One of the things readers consistently tell us they like are our sensuality ratings. They’ve been a part of AAR since its inception and we think they help readers find books they love. We’ve not revised them, however, in quite some time and, with the trend towards more sex and more graphic sex in romance, we feel we may need to.
Here are our current definitions:
Kisses: Kisses only. Many of these books are quite simply “sweet.”
Subtle: No explicit sensuality. Kissing and touching, but physical romance is described in general terms or implied. The emphasis is on how lovemaking made the characters feel emotionally, and not on graphic description.
Warm: Moderately explicit sensuality. Physical details are described, but are not graphically depicted. Much is left to the reader’s imagination.
Hot: More explicit sensuality. Sex is described in more graphic terms. Hot books typically have more sex scenes and are more likely to depict acts beyond intercourse.<
Burning: Extremely explicit sensuality – these books are often erotic romances or flatout erotica.
We’ve thought about narrowing the system down–this would only be for 2017 and beyond–to Subtle, Warm, and Hot. We’ve also considered leaving the four of the five levels in place and getting rid of Burning.
We’d like your input. What would work for you?
Thanks!
As a longtime AAR visitor (since 2004!), the sensuality ratings may appear meaningless for today’s releases, but they mean something to me–they are essentially part of the AAR brand. And I know what they mean within the context of this site and its community of readers. Changing the ratings–changing the common language of this site–for a new set of readers/books who might not even visit AAR can come across as saying we Romancelandia veterans are irrelevant!
I think that’s actually a great point, NoirFemme. I’ve been an AAR reader since the early about 2006 and am accustomed to the review scheme here. It’s nice when a site has a history and brand and changing too much can alienate long-time readers.
As a reader, I appreciate the distinctive sensuality ratings. It makes it much easier to choose what books I will read, and also to recommend books to friends based solely on a review I read at AAR. I think if you change the ratings I will be less likely to make those suggestions because I won’t feel as confident about it.
I appreciate the distinctions you make. For instance, I don’t think I have read many with a burning rating…generally not my thing. So while I may read the review, the burning designation makes me more careful in my final decision. And I appreciate that – it’s one reason why I use the website (and have for 20+ years).
I admit, as a reviewer, it’s become harder for me to differentiate between Hot and Burning. What I consider Burning is now actually only rated Hot. So I suppose it’s all a matter of things being relative to the reader.
I personally define the different between Warm, Hot and Burning as follows:
Warm – fairly traditional sex described mostly in ambiguous terms, focusing on feelings and sensations rather than the physical act.
Hot – various forms of mainstream sex acts that are more graphically described, with the addition of things like dirty talk and explicit descriptions and use of slang for body parts.
Burning – anything considered out of the mainstream, sex-wise. BDSM, multiple partners, erotica, etc. would all be considered Burning to me.
I do think we need to keep categories for Kisses/No Sex and Subtle. I’ve read books with a single kiss. The sex isn’t even subtle-it’s non-existent. For me, Subtle would also be know as “closed the bedroom door” books where the sex is heavily implied but not at all described.
I agree with this. When I rate books, I use similar criteria for warm and hot. I don’t think I’ve ever reviewed a book I’d consider burning, although I have read a few.
This is a great breakdown of the various ratings. I use the same scale.
My rules for grading run in a similar fashion!
I guess I feel as long as a reviewer is consistent and, in the case of Burning, explains why it’s Burning, I’m inclined to keep it. I think Warm is the most useless one currently.
I’m really pleased this discussion is happening and it’s interesting to get the reader’s perspective, because from a reviewer’s perspective, sensuality ratings are difficult. As is obvious, I tend to be pretty laid back, and would find it difficult to find a book I’d rate as Burning. It would have to have a lot of kink and be pretty much all sex all the time for me to use that rating and that, to my mind, is erotica rather than romance, anyway. And that would be indicated in the review itself and in the review type on the page.
Such ratings are very subjective, but if they’re to be at all useful to our readers, we have to try to achieve some sort of consistency. At the present time, a book gets rated warm if it has sex scenes that take place between two people regardless of sexual orientation or explicitness of language (and as I said upthread, what language IS explicit these days?) and in which there are no kinks – no toys, bondage, BDSM, three-ways etc. etc.
I know there are some pretty “dark” romances (and I hesitate to use that definition) out there which venture into taboos like rape and incest. Maybe those are the books I might consider Burning if I had the desire to read them.
I think I go along with the “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” brigade. I find the ratings about right for my reading requirements. I do look out, though, for indications that books are M/M romances as these don’t particularly appeal to me though I always read the reviews and have read a few – just not what particularly pushes my buttons as I sometimes feel a bit voyeuristic myself when I read them. The current system seems to have worked for many years so I am happy with it though I can see a case for periodic review and consideration, asking newer AAR members/visitors what they think as time and tastes move on.
I have to question just WHY we have the ratings system. Is it so that readers who want to avoid sex scenes can find out what they are getting into? Or conversely, is it so that readers who are in the mood for a hot rather than warm read can find a book to fit that criteria? I think If you know the reason people are paying attention to the ratings, it helps you know just how to rate them.
Both!
If you want to see examples of what we currently consider Warm and Hot, just look at reviews from 2017.
We have used Burning four times this year. Here’s one Haley gave that rating to:
https://allaboutromance.com/book-review/midtown-masters-by-cara-mckenna/