Romance category

[SamScribble]

Finally, when I read a Romance story on Lit and it begins with the female wanting to masturbate and in the end she has anonymous sex with a stranger in a cinema ... I am going to assume the writer has never read Romance and wouldn't do it if they were paid.

Not guilty, m'lady.

 

[Handley_Page]

Not guilty, m'lady.

" . . . in the end she has anonymous sex with a stranger in a cinema ... I am going to assume the writer has never read Romance"

Probably never HAD a Romance.

 

[Carnal_Flower]

Easy. Because they're writers.

The same could be asked for a lot of things.

You read some "BDSM" stories and it's obvious they know absolutely squat about BDSM, but they still think they can write it, because they're erotica writers, don't cha know, and that's what it's all about. And we're all supposed to stand up and applaud that they've written a story.

Third, I would like to believe that any writer who is going to post a SciFi or Fantasy story has actually read SFF stories. Because, if they haven't read them, don't want to read them, what the fuck makes them believe they can write one?

.

 

[NOIRTRASH]

I appreciate all the comments. I would like to add a few points.

First, why is the Romance category the only category now without a description? Seriously. (I saw your comment, Pilot. Thank you.)

Second, I went to the RWA site before I posted this thread, and I wasn't too impressed with what they had to say. But that JBJ took the time to post the RWA site is cool. Seriously.

Third, I would like to believe that any writer who is going to post a SciFi or Fantasy story has actually read SFF stories. Because, if they haven't read them, don't want to read them, what the fuck makes them believe they can write one?

Fourth, Romance outsells every other fiction genre.

Finally, when I read a Romance story on Lit and it begins with the female wanting to masturbate and in the end she has anonymous sex with a stranger in a cinema, and the story is only one page, I am going to assume the writer has never read Romance and wouldn't do it if they were paid.

Thanks again for all the comments.

I know squat about romance. High school girls cured me of all romantic notions. High schools girls want thrills or husband applicants. And I spared no money for better restaurants and activities. One girl said, MY MOM SAID SHE'D DATE YOU IF I DIDNT. I collides with the same silly woman 10 years ago after her mom died, and she expressed enduring surprise at how her mom liked me so much. I knew the father, his idea of a great time was supper at the cafeteria every Friday night. I took the daughter to the best places. She cured me.

I don't write what I don't know. And I've been banned from writer sites for suggesting virgins are ill-prepared to write about sex. I just spent a week studying deviant sex to 'get' the method in the madness. I did 'get' it. And what I know will shape what I write. Guys fuck for one reason, girls use sex like they use their kitchens.

 

[HandsInTheDark]

All of my romances have HEA implied, or what I call "happy for now," which I guess most people take as HEA. I have never ended a romance with a commitment.

Romeo and Juliet is (among other things) a romance. In the more modern era, so was the early DiCaprio film Titanic. Neither are exactly HEA. Either character can suffer a noble or lingering death, as long as the reader can believe it WOULD have been HEA but for Cruel Fate. Cruel Fate is big in romance, and sometimes it gets to win, but it's better if Cruel Fate gets subverted by Patience and Purest Love.

I think of Romance as a formula story that makes women metaphorically (maybe literally) send their hand fluttering to their throat and feeling a specific "oh yes" emotion that's much less about sexuality than it is about affirmation. (They'll get wet, though.) Obvious erotica is always a little suspect in romance because the women always fear the male might (oh dear!) have shallow reasons for sex. The male is either a knight in shining armour, or a scurrilous cad who is transformed into the knight by his love for her. If she falls for the cad and becomes as bad as he is, it could still be romance but it's noir and will annoy some people.

Romance is the land where men are almost unobtainably wonderful - note the almost - and the woman is, despite social or economic handicaps, is worthy of his attention, which eventually he realises. Men can be poor at the start, but then they'll inherit by the end. Hardworking regular employed men won't be in romances, because they're too busy working to affirm the woman's every thought, word and deed. Rich powerful men are much preferred.

Women can be plain, which is just about unworkable in any other kind erotic story. Women can be vain or proud or foolish, but the man will cure her of it. He corrects her few flaws and loves her anyway.

Men can start out banging every hot girl in sight - in fact that's often preferred because of the power of confirmation bias - but by the end he's strictly monogamous. If he looks at any other woman at that point it is not romance. (Try it and see). Romance can be mixed with D/s - if done carefully - and the effect is extremely powerful. It can be mixed with BDSM. Anal need not apply, and Group will not work. (I mixed it with noncon once and got away with it, but it was in scifi not romance, and it only worked because the premise was so unlikely and heavyhanded.)

It's a romance when the man reader starts skimming the exact sections that have women readers rereading every sentence three times. The otherworldly perfection of the male characters can make male readers uncomfortable for much the same reasons that the otherworldly hotness of female characters makes female readers uncomfortable with some erotica.

Romance is a code word for "the male will shower security and respect on a woman and give her an environment safe for making babies." This remains true even if neither party wants babies. In romance the babies are always implied; in erotica they are firmly nonexistant. A romance can end with a marriage and an almost immediate pregnancy, but not every woman (and no man) reader will groove to that.

A brilliant writer can subvert all this and make a romance anyway. I'd never try it - far too hard for me. Note I have no idea how gay romance works and probably little of the above implies.

Men can write romance, but they're smirking the whole time. Women can write it, and deep down they believe every word they write.

 

[HandsInTheDark]

Guys fuck for one reason, girls use sex like they use their kitchens.

Have you considered moving to a part of the country with less trailer trash? Which, apparently, would be almost any part of the country?

All your posts sound like something out of Killer Joe. Except without the amazingly dark comedy of that movie.

 

[GoldenCojones]

Finally, when I read a Romance story on Lit and it begins with the female wanting to masturbate and in the end she has anonymous sex with a stranger in a cinema, and the story is only one page, I am going to assume the writer has never read Romance and wouldn't do it if they were paid.

Now that is a romance story I would read.

 

[EverLux]

"Romance" is too broad a term for what the readers in that category appear to be looking for. Outside of Lit, all I read is romance--mostly New Adult and Fantasy--so I know at least those subgenres very well. Romance can absolutely include explicit sex and nontraditional relationships, so long as (like others have mentioned) the story itself hits all the necessary plot points: the characters fall for each other, along comes some external or internal conflict that threatens their relationship, they overcome said conflict, HEA.

As the RWA site JBJ posted describes Erotic Romance: ...strong, often explicit, sexual interaction is an inherent part of the love story, character growth and relationship development and could not be removed without damaging the storyline.

That describes my story perfectly, yet it was slaughtered in the Romance category. And that's fine. As I said, if that category's readers seek specific elements and shun others, just like every other Lit category, I can respect that. But then we can't say that not knowing Lit romance means that you don't know the romance genre, altogether.

 

[sr71plt]

I agree that Romance can end in tragedy or bittersweet. Just not here at Literotica, apparently, given reader comment reaction.

 

[LadyVer]

Not guilty, m'lady.

I didn't think you were involved.

 

[LadyVer]

Easy. Because they're writers.

The same could be asked for a lot of things.

You read some "BDSM" stories and it's obvious they know absolutely squat about BDSM, but they still think they can write it, because they're erotica writers, don't cha know, and that's what it's all about. And we're all supposed to stand up and applaud that they've written a story.

I'm thinking part of the problem is that Romance and SFF are two genres that existed on their own before writers who could care less about conventions started putting everything and the kitchen sink into both genres. Granted, Lit is an erotica site, but writers who put a story into either category without understanding either genre should not be surprised when readers question their knowledge or intelligence.

 

[sr71plt]

I'm thinking part of the problem is that Romance and SFF are two genres that existed on their own before writers who could care less about conventions started putting everything and the kitchen sink into both genres. Granted, Lit is an erotica site, but writers who put a story into either category without understanding either genre should not be surprised when readers question their knowledge or intelligence.

Is it really the author's problem (or anyone's really) that what is put in Romance is broader than the original scope of what Romance is? There are only so many categories here. All of them receive, necessarily, a broader scope of story content than a narrow definition of the category permits.

 

[LadyVer]

I know squat about romance. High school girls cured me of all romantic notions. High schools girls want thrills or husband applicants. And I spared no money for better restaurants and activities. One girl said, MY MOM SAID SHE'D DATE YOU IF I DIDNT. I collides with the same silly woman 10 years ago after her mom died, and she expressed enduring surprise at how her mom liked me so much. I knew the father, his idea of a great time was supper at the cafeteria every Friday night. I took the daughter to the best places. She cured me.

I don't write what I don't know. And I've been banned from writer sites for suggesting virgins are ill-prepared to write about sex. I just spent a week studying deviant sex to 'get' the method in the madness. I did 'get' it. And what I know will shape what I write. Guys fuck for one reason, girls use sex like they use their kitchens.

Appreciate your input. Makes me curious as to how a JBJ Romance story would read.

 

[LadyVer]

Now that is a romance story I would read.

Quite a few people enjoy one page stories.

 

[NOIRTRASH]

Appreciate your input. Makes me curious as to how a JBJ Romance story would read.

In Jim World romance is like an Easter Egg hunt where your luck is incredible. Theres immediate attraction and rapport and a sense of pleasant comfortable intimacy like its safe to spill your soul. Youre in the presence of your soulmate.

 

[LadyVer]

"Romance" is too broad a term for what the readers in that category appear to be looking for. Outside of Lit, all I read is romance--mostly New Adult and Fantasy--so I know at least those subgenres very well. Romance can absolutely include explicit sex and nontraditional relationships, so long as (like others have mentioned) the story itself hits all the necessary plot points: the characters fall for each other, along comes some external or internal conflict that threatens their relationship, they overcome said conflict, HEA.

As the RWA site JBJ posted describes Erotic Romance: ...strong, often explicit, sexual interaction is an inherent part of the love story, character growth and relationship development and could not be removed without damaging the storyline.

That describes my story perfectly, yet it was slaughtered in the Romance category. And that's fine. As I said, if that category's readers seek specific elements and shun others, just like every other Lit category, I can respect that. But then we can't say that not knowing Lit romance means that you don't know the romance genre, altogether.

This is why I don't put much stock into what the RWA says about the genre. Romance now includes erotica and porn, and RWA promotes it all as Romance. I'm assuming it's easier to make more money marketing a story under Romance than Erotica

Outside of Lit, I read Romance that includes varied sub-genres. Urban Fantasy, Steam Punk, Suspense, Paranormal, Victorian, HF. The problem with the Romance category is that readers think they're buying Romance, when in fact it is erotica or porn. In reality, Romance has many sub-genres, but the sex isn't, or shouldn't be, broad enough to include what many readers consider porn. I recently stopped reading what was supposed to be Romance when the male character told the female character that she was his new fucking project. And she quietly accepted his decision. I suspect the writer is male and uses a female pen name.

 

[LadyVer]

Is it really the author's problem (or anyone's really) that what is put in Romance is broader than the original scope of what Romance is? There are only so many categories here. All of them receive, necessarily, a broader scope of story content than a narrow definition of the category permits.

I assume that your GM stories actually have gay males in them.

 

[LadyVer]

In Jim World romance is like an Easter Egg hunt where your luck is incredible. Theres immediate attraction and rapport and a sense of pleasant comfortable intimacy like its safe to spill your soul. Youre in the presence of your soulmate.

I knew you had it in you.

 

[sr71plt]

I assume that your GM stories actually have gay males in them.

Yes, but I don't see how that relates here. I certainly couldn't put gay Romance in the Romance category here at Literotica. The readers wouldn't stand for it. (Which speaks directly to how the Romance category specifically functions at Literotica rather than what is Romance in the broader world.)

What is your post saying? I don't understand how it relates to anything I've posted here.

 

[LadyVer]

Yes, but I don't see how that relates here. I certainly couldn't put gay Romance in the Romance category here at Literotica. The readers wouldn't stand for it. (Which speaks directly to how the Romance category specifically functions at Literotica rather than what is Romance in the broader world.)

What is your post saying? I don't understand how it relates to anything I've posted here.

Pilot, there was zero romance in the Romance story. It was a one-page wanker story about a woman who wanted sex so badly she went to a movie theater and had sex with a stranger. It was an E/V EC wanker story.

 

[sr71plt]

Pilot, there was zero romance in the Romance story. It was a one-page wanker story about a woman who wanted sex so badly she went to a movie theater and had sex with a stranger. It was an E/V EC wanker story.

You've still lost me. I haven't been posting to the content of a specific story and I don't know what you're referring to. And I don't know what this has to do with anything gay.

 

[CyranoJ]

the sex isn't, or shouldn't be, broad enough to include what many readers consider porn

Eh, the Romance genre has included extremely hardcore sex for longer than some people seem to think. As far as subject matter goes, the sheer kink factor in something like, say, Secret Fire in the late Eighties -- I'm picking on it because it was one of my first exposures to intense written erotica as an adolescent, when I snuck it off my mom's bookshelf -- was way, way heavier than what happened in most mainstream porn of that era*. I'm not a huge aficionado on the genre but I'm not sure that how "broad" the sexual content goes is necessarily a reliable guide.

(* It had the superficial difference of not using porny words to describe the sex, which IMO counts for relatively little in the bigger scheme... but then I'm not a romance writer.)

 

[LadyVer]

Eh, the Romance genre has included extremely hardcore sex for longer than some people seem to think. As far as subject matter goes, the sheer kink factor in something like, say, Secret Fire in the late Eighties -- I'm picking on it because it was one of my first exposures to intense written erotica as an adolescent, when I snuck it off my mom's bookshelf -- was way, way heavier than what happened in most mainstream porn of that era. (It had the superficial difference of not using porny words to describe the sex, which IMO counts for relatively little in the bigger scheme... but then I'm not a romance writer.)

Maybe the key is language. Haven't seen you around for a while. Good to see you!

 

[CyranoJ]

Maybe the key is language. Haven't seen you around for a while. Good to see you!

Good to be seen.

 

[LadyVer]

Is it really the author's problem (or anyone's really) that what is put in Romance is broader than the original scope of what Romance is? There are only so many categories here. All of them receive, necessarily, a broader scope of story content than a narrow definition of the category permits.

This is your post that started our conversation. As a GM category writer, you include gay males in your stories. If a writer writes a story and puts it into GM and the story doesn't have any gay males in it, wouldn't you question why the author put the story in GM???

So, logically, as a romance reader, when I read a story in the Romance category and the story has zero romance, my initial reaction is not to commend the writer. My initial reaction is feeling the author has jerked me around by pulling a bait and switch, as well as wasting my time.