A few articles with the usual dribble have appeared in various media over the past few weeks. I’m not going to link to them (well, except to one truly extree speshul example of idiocy), because we see this kind of crap all the time and I’m not going to give them any extra hits.
But we all know the clichés, right?
10. Romance Novels are porn for women. Ah, yes, that old classic still resonates with idiots who love to sing it. It’s an oldie but a goodie that has sunk to the number ten spot because there is a new spin on this one that’s far more amusing. (See number one.)
9. The only ones who read romance are _______________(Pick one: Old Maids, fatties, blue hairs) too stupid to read anything else. Hey, if you’re stupid enough to believe that blanket clichés are in any way accurate, how ’bout this one: Any guy who reads literary fiction must have…limitations if you know what I mean. (wink, wink, nudge, nudge, say no more)
8. Women who read romances are sexually repressed ____________(Pick One: Old Maids, fatties, blue hairs). See above.
7. All romance novels are the same. What is there to say to this one, except maybe, well, you know read one or two before you make a judgment.
6. You women just love those ripping bodices. Hey, pal, do you even know what a bodice is? I thought not.
5. Romance novels are anti-feminist. You know what I think is anti-feminist? Women who judge other women without knowing what the hell they’re talking about.
4. Romance novels lead girls to have unrealistic expectations about life. Okay, well with the exception of those hardcore dreamers still waiting for the discovery of time travel so they can tootle on back to the Regency, I think it’s safe to say we have a handle on this. It’s fiction. We know this.
3. Anyone can write a romance novel. I’ve heard this from the usual idiot faction, but also from people who should know better.
2. Writing a romance novel is a quick and easy way to earn some fast bucks. (See number 3.) Absolutely! Get right on that, idiots! It’s a really productive way to spend months – even years!
And now taking the top spot is a new level of idiocy recently featured on a Salt Lake City TV station’s Web site:
1. Romance Kills. Yes, we women are more motivated by romance than men (and a big duh to that one) and we’re releasing the same deadly and addictive brain chemicals when we read romance as men do when viewing porn. The author offers some helpful tips to reduce your addiction and they’re just too good not to share:
- Commit to stop reading romance books
- Commit to working on your relationship, if you’re in one
- Find a different hobby, or find a new genre of books to enjoy
- Invest in your real life, not fictional characters
Much merriment was had at the hashtag #romancekills and it’s worth a read if you haven’t yet. The one heartening thing about this bull is that so many stood up to call it bull. And you have to laugh, right? It’s the only way to react to this kind of horse crap.
– Sandy AAR
I’m getting to this article a little late, but I just have to comment. To preface, PLEASE read my comment in its entirety before you start beating me over the head with dead fish. I am a woman, I have been reading romance novels since I was about 15 or so. I have several old favorites that I reread at least once a year. I enjoy romance novels. That being said, let me wade into the discussion at hand.
10. porn for women.
I have to agree with this point. I have said it myself many times and here is why. The definition of pornography is anything that is designed to elicit a sexual response. By this definition, romance novels count. However, I do not think it is the same as regular porn. Mainly men and women are different. When I’m reading a romance, I’m not mentally having sex with the hero. Thoughts of that hero aren’t on my mind when I have sex with my husband. I’m not bringing it to bed with me. Reading it doesn’t take away sexual energy from our bed either. Porn will suck a guys sexual focus away from his woman so that he might loose interest in her. Not so with romance novels. My husband loves when I read them because I jump him when he comes in the door.
4. unrealistic expectations.
This too has a kernel of truth in it. But Romance is my no means the biggest culprit of this, magazines, movies and TV are! If a girl is properly educated by her mother or female caretaker, this shouldn’t be an issue. And there are grown women who get caught up in this too and it’s not the Romance novels fault that she can’t understand the difference. But that same woman is going to be just as duped by other media as well.
1. Romance kills.
The bit about the chemicals is true, however it fails to take into account the effect those chemicals have on the male and female brain. The chemicals released are bonding ones and the female brain has those flowing all the time! We bond over all kinds of stuff, we feel gooey toward our men regularly. For men, these chemicals are released after sex, or orgasm, so they are far less used to it, and if they are only feeling that after pron, that can be a problem. Back to #10, reading Romance novels makes me bond more closely to my husband, not to the book! I’m thinking about how awesome he is, not how great the hero is. The same thing happens to me when I see people hold hands of have an emotional moment in movies or on TV. I’m not feeling gooey toward the guy on the screen, I’m remembering similar moments in my life with my husband and reaching for his hand.
It boils down to men looking at Romance novels through male eyes as if women were like men. We aren’t.
I’m impressed, I must say. Genuinely rarely will i encounter a weblog that’s both educative and entertaining, and let me let you know, you can have hit the nail about the head. Your concept is outstanding; the catch is something that not enough folks are speaking intelligently about. I’m very happy which i identified this at my seek out some thing concerning this.
Well. like any other genre, anyone CAN write a romance novel. It’s just that few can write a GOOD romance novel.
This reminds me of the people who told me my children would become ax murderers because we allowed them to play Unreal and other first-person shooter games. Or the ones who said they’d become obsessed with the occult because we let them play Dungeons and Dragons.
Romance novels can’t be blamed for someone’s obsessive behavior. Certain personalities are at risk for obsessive behavior no matter what. If someone is using romance novels to avoid facing the real world, chances are they’d use something else if there weren’t any romance novels. (Like TV watching.)
As for “”anyone can write a romance novel.”” Gads no. While there are many artfully crafted romances, the genre has it’s share (like all genres do) of mediocre to poor ones as well.
Lastly, why would anyone think sexually repressed women would want to read about sex (since that’s what the critics think is the sole purpose of romance novels)? That doesn’t even make logical sense. If one is sexually repressed, one avoids sex in all its forms. It seems to me readers of romance are more apt to be sexually open and confident. We read about love, sex, and romance. We discuss it, analyze it, and even laugh about it. I can honestly say my husband loves my romance habit. He gets the benefit of me thinking about relationships, love and sex, while knowing I’m sensible enough not to wish he was a 6’4″” SEAL. I know the difference between a satisfying fiction, and a satisfying reality. ;-)
Romance: novels written by women for women. Anybody who knows anything about feminism knows this is a great definition of what many branches of feminism believe is a condition for women’s emancipation.
We’ve long been told that feminism allows women to make choices. I’ve long suspected that my choices are only OK if the “”feminist establishment”” agrees with them. It would appear that my reading romance novels is one of those “”bad”” choices.
I have only been reading romance novels for a few years. They make me laugh and make me cry. They entertain me in the middle of the night.
I believe in the redemptive power of love.
As for the sex, one is never too old to learn something new. Ha
My retirement is enriched by the many vicarious adventures.
No one has mentioned the amazing generosity of the romance readers.
After my first question on AAR I received enough recommendations to last me many months…..and I read almost all of the books.
Love the books and love the readers who share them.
Gypsy
ROFLO! I have been married 30 years…I am a feminist…I have a great sex life with my husband…I admire the talent it takes to write a great romance novel, I could never do it…I have had more life slap me in the face and believe me I know about expectations and reality…if my bodice rips its because I bought the thing to small! :)
Thank you for your post, Sandy. This is just my opinion, but I suspect that much of the negative criticism of romance fiction stems from not only a lack of knowledge about the genre, but also a failure to grasp the actual psychological dynamics at work in the reading of this genre.
Too often, critics (in the broad sense of the word) assume romance fiction at its core is about sex, and that’s what its readers read it for. If this were true, they wouldn’t bother to slog through all those pages in which the author develops plot and character, describes surroundings, and details non-erotic events and situations. In fact, these readers wouldn’t be reading at all. They’d be visiting X-rated websites.
No, something else must be at work here. I suspect what’s going on has much to do with fantasies of power, redemption, and healing. A reader can identify with a female protagonist who changes for the better her little world—in particular, the male protagonist in it.
He enters the story a lost soul—bitter, angry, cynical, incapable of loving or doing anything for anyone but himself. The two focal characters can’t stand each other, and struggle to control each other.
But though he holds all the obvious advantages, she always wins. And he ends up thanking her for it. She heals his hurts, saves him from himself, redeems him, turns him into the ideal man. The heroine accomplishes a great victory, something nobody else can; and the reader vicariously shares in her triumph.
Sex is a factor in this formula, but it works only when applied in the right context, as part of a fantasy of empowerment and redemption. Otherwise, it would not be pleasurable for the reader. And it would have no more meaning than porn sex.
Personally, I think this is only one type of romance fiction, albeit the most popular and profitable one. I prefer romances that revolve around a different dynamic, one in which empowerment and redemption play little if any part. But even I would defend empowerment/redemption romances against the charge that they’re just about sex!
I remember a time when felt I should hid the books I read for fear someone would laugh at me. All the reasons you have given are so real. I have been reading romance for 50 years and have gone from Harlequin books to paranormal, historical and futuristic romances; and still I love all romances.
I love romance novels and only read romances. I don’t really care what anyone else thinks about that.
But as to # 3 Anyone can write a romance I think some people really believe this and are actually getting their “”work”” printed. So many of the new writers that I give a try are really poor I now hesitate to actually pay for books written by persons that I have never read before. Only getting books by new authors from the library.
To my favorite authors please never stop writing :-)