One Bombs

[MillieDynamite]

Most men are one dimensional in real life to make them three dimensional is a true work of fiction.

ah, you're braver than I!

I indented to explore gold-diggers and Man-Eaters in the near future. I'm not sure what my Man-Eaters means of breaking the fellow will be. I mean a gold-digger and Man-eater can be the same. But as I understand Man-Eaters, they are sexually aggressive, and can be compared to womanizers, but they go beyond what a womanizer does in that the end goal is to destroy the fellow.

At least, that's what I was told, by a person that read in an article, who heard it from a friend, that knew a person, who was related to a guy, that had a friend, that a Man-Eater destroyed his marriage, his pocket book, and will to live.

 

[Rustyoznail]

ah, you're braver than I!

I indented to explore gold-diggers and Man-Eaters in the near future. I'm not sure what my Man-Eaters means of breaking the fellow will be. I mean a gold-digger and Man-eater can be the same. But as I understand Man-Eaters, they are sexually aggressive, and can be compared to womanizers, but they go beyond what a womanizer does in that the end goal is to destroy the fellow.

At least, that's what I was told, by a person that read in an article, who heard it from a friend, that knew a person, who was related to a guy, that had a friend, that a Man-Eater destroyed his marriage, his pocket book, and will to live.

I don't think the gender or sexual inclination matters for a man/woman eater. It's the attitude. He/she wants someone, no matter what and when they are rejected, blocked, or whatever, they go all out to eliminate the opposition or destroy the object of their desire.

Gold diggers are different, in my opinion. They want as much as possible without really doing much to earn it. "Lyin' eyes" by The Eagles sums it up.

 

[Bramblethorn]

Readers in the Romance category like Romances in the sense widely used in the publishing industry. As described to me by DreamCloud, the stories are broadly formulaic; a man and woman who don't know each other meet and develop a mutual interest. They struggle through adversity and overcome hurdles to build a relationship, and they live happily ever after (or at least, happily for now).

FWIW, published romance has a bit more latitude these days. The HEA/HFN is pretty much de rigeur, and it's hard to write an interesting story in any genre without some sort of adversity, but "man and woman who don't know each other" doesn't seem to be a requirement.

The two published romances I've read recently both feature couples who've known one another for years by the time the story begins. One is about childhood sweethearts who never quite managed to get it together. The other is about a married couple who fell apart, meeting years later in different circumstances and realising they want to give it a second try. Both of them have sex scenes that would be quite at home on Literotica, although maybe not as often as most readers here would look for.

Romance publishing also seems to be getting more willing to go beyond "man and woman" - as I understand it, queer romance used to be a very separate niche, but these days you can find straight and queer romances from the same authors and in the same collections.

 

[MillieDynamite]

I don't think the gender or sexual inclination matters for a man/woman eater. It's the attitude. He/she wants someone, no matter what and when they are rejected, blocked, or whatever, they go all out to eliminate the opposition or destroy the object of their desire.

Gold diggers are different, in my opinion. They want as much as possible without really doing much to earn it. "Lyin' eyes" by The Eagles sums it up.

I don't disagree with you. But as explained in Hale and Oats song "Man-Eater" she'll rip the man's world apart. The song implies she will leave him broken in every way possible. I have known a few Man-Eaters and already wrote about one here, at least a mild one here. In my story "Molly’s Rapturous Embrace" the woman wipes him in out in one night.

I won't go beyond that in case someone wants to read it.

 

[LAHomedog]

You have my condolences. That does not describe men I know.

I'm with you. I certainly know a bunch of one-dimensional men, or aggressive men, but they are not in my friendship circle or folks I associate with unless I have to. But I favor creative types of all kinds.

 

[NotWise]

The two published romances I've read recently both feature couples who've known one another for years by the time the story begins. One is about childhood sweethearts who never quite managed to get it together. The other is about a married couple who fell apart, meeting years later in different circumstances and realising they want to give it a second try. Both of them have sex scenes that would be quite at home on Literotica, although maybe not as often as most readers here would look for.

I've seen some shift in the definition, but I'm curious. Why do you consider those to be Romances?

Romance Writers of America (this is a large organization of mainstream writers) gives this:

Definition

Two basic elements comprise every romance novel: a central love story and an emotionally satisfying and optimistic ending.

A Central Love Story: The main plot centers around individuals falling in love and struggling to make the relationship work. A writer can include as many subplots as he/she wants as long as the love story is the main focus of the novel.

An Emotionally Satisfying and Optimistic Ending: In a romance, the lovers who risk and struggle for each other and their relationship are rewarded with emotional justice and unconditional love.

This is a little less restrictive than DreamCloud quoted to me, but then RWA has changed their definition since then.

I've read commentary on the RWA site that questioned the need for the HEA of HFN ending.

To me, it seems like there should be a market for the tragic love story -- no HEA or HFN. The emotional impact can be huge. I'll humbly submit "The Third Ring."

If you're going to submit a tragedy to Lit, then you probably need to be very careful with the emotional trajectory of the story.

 

[MillieDynamite]

I've seen some shift in the definition, but I'm curious. Why do you consider those to be Romances?

Romance Writers of America (this is a large organization of mainstream writers) gives this:



This is a little less restrictive than DreamCloud quoted to me, but then RWA has changed their definition since then.

I've read commentary on the RWA site that questioned the need for the HEA of HFN ending.

To me, it seems like there should be a market for the tragic love story -- no HEA or HFN. The emotional impact can be huge. I'll humbly submit "The Third Ring."

If you're going to submit a tragedy to Lit, then you probably need to be very careful with the emotional trajectory of the story.

There's this song, which I love, which has the lines --
This is the way that we love, like it's forever
Then live the rest of our life, but not together

Which could be a great way to end a non happy ending romance story. Why not, someone write it.

 

[MelissaBaby]

The first rule of one bombs is never talk about one bombs.

 

[KeithD]

The first rule of one bombs is never talk about one bombs.

I don't think the trolls would find you fun.

 

[Bramblethorn]

I've seen some shift in the definition, but I'm curious. Why do you consider those to be Romances?

Romance Writers of America (this is a large organization of mainstream writers) gives this:

This is a little less restrictive than DreamCloud quoted to me, but then RWA has changed their definition since then.

The two stories I mentioned are Courtney Milan's novel "The Duke Who Didn't" and Rose Lerner's novella "Promised Land", the latter originally published as part of "Hamilton's Battalion: A Trio of Romances".

If you search around, you'll find those stories and their authors consistently filed under "romance". Milan in particular is a well-known name in US romance; one of her previous books won a RITA (RWA's highest award for romance writing) and she was on RWA's Board of Directors for four years.

I've read commentary on the RWA site that questioned the need for the HEA of HFN ending.

To me, it seems like there should be a market for the tragic love story -- no HEA or HFN. The emotional impact can be huge. I'll humbly submit "The Third Ring."

Those are two largely separate discussions, IMHO. One is about whether there's a place for love stories with unhappy endings (I think almost everybody would answer 'yes'), the other is whether "romance" is an appropriate genre for categorising those stories.

Genres are mostly a marketing/navigation convenience. There are thousands or millions of books out there, readers need to filter that down to find something they'll enjoy reading, genre is one of the tools that authors/publishers/sellers use to help readers do that filtering. So it comes down to is whether it's more useful to readers to have a line drawn between "love story with happy ending" and "love story with sad ending", or not.

A lot of the people who look for "romance" go to it for a dependable place to be cheered up, so there is at least some argument for drawing that line.

 

[Bramblethorn]

No, sweeps do not remove only ‘one’ votes. I’ve had votes that were ‘fives’ disappear. It might take some searching AH here that I’m not going to do, but I posted at lease one case of that happening and there was a bit of discussion, but it was some time ago. The specific methodology of sweeps is intentionally kept secret to address the issue you imply.

But I can guarantee you, it does not simply remove all of the ‘ones’ or even the ‘twos’ blindly. If it did, some of my stories would have higher ratings. As a rule I don’t track stats too closely, but when I’ve submitted for contests I do so, both to see how my entry is doing but also what effect it’s having on my other stories. So I know that they don’t simply remove ‘ones’ and/or ‘twos’ votes.

Indeed, there are stories on Lit that have 'perfect' 1.00 ratings.

 

[NotWise]

Genres are mostly a marketing/navigation convenience. There are thousands or millions of books out there, readers need to filter that down to find something they'll enjoy reading, genre is one of the tools that authors/publishers/sellers use to help readers do that filtering. So it comes down to is whether it's more useful to readers to have a line drawn between "love story with happy ending" and "love story with sad ending", or not.

As far as I know there's no popular genre for stories without happy endings. They don't have to be sad endings. In The Third Ring Tannehill creates a monument to his love for his wife (murdered by her sister) by sacrificing himself. I don't think that was a sad ending. In Love is Enough TJ loses Hannah and Gabby (for now) because his love lets them transcend. I don't think that's a sad ending.

A lot of the people who look for "romance" go to it for a dependable place to be cheered up, so there is at least some argument for drawing that line.

Romantic tragedies are a way for readers to be inspired, which is a big step beyond "cheered up."