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?
No, I don’t like the sorts of double standards you’ve mentioned and feel uncomfortable reading them in het or queer stories.
I recently listened to an m/m story in which one of the guys spoke almost entirely in sexual innuendo. In my review of it I described him as “a sexual harassment suit waiting to happen”. If he’d said the things he said to a female character, we’d all be spitting feathers. So what makes it okay for him to say them to another man?
I just read the book you’re talking about and I agree with you. Violence is never the answer no matter how upset/angry/frustrated one is. And as for justifying it as “smashing the patriarchy”, well that is no excuse. Two wrongs don’t make a right, as the saying goes, and we – women – are better than that.
I know I’ve read this scene a short while ago. I wasn ‘t happy with it. But now I have another problem: I just can’t remember which book it was. It makes me crazy.
The scene I mentioned is in a book coming out this fall. But I’ve read very similar scenes several times over the past few years.
Agreed – the m/m example I mentioned was just the most recent I could recall, but I’ve definitely had a few “what if the situation were reversed?” moments when reading over the past few years.
More so than in previous times? That’s my sense.
Nora Roberts is infamous for this IMHO. And it really bothers me.
I think so. I have a pretty hot temper but I shout and yell and it (my temper) has NEVER manifested in violence – I’m not wired that way I suppose. (I’m not talking about issues of personal (,or my kids) safety here.) I just can’t ever envision a situation where I would strike someone in this way, so when it happens in fiction (other than PNR, fantasy etc.) the “slapper” immediately goes down in my estimation. And in a romance where, as others have said, I want to like both protagonists, that’s not good.
This came up a week or so ago in a review here. Sorry—I don’t remember the title book of the book right off the top of my head, but one of the characters in the book was the “feisty grandma”—who is feisty apparently because she’s an old lady who talks (inappropriately) about sex all the time. I have no problem with sex-positive and/or sexually-active older characters, but the way the “feisty grandma” is presented (ogling younger men, quizzing her granddaughters about their sex lives, making very loud public comments about sex) is not cute or funny—it’s downright creepy. Someone commented, “What would we think about a male character who acted this way?” So true. There’s a reason there’s no “feisty grandpa” character in romance—and I think “feisty grandma” should go too.
An example of how things evolve: Back in the late 1980s, when I’d been totally burnt out on bodice rippers and was making my way back to HR via Regency romances, I read Edith Layton’s THE ABANDONED BRIDE, which was very good, but includes a scene where the hero slaps the heroine. The consequences of that slap continue throughout the book. At the time, I was surprised by the physical violence, but kept on reading the book. I know if I were reading THE ABANDONED BRIDE for the first time today, that scene would be a DNF for me. Heroes do not slap heroines…or vice-versa.
One of the first romance authors I used to read back in the 80’s was Laurie McBain and in one of her books the heroine slaps the hero across the face and he slaps her right back. Nowadays I don’t think I could get through the book even though technically “she hit first”. Particularly because she is described as a tiny little thing and he is the big strong hero so you know those slaps don’t compare.
, I read Edith Layton’s THE ABANDONED BRIDE, which was very good, but includes a scene where the hero slaps the heroine. The consequences of that slap continue throughout the book. At the time, I was surprised by the physical violence, but kept on reading the book. I know if I were reading THE ABANDONED BRIDE for the first time today, that scene would be a DNF for me.
Interesting! I find this – the consequences of the action reverberating through the rest of the story – to be far more acceptable than if it had been a petulant reaction or if everyone had thought it “cute” or something and its immediately forgotten/glossed over.
I’m not here for violence just for violence’s sake (that’s not cute or cool), and unless its a situation like this where consequences are explored, I’m not a fan of violence between the hero/heroine. It’s important to find out if your paramour has a violent temper, but there are other ways of discovering that than being the victim of it yourself.
BUT I have no problems with protagonists defending themselves against villains. The first Beverly Jenkins novel that I fell in love with was Destiny’s Surrender, in which the heroine kills the (male) villain with her bare hands for entirely justifiable reasons. I was cheering her on, because its nice to read about heroines who can save themselves, instead of having to wait for their heroes to rescue them!
Agreed.
Oh I am all about the heroine getting justifiable revenge. One of my pet peeves with some Carla Kelly books is how the heroine forgives the villain at the end. It’s not even just about revenge, some of these guys shouldn’t even be walking around. What about the next woman he victimizes?
I am torn on that issue. I am not a fan of revenge plots–so much wasted negative energy. But it is frustrating when evil is allowed to go unchecked.
Well, one reason the man sitting the woman seems worse than the other way round is that he is generally a lot stronger. It’s the big bully picking on the skinny little guy. (I know there are some women who are stronger than some men, but that’s not usual.)
Whether this kind of violence bothers me depends a lot on the situation. I’ll condemn it if it’s for punishment or to establish dominance, but if it’s an instinctive reaction to betrayal, I will probably consider it understandable. There’s a scene in Jo Beverley’s An Unwilling Bride like that. There have been lies and misunderstandings leading up to it, and it’s completely in character for the hero—a flaw that he has to learn to overcome in the book to redeem himself.
Also, people seem to be talking only about violence between the hero and heroine. Does anyone mind if the heroine clobbers the villain?
No–and I don’t mind when the heroine/hero clobber each other consensually.
“Does anyone mind if the heroine clobbers the villain?”
Heck, no! The hero can have a few good whacks at him too, as far as I’m concerned. :)
As an addendum to that, I think it heavily depends upon what kind of villain you mean. Someone who’s just a snot, not really. But an actual villain, as in murderer or rapist? Have at ’em. I like seeing the bad guys get their comeuppance.
Yes and yes!
This is a huge pet peeve of mine. In general my rule is: if the hero shouldn’t do it, then the heroine shouldn’t either.
Now I understand in the past a cheek slap was understood as an “appropriate” response by a woman to man who had offended her -usually by a sexual or derogatory remark. (Similar in my mind to a guy challenging another guy to duel with a slap across the face with a pair of gloves, it was symbolic). It wasn’t meant to be a challenge to a fist fight, and it was understood to be a rebuke, so if I were reading a Historical Romance and the villain was inappropriate with the heroine and she slapped him, I wouldn’t quibble with that. (Although I don’t think it’s the best strategy with an unstable person).
Nora Roberts is big on the heroine feeling very free to punch the hero at will. For some reason the people in the book think it’s cute when she breaks his nose or something and it really bothers me. I don’t care who you are or how mad, unless it’s someone threatening or hurting you keep your hands to yourself. I especially don’t like it between the hero and heroine who supposedly love one another.
Now in the case of supernatural, superheroes, paranormal or even spies etc where two agents or antagonists are fighting it out (think Buffy and Spike or Wonder Woman helping to subdue a crazed Superman) then it’s fair game. If the sides are equal and in some physical contest or fight then it’s every person for themselves. As long as it’s fair and evenly matched.
In other behavior I think it should carry over as well. One recent review mentioned they were upset with the guy In the novel who had been in an arranged marriage for not reciprocating the wife’s feelings and thinking she was a psycho for pursuing it. Now I haven’t read that book in years so I would have to do a reread to be sure, but if it were the heroine would we think she was obligated in any way to return affection she didn’t feel? I don’t think so. We’d call him a stalker husband or no.
I like things to be in a place of balance and sometimes it seems authors go too far one way trying to compensate for sins of the past. I want to like the hero and the heroine.
The setting is really important to me as well. I recently finished one of Megan Crane’s dystopian Viking Edge books where the heroine cuts the hero across the stomach to make a point during an argument – something I would be horrified by in a contemp but which, in this violent setting and with a huge power imbalance (the hero warrior king hero could have disarmed her or evaded her) worked fine.
Agreed. I was actually thinking about a scene in another one of those books where the leads beat the hell out of one another. I was fine with that–I think Crane does a great job of power balances in those books.
Yes I was thinking of Kresley Cole or Bec McMaster where there is a supernatural/paranormal element and often the hero and heroine physically battle. Or Buffy and Spike. If a woman is a warrior and lives by her sword it has to work both ways. She can’t be slashing at people and then be outraged if the men swipe back.
Huh, this is an interesting discussion. I couldn’t help but chime in since this is such a hot button issue for me. In certain contexts and in historicals, violence between the hero and heroine can sometimes make sense. It’s rare and not preferable but times being what they were…
On the other hand, in contemporaries the double standards are a hard no for me. Several years ago, I read two books almost back to back that horrified me to no end. In one of them, a man goes to a matchmaking agency to get help. A complete makeover is the end result (which could be bad enough, I suppose) but to complete the whole thing, she puts a shock collar on him to “correct his behavior” and during the first outing admits that she shocked him more than necessary because she could. My first reaction to this was horror and my second was and if the roles were reversed, this would never get published.
In the second book, a woman is convinced that a man is a horrible bigot, so she agrees to drug him (Rohypnol) and then take racy photos with him to destroy his reputation, and she does. But, when she realizes she messed up, does she go to the police? Nope. She and his family convince him to take her on as his girlfriend to rehabilitate his image. That one was more horrific to me. His own family pushed him to let the person who sexually assaulted him be his girlfriend?! Before that book, I loved the author. I can’t bring myself to read her now, even though I have books of hers I have not read.
I don’t like the double standard though I can see real reasons for some of it. Sometimes it’s just too much, and it is always too much in contemporaries.
A shock collar? Was this is a romance or an erotica? Because I’m not sure how an author could justify something that perversely kinky in a romance. It would also be questionable in an erotica unless there was clear consent.
As for the second book, holy moly! That is sexual assault, no question. And this was in a romance? I’d be hard pressed to defend something like that in an erotica.
Neither of these were erotica. And technically, he gave consent when he agreed to her makeover. But that she considered it acceptable at all is a problem and that she admitted to shocking him more than necessary was highly problematic.
Yes, the second was definitely romance, the last in a series. And frankly, the others were tame. This author doesn’t typically go for anything particularly dark or problematic. I ended up writing a review about the book because I simply could not keep silent over it.
Thanks for replying to my post. I agree that the scenarios you described are troubling for a romance.
I’m sure a lot of people have different views on this, but I am far more tolerant of problematic content in erotica or clearly labeled dark romance because they present a different kind of fantasy than other types of romance. That was a big reason why I asked. Romance, after all, should be… well, romantic. And I have no idea on what planet shock collars and drugging the hero is considered romantic…
Agree.
I stopped reading Bertrice Small quite a few years ago because she had a series of contemporaries where an agency that was billed as helping unfulfilled women find erotic satisfaction evolved into a revenge club where it was ok to destroy men‘s lives – violence, financial ruin, I even think accidental death – because they had cheated. I do not condone infidelity, but the glee with which these revenge scenarios were realized, and the backslapping encouragement of other women – it horrified me.
All those things do sound pretty horrific- and not romantic at all!
As for revenge scenarios, I am highly tolerant of them in cases of true villainy as in rapists and murderers getting what’s coming to them. But over cheating? Sure, I can see a fight breaking out if someone catches someone in the act (not necessarily in romance, but in other genres), but a revenge club for getting cheaters? That’s taking things a bit too far for me, certainly in something billed as a romance.
Yes, at first those contemporary novels by Small seemed quite empowering because the women were controlling their own fantasies about things Small used to have to write as the women being “forced” to do. Then the books took a weird dark turn where the guys had really awful things happen to them as revenge for being crappy husbands or cheaters. (not because they were physical abusers, rapists or murderers). They also turned me off.
Interesting topic!
Overall, I have moments in books where I just feel „no, this is horrible from a woman to a man, too“, more and more often. It seems that authors are experimenting with role reversal in many ways. I am glad that they do, but it often ruins the romance for me. Disrespect, humiliation, talking down, body shaming, trophy dating, objectification, it all makes for bad romance no matter the gender. Often, I make an effort to read on, to make sure I am not just a victim of old gender Stereotypes, and try to be open to different behavior. Sometimes, it works out.
Physical violence and intent to hurt: no.
Unless we are in a Animal/fantasy/battlefield/ comrade in arms setting where fighting is part of the normal behavior.
The one way I can imagine forgiving a slap in a book is when it is a reaction to a personal insult, or inappropriate touching, as a more or less automatic trained defense mechanism- when I grew up, a long while back, in my last two years at school (about 16-18) I had a few classmates who automatically slapped in the face whoever slapped them on the ass or groped them. Cubs growing up in a very rough and rude touchy-feely way. I could relate to such scenes in a book, because I knew such people. My limit: Intention to hurt, physically. The emotional impact is bad enough. This would work better in older books, I suppose. Not sure.
I love Susan Elizabeth Phillips books but have always had a major problem with This Heart of Mine, the heroine had non consensual sex with the hero but I’m not sure she ever realised- it was rape.
I guess I tend to judge Molly in the same way that Kevin does–he forgives her very explicitly. Molly makes a terrible choice but it really is just one and over the course of the book she redeems herself. Molly know she did a terrible thing–which is why the scene where Kevin tells her she has to forgive herself is so necessary to the reader believing that Molly can be forgiven.
I think Molly gets a pass by a lot of readers because she is woman, not because she is sorry. I just don’t think a guy doing the same thing in a story would ever be sorry enough for 99% of readers to forgive him.
I remember back in the heyday of Brockmann’s books Sam Starett gets roped into marriage because the girl he was hooking up with intentionally damages his condoms to get pregnant and land a SEAL husband. Most women readers were very sympathetic to her and I was In the minority because I thought she was awful. Can you imagine if a guy in a story tampered with a woman’s birth control to get her? Now I understand the woman physically carries the child but that’s just unforgivable in my eyes. How do you ever trust someone? Someone willing to use a child to trap someone else. I know if happens plenty in real life but to me it’s despicable.
I don’t know if I agree about that (the Molly being a woman part.) Part of it is that I am unlikely to judge a character by a single act. In this book, I think Molly’s one bad choice is just that. If Kevin had done a similarly stupid thing and had the same ratio of good to bad choices, I think I’d have forgiven him too.
If I am being honest it did matter for me. I still don’t like Molly, but if it were a guy I probably would have wanted him arrested.
That’s fair. And I think if Kevin had seen Molly with more fury, I might have too.
Caz kindly supplied the name of a book I couldn’t think of which was The Virgin and The Rogue by Sophie Jordan. I read it right after the reviewer here (who viewed the heroine’s actions as sexual assault) and I didn’t find it as bad as that at all. But again, it was (like in This Heart If Mine) treated very differently because it was the woman doing it. The guy in The VATR is out looking for the heroine again that same night she surprised him in the library -and while he’s surprised at the initial encounter he sure doesn’t push her away, and he easily could have and he’s helping her by the end of their encounter. Its been years since I read THOM but while Kevin was certainly angry he’s not calling the police. So I think the women also get more of a pass from the reader because it’s presented as either OK or not as bad.
The assumption is that if some Regency Miss got grabbed the same way and accosted in the library she would scream the house down. If Kevin were a female celebrity or sports star who had a guy take advantage of her in her own bed the same way there’s no question it would not be the same story. And didn’t the family blame him in some way?
No–they blamed him for getting her pregnant and bailing which he hadn’t done since she’d lied to him about the pregnancy.
I’d have to reread it but I remember thinking he wasn’t treated very well and it was assumed because he was the guy things were all his fault.
I think that’s true–Dan, who is a very manly man, is furious at Kevin when the family learns Molly is pregnant. But, once they understand what happened, they get over it. Except for a dumb thing at the end where Phoebe says Kevin has to pick between Molly and the team. But that’s just for plot shenanigans.
As mentioned above, Molly didn’t get a pass from me. (Her losing the baby was what made her sympathetic.) I give Brockmann a lot of credit for 1) realistically turning the pregnancy = marriage trope into a really bad marriage; and 2) finding a way to make Mary Lou (eventually) into a sympathetic character.
I “love” two of SEPs books but have major issues with how each opens: This Heart of Mine and Nobody’s Baby But Mine. At least the sex at the beginning of NBBM is consensual but the pregnancy is not. Both of these openings are incredibly problematic for me and I don’t believe either would be well-received today, which is a shame because what follows is quite fun to read. I’d like to think the author would find another way to get the MCs into each others’ lives if starting either book to