What parts of the genre you’re writing in do you dislike/hate? Do you try avoid them?

Fantasy:
Giant worldbuilding essays. I love to write them, don't get me wrong, but I recognize that they aren't the same thing as a story, and I acknowledge that the average reader would have very little use for them. I wish more fantasy writers would also acknowledge that... 9_9
'Chosen Ones', as in, "someone is supposed to do X, Y, and Z, and we've picked you to be that someone, so get to training!" The concept just bores me; I can't get invested in it or take it seriously. I have created exactly one Chosen One MC in the modern day, and her story's been DOA for 2 years because I just have no idea how to write it (even though it's a parody! o_o)
The Big Quest To Defeat the Ultimate Evil-type plots. I guess I don't hate seeing them, but I don't like to write them and I prefer stories that also do not use them. I just feel like conceptualizing 'evil' as something with a singular source that can be found and eradicated is a bit...childish.

Sci-Fi:
Aggressive technobabble. Again, don't get me wrong-- I love technobabble; although I try to restrain myself I'm probably guilty of this exact thing. XD But I feel like I get a pass because I'm a scientist; I tend to know what I'm talking about or at least how to simplify it. Many sci-fi authors...don't. ^^; And if you stop to think about the terms they're throwing around it quickly becomes obvious that it's just thematic nonsense.
Robots as disposable sidekicks that can be abused and tormented for fun-- HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE IF YOU DO THIS I'M MENTALLY SCRATCHING AND CLAWING YOUR FACE RIGHT NOW
...Not only do I find the "oh, they don't have feelings" excuse disgusting, I think this trope kinda goes against human nature. We love to anthropomorphize things; long before 'robot' was a concept we gave cute pet names to boats and weapons and even buildings, and tried to love and care for them accordingly.
Just in general, I want more sci-fi stories about recognizing the value in non-human objects AND creatures, and less promoting sick outdated ideas of 'supremacy' from the early days of the genre. T_T
Science vs. Ethics-type plots, as if the two concepts can't coexist. Good science always takes ethics into account, and scientists in general are not emotionless data-gathering shells of human beings (seriously, this portrayal needs to stop. It's just sad at this point).
I do like Ethical vs. Unethical scientist conflicts, though. More of that, please~
'ToughGuy McManlyMan' MCs. ^^; I don't even know why this is a trend...maybe because that type of protagonist was popular in the 80s when sci-fi started to get really big...? Anyway, I'm just...not interested
Mad scientists specifically as people who do whatever-the-heck and have lost all contact with reality. It's just too unrealistic for me...you know what usually happens when you goof around in the lab with no plan and no idea what you're doing? You accomplish very little, and then you die. ^^ There are plenty of ways to write a 'mad' scientist who's still competent enough to get things done without relying solely on luck and coincidence.

In relationship genre:
1. The characters not acting like humans. Throwing temper tantrums and the other person putting up with it. One person in the relationship hitting the other like its normal (not playfully, you know the difference).
2. The person that is suppose to have others falling all over themselves to be with has the personality of a rock. Most socially awkward people don't have people throwing themselves at them.

Sci fi or fantasy
1. explaining the complex world and background to things that have no impact on the story in any way. It's great your magic system is thought out but if it doesn't have a reason to be explained to move the story along, who cares.
2. Wildly different species living in a city with no conflict. Everyone just acts like the cat girl and the 9 food lizard man are perfectly ok with one another. That doesn't happen in any real world or animal kingdom.
all genre:

Meta: (not in a straight up comedy) I hate, hate, hate. When the characters know they are in a comic. Quippy jokes in life and death situations. Jokes that only the audience would get but the characters in the story wouldn't say. The characters have to believe this is their reality. They don't know any different. Quickest way for me to stop reading any story is meta.

(Hope no one is butthurt because you can dislike a trope but still enjoy the media that have it, or even have it in your own series. I personally don't actively avoid them, they simply less likely to exist just because the taste and story don't overlap)

• Obvious wish-fulfillment audience/author surrogate main character
• Also I have biases against overpowered main characters, they are hard to get right
• Power/magic system? You mean the reason the MC is fucking strong that also kinda explain the power/magic that presents in the story
• You are not "subverting it" you're "adjusting it to your preference." Sometimes some works that "subvert" or "defy expectations" are the most predictable in itself. Subverting or defying cliché is the new cliché. It's okay to have some clichés or common tropes in moderation.
• Hey, give that sidekick a.k.a the-narrator-of-fights-and-explainer-of-power-system a raise
• There is an obviously superior and often flawless race/species, or a species/race that has strong predisposition to be good/evil. Why the Zogborgorc pillaged our village? Because they're an evil race, Sonny. Let's go to the Elven hippie festival.
• Or it is humans that are the weakest, but the greediest, breed like roaches, and destroy everything in their wake. Humans are always wrong and evil! I get it I hate humans too, but that is stupid.
• MC is a sole survivor of an extinct race/species that is often proven to be special or really powerful in the future
• Shoehorning real life racial/class dynamic or political issue sloppily into the fantasy counterparts, because it will inspire many people and solve racism (nominated for Nobel)
• "Tyrants." Royals cannot get away with whatever they want. There are often other parts of the court like ministers or other royalties who hold power over them, that they can sometimes be a figurehead. A noble/royal killing another kingdom's for lulz isn't a cute example of a "Such a cool and cold-hearted tyrant." That is a stupid act that can risk the stability and security of their own countries.
• Literally nobody cares about the people, aren't they the part of the kingdom? Who the royals and nobles collect tax from? Who moves the economy and build infrastructure? Who can be drafted when invaders arrive? Who will bring out the guillotine, then? Collapse is inevitable for those who treat their people like shit and keep killing them.
• Oh, this 21st century town girl is isekaied into some "primitive" fantasy civilization? Of course as a modern human she must teach and lead the way of the uncultured into the true height of civilization! And she is gonna be extremely good at it, despite never doing outdoor work in her life. She is also an expert despite not having any qualification and only have read Wikipedia. I meant what can ancient people do? It's not like they did invent mathematical theorems, sail to find new lands, build cities, or something. Also of course, please preach about modern moral/religious values that may or may not be applicable or practical in the circumstances of the savages, but they don't know better! (I used female pronoun just because the last example I saw features girl MC)

Slice-of-life:
- The quiet, serious one vs the loud, silly one. Maybe it's because I act quiet IRL and get irritated at people telling me to 'lighten up' (moreso as a kid when people expect kids to be rambunctious). I believe that's what triggered my 'lolrandum' phase. Yeah, I have a bit of a personal grudge against this trope Conversely, I have an irrational adoration of quiet, spacey, out-of-touch character vs loud, bossy, overachiever character dynamics XD

Fantasy:
- Worldbuilding that feels too 'clean'. Examples include

• The humans being the 'central' race; e.g. there's a masculine race, a feminine race, a strong race, a smart race, a quick race, but the humans are the middle of them all and the 'jack of all trades'.
• Magic systems where everything fits neatly into one category. Also, when everything is known about the magic system and there are no new discoveries that completely upend the current model of how magic works (at most, a new magic comes along that get its own new category, and that's it :P)

I guess it kind of just breaks my immersion and reminds me that this world was designed by a human for consumption by fellow humans, and not a real, organic world that exists out there somewhere

And yeah, I do kind of naturally feel like not-doing these things in my own writing For instance, the fantasy series I'm currently developing has exactly one (1) other sentient humanoid race other than humans, so humans by necessity can't be a 'central' race because the average of two different points is neither of those points

Since Lyza's Sandstorm is an Action packed series... so here are things that I dislike:

• Villains being too sympathetic: The villains are one of the most important characters in the story and they do play big roles in the protagonist's journey. However, recent times, they are making the villains too sympathetic or too relatable that you cannot hate anymore. That's get kinda annoying so, that's why I'm appreciating the more evil, sadistic, malice, more removed than being humanistic. Those are what villains are supposed to be. You can have a backstory or make in totally ambiguous and make the readers come up with their own conclusion but at the very least, make the villains that you'd love to hate. That's why Dr. Robotnik is my all-time favorite villain ever. HE DESTROYS PLANETS!!! He wants to robotisize everything and never mentioned onto why he wants to do that or what's behind his motivation or maybe it did but my God, he's hellbent in accomplishing that and he has the balls to face Sonic straight on in almost all levels. I like that in villains... not being afraid to go after the hero rather wait at the very end.

• Short main fights: For the most parts, action stories are about as simple as building up the hero and the villain together so that, they'd eventually face off at the very end. Once it does, IT'S ON!!! You'd expect an epic duel that both would just GO ALL OUT and then... "fart" and done. What a fucking load!!!

• ...and it was all just a dream: That could be for any genre but please, never finish a story like that.

as a fantasy enjoyer and writer my biggest beefs are isms and appropriation

i wont flat out avoid isms in fantasy but depending on use it may earn a lil stank eye

also complete lack of poc in fantasy settings and again its getting the look if they're only inluded in instances with isms coz in a planet world whatever with varying climates, ecosystems, biomes whatever your gonna tell me everyone looks exactly the same??? 🤨

Just out of curiosity, what are "isms"?

I assume from context you mean things like racism; misogynism...?

I write mainly in the sci-fi genre... I can tolerate a lot of stuff depending on the execution but there are some things that just... always get on my nerves.

1. This one is a new one, and I hope this doesn't get taken the wrong way, but... Every new book I've picked up recently that featured a female protagonist that wasn't stereotypically femme/was written as an interesting, fully fleshed-out character - was lesbian or wasn't allowed to express any sexuality at all (Greg Rucka, as much as I LOVE his female characters, is super guilty of this second one). I uh... I find this super problematic because it continues to reinforce the idea straight cis-gendered women can't be interesting/butch/not written for the male gaze and that lesbian women can't be traditionally feminine. A good number of them were written by what appears to be lesbian authors so, okay, fair enough. They're just writing what they want to see. But it's been a rising trend even outside of this set of circumstances and I, a pansexual woman, am starting to really dislike it.
2. This only applies to male authors writing female characters, but like... female characters with tortured pasts related to their femininity or their reproductive capacity in some way. Not even necessarily the "sexual assault as a backstory" thing, but like... Yennefer in the Witcher, who chooses to give up her reproductive capacity for power and then becomes incredibly whiny about it. I'm not saying a woman can't regret the choice to give up her reproductive ability, but women generally don't start to make up stories about how other people wronged them in these cases and start randomly lashing out...? Like women in general are raised to be super self-deprecating, so if anything, the first person they'd blame is themselves. The whole thing just feels exploitative, patronizing and slightly misogynistic. I'm not one to say that people can't write X or whatever, but this is starting to approach the "if you don't have a uterus and/or identify as a woman, please don't write about it" territory for me.

My genre is fantasy.

I feel like it's such a broad genre that there are a lot of things I could write about it. But this early in my story, this was the main one I tried to avoid:

Starting with a lore dump

Now I don't actually hate lore dumps and I don't even mind when they start the story. They're hard to avoid when explaining a fantasy world. And I know some people prefer it because they want to know what kind of world they're getting into. I even got a few critiques from friends to do this (while others told me they liked that I didn't start that way)

But I don't like it when I've read through all the lore only to realize I don't vibe with the actual characters or the specific journey the protagonist will take. I wanted to put my characters before the lore dumps so readers could decide if they actually want to spend time with these people.

I do think the opposite is completely valid but both appeal to different types of readers.

Okay, I have some tropes that I have been trying to avoid in my genre (BL, LGBT+, Slice of Life?).
-I dislikes when the couple (and maybe all the cast) travel. Almost always its to a mountain, and one of the characters has an accident, and the other one saves him/her and have a romantic moment, and PLEASE! At least now they could be traveling to a lake, to make it more interesting, not always the mountain.
-The sickness. One of the charas get sick, and the other goes running to buy a medicine, and pass his time making the other gets fine.
-The stolen kiss -Absolutely NO. If there is no consent, it shouldn't be romantic. Never.
-Festivals, when they are at the end of the series, and the fireworks go with the kiss. That's why on my series I added the festival at the beginning and not at the end, to avoid expectations xd
-And here one that I have been hating with intensity lately in any genre. When the characters are LGBT+ coded, but they are just 'good friends'. Like, most mangas major characters are coded like lovers, and besides there is another character added as a romantic interest just there to justify their straightness, and I have to ask, why do people do that? Why? I absolutely dislike that because its such a loss. There are a lot of couple that could had been, but died before existing because this reason. You all know your couples that creators didn't make, or weren't allowed to make.

So, I suppose my writing orbits around the science fiction and horror genres, so I'll be talking about them.

For Sci-Fi I do have one main gripe that I haven't seen brought up yet: ideology. While I don't necessarily have an issue with politics or ideology in stories (and in sci-fi it can be pretty hard not to insert that stuff anyway), what I do have an issue with is when the ideology or politics take precedent over the story. Often this causes the story itself to degrade in quality quickly as the author shoehorns things in to fit the 'message', and I have often noticed that frequently it seems the authors assume that they are preaching to the choir and characterizations are often loaded (e.g., in an eco-friendly story the villain is a hunter. That's it, they don't do anything particularly bad, but they are a hunter and that should be enough).
Also, black and white solutions to grey problems are a big buzzkill. Often, I find the stories I find to be 'deepest' are the ones that seem to be about nothing (i.e. It's Such a Beautiful Day by Don Hertzfeldt or Stalker by Andrei Tarkovsky)

For horror I suppose my peeves are fewer and less intense as I find myself recently falling out with an old love of science fiction and snuggling into a comfortable space in horror writing. But there are a few things.

Generally, I don't care for this either, with the exception of if the creature is tied or cleverly juxtaposed with a more grounded or human threat or problem. I think the two examples of this I can think of is Hell-Star Remina by Junji Ito (actually I like I lot of his work, though on the theme of more human threats The Bully is still my favorite) and House of Leaves by Mark Danielewski. The former dealing more so with the fallout of an apocalypse unfairly blamed on a girl and the latter a clever (IMO) metaphor for the distances in a failing marriage. Now ghosts are a thing I rarely can get behind, I have issues thinking of a time they've been done well...
The other thing is well, oddly enough, edginess. I used to be a creepy pasta fan, OG slenderman and all, but I think the edge arms race ruined it (Looking at you Jeff). Mindless, untargeted violence can be scary, but it can very quickly just be over the top cringe. There's an interesting observation by Slavoj Zizek (I think) in his book The Plague of Fantasies where he espouses an idea that there is no 'evil' just perversions. He gives the example of a case of an Austrian man held his daughter captive in his basement (even fathering a family with her) out of a perverse sense of fatherly protection. (source: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/josef-fritzl-10-years-what-happened-daughter-dungeon-basement-incest-rape-austria-elisabeth-kampusch-a8322671.html)

Now that's horrifying. Like @smokesalty said, put some thought into the villain's motives, humans are scary stuff.

I mean, queerbaiting is real but the term has definitely been used a little too much lately. (By some people's standards my same-gender queerplatonic partners would also be considered queerbaiting because they explicitly say they're not in love with each other or anyone.) I agree with you that all of these themes should be available to other kinds of relationships too, and those relationships deserve to be at the centre of the story and the characters' main/most important relationships. Like, friendship isn't secondary to romance, to some people it's more important than romance.

Personally, I'd say it's queerbaiting if you build up the relationship and use a lot of relationship tropes, only to suddenly make it less important and secondary to a straight romance. Like the characters have this really close bond, their relationship is beautiful and intense and important to them, they spend a lot of time together, they care about each other, they'd do anything for each othe, and then in the last chapter they get straight married with no build up (bonus points if they showed no interest in dating or marriage until then) and now the two couples meet for brunch once a week and aside from that they spend 90% with their spouses and they're their main and most important relationship. That kind of ending is extremely unsatisfying to me personally and I would classify it as queerbaiting. Not because those kinds of stories don't happen irl (they do) but because of the abundance of queer erasure in media and because straight marriage and romance is already put on a pedestal and it just contributes to this notion that it's something everyone should want and strive for and it's the only good way to live.
But simply focusing on a relationship that's a friendship or not labeled at all? I'd say we need more of those stories. But then again my arospec ass is very biased in that regard.

queer baiting is more of a term for advertising than it is for story telling, if a corporation -Disney- is really really hellbent on telling you that this is the "first ever gay person to exist ever in cinema ever" and you see the thing they're advertising and the gayest thing about it is a side character making the vaguest throwaway line and smiling at someone of the same sex. Cruella, Solo, Beauty and the beast, and How to train your dragon 2 were very very very queer baity but you don't get that out of the context of the advertising because if you don't know that someone is supposed to be gay then you won't notice that throwaway line or smile at a person of the same gender because that's the point.

I'm also aro ace, and I get where your coming from but we deserve queer platonic relationships that say they're queer platonic relationships because then it would be representation not just an excuse to "galpal" or "just friends" queer coded relationships. There are lots of people out there who would benefit from learning about the different ways people show affection from each other but leaving something ambiguous is a death sentence for representation. (also I think that the example you listed would be a perfect polyamorous romance plot with the two main characters having a queer platonic relationships with side character spouses)

Ah true, I forgot the advertising aspect! I was thinking more about shows like Supernatural (which I won't even get into now because I have to leave for work and that's a topic for an entire essay)

Also I agree, I'd love that as a polyamorous plot (with some buildup and a proper introduction of the spouses as real, equal characters and not just some last minute proof that the characters are straight after all) ... It would be nice to have an alloromantic or arospec character that experiences romantic attraction to its full extend also explore other relationships like a QPR and for those relationships to be treated as equally important. I feel like it'd benefit everyone to learn more about how diverse relationships and affection can actually be. (But also I want more polyamory and non-monogamy representation in general.)