I get disturbed when I see on T.V (drama series, movies) women initially saying a half-hearted “no” but physically responding - or else seeing when the guy doesn’t stop pressing her/kissing her, that she ‘gives in’.

On T.V a “no” that is not strong is not a “no” - there is this message that women really want sex but they don’t want to be seen as promiscuous, so they say “no” but respond physically and have sex anyway.

If in doubt, guys should assume the woman means “no”. If she says “no” but she’s acting like she wants to go on (which I see a lot on T.V) they should stop, look at her, then ask her if she really means “no”.

“no” needs to be a powerful word.

The legal concept of consent is sound and is the only workable definition consonant with due process. Consent is often difficult for a jury to determine, but so are many other things in the law.

The legal concept of consent is sound and is the only workable definition consonant with due process. Consent is often difficult for a jury to

This stuff is all a little old, as in the discussions have died down, but still interesting… There was a righteous feminist furor in late August over Cosmo’s “gray rape” article (in which everyone mentioned clearly said “no”, so… what’s gray …

But if this thread does revive, let’s try and keep it off romance novels!

So, you read “a dozen or so” of a genre that includes hundreds of books published per year and now presume to understand it?

If you’re actually interested in learning more about sexual dynamics in romance novels, rather than simply scoring cheap points on a blog, can I suggest that you take some time to learn a bit about the genre?

Radway is generally considered outdated, but the anthology Dangerous Men and Adventurous Women would be a good place to start.

The blog “Smart Bitches, Trashy Books” would also be a good place to learn how actual romance readers experience these books. This thread directly addresses some of the issues you raised. Teach Me Tonight is a blog run by academics studying romance novels, and would be another place to start learning about what you’re criticizing.

Frankly, I read what you’ve written as another attempt to maintain that the responsibility of sexual gatekeeping should fall solely on women. Women don’t need to be told that if they only said no in the “right way” men would understand it better…trust me, we’re bombarded with messages that if men don’t get the message, it must be our fault. There is, however, a severe shortage of people willing to stand up and say that men’s responsibilities extend beyond avoiding actions that fit the legal definition of rape. Thanks, Hugo, for being one of them.

They are the only form of fiction overwhelmingly written by women, intended for a primarily female audience. I find it interesting how much disdain Romance novels are held in by men. They are almost universally reviled as worthless by the men that I have discussed them with. The subtext I have experience is ‘nothing a women writes about can be that interesting’.

They are not deep fiction - I learned to loathe ’significant’ novels in highshcool. I’m always shocked when I run across ’significant’ novels that are readable, and don’t give me nightmares or make me hate everyone around me.

They are idealized stories women tell ourselves about our lives. As a genre, historically, Romance has been almost hyper conservative. In the early days, bodice rippers came under fire for inflaming young women’s sensibilities, and so publishing houses came up with writing standards much like the film standards of the 40’s. The other women can never ‘win’. If you loose your virginity, you have to marry the guy, or be raped (ugh… the 70’s and 80’s were rife with rape plot lines, I can’t make myself read about rape for entertainment), or even better, be raped by the hero, and after sufficient abasement on his part, forgive him and marry him.

In the 90’s the formula began to change, and publishers took some risks and opened up new romance lines with new guidelines. There are now plots that specialize in beta males who get the girl (with some annoying titles, like ‘Nerd in shining armor’), and some new lines that are explicitly erotica. Online publishing opened up erotica to women in a way that print publishing is just beginning to catch up with. Check out Ellora’s Cave to see one of the biggest online women’s erotica publishers. Authors who started out on EC are making the jump to mainstream publishing houses.

In fact, if you are interested in seeing how explicit the instructions to authors are, check out http://www.eharlequin.com/articlepage.html?articleId=538&chapter=0.

Now, I started reading them when I was twelve, with Dame Barbara Cartland. She of the very chaste, kiss on the last page after getting engaged novels. She used to get smashed on champagne, and dictate a novel a day to her secretary. What I read and enjoyed at 12, I would snort milk out my nose reading now.

One of my favorite writers, Jayne Ann Krentz has been writing for at least 20 years. I collected the bulk of her early works, mostly written in the early 80’s, and find the writing elements that I like, combined with story elements that drive me nuts. The rabidly alpha hero. The bright and capable woman inexplicably letting herself be a doormat. Over time JAK’s plots changed as instructions to authors changed, and she is one of the most progressive blockbuster mainstream Romance authors. Almost every book of hers has gay secondary characters (positive ones), the main character (female) is not a virgin (in contemporary lines) and is financially and socially equal to the male character. Historical novels have to deal with the fact that women, historically, did not have equal financial or social power as men.

The 2000’s have seen the rise of paranormal romance, featuring very very strong female characters - women who are warriors, shape shifters, vampires, what have you. In many ways, the popularity of this genre is because the female characters are so strong - and the strong fantasy element allows the author to write female characters behaving very much the same way male characters behave without the feeling of social dissonance that would happen if you tried to have a physically and socially strong female in a normal contemporary romance. JAK’s novels have evolved from the romantic conflict being interpersonal (alpha male annoys female), to the plot conflict being external (romantic mystery). Her novels now feature a hero and heroine who are in simpatico, facing conflict from others.

As I read more about feminism, and transform my internal thinking, I find myself less and less tolerant of sexism and stupidity in the fiction that I read. Mercifully, the Romance genre is morphing along with me, so that I still find plenty to read that I enjoy. And even in the books with rabid alpha males, the source of conflict in the plot is the male’s behavior, and how the female doesn’t like/won’t tolerate it, and how two strong wills compromise to form a union both can enjoy.