Results of the 2026 author survey: How are sapphic fiction authors doing?

INTRODUCTION

Sapphic fiction publishing—and publishing in general—has changed a lot during the past few years.
The number of sapphic titles has exploded, with more sapphic books being released and more new authors starting to write sapphic stories than ever before.

Our books have also become more visible, with even big mainstream publishers picking up sapphic romances.

More sapphic books are released as audiobooks too, making them more accessible.

But not all of these changes are positive. More books and more authors writing sapphic fiction also means more competition. Authors have to work harder to promote their books and make them stand out so they don’t get lost among thousands of new releases.

Authors also face additional challenges: AI-generated books are flooding the market, making visibility even harder; authors are increasingly at the mercy of Amazon and social media algorithms, and the pressure to publish faster is higher than ever. And while the number of books published increases daily, the audience isn’t growing at the same pace. There are plenty of readers who are enthusiastically devouring M/M romances but aren’t interested in sapphic books at all.

So I wanted to check in with my fellow sapphic fiction writers and get a clearer, broader picture of what the situation looks like for them right now. Are they feeling the effects of these changes? Is their writing-related income increasing, decreasing, or staying the same? Are they changing their publishing strategies, e.g., moving away from Kindle Unlimited? What’s the biggest challenge they are facing, and is there anything I can do to help?

To answer these questions, I put together a survey for sapphic fiction authors and tried to reach as many authors as possible and get them to participate.

Here are the results of the survey. Since the full report is detailed and long, I’ve included a summary below for those who don’t have the time or patience to read it all.

TL;DR

I surveyed 490 sapphic fiction authors about their publishing experiences, biggest challenges, AI use, and outlook for the future.

Here are the biggest takeaways:

• About half of participating authors are fairly new to sapphic fiction publishing; 45% started writing sapphic fiction within the past five years and 47% have published 1-3 novels so far.
• Most participating authors are indies (60%), while 23% publish with a small sapphic or LGBTQ+ press.
• 80% of authors are either making no money or only small amounts from writing sapphic fiction.
• Most authors rely heavily on income from Amazon. 86% named Amazon as either their top or a major source of their writing-related income.
• More than half of sapphic fiction authors are making less money than they did a year ago. 51% saw a decline in their writing-related income, compared to 20% who reported an increase. The decline affected authors across all publishing paths and experience levels, with authors who have been publishing longer and have a bigger backlist reporting declines at a higher rate.
• The most commonly reported reasons authors gave for a decline in their writing-related income were the lack of new releases, not marketing consistently, and the flood of AI-generated books.
• The most commonly reported reasons for an increase in income were releasing a new book, doing more marketing, and hitting a popular trope or trend.
• 61% of authors have changed their publishing strategy in the past year or are planning to change it soon.
• There’s no consensus on what publishing strategy to pursue, e.g., leaving Kindle Unlimited or putting books into KU.
• 77% of authors don’t use generative AI in their creative process at all. Only 1% use it to write or substantially rewrite their books.
• Most authors don’t plan on using generative AI in the future either. The majority say they definitely won’t or are unlikely to use generative AI for audiobooks (93%), covers (92%), or translations (89%).
• The most common concern authors had regarding generative AI was its impact on human creatives (writers, artists, editors, translators, and narrators losing their jobs or income), followed by ethical concerns (AI being trained on books and artwork without permission or compensation of the writers and artists).
• The biggest challenges authors reportedly face are the flood of AI-generated books, the lack of visibility, and a constant struggle to market their books.
• One-third of authors are optimistic about the future of sapphic publishing, while one-third are pessimistic, and the rest are either neutral or uncertain.
• The most-mentioned requests and suggestions for how I could help my fellow authors were more exposure for new and lesser-known authors as well as more opportunities for authors who are writing in genres other than contemporary romance.
• Some suggestions contradicted each other, which is a good reminder that the sapphic author community isn’t a monolith. Different authors have different needs and opinions.
• The biggest conclusion: While our strategies for dealing with the changing publishing landscape might differ, many of the challenges we’re facing are the same. That’s why supporting each other, cross-promoting, and sharing information matters now more than ever.

THE PARTICIPANTS IN THE SAPPHIC FICTION AUTHOR SURVEY

The survey ran for three weeks, from August 27 to September 17, 2026, and was open to any sapphic fiction author who had published at least one novel-length sapphic book.

For any future survey, I’d like to also include authors who publish shorter works, but for now, I focused on novels to keep the results as comparable as possible. An author who has published 20 novels is in a very different position from an author who has published 20 short stories, so combining the two would have made the results more difficult to interpret.

In total, 490 authors of sapphic fiction completed the survey.

This is not a random sample of all sapphic fiction authors; it’s a sample of all the authors I was able to reach, and it might not be representative of those sapphic fiction authors I couldn’t reach. I recruited participants primarily through the Sapphic Quill newsletter (1,000 subscribers), the Sapphic Quill Facebook group (1,200 members), my social media, by emailing every author who had submitted a book to the Sapphic Book Bingo in the past three years, and asking fellow authors to share the survey. That’s why authors who are more active in the community may be overrepresented, while newer and less well-connected authors might be underrepresented. The results therefore shouldn’t be interpreted as an exact picture of every sapphic fiction author.

However, I believe the responses from those 490 authors give us a substantial collection of experiences and can still be helpful to understand the current situation and challenges in sapphic fiction publishing.

PUBLISHING EXPERIENCE & PATHWAYS

How many novel-length sapphic books have authors published?

• 1 book: 18%
• 2-3 books: 29%
• 4-5 books: 16%
• 6-10 books: 17%
• 11-15 books: 6%
• 16-20 books: 6%
• 21-25 books: 1%
• 26 or more books: 6%

Almost half (47%) have published three novels or fewer, with the biggest group currently having two or three books out.

19% of authors have published more than ten sapphic novels.

Among authors who make either all or a substantial part of their income from writing sapphic fiction, 53% have published more than 10 sapphic novels; 20% even more than twenty-five novels.

How long have authors been writing sapphic fiction?

• Less than 1 year: 1%
• 1-2 years: 10%
• 3-5 years: 34%
• 6-10 years: 26%
• 11-15 years: 17%
• 16-20 years: 5%
• More than 20 years: 8%

The authors participating in the survey represent a broad range of experience. The biggest group of authors (34%) has been writing sapphic fiction for three to five years. Almost half (45%) have started writing sapphic fiction after the pandemic.

11% have started writing sapphic fiction within the past two years. That number is surprisingly low, considering how many debut novels are published every month. Very likely, newer authors aren’t yet as involved in the community and might not have found the survey. We also had fewer people sharing the survey on newer social media such as TikTok.

At the same time, there’s also a substantial group of authors who has been writing sapphic fiction for more than ten years (30%).

I would say the data confirms that sapphic fiction is definitely not a new niche. It has a strong backbone of veteran authors, but it has also experienced an influx of new authors since the pandemic.

What publication paths have sapphic fiction authors chosen?

This question of the survey allowed authors to choose more than one publishing route because I wanted to make sure to capture hybrid authors who are indie-publishing some of their books while going with a publishing house for others.

The results were:

• Indie authors: 60%
• Authors publishing with a small sapphic or LGBTQ+ press: 23%
• Authors publishing with a large mainstream publisher: 2%
• Authors publishing with a small independent non-LGBTQ+ press: 1%
• Hybrid authors: 14%

Most hybrid authors (63%) had self-published some of their books while going with a small sapphic or LGBTQ+ press for others. 15% of hybrid authors are indies who also publish with a small independent press that doesn’t focus on LGBTQ+ fiction.

Looking at authors overall, including those using hybrid models, 72% have self-published at least one book, while 33% have published at least one book with a small sapphic or LGBTQ+ press.

Among authors who make either all or a substantial part of their income from writing sapphic fiction, 71% are indie authors, 15% are hybrid authors, 7% publish with small sapphic or LGBTQ+ presses, and 5% are with a large mainstream publishing house.

The dominance of indie authors isn’t surprising. In fact, compared to the top 100 bestseller charts on Amazon, this survey even underrepresents self-published authors. Currently (September 16, 2026), 84% of the books in the Lesbian Romance top 100 are indie-published, while 13% are published by large mainstream publishers like Macmillan, HarperCollins, or Amazon imprints like Montlake, and 2% are published by small sapphic presses.

WRITING-RELATED INCOME

What financial role does writing sapphic fiction play for authors?

• Currently not making any money from their writing: 18%
• Writing provides some extra pocket money, but isn’t a significant part of their income: 62%
• Writing provides a substantial part of their income (but isn’t the only income source): 13%
• Writing is their sole source of income: 7%

For most authors, writing sapphic fiction is a hobby, a passion project, or a modest side hustle, not their primary career.

80% of authors either aren’t making any money from writing sapphic fiction or making only small amounts, while 20% rely on their writing-related income as their only or a substantial part of their income.

Even among authors with 10+ novels out, nearly half (46%) reported making little to no money from their writing.

So while it’s possible to make a living off writing sapphic fiction, it’s certainly not the norm for most authors.

What are authors’ main sources of income?

For the question regarding their biggest source of writing-related income, authors were asked to select just one source.

• Ebook sales via Amazon: 43%
• Subscription programs such as Kindle Unlimited: 18%
• In-person events (e.g., book fairs, cons, bookstore signings, etc.): 9%
• Ebook sales via other platforms: 5%
• Paperback or hardback sales via Amazon: 4%
• Audiobook sales via Audible: 4%
• Paperback or hardback sales via other platforms: 3%
• Writing-related activities (e.g., editing, workshops for writers, cover design, etc.): 3%
• Direct sales via author’s own webshop: 2%
• Patreon or similar memberships: 2%
• Advance from their publisher: 1%
• Audiobook sales via other platforms: 1%

The majority of authors rely heavily on income from Amazon. 69% name Amazon as their top source of income. For most, their biggest income source is ebook sales via Amazon (43%), while 18% make most of their income from Kindle Unlimited and other subscription programs.

3% of authors weren’t sure where most of their income was coming from. These were mostly authors whose publisher didn’t provide a breakdown of platforms in their royalty reports.

Among authors who make all or a big part of their income from writing, in-person events are named less often as their top income source (2%), while KU & KU-like subscription programs are more often the biggest source of income (30%).

What are other important sources of income for sapphic fiction authors?

When asked about significant income streams other than their top source, authors named the following.

Note: “Income streams” refers to the different ways authors earn money from their writing.

• Ebook sales via Amazon: 42%
• Paperback or hardback sales via Amazon: 27%
• Ebook sales via other platforms: 21%
• Subscription programs (e.g., Kindle Unlimited): 16%
• Audiobook sales via Audible: 16%
• In-person events (e.g., book fairs, cons, bookstore signings, etc.): 16%
• Paperback or hardback sales via other platforms: 13%
• Direct sales via author’s own webshop: 8%
• Audiobook sales via other platforms: 8%
• Patreon or similar memberships: 7%
• Writing-related activities (e.g., editing, workshops for writers, cover design, etc.): 6%
• Translations of their books: 3%
• Crowdfunding, e.g., Kickstarter: 1%

Amazon makes up not just the top source but also the most-mentioned other major income streams for the majority of sapphic fiction writers. A total of 86% of authors name Amazon as either their top or a major source of their writing-related income.

Authors who make either all or a substantial part of their income from writing sapphic fiction rely even more heavily on Amazon-related income, especially on Kindle Unlimited. 52% of those writers name KU and other subscription programs as their top or an important income source, while it’s only 19% of writers who make no or little money off their writing.

Authors who make no money off their writing name an average of 2.4 income streams; authors who make pocket money have an average of 2.9 income streams; authors who make a substantial part of their income through their writing list an average of 3.6 income streams, and authors who rely on their writing as their sole income have an average of 3.9 income streams. Of course, correlation doesn’t necessarily mean causation. Diversifying income streams could lead to authors’ income rising, but it’s also possible that making more money from their writing enables authors to create additional income streams, e.g., by investing in audiobook narration or translations.

How has authors’ writing-related income changed over the past twelve months?

When asked whether their writing income had changed in the past year, 8% of authors weren’t sure or preferred not to answer. Of the remaining authors, the responses were:

• Decreased significantly: 29%
• Stayed the same: 28%
• Decreased slightly: 22%
• Increased slightly: 13%
• Increased significantly: 7%

So more than half (51%) of all participating authors said their income had decreased in the past year, while only 20% saw an increase.

The changes in income among authors who make all or a substantial part of their income through writing sapphic fiction present a more polarized picture:

• Decreased significantly: 30%
• Stayed the same: 14%
• Decreased slightly: 24%
• Increased slightly: 11%
• Increased significantly: 21%

Far fewer of those authors said their income remained the same. The majority of them saw a decline in their income (54%), while 32% reported an increase.

Among authors publishing with a small sapphic or queer press, 55% of authors saw a decline in income, while only 9% reported an increase. 52% of indie authors said their income decreased in the past year, compared to 24% whose income increased. Authors who have signed with a publisher usually have less control over pricing, publishing strategy, release schedule, or marketing tactics and won’t be able to adjust to a changing market with the same flexibility as indie authors.

Among authors who have been writing sapphic fiction for 10 years or less, 50% saw a decline in their income, while 24% reported an increase in the past year. Of the authors who have been writing for longer than ten years, 55% say their income decreased, while 14% had an increase.

A similar trend appears when you look at the number of books an author has published. Authors with a bigger backlist actually reported declining income at a higher rate, with 64% of authors who have more than 10 novels out reporting a decline of their income, compared to 52% of authors with 4-10 published books and 37% of authors with 1-3 books.

So interestingly, more experience or a bigger backlist doesn’t appear to protect authors from declining income. In fact, authors who have been writing longer and have a bigger backlist reported declining income at a higher rate. There are several possible explanations for this pattern: It might have to do with backlist fatigue (finding fewer readers for older books) or difficulty pivoting to new marketing methods when the old ones no longer work, but it probably also has to do with new authors starting from a lower income baseline, so they have more potential for growth.

Authors with an income increase tended to have more income streams (an average of 3.2), compared to authors who saw a declining income (average of 3), but it’s unclear whether authors increased their income by diversifying their revenue streams or their increased income enabled them to invest in additional income streams such as audiobooks or translations.

The most noticeable takeaway is a decline of writing-related income for the majority of authors, regardless of publication path, writing experience, and whether they write as a hobby or to pay the bills. Across all groups, the majority of authors (50-55%) are now making less money off publishing sapphic fiction than they did a year ago, which points to broader market conditions rather than an individual issue.

But not every author is making less. A small group of writers is actually making more money from their writing. Not every demographic is experiencing the same percentage of authors with an increasing income, though. On average, indie authors, career authors, and comparatively newer authors were more likely to see an increase in their writing-related income.

What factors caused authors’ writing-related income to decrease?

When asked what caused their income to drop, the most common answers were:

• Not releasing enough books/too much time between releases: 27%
• Not marketing consistently: 17%
• Flood of AI-generated books: 17%
• Market saturation/too much competition: 11%
• Economy/readers spending less on recreational activities like reading: 10%
• Changes in the Amazon algorithm: 9%
• Health or mental health problems, including burnout: 9%
• Political situation making it harder to promote LGBTQ+ books: 5%
• Leaving KU to go wide: 3%
• Social media views are down: 3%
• Amazon boycotts: 3%
• Advertising became less effective: 3%
• Family/personal problems: 3%
• Piracy: 2%
• Readers reading less: 2%
• Readers not taking a chance on new authors: 1%
• Backlist not selling: 1%
• Harder to get reviews: 1%
• Publisher closed: 1%
• Not publishing the “right genre/tropes”: 1%
• Switching from self-publishing to small-press/traditional publishing: 1%
• Left Amazon: 1%

It’s important to emphasize that these are the perceived reasons why authors assume their sales have dropped and/or their KU reads are down. Many authors stated that they had no idea why their income decreased. No one knows for sure, and most authors agree that it’s a combination of factors, not a single cause.

The majority of authors assumed they were to “blame” for the drop in their income because they reduced their release frequency or weren’t marketing enough. But authors who were publishing and marketing consistently also saw a decline in income, so the market situation plays a role too. The most commonly mentioned external causes were market saturation due to the flood of AI-generated books as well as more new authors entering the market. The economy and readers being more selective regarding how they spend their money were seen as contributing factors too, as were changes in the Amazon algorithm and social media algorithms.

What factors caused authors’ writing-related income to increase?

When asked what caused their income to increase, the most common answers were:

• Building a backlist/releasing a new book: 22%
• Publishing the first book: 10%
• More marketing: 8%
• Hitting a popular trend/trope: 8%
• Publishing a new book in a series: 5%
• Audiobook releases: 5%
• Better marketing: 4%
• Paid advertising: 4%
• Doing more in-person events: 4%
• Going indie: 3%
• Investing in better covers: 2%
• Releasing books faster: 2%
• Going wide: 1%
• Marketing on TikTok: 1%

The most commonly reported way to increase writing-related income is publishing a new book, especially for those authors who haven’t built a big backlist yet, followed by doing more marketing and posting on social media more regularly.

For established authors with more than 10 books out, the best strategies were continuing to publish regularly, hitting popular trends, and improving their marketing skills. For that group of authors, the changes they reported were mostly about working smarter, not working harder.

PUBLISHING STRATEGIES

Have authors changed their publishing strategy, or are they thinking about changing it?

When asked whether they have changed publishing strategies in the past twelve months or were thinking about changing them in the near future, the responses were:

• Haven’t made any changes, nor were they planning to: 39%
• Releasing more books per year: 15%
• Selling directly to readers through their own web shop: 15%
• Exploring non-traditional platforms (e.g., Patreon, Kickstarter, etc.): 14%
• Expanding into new formats (e.g., audiobooks, translations, etc.): 11%
• Leaving Kindle Unlimited and going “wide” (offering books on platforms such as Apple, Kobo, etc.): 10%
• Moving from indie/self-publishing to publishing with a publishing house: 7%
• Moving from publishing with a publishing house to indie/self-publishing: 6%
• Putting their books into Kindle Unlimited: 6%
• Discontinuing expensive formats such as audiobooks or translations: 2%
• Switching publishers: 2%
• Stopping to write/publish: 1%
• Changing or adding genres: 1%
• Doing more marketing: 1%
• Doing more in-person events: 1%
• Focusing more on newsletter than social media: 1%
• Publishing fewer books/Focusing more on quality over quantity: 1%

Most authors (61%) have either changed their publishing strategy in the past year or are planning changes in the near future, while 39% hadn’t made any changes, nor were they planning to.

Of those authors who made changes, there seems to be no one obvious direction: some authors are going indie (6%) while others are trying to find an agent and switching to traditional publishing (7%); some are going wide—leaving Kindle Unlimited and offering their ebooks via more platforms (10%), while others are pulling their books from other platforms and putting them into KU (6%); some are investing in new formats such as audiobooks and translations (11%), while others are cutting those more expensive formats (2%).

That tells us that there’s no single publishing strategy that works for every sapphic author.

What new publishing strategies did those authors adopt who managed to increase their writing-related income during the past twelve months?

• 35% made no changes to their publishing strategy.
• 22% released more books per year.
• 20% explored non-traditional platforms, e.g., Patreon, Kickstarter, etc.
• 20% expanded into new formats, especially audiobooks.
• 16% started selling directly to readers via their own webshop.
• 9% left their publisher and went indie.
• 9% withdrew their ebooks from other platforms and put them into KU.
• 8% left KU and put their ebooks onto other platforms.
• 5% went from self-publishing to joining a publishing house.

The most reported strategy to increase writing-related income, apart from releasing faster/more books, is to find additional ways to monetize their work, e.g., by offering early access or bonus material via Patreon or branching out into new formats such as audiobooks.

Why did authors change their publishing strategy?

Authors who went from releasing their books with a publisher to being indie authors gave the following reasons:

• Wanting more control over the publishing process: 31%
• Not being happy with their publishing house: 26%
• Lack of promotion from publisher: 26%
• Wanting to make more money: 15%
• Publisher going out of business: 8%
• Wanting to make writing a full-time job: 4%
• Slow publishing speed of publishers: 4%
• Publisher started to use AI: 2%

Authors who went from being indie-published to signing or planning to sign with a publisher gave the following reasons:

• Trying to reach a wider audience: 19%
• Costs of editing & covers: 13%
• Not being great at marketing: 13%
• Would like to focus on writing: 10%
• Trying to get into bookstores: 6%
• Not being able to do everything by themselves for health reasons: 6%

Authors who pulled their ebooks from Kindle Unlimited and made them available on other platforms gave the following reasons:

• Not trusting/liking Amazon and its policies: 18%
• Not wanting to put all of their eggs into one basket/be dependent on one platform: 16%
• Their KU income dropped: 11%
• Trying to reach a wider audience: 11%
• Reduced visibility on Amazon because of AI books: 9%

Authors who removed their ebooks from other platforms to put them into KU gave the following reasons:

• Trying to increase their income: 20%
• Not seeing enough sales on wide platforms: 12%
• KU helping with visibility: 5%
• Trying to reach more readers: 5%

Authors who are trying to write and publish more books per year gave the following reasons:

• Stabilizing their declining income: 19%
• Generating more income: 12%
• Getting more visibility with more new releases: 7%
• Avoiding losing reader interest between releases: 5%
• Wanting to make a full-time income: 5%

Authors who started selling books directly to readers via their own webshop gave the following reasons:

• Wanting a higher profit per sale: 12%
• Escaping the reliance on Amazon: 12%
• Stabilizing their declining income: 5%
• Providing readers who boycott Amazon with another option: 5%
• Their KU income dropped: 5%

Authors who stopped creating expensive formats such as audiobooks and translations gave the following reasons:

• Not being able to recover costs: 60%
• Declining income: 14%

Authors who are expanding into new formats (most often audiobooks) gave the following reasons:

• Creating additional income streams: 23%
• Increasing their audience: 18%
• Making their books more accessible: 10%
• Popularity of audiobooks: 5%

Authors who have explored non-traditional platforms such as Patreon, Kickstarter, or itch.io gave the following reasons:

• Stabilizing their income: 20%
• Escaping the reliance on Amazon: 20%
• Trying new ways to reach more readers: 11%

SAPPHIC FICTION AUTHORS AND GENERATIVE AI

To understand the discussion surrounding AI in creative spaces, it’s important to distinguish between two different types of AI:

Generative AI creates something new—a cover, a scene, a chapter, or an entire book, a social media graphic or video, an audiobook, or a translation—from a prompt. But it doesn’t create this content out of nothing; it creates it based on patterns the AI model has learned during training on large datasets that included millions of books and artwork used without the permission of or compensation for the copyright holders.

By contrast, assistive AI doesn’t create something new. It works on a text, an image, or an audio recording that humans have created and tries to improve it, e.g., grammar/spell checkers, tools that analyze manuscripts and flag clichés or overused words, software that helps audiobook narrators with noise reduction, and tools that remove an object in the background from an image. These kinds of tools have been around for many years, and they are commonly accepted among writers and readers. They support human creativity, whereas generative AI replaces it.

Of course, the distinction between assistive and generative AI is not always clear-cut. For example, if an author writes the first draft of a book themselves but then uses AI to heavily rewrite the entire text in a way that completely changes the style and voice, can it still be considered assistive? At what point do the AI revisions become so substantial that it’s no longer really the author’s book?

Some people insist that AI-generated translations are assistive, but I would argue that they are really generative since completely new text is being generated, even though it’s based on an author’s original book. AI doesn’t just assist translators; it replaces them entirely. With AI translation programs such as Kindle Translate, the entire process is automated, with no human translator or editor involved. A good translator does so much more than just switch the words in one language for their equivalents in another. They make creative decisions to achieve the same emotional effect as the original. This is especially apparent with humor and banter, which often depend on cultural context, wordplay, and double meanings of words that might not exist in the target language. In such cases, translators have to rewrite entire passages to make them work. For that reason, a translation is protected as an independent work under German copyright law, with the translator being considered the copyright holder. Even Amazon KDP considers translations AI-generated rather than AI-assisted content.

Despite ongoing debates and gray areas, the distinction between assistive and generative is still important. When you hear people in creative spaces speak out against AI, they are usually talking about generative AI and people using it to produce hundreds of AI-generated books within a few months, flooding the market and reducing visibility for human-created books.

That’s why most questions and answer options in the survey focus on generative AI, e.g., using AI to write the first draft, to substantially rewrite, or to create book covers, audiobooks, marketing material, or translations. I did include two aspects that are generally considered assistive rather than generative (using AI for research and for brainstorming) to get a more complete picture about how authors are using AI in their creative process.

How are sapphic fiction authors currently using AI?

For the question on how authors are currently using AI in their writing or publishing process, respondents could select multiple options.

• Not using it in any part of their writing/publishing process: 77%
• Using it for research: 15%
• Using it for brainstorming or plotting: 8%
• Using it for marketing, e.g., creating social media texts, images, or videos: 6%
• Using it to write the blurb (book description): 4%
• Using it to create book covers: 1%
• Using it to write the first draft, which authors then edit: 1%
• Using it to translate their books into other languages: 1%
• Using it for revisions, e.g., to substantially rewrite text authors have written: 0.4%
• Using it to create audiobooks, e.g., Virtual Voices: 0.4%

More than three-quarters of sapphic fiction authors aren’t using generative AI at all. That number is considerably higher than among the authors participating in a 2025 Bookbub survey, in which 55% said they weren’t using generative AI.

Of the authors who do use AI, most (68%) use it to do research. This is consistent with the findings from the 2025 Bookbub survey, in which the majority of authors (81%) who do use AI reported using it for research.

Among authors who use AI, 34% use it for brainstorming or plotting, while 25% use it to create marketing images, text, or videos. By contrast, very few authors (5% of authors who use AI and 1% of all authors) report using generative AI to write or substantially rewrite their books.

When it comes to their current generative AI usage, there was no statistically significant difference between writers who made no or almost no income from their writing and those who relied solely or substantially on writing-related income, nor was there any difference between authors whose income had decreased and those whose income increased during the past year.

There was also no statistically significant difference in current generative AI usage between indie authors, authors who publish with large mainstream publishers, and authors who publish with a small press, nor were there differences between writers with an optimistic vs. pessimistic outlook on the future of sapphic publishing.

New writers weren’t more likely to use AI than veteran authors. In fact, authors with 10+ published books were more likely to use AI for brainstorming or plotting compared to authors with 10 books or fewer, and authors who have been writing sapphic fiction for more than five years were more likely to use AI for research than authors who have started writing sapphic fiction within the past five years.

A quick reminder: The survey results regarding usage of generative AI aren’t necessarily representative of all people publishing sapphic books. This is particularly noticeable when comparing the survey results with the Amazon lesbian fiction/lesbian romance top 100, where we see far more AI-generated books and covers. Our results reflect the majority of sapphic authors involved in the community but not all sapphic books published on Amazon.

Would authors consider using generative AI to create their book covers in the future?

When asked whether they would consider using generative AI for future book covers, the responses were:

• Will definitely use an AI-generated cover: 1%
• Will probably use an AI-generated cover: 1%
• Might use an AI-generated cover, depending on circumstances: 6%
• Unlikely to use an AI-generated cover: 13%
• Definitely won’t use an AI-generated cover: 79%

Would authors consider using generative AI to create audiobooks in the future?

When asked whether they would consider using generative AI to produce an audio version of their book in the future, the responses were:

• Will definitely produce an AI audiobook: 1%
• Will probably produce an AI audiobook: <1%
• Might produce an AI audiobook, depending on circumstances: 5%
• Unlikely to produce an AI audiobook: 11%
• Definitely won’t produce an AI audiobook: 82%

Would authors consider using generative AI to produce translations of their books in the future?

When asked whether they would consider using generative AI to produce a translation of their books in the future, the responses were:

• Will definitely produce an AI translation: 1%
• Will probably produce an AI translation: 2%
• Might produce an AI translation, depending on circumstances: 8%
• Unlikely to produce an AI translation: 15%
• Definitely won’t produce an AI translation: 74%

The majority of sapphic fiction authors rejects the future use of generative AI, especially for audiobooks (93% say they definitely won’t or are unlikely to ever produce an AI audiobook) and for book covers (92%). Authors are slightly more open to using generative AI for translations, but 89% still say they are unlikely or definitely won’t ever publish an AI translation.

What’s stopping authors from using generative AI?

Authors were asked about their primary concerns regarding generative AI. They could select multiple options. Their responses were:

• No concerns about using generative AI: 4%
• Ethical concerns (AI models being trained on artwork and books without permission or compensation of artists and authors): 82%
• Concerns about the impact on human creatives (Narrators, translators, cover artists & writers losing their jobs/income): 85%
• Concerns about quality and emotional depth of AI output (e.g., flat narration tone, loss of nuance in translations, etc.): 74%
• Concerns about the negative impact of AI on the environment: 74%
• Concerns about the effect of generative AI use on users’ cognitive or creative skills: 53%
• Concerns about negative reader reactions or community pushback: 51%
• Concerns about the political affiliations & activities of AI companies/their founders & investors: 57%

Only 4% of authors had no concerns about generative AI.

The most common concern was the impact generative AI has on human creatives. 85% of authors were worried about cover artists, translators, narrators, and fellow authors losing their jobs or part of their income due to generative AI.

82% of authors had ethical concerns since AI models were trained on copyrighted books and artwork without permission from or compensation for authors and artists.

Concerns about the quality and emotional depth of AI output and about the impact of AI on the environment were also widespread, both reported by 74% of authors.

As other reasons for not wanting to use generative AI, authors mentioned:

• Complaining about the flood of AI books but using AI for covers, translations, or audiobooks would be hypocrisy (4%)
• Writing gives them joy, so why would they outsource it to AI (2%)
• Taking pride in their work (2%)
• Relying on AI means taking shortcuts and stops you from learning (1%)
• Impact of AI/data centers on local communities, e.g., electric bills going up (1%)
• AI amplifying biases and stereotypes (1%)

BIGGEST CHALLENGES

What are the biggest challenges sapphic fiction authors are currently facing?

When authors were asked about the biggest challenges they are facing, the responses were:

• Flood of AI-generated books swamping markets: 24%
• Lack of visibility: 23%
• Marketing: 17%
• Lack of time to write/do it all: 10%
• Market saturation: 8%
• Declining sales: 7%
• Lack of motivation: 7%
• Writing in a genre/subgenre less popular with readers: 5%
• Rising costs of publishing (editing, covers, etc.): 4%
• Amazon algorithm changes: 3%
• Reader preference for M/M over sapphic romance: 3%
• Piracy: 3%
• Censorship and suppression of LGBTQ+ content: 3%
• Tension/toxicity in the sapphic community: 3%
• AI “witch hunts”/fear of being accused of using generative AI to write books: 3%
• Downturn in economy: 2%
• Rising homophobia and especially transphobia: 2%
• Health issues: 2%
• Getting reviews: 1%
• Indies & small presses being ignored in favor of books from large mainstream presses: 1%
• Burnout: 1%
• Only big-name authors being recommended: 1%
• Readers being hesitant to pick up new authors due to AI: 1%
• Writer’s block: 1%
• Drop in quality leading to readers buying fewer books: 1%
• Pressure to release more books: 1%
• Keeping up with constant changes: 1%
• Self-doubt: 1%
• Dealing with an uncertain future for the publishing industry: 1%

Authors’ biggest struggles clearly aren’t internal, creative ones. Writer’s block and self-doubts are mentioned by only 1% of authors each.

The number one challenge that authors reportedly face is having to compete against a flood of AI-generated books (24%), followed closely by a lack of visibility (23%).

Many of the most-mentioned challenges writers face are connected:

The number of sapphic fiction authors and books has increased considerably (8% of authors name market saturation as a big challenge), while the audience for sapphic fiction hasn’t grown in the same way that the audience for M/M romance has (3% of authors mention reader preferences for M/M over sapphic books as a major hurdle).

The flood of AI-generated books adds to the problem of market saturation, making it harder for authors to get any visibility for their books in an already crowded market. According to a study by Reimers & Waldfogel, the number of monthly new releases tripled since the launch of ChatGPT, and we’re certainly seeing that reflected in the sapphic fiction market too.

A prominent example is Aurora North, who is part of Fractal Enigma, widely assumed to be an AI content farm. Aurora North has published 172 novel-length books within 8 months (January 12, 2026 – September 16, 2026). That publication volume is far outside what a single human author can reasonably be expected to write and publish without using generative AI. In August and September 2026, Aurora North had up to 16 books in the Lesbian Romance top 100 on Amazon.com. That means 16 fewer spots were available for human-created books, whose authors missed out on the visibility being in the top 100 would have given them.

As a result of an increasingly crowded market, authors have to spend more of their time marketing their books. 17% of authors mention their struggles with marketing—they either hate it, feel that they are not good at it, or report that they are not getting good results.

The amount of time spent marketing contributes to a lack of time for writing, which 10% of authors reported as one of their biggest challenges.

7% mentioned that finding the motivation to keep writing is a struggle when faced with the flood of AI books.

AI-generated books also undermine the trust between writers and their audience, which affects especially new authors. 1% of respondents mention that it has become harder to get readers to pick up a book by a new author for fear of it being AI-generated. 3% of authors are afraid of “witch hunts”—being accused of using generative AI for their writing without any real proof or their book being uploaded into unreliable AI checkers.

3% of authors felt that the sapphic community had become less supportive or even toxic in some cases. Some trans, bisexual, and asexual authors mentioned not feeling welcome in the community, while some lesbian authors described a growing sense of their identity being erased by the label “sapphic.”

Authors who are writing outside the romance genre reported additional challenges. There are fewer promo opportunities, and their audience is even smaller, making it harder to recover costs.

OUTLOOK ON THE FUTURE OF SAPPHIC FICTION PUBLISHING

What outlook do authors have on the future of sapphic fiction publishing?

When asked about their outlook on the future of sapphic fiction publishing over the next five years, authors’ responses were:

• Somewhat optimistic (the market will remain healthy, despite current challenges): 27%
• Somewhat pessimistic (it will become harder to maintain a viable career as a sapphic fiction author): 24%
• Neutral (positive and negative trends will balance each other out): 23%
• Uncertain (no idea where things are heading): 12%
• Very pessimistic (Publishing sapphic books might become unsustainable): 9%
• Very optimistic (The market and income for sapphic authors will grow): 6%

One-third of authors are very or somewhat optimistic about the future of sapphic fiction publishing (33%), one-third are very or somewhat pessimistic (33%), while 12% are unsure of where things are heading and 23% expect things to remain more or less stable, with positive and negative trends balancing each other out.

HELPFUL CHANGES TO THE SAPPHIC QUILL

The Sapphic Quill is my way of giving back to the community and uplift fellow authors.

I send out a monthly newsletter for authors, filled with advice, promo opportunities, and the latest news relevant to sapphic fiction authors; I offer a website with helpful information, and I run the Sapphic Quill Facebook group where authors can ask for advice and exchange tips & information.

I also run several big multi-author events and cross-promotions every year such as the Sapphic Book Bingo, the Sapphic Book Advent Calendar, and Give Something Away Day, trying to help authors gain more visibility.

In my reader Facebook group, I offer authors the opportunity to introduce readers to their book via posts like New & Upcoming Releases, New Author of the Month features, and the Giveaway of the Week spots.

How could I improve the Sapphic Quill newsletter and Facebook group and my events & cross-promos to make them more useful to sapphic fiction authors?

As the last question of the survey, I asked authors what I could do to make my offerings more helpful to them.

The most-mentioned suggestions were:

• You’re already doing great; I don’t think you can do more: 58%
• More exposure for new and not-as-well-known authors: 2%
• More opportunities for writers in genres other than contemporary romances (crime/thriller, horror, speculative fiction, historical fiction, etc.): 2%
• Share the results of the author and reader surveys: 2%
• Move away from Facebook: 1%
• More marketing advice: 1%
• Connecting authors for newsletter swaps: 1%
• Stop the AI witch hunts/stop bashing AI: 0.5%
• Stop posting “readers’ favorite authors” lists: 0.5%
• Stop posting your personal “favorite book of the month”; remain more neutral: 0.5%
• More writing craft advice: 0.5%
• Advice for new authors: 0.5%
• Offer paid advertising options: 0.5%
• More promotion of authors who rely on their books to pay the bills: 0.5%
• Index of cover artists and editors: 0.5%
• Beta reader database: 0.5%
• Helpful links page on the Sapphic Quill website: 0.5%

Additional suggestions that were each mentioned just once (i.e., no suggestion was made by more than one author):

• More surveys showing the impact of AI on authors.
• Be more strictly anti-AI/stop coddling AI users.
• More on the concept of generative AI.
• Resources for writers who want to avoid AI.
• Checklist for readers to consult if they’re wondering whether a book is AI.
• Open the call for authors to submit their books for consideration.
• Include a wider, more diverse range of authors and books in promos.
• More curation and narrower focus for promos.
• Add an Experienced Author of the Month feature.
• More help for authors relying on their writing-related income.
• More use of lesbian as an identity.
• Make them more trans friendly.
• Cross-promos with authors that aren’t sapphic to get more readers who aren’t queer to read sapphic books.
• Provide more resources for the German market.
• More networking opportunities with other authors.
• Invite authors for giveaways of ebooks.
• Create more community in real life and not over social media.
• Clearer expectations and understanding of what the Sapphic Quill Facebook group is for.
• Centering Black women as an integral part of the process/discussion.
• Announce dates when posts will go up in the Facebook group in the Sapphic Quill newsletter ahead of time.
• Feature books in your reader newsletter.
• Help newbies avoiding getting ripped off by scammers.
• Resources that aren’t sapphic (sci-fi, horror, historical fiction author groups).
• Cover some of the Author’s Guild topics from a sapphic perspective (copyright, etc).
• Guest blogs from content creators or avid sapphic book readers.
• Resources to check accuracy of AI content used for research.
• Market the Sapphic Quill more.
• Information about the changing publishing landscape.
• Mini university on going indie.
• Author interviews.
• A regular blurb on an unconventional marketing strategy that worked for an author.

As you can see, there were a lot of really great suggestions. I’ll implement as many of them as possible, but I won’t be able to do them all. I’m only one person, and I don’t make any money from the Sapphic Quill newsletter or events. I do it in my very limited spare time, so there are things that are outside of the scope of what’s possible for me to do. I’m sharing all suggestions here anyway in the hope that someone else will have the time, energy, and knowledge to tackle one of the suggested projects.

One thing you probably noticed too is that some of the suggestions are conflicting. Some authors want me to stop “bashing AI,” others want me to be more strictly anti-AI. Some want me to stop sharing lists of readers’ favorite authors, while others suggested more help for authors relying on their writing-related income. Some want me to include a wider range of authors in the promos, while others want a narrower focus. Clearly, the sapphic community is not a monolith, and different authors have different needs and opinions. As much as I’d like to, it’s impossible for me to make every single author happy, but I’ll try my best to find ways to incorporate many different perspectives, make thoughtful choices, and help as many fellow authors as possible.

Already implemented and planned changes to the Sapphic Quill

I’ve already started to implement some of the suggestions. Here’s a list of what I’ve already changed or will change in the near future:

• To give authors who aren’t writing contemporary romance more opportunities to introduce their books to readers, I’ll post a monthly Sapphic Subgenre Spotlight post in my Facebook reader group and invite authors to share their books there. We are starting with a spotlight post for mystery/crime novels on September 24. Authors who aren’t on Facebook can email me with information about their book, and I’ll add it for them.
• For the 2026 Sapphic Book Advent Calendar, I might group some of the subgenres together so I can feature more books and showcase a wider range of sapphic stories. For example, one door might contain several mystery & crime books, while another could be speculative fiction. It depends on how many and what kind of submissions I’ll get.
• I’ve reopened submissions for the New Author of the Month feature. There are eleven spots available for 2027, starting in February, and they’ll be filled on a first-come, first-served basis. Each author will get a dedicated feature in my Facebook group of 8,000 readers. I’ll create the post and the graphic, so there’s zero work involved for authors, other than filling out the submission form. Authors do not have to be on Facebook to be featured.
• Since there are only 11 spots for the New Author of the Month feature, I’ll also start doing a monthly or quarterly New Author Intro post in my Facebook reader group, where authors with 1-3 books can introduce their work to readers in the comments. I’ll share the link to each post in the Sapphic Quill newsletter. If you are a new author and you’re not on Facebook, feel free to email me and I’ll add you to the post.
• I’ll post a monthly Fresh Finds Friday post in my Facebook group to shine a light on all the underappreciated books and books that get lost in the sea of new releases and backlist books. Readers are invited to share a book they wish more people knew about, and authors can share one of their books that always seems to fly under the radar, no matter how hard they try to promote it. You’ll find the first Fresh Finds Friday post here on September 25 (The post isn’t live yet). Authors who aren’t on Facebook can email me with information about their book, and I’ll add it for them.
• To help new and not-as-well-known authors get more exposure, I’m planning a “20 under 20” post that I’ll share on Facebook and Instagram. The post will feature 20 sapphic books with fewer than 20 reviews. If I get more than 20 submissions, I’ll make it a monthly or quarterly feature. You can submit your book here.
• Of course, one of the categories in the 2027 Sapphic Book Bingo will be “new or new-to-you author.” That’s been an annual tradition for the past 5+ years, and I’ll continue it next year. I’ll include the submission form for the 2027 Sapphic Book Bingo in the October newsletter.
• Authors will be able to suggest categories for the 2027 Sapphic Book Bingo. I’ll include the form for suggestions in the next Sapphic Quill newsletter.
• I’ve shared the results of the author survey here, and I’ll post the results of the reader survey as soon as I have them. With more than 2,800 readers participating so far, it’s more data to analyze, so it’ll take a bit longer.
• Several authors suggested moving away from Facebook/Meta for my reader group and the Sapphic Quill group. I considered it in the past but decided against it. Moving would inevitably mean losing a part of the communities I’ve built over many years. Many people won’t be willing to move to another platform, and there’s no consensus about where to move. While I won’t be moving my Facebook groups, I have moved the Giveaway of the Week feature to my website. That will give authors and readers who are not on Facebook a chance to participate. I’ll still post the link to the giveaway in my Facebook group so those readers won’t miss out, but I’ll also promote it more widely across all of my social media. I’ll continue to provide featured authors with social media graphics so they can promote the giveaway too. I’ve also added an option for readers to sign up for a reminder email so they’ll be alerted any time a new giveaway starts. That way, we won’t be as dependent on social media algorithms.
• For the Giveaway of the Week feature, authors can now restrict shipping to their own country if they choose to give away a paperback copy, keeping shipping costs reasonable.
• I have added a resources page to the Sapphic Quill website. It includes a long list of helpful resources specific to sapphic fiction authors, including free and paid promo opportunities, resources on writing sapphic books, sapphic publishers & organizations, reviewers, podcasts, and marketing advice.
• I’ve also added resources for German-language sapphic books to the resources page. Unfortunately, there aren’t many, but I’ve included all helpful resources I’m aware of.
• I’ll add more resources to the Sapphic Quill resources page in the future, including links to cover artists and editors, a beta reader database, and more general resources for authors of all subgenres. If you know of any helpful resources I should include, please send me an email and let me know.
• I’ve updated and extended the FAQ section of the Sapphic Quill website, and I’m keeping it pinned to the featured posts section of the Sapphic Quill Facebook group to avoid new authors having to ask the same questions all over again.
• I’ve started sending out an extra Sapphic Quill newsletter at the beginning of the month, sharing the dates when Facebook posts will go up so authors have a chance to add their books right away instead of only at the end of the month.
• I set up a newsletter swap directory. Authors who are interested in doing a newsletter swap can fill out this form to join the directory. The directory is set up in a way that will allow authors to contact each other directly without me having to be the go-between.

A few authors also suggested options I’m already offering, and I wanted to point them out here to help guide authors to those resources:

• Open the call for authors to submit their books for consideration: All of my events and promo opportunities have always been open to all authors. I do not pick which authors I feature; authors submit their books, and I feature all of them, in the order in which they were received. The only event that is a bit more curated is the Sapphic Book Advent Calendar. Among all submissions, I give specific authors preference for being featured in a door of their own rather than in one of the group doors on December 24 & 25: I try to give BIPOC authors an individual spot as often as possible, and I reward team players who have a history of reliably sharing cross-promos and uplifting fellow authors. For the remaining individual doors, I strive for a good balance of new and established authors as well as different formats (ebook, paperback, and audiobook) to make the event accessible to all readers. Most importantly, I’m not turning away any author who submitted their book (as long as the book is sapphic and generative-AI-free). The best way to never miss an opportunity is to sign up for the Sapphic Quill newsletter.
• Feature books in your reader newsletter & offer paid ads: I’ve shared book recommendations in my personal reader newsletter for many years. Those recommendations are not paid ads, though; they are all books I’ve personally read and enjoyed, and that’s how I’d like to keep it. I don’t want my recommendations to be based on who can afford to pay for them.
• Help newbies avoid getting ripped off by scammers: I share warnings and scam alerts in the Sapphic Quill newsletter and the Sapphic Quill Facebook group whenever I become aware of them. I also recommend signing up to the Writers Beware blog, which does a wonderful job of alerting authors of new scams.
• Invite authors for giveaways of ebooks: I feature 50+ authors per year in the Giveaway of the Week feature, and I run several big multi-author giveaways such as Give Something Away Day every year. Authors can always choose which format they want to give away, including ebooks. You can find the link to the submission form for a Giveaway of the Week feature here.
• Share more writing craft advice: I’ve written several books on the writing craft under my legal name, including books on Show, Don’t Tell; Point of View, and Write Great Beginnings, as well as Time Management for Writers and Goal Setting for Writers.

Finally, I’d like to comment on my stance on AI in creative spaces. I’ve always made it clear that I support my fellow creatives—not just authors, but also narrators, cover artists, translators, and editors. In a small niche like sapphic fiction, authentic representation and mutual support are especially important, and I don’t want AI-generated content to replace human voices.

To uplift human creatives, I have a clear no-generative-AI rule for all my events, promo opportunities, and groups. When authors submit their books to any of them, they need to confirm that they haven’t been using generative AI to write their book, create the cover, or publish a translation or an audiobook. My rules do not exclude authors who are using assistive AI such as grammar/spell check tools.

However, I want to make it clear that I’m not encouraging witch hunts and unfounded accusations against individual authors. Having clear boundaries against generative AI doesn’t mean I would publicly tear down another author who, for example, chooses to use an AI-generated cover. As a reader, I would simply not buy or read that book, and as a fellow author, if asked, I would point them toward affordable options for AI-free covers.

But if an author chooses to use generative AI, they have to respect that I don’t want to promote their book. I ask authors to be honest when they submit their books and not try to pass off an AI-generated book or cover as a human-created work. Our readers should be able to trust us.

I’d also like to point out that there’s a difference between engaging in witch hunts based on pure speculation and pointing out clear evidence of large-scale AI content production. If a reader asks me if an author like Aurora North is legitimate, I shouldn’t have to lie to readers and pretend that it’s possible for a single human author to write, revise, and publish 170+ novels within 8 months. I’d like us to be able to honestly address issues that affect the sapphic community instead of ignoring them.

Likewise, educating readers about labels such as “Virtual Voices” or “Kindle Translate” and what they mean is not a witch hunt either. I believe that transparency is important. Readers should be able to make informed decisions about what kind of books they’d like to read or listen to and which authors they want to support.

I hope that we as a community can stand up for transparency and human creativity without resorting to harassment and accusations based on speculation.

CONCLUSION

If I had to sum up the results of the author survey in one sentence, I would say: Sapphic fiction authors now have more opportunities, but they also face more competition and more challenges than ever before.

In the past decade, the world of sapphic fiction has grown and professionalized. Authors now have many more publishing options than in the past. There are more platforms to publish books and more opportunities to promote them than ever before. New formats have become accessible to more authors and readers.

Mainstream presses have started to publish sapphic books, and authors who’ve been told sapphic fiction doesn’t sell have begun to take a chance on it.

Readers now have more sapphic books to choose from than in the past—which is wonderful, but it also means it’s getting harder for each individual book to stand out and for authors to find enough readers to recover their costs or pay their bills.

The audience for sapphic books hasn’t grown as much as the audience for M/M romance, and each reader only has limited time to read and limited money to spend on books. Sapphic books compete not only with each other and with books that aren’t sapphic; they also compete with other forms of entertainment such as TV/streaming, podcasts, games, social media, etc.

If you add the flood of AI-generated books on platforms such as Amazon, it’s getting even more difficult for authors to make their books stand out in the sea of available titles.

As a result, more than half of sapphic fiction authors have seen a decrease in their writing-related income, which forces them to spend more time and energy on marketing instead of writing.

Nearly two-thirds of sapphic fiction authors have changed their publishing strategy in the past year or are thinking of changing it soon. Many feel the pressure to publish books faster or are trying to find ways to connect with and sell books to readers directly.

Authors are faced with constant changes—social media platforms becoming unusable for LGBTQ+ writers, new ones popping up, retailer algorithms changing, new formats becoming popular, and marketing tactics that were once successful no longer working.

Authors who started publishing sapphic fiction 10+ years ago are now faced with an entirely different publishing world. Staying flexible and adjusting to changes is becoming more important than ever.

There’s no one best way to deal with all the changes. For some authors, putting their books into Kindle Unlimited still works best, while others have found more success in going wide. Some are going indie; others are trying the traditional publishing route. For some, investing in audiobooks is worth it; for others, it’s not. Some are trying to increase their output and publish more often; others decided to focus on quality, not quantity.

There’s no universal one-size-fits-all solution. Different strategies work for different authors.

But that doesn’t mean authors have to be one-person armies and figure it all out alone. Authors’ strategies may be different, but we’re all facing the same challenges. We can all benefit from cross-promoting our books, sharing information, learning from each other’s experiences, and helping each other navigate changes that affect all of us.

No doubt, the sapphic publishing landscape will continue to change, but I hope we can face those changes together and help each other make sure our stories find the readers they deserve.

What do you think?

If you’re a sapphic author, do these survey results sound familiar to you? And what conclusions do you draw from them?

Let us know in the comments!