Beauty, Ugly.

Beauty, Ugly.

1 chapter / 495 words

Approximately 2 minutes to read


if I win the contest, I will DONATE the ENTIRE prize to animals foundations/ stopping animal testings. That is a promise. please support me!!!

  • 1097
  • 13
  • 329
  • 278
  • 35
  • 466


Red hart

3 months ago Rachel D. said:

I stumbled upon this, and I'm very glad I did. Nicely done, you are a brilliant writer!!!!


6 months ago Lightningfur said:

Very well written. You are a very good writer! :)


7 months ago Nikita Eragon said:

I read this before and I just read it again and I still love it! Write more!! You're so good! :) -(>

August 2013

8 months ago Bailey Tidmore said:

Guess who is gaining a new follower! YOU ARE!



over 1 year ago Haylei said:

Your concept of the story is great but you speed Things a bit too fast first of all the main question a few readers will probably ask is, who is our character. From the description the only thing that we can get from our character is the fact that "he" is actually a "she". But what is her name? You need to take your time to introduce the story. But all in all it is a really good story.

Screen shot 2013-05-04 at 11.35.00 am

over 1 year ago Badwolf said:

Your writing is excellent. It evokes emotion. Unfortunately, you also have a lot of thing in your story–– key elements–– that don't make any sense/are unrealistic.

1) She would not have been able to keep test animals in her parka–– let alone pick one up to pet it–– without them freaking out and clawing/biting her. They've become used to humans doing terrible, painful things to them. Why would she be any different to them, being that she's human?

2) She wouldn't just be able to enter a testing facility. She'd need at least an ID badge.

3) If the animals weren't being attended to (which, more likely than not there would be at least someone looking after them), they would be in a storage facility, which would be more like the kennels of a vet's clinic. That means no test tubes or microscopes. Those are for the labs only, which are being attended to by scientists and other testers.

4)There would be cameras everywhere. I mean, how else would security be able to keep track of everything? This would mean that they probably would have caught her, even before she got out of the building with them, and she would have been arrested.

5) She couldn't just "walk in" and almost immediately find the animals. It would be a lot further in. It's not like this is a concentration camp or anything, where you'd walk in and see prisoners everywhere (which, by the way, would also have guards ;D).

I appreciate your writing and your desire to get it out there that animal testing is bad (I mostly agree with that.) But, please, for the sake of logic and keeping your "argument" sound so that those pro-animal testing people can't put it aside, please, please, please do some research? Thanks!