, The Grinder publish that Ideomancer's   
   average response time is a little over 30 days with a maximum of 50 days.   
      
   So, a little more than 120 days since my submission to them, I'd not heard   
   anything.   
      
   I wrote Ideomancer a query - no response.   
      
   About a month later I wrote that if I heard nothing from Ideomancer by this   
   coming Monday, I was withdrawing the story.   
      
   DID I DO THE RIGHT THING ?????????????????????????????????????   
      
   I've already dismissed one professional level magazine -- ANALOG   
      
   Analog once sat on a story of mine for seven months (7 months!!) before   
   rejecting it.  Not a word from them about sitting on the story.   
      
   I removed Analog from my submissions list.   
      
   In this day of scores and scores of SF magazines competing for publishable   
   stories, can any magazine afford to tick off writers?   
      
   I dislike removing Ideomancer from my submissions list.  It's a decent   
   magazine.  And it's online, which is what I favor, print magazines being a   
   dying breed.  But I'm currently inclined to remove Ideomancer from my   
   submissions list.   
      
   There MIGHT be an unusual factor involved here.   
      
   As far as I can detect, about 80% of Ideomancer's staff is female.   
      
   I randomly checked several back issues of Ideomancer, found that about the   
   same percentage of stories published recently were written by females.   
      
   Now, I'm so old, I came of age during the cultural revolution of the late   
   1960's, early 1970's.  Before that time, females were greatly suppressed,   
   much, much more so than today.   
      
   I've noticed that there are some females, who because of the way they were   
   (and still are) treated have a bias against males.   
      
   Could this be a factor in my above experience???   
      
   Any of your input would be helpful, though I'm so busy right now, I might not   
   be able to pen individual replies.   
      
   Thanks in advance for any advice.   
      
   NAMASTE   
      
   C.E. Gee    aka Chuck   
      
   http://www.kinzuakid.blogspot.com   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)