Last week, I was thoroughly enjoying an upcoming historical romance when, in a fit of understandable anger, the heroine slapped the hero across the face hard enough to leave a mark. As I continued reading, I couldn’t stop thinking about how uncomfortable that made me. If he’d hit her, that would be unacceptable. Why then, in a book with a wonderfully realized strong feminist hero, did the author believe it was viable for for her heroine to be violent?
There are a host of behaviors we (now) say are unacceptable in heroes. It’s deeply uncool for romance heroes to pressure a woman to have sex, to have sex with a lover who’s drunk or drugged, to raise a hand against or to belittle a woman.
And yet we reviewers at AAR are seeing stories where women do these same things and don’t receive the sort of censure male leads do. Sometimes these behaviors are explicitly justified by smashing the patriarchy. I understand that argument–women have been at the mercy of men for millenia–and yet, I still find myself discomfitted.
What do you think? Is it reasonable to have different standards for heroes and heroines? If so, why? If not, why not?
In strict answer to Dabney’s question, yes it’s reasonable to have different standards for heroes and heroines BUT that does not mean I have to like it or agree with it. A writer is telling a story so they may need to show differing standards as part of it to drive the narrative and character development forward. It would be more acceptable in HR, not so in the main for CR. As for the violence discussed here such as face-slapping, I cannot compute violence and romance together – this seems to me to be completely contradictory. Violence in war time MAY be an exception as writing about war is writing about violence.
Excellent clarification. Thank you!
About a half hour after I finished reading these comments, I resumed reading Sweet Fortune, by Jayne Ann Krentz, because I have been doing some rereading. And there’s this scene, where little sister Elizabeth talks to heroine Jessie right after Jessie has dissolved in tears over her relationship with Sam Hatchard, the hero:
“I bet you’re crying on account of Hatch, aren’t you?” [Elizabeth said.]
“Afraid so,” Jessie said.
“Why don’t you just punch him out instead?”
“That would probably be a much more satisfying approach to the problem,” Jessie said. “But he happens to be a lot bigger than I am.”
“I don’t think he’d hit you back,” Elizabeth said, thoughtful. “At least, not very hard.”
“Of course he wouldn’t hit me back. Which is exactly why I can’t start pounding on him,” Jessie explained patiently. “It wouldn’t be fair, you see. He couldn’t retaliate in the same way.”
“So what does that leave?” Elizabeth asked.
“I don’t know,” Jessie said. “I’m still trying to figure it out.”
Personally, I am not in favor of anyone slapping anyone unless the heroine is trying to disconcert a killer she wants to escape from, as Stephanie Laurens has Alicia do in in one of her Bastion Club books, A Gentleman’s Honor. I am pretty sure there were also a couple of medievals I read where parents slapped their daughters. There might have also been a Krentz novel where the hero did slap back (not full force) after being slapped by the heroine — I may have the author wrong, but I know I have read that scene.
While it is perfectly true that historically slapping and other punitive violence was more accepted socially, there were still plenty of families and relationships without violence. Refraining from physical fighting, particularly between the hero and heroine, is not a historical anomaly in the same way that attributing feminist ideals to a heroine is. It is not poor writing or editing practice to rein in slapping in romance novels.
All the posts have been about physical violence, but the example I have in mind was mental violence. Years back I read a paranormal supposed-romance in which the heroine did a partial mind-wipe of the hero. The ethical/moral issues/attitudes and the power imbalance totally spoiled the romance for me. I think the book was Over Hexed by Vicki Lewis Thompson, but it’s been enough years that I’m not positive.
On power imbalances, one of the core features of the Argeneau vampire series by Lynsay Sands is that mates can NOT use mind control on each other.
That reminds me of Buffy where Willow used something similar on Tara not once but twice. It was particularly horrific because it was just regular Willow doing it. It wasn’t soulless Angel torturing Buffy because he went full evil.
Any kind of messing with someone’s brain is true nightmare stuff to me regardless of gender. I think it’s even worse than violence.
That example is interesting because Wheedon framed it as a drug problem on Willow’s part. Thus, when Willow kicked her drug problem, she was forgiven. And yet, Wheedon still punishes Willow in the end.
Yes I used to adore Whedon and I am still a big fan of a lot of his work. Over the years however I’ve become more critical on how he deals with women both in his written work and how he dealt with them as actresses etc.
I think he punished everyone though across the board. By the end of Buffy the only relationship intact is Willow’s very new one right? By the end of Angel there aren’t any. (I’m counting romances not friendships).
Mental violence is to me definitely as problematic as physical violence, though I have to say that I don’t see the issue trending in romances. The only book that comes to mind at the moment is Beth O’Leary’s The Flatshare. Tiffy, the heroine, is gaslighted and stalked by her ex. He’s not the center focal point of the story but he’s present enough in the background that there is unease about that particular plot and where it’s heading in the book.
Here’s an example of double standards in a recent self-published book: A guest reviewer at AAR just posted a review of A Duke will Never Do with the concern that the heroine pressures and manipulates the hero for sex and how if the roles were reversed, would this ever be permissible? And although this book fails to make a passing grade at AAR, its sales are quite good on Amazon with quite a few positive reviews (for what it’s worth). So, quite a few people don’t have a problem with it. What do you think?
I appreciate real reviews that call out bad writing/behavior; and expect reviewers to read critically for just such issues. Reviews at Amazon are largely bogus and/or from readers who are getting free or cheap copies. These are not people who read and review critically. Personally, I never look at reviews at Amazon, and stopped paying attention to Goodreads reviews when Amazon purchased them (unless I know the reviewer).
Sound advice, nblibgirl.
I think, as I posted elsewhere, that this is the result of the societal idea that’s still quite prevalent that most women would object to a guy doing this to them but “most guys” would be happy if a woman did it to them so it’s somehow OK.
Yeah, this reminds me of an episode of Futurama where three of the male characters get captured by Amazon women on a female-only planet, offend their leader, and get sentenced to “death by snu snu.” It’s played for laughs with the men vacillating between ecstasy and terror at the prospect (“I never thought I’d die like this! But I always kind of hoped!”) But when you stop and think about the implications, the characters essentially get sentenced to be raped to death. But because the condemned characters were horny heterosexual males and their would-be executioners were females, this was somehow considered okay for laughs? I guarantee you the other way around would never pass muster. (And for the record, the men are rescued before they die but not before part of the sentence is carried out- so they’re kind of happy about it? Ugh…)
As I started reading romance novels in the 1980s, I recognize I had different standards then. But today I don’t find them reasonable because violence does not usually lead to anything good. Many books I enjoyed then would horrify me if I read them today.
Perhaps people see violence aganst men as something less terrible because, in real life, more men kill women than the other way around. Therefore, there’s more danger in a male agression towards a female. A heroine kicking a hero looks humiliating for the man, but not the beginning of a nightmare that could easily end up in a killing. I guess that’s the reason why people have no problem, or even find it cute, when a heroine slaps a hero.
Nevertheless, I usually find this kind of behaviour unacceptable even if the man’s life is not in direct danger. I could probably enjoy the book if the rest of it is great, but those scenes make me uncomfortable and I normally wish they have not been there.
I’m pretty much with you.
I also started reading romances back in the 80’s and with the exception of a handful of category romances, I found I read mostly historical romances.
I think that put another layer of distance over the violence in them as well. I certainly hated it even then, but I guess my thought was “That happened more way back then” so it didn’t seem like something contemporary or related to life in the 80’s. I certainly didn’t expect men to act that way in my life any more than guys I knew were acting like Rhett Butler or Captain Blood or Ivanhoe.
I also think some authors like Diana Gabaldon use that “bad things happened more often back then” argument in their writing. We all know sexual violence happens frequently even today, but I gave up on the Outlander books when every single person in one family was sexually assaulted. For me it was just too much.
It’s so hard to go back to books from the 80s as so many of the books feature violence against women as a routine aspect of seduction and romance. I don’t know if I actually think readers believe that violence against men is acceptable though. Unless I’ve missed someone’s post here, I haven’t read anyone supporting authors including this in their books. Instead there seems to be consensus that it’s not appropriate or welcome in a story. I don’t have any Goodreads friends endorsing violence against either men or women or clamoring for more of it in books, and I honestly cannot remember anyone on other romance sites doing that either. I think maybe there is a sense that readers are okay with it, but I haven’t seen evidence of that. That’s a good thing though and probably why violence against either partner in a romance is something that rarely occurs today.
I agree that readers aren’t fans which is why it has surprised me to encounter it in several recent books. It seems like an odd choice in 2020.
I’m certainly not condoning violence between romance heroes and heroines either, but there must be a market for these 1980s style forced seduction (i.e. rape) and smacking each other about if new books of that type are still being published in 2020. But I think a lot of that niche market wouldn’t be apt to post reviews as that would be akin to admitting, “Hey, I like this stuff.” Because when I read these examples of MCs hitting each other hard enough to leave a mark or using shock collars on each other, my mind immediately goes in the direction of, “These stories aren’t targeted toward or read by mainstream romance readers. These are fetish/niche readers with certain kinks.” (Which I’m not knocking, by the way! But it certainly wouldn’t be my cup of tea, especially in a work specifically marketed as a romance. Some of the scenarios described in this comment section would be far more appropriate in dark romance or erotica than a more mainstream romance designation.)
On that note, I remember hearing on a PowerPoint presentation about KDP erotica that if rape stories were permitted, they would probably be the hottest selling genre. Make of that hypothesis what you will. But I think it ties into a lot of what we’ve been discussing. Maybe some “romance” writers and readers are getting off on the violence?
Dark romance is HUGE now. It definitely taps into something for lots of readers.
I think there’s a reason why Willing Victim catapulted Cara McKenna on the romance/erotica radar all those years back. Apart from really talented writing it hit a nerve and straddled a line between acceptable role play and much darker stuff. It was all consensual but it dipped its toe into the dark side that still made it palatable for a lot of readers.
I’m not a fan of violence, whomever is doing it. Very occasionally it makes sense in the context of the story, but the author better do a darned good job convincing me a) it was necessary, and b) they equitably resolve their differences.
To me, a lot of times the violence is a symbol of a larger power imbalance, which I really have an issue with. Many of the “meet cute” setups or other tropes in romance have totally lopsided power dynamics, and I have a hard time believing in the relationship when it’s clear one party can’t make a free choice. It’s one of the reasons I started reading more M/M over the past few years, because there’s a lot less of the power dynamics that make me quite uncomfortable. It shows up some in M/M (I avoid D/s and daddy books for this exact reason), but it seems to be less prevalent.
99.9% of the time violence has no place in an intimate relationship. It’s why I’ve always loathed the movie Mr. and Mrs. Smith — there’s no romantic relationship when they’re beating the crap out of each other all the time.
Completely agree! I intensely dislike power imbalances in relationships, though in contemporary “meet cute” setups, I haven’t encountered physical violence, especially in the sense of an author endorsing it as a sign of feminism. I too really disliked Mr. and Mrs. Smith and did not find the violence exciting or powerful.
Agreed…I don’t see physical violence much in contemporary romances. I’m thinking more of the boss/employee relationships or the “I need to marry someone” relationships, where there’s a fair amount of leverage one party has over the other. I get why they’re in the structure of the story (they need a reason to be around each other until feelings), but many of them aren’t done well, and it feels like the free choice is somehow less.
I think the basic issue is if they don’t treat each other as equals and/or they aren’t fully realized characters — where one party gives up too much or doesn’t value what the other partner wants and needs. It’s hard to articulate, but I’m trying :).
Like you, I’m not a fan of employer/employee relationships. I’ve liked some but in general I’m always wondering why they couldn’t just be coworkers in a different department or rivals or in the same industry but work at different companies. The employer/employee relationship feels like a relic from another era and so much as change in public perception and in HR rules that it’s hard to stop thinking about all the real life problems this sort of relationship faces now.
“I’m not a fan of employer/employee relationships.” I like your idea of coworkers and/or business rivals though. :)
At the risk of getting too off-topic, what are your thoughts on forced proximity romances in general? I ask because I think there is some overlap between the two tropes. I.e. if you work somewhere, you can’t exactly *avoid* the boss, kind of like what Jessica was talking about.
I don’t mind forced proximity if there aren’t power issues — two people stranded in a cabin is fine. Two people stranded in a cabin where one is the owner and has the power to kick out the other is much more fraught. It depends on the setup and the dynamics between the two, but the setup is much harder to make work if one has the power to force the other to do something.
I definitely like the idea of coworkers in different departments or business rivals. Agreed — in today’s day and age, there is so much HR stuff and other issues with it, it’s really hard to suspend my disbelief and buy the relationship.
“It depends on the setup…” My thoughts also. Context, situations, characters- all these elements of great storytelling can make nearly any premise work depending on how they are presented.
“Two people stranded in a cabin where one is the owner and has the power to kick out the other is much more fraught.” Oh, definitely! Although this could be a fascinating story as well…
It all could be a fascinating story!! Totally agree on your comment about context, situations, etc. It all depends on how it’s written and how it’s handled. I’ve read some boss/employee books where I have no problem and I’ve read others that have a high squick factor for me.
I’m not much for books or movies that are full of violence either; and I’m really hoping the recent spate of action movies with female leads dropped into what would have otherwise been a male lead will quickly die away: Atomic Blond with Charlize Theron and Red Sparrow with Jennifer Lawrence are two that come mind. I’ve never watched Mr. And Mrs. Smith, nor the two I just mentioned. Absolutely no interest.
I haven’t watched either of those, and based on your description, I probably won’t. And totally agreed — movies where the female lead has to “out-male” the male can be really annoying. In that sense, I really like Black Widow in the various Avengers movies — she’s badass, but she owns being female and doesn’t feel like she has to be stronger and tougher than the males. Plus, she’s got awesome one-liners :).
I think a woman reacting to something inappropriate by a man by slapping him must be an old theatrical trope to increase dramatic tension. It’s outdated and should be ruthlessly avoided.
In real life, violence begets violence. If you hit someone–male or female–you are more than likely to be hit or punched back. You want to ignite uncontrollable anger? Just hit someone.
I can’t believe such behavior was encouraged, even in the past. The slapper would depend on the protection of her husband or father, applicable only if his status, power, or rank were equal to or greater than the that of the slapped man. Even then, she depended on him adhering to the polite code. You can be guaranteed that if a “gentleman” made an insulting comment to a common woman, she would have had to be crazy to slap him– far too dangerous to her and to her family.
However, if the heroine is physically attacked, clearly, she may have no recourse, except violence. In the last few years, Hollywood has liked to stage fights between a man and a woman. That is what some idiots think of feminism. This change in our society’s mores encourages violence against women and by women. Not a good idea.
I definitely agree with you that violence perpetrated by women is not a symbol of progressive changes for women, and I agree too that violence begets violence. It’s never been a part of my own personal life and so I find myself appalled and shrinking from it whenever I encounter it in entertainment. I’m probably therefore the opposite of the desensitized consumer that gets characterized by critics of pop culture. I have to say though that I have not actually encountered much of the Hollywood staged fights in recent movies. Do you have specific titles in mind? Maybe in Game of Thrones when Arya became an assassin to avenge her family? Quintin Tarantino created the female assassin gang in Kill Bill years ago, but those examples are from years ago or take place in fantasy-type settings. Perhaps the Marvel world and recent spate of female superheroes?
This question feels a little dated because I have not found too many recent books, or any current ones, that depict women hitting men or women violating men sexually. There was though a period back in the late 1990s/early 2000s when this happened in a handful of romances and it felt that women writers were really struggling to find ways to represent women as strong and as equals and able to function in a man’s world on men’s terms. If men hit women, women could hit men just as hard.
Today, my sense is that romance authors are more comfortable creating strong women who know what they want and are able to articulate those needs to their partners. Feminism is sitting a bit easier with many women writers today, it seems to me, or at least there is more acceptance that feminists do not need to define female agency in masculine terms. I occasionally see women portrayed as prickly, shall we say, and this is where I find a double standard still exists because grumpy men are revered in romances but grumpy women are still considered bitches if they display close to the same types of behavior. I see many more men today represented as caring and supportive and even welcoming of strong women with open arms, maybe what some readers would call beta heroes. It could just be that I read in a bubble though and have weeded out the representations that I don’t enjoy.
What current romance titles are depicting women slapping men or sexually assaulting them? Any recent titles come to mind because I can’t think of any off the top of my head.
That’s me, dated.
Dated, or aged like a fine wine? :)