If you missed the great awesome news: RWA has a new chapter, the Rainbow Romance Writers, a GLBT Romance chapter. WOO HOO! How awesome is that? Mazel tov!
I first heard the news from RWA President Diane Pershing at the Princeton romance conference, though she asked at the time that the announcement not be made until the final details had been filed – so I didn’t mention it then. There was, however, applause and squeeing at the time. No comment on who exactly was squeeing.
So while I was waiting for the official word from RWA, which went out 1 May, I bothered Jade Buchanan, the president of the Rainbow Romance Writers, and asked if she’d answer some nosy questions.
Her reply cracked me up: “I’m a little long-winded I know …which is slightly puzzling for someone who writes mainly novellas.” SNORT.
So behold: an interview!
(And can I tell you again at how damn excited I am that there’s a GLBT chapter in RWA now? HOLY SHIT that is awesome.)
In your stated goals, you write: “to be an advocate within the industry for our genre.” Can you expand on that? What specific topics immediately demand advocacy?
Jade: At the most basic level, we want to promote the authors who are writing GLBT romances on an even playing field. The world of e-publishing and small press publishing has been wonderful for a lot of our authors, while traditional mainstream presses have been closed to the majority of GLBT romances with a few exceptions. Running Press has a new experimental historical gay romance (non-erotic) line and there have been a handful of publishers who have either published GLBT romances for brand name authors or for authors who have GLBT characters in their existing series. A lot of our authors have also been refused reviews from large review bodies because of the GLBT content of their books. While we believe that every publisher and review site has the right to limit their books based on their target audience, we do want to be able to promote our authors and their books to the best of our ability.
We are also aware that as a chapter we represent all our member authors who write in the fields of gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender romances. Some of these are more popular at the moment, but all four categories (as well as all types of cross-over stories) deserve to be discussed and will be treated equally by us as a chapter.
Do you plan to have a newsletter, e-newsletter, or conference? How about contests for published or unpublished writers?
Jade: We are currently hard at work on our first electronic newsletter, which will include craft articles and publishing news as well as interviews with our current members. Weíve discussed having a conference at some length and have also discussed the possibility of published and unpublished contests. I deal a lot with management systems in my day job and I believe that a slow and steady approach is best for an organization to sustain itself in the long run. A GLBT romance contest is something we want to have, maybe in the next year or two, but we are not ready for it yet. The same goes for a conference. Hopefully in the future!
So far, no courses are listed on your website, but you’ve already created a space for them. If you were to offer online courses to your members, what topics do you think would be most important, or most appreciated? Who will you tap to teach them?
Jade: Two of the courses we have planned are on marketing and plotting. We also had a recent request for a class on writing short stories, which weíll consider. Weíre very lucky to have an amazing talent pool among our current members so we will initially tap interested members to teach courses and then branch out if needed. Weíll also consider virtually anything that our member authors would like to learn about, if itís feasible and if enough individuals are interested.
What issues or challenges face GLBT romance writers which most romance readers or the rest of the romance community might not know about?
Jade: I think one of the biggest misconceptions about our group is that our authors only write gay romances. We actually have quite a number of individuals that write lesbian and bisexual romances and we also represent authors who focus on transgender romances, including those with either transvestites or transsexual characters.
Our current members come from all areas of the industry, both published and pre-published authors, as well as agents, editors, publishers and other industry professionals. Because we are so diverse, our members have all had quite different experiences within the romance community. One thing we almost all have in common is the need for a place to discuss our careers and our writing goals within an open and accepting environment. While some of our writers have had positive experiences at local or other special interest chapters when we reveal our GLBT focus, there are a lot of our members that have had very negative experiences. Some of our members have been ostracized from other chapters and a lot of members have had to deal with stereotypes and negativity. We’re dedicated to providing all our members with a comfortable place to gather and discuss issues!
Would you personally – not speaking as president but as an author if that is a more appropriate perspective – want a GLBT category in the RITAs as part of RWAs annual recognition of romance novels? Or do you prefer that the sex/gender of the protagonists is not specified, and ultimately may include GLBT protagonists?
Jade: Speaking personally, and not as a RRW representative, I would prefer that GLBT titles not be considered as a separate category, but rather be welcomed within whatever category the book fits. It’s always been my belief that a great story is a great story because of the plotting, characterization, world-building, etc. and not the gender or sex of the protagonists. One of the reasons we decided to form this chapter was to give a voice to our genre and hopefully show that we represent a number of very talented individuals that are no different than any other group of romance writers out there. At the end of the day, we all write about love!
Thanks to Jade for her time, and congratulations to the new chapter. For more information about the chapter or to inquire about membership, visit them online at RainbowRomanceWriters.com.
Fantastic news, and another step in the right direction from the RWA. But I’m wondering about the title of the chapter, and I remember the difficulties faced by the RWA’s erotic chapter when it formed a few years ago. Part of the deal was that the word ‘erotic’ shouldn’t appear in the title, which is why it was named Passionate Ink. Has the same thing happened here? Are we allowed to include gay romance so long as we don’t have to use the G word?
As a junkie for GLBT romance and a sometime writer of it, I was thrilled to red about this on the Fiction With Friction blog a few days ago. I have several friends in a local RWA chapter and they’ve never quite gotten that the MF pairing is not the only combination that can produce a worthy lovestory.
Equality=Sexy
I hope this chapter has a ton of success!
*would66 (Depends. What’s a 66?)
Congrats to RWA and to the new Chapter!
Rock on Y’all!
@Cat Masters, I think it’s more an issue that “G” doesn’t cover it all. And GLBT is unwieldy. And do you add the Q or not? What order to you put the letters in. I was NOT involved in choosing the name, I hasten to add, but I think “Rainbow” covers more ground.
Exciting news! Congratulations to all who are involved!
It is about time!
My congratulations and warm welcome into the RWA fold to Jade and the other members of RWA’s newest special interest chapter. As a member of Passionate Ink, I know the hard work involved in getting a new chapter started. Kudos to RWA for being open-minded and accepting of this new chapter and its goals.
Great interview! I really think RWA has a lot to offer pubbed and pre-pubbed authors of GLBT romance, so I’m thrilled we’re all coming together in such a positive way. And Jade, I loved your answer about the inclusion of a GLBT category in the Ritas. Love is love is love, no segregation into a separate category required!
I admit, when I looked at your bookshelf I jumped to that conclusion myself, because the L and femaleB parts of LGBT often have little or no presence in many online venues for discussion, review and even publishing, despite the use of the LGBT banner.
The discussion over my initial assumption got quite rancorous, because yes, it was a hasty judment based on a first glance at your site. But I have spoken to a number of others (mostly readers) who jumped to the same conclusion, because the general invisibility of f/f(/m) is something that’s fairly pervasive in the online romance community. Many readers and writers of L and fB have come to expect that LGBT doesn’t necessarily mean them. That isn’t RRW’s fault, but there are things you can do to dispell the misconception that RRW is one of those venues.
I’d really like to see an immediately visible presence of your f/f(/m) members—that doesn’t mean you should promo their books if there aren’t any, or over and above m/m books, but slash-tags next to the names on the members list would have been an instant and visible way to refute the misconception.
It would also make it so people like me, who actively seek f/f and f/f/m books and authors, wouldn’t have to visit every author’s website and sift through their booklists for something we’ve come to expect might not be there.
It would be a visible reassurance that yes, they’re there, and yes, they’re represented.
Me too! I read romance across the board, and it would be absolutely fantastic if RWA moved toward embracing love and sexuality in all its forms. I hope RRW can be an equal and effective advocate for all permutations of LGBT. I wish you the best of luck. 🙂
While I am not a reader of m/m romances, I would be open to f/f romances. I think this new group is good for the RWA. Romance readers are a diverse group and deserve to be represented,
As a charter member of the Rainbow Romance Writers who is about 95% finished with an historical f/f romance, I’d have to say that I really would not want a slash tag next to my name in order to offset a misconception. I hear what you’re saying, but I, for one, do not want to be, essentially, “sub-tagged” as anything. I’m in the Rainbow Romance Writers chapter of the Romance Writers of America. That, really, ought to be enough said. I think the day that we have to put slash tags next to our names to offset anyone’s misconception that Rainbow Romance Writers chapter is not inclusive is the day we might need to embiggen the font on our website that speaks to our goals. The first goal noted says that it is a goal “to promote excellence in gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender romances.” That’s enough for me.
This is an interesting and admirable development. Congratulations to the RWA, and good wishes to all the writers involved.
Yessss! SO happy there’s an LGBT chapter now. Hallelujah.
Maybe more f/f(/m) graphics on the site, then? At the moment, the graphics on the homepage are male (or m/m if you include the ad), all the books on the bookshelf are either m/m or trans, and the only f/f graphic is on the resource page (and it’s not even overtly lesbian—it could easily be a picture of two BFFs, lol). I’m just looking for something to counter a general lack of visibilty and difficulty finding f/f(/m) that sometimes happens elsewhere online, from publisher’s sites to review venues.
I’ve been sites flying the LGBT banner, where they’ve even had mission statements that were inclusive of all permutations of LGBT, but L/fB/T content constituted less than 1% of the material there. So it’s a misconception that’s based in part by the experience of readers and authors who’ve encountered it elsewhere.
Plus, for authors like you who don’t want to be limited, they could simply put “all subgenres” rather than a slashtag.
Jade—you are far from long winded!!!
All I can say is it’s about time! In this day and age—we needed this. The energy within this newly founded group is beyond amazing… I believe with all my heart that RRW will truly be a success and set the standard for how diveristy and openmindedness can indeed, combine harmonilosly with disimular people working for the greater good—love is love, no matter how you make it!
This ought to make for some interesting RWR letters in the next few months. If I renew RWA, I’ll join RRW just to support them.
YAY!!!!
I fall a little bit more in love with the romance genre every day.
And Sexy=Sexy. Flavor it as you will. How nice to see everyone finding their place at the table.
First of all, ttthomas, I love that you use “embiggen.” Such a cromulent word!
Kirsten, I find this such a strange request. I have to admit, this is the first time I’ve ever seen an RWA chapter’s website so harshly criticized. I don’t assume that because the Hearts Through History website has two crossed swords and a Celtic love knot on their homepage, that they would be opposed to members who write Westerns. (What? no cowboy hats? I’m outta here!) 🙂
I’m so happy to see this chapter take form, and I’m excited to see where it goes.
Thanks for your support and the lovely interview, Sarah! I had fun answering your questions 🙂
I appreciate the lovely words of support from all of the comments, thank you!! Rainbow Romance Writers is definitely still in the beginning stages as a chapter and we certainly appreciate hearing suggestions for improvement. We have a lot of different things planned, and we will be unveiling them in the near future now that we’re officially part of RWA.
A lot of work went into starting this up, and I’m very thankful to Sara Bell, Kimberly Gardner, JL Langley, Jet Mykles and Laura Baumbach for helping me get through the past few months. We also have a wonderful group of members that I can’t wait to get to know better 🙂
Well, if you’d ever gone looking for reviews for f/f or f/f/m romance, and found an LGBT review site with a mission statement almost exactly word for word what RRW’s is, and then discovered that f/f(/m) and trans reviews comprised less than one percent of their content, you might not find it so strange.
That’s not RRW’s fault, or even necessarily the fault of the review site in question (because they can’t really force their reviewers to read books they don’t want to, and to be honest, I wouldn’t want my f/f or f/f/m romance reviewed by someone who didn’t enjoy those kinds of books). But it can leave you with an impression that “LGBT” isn’t always going to indicate, in practical terms, the full diversity inherent in the tag.
I’m not really trying to be critical (because, as I’ve said, it’s not their fault that the LGBT tag doesn’t always reflect equal representation—willingness, sure, but it still might not be there, for whatever reason), just making suggestions for how they can more effectively dispell, on first viewing of their site, a misconception they admit already exists.
Wonderful interview, Sarah and Jade! I am proud to be a charter member of the new chapter. Our group is one of the most diverse, interesting and supportive you’ll find anywhere. This has been a long time coming and I’m just tickled to death to see it finallly happening, and to see all the love and support from the romance community 😀
I volunteer to review. MMMMMMM, lesbians. Romance novels that reflect my reality more fully, won’t that be lovely.
Caution, brief thread hijack ahead:
@Iron Lesbian:
You could always write a guest review for Loving Venus- Loving Mars. We’re still really small, and we don’t only review lesbian romance, but welcome f/f in all permutations, and we’re catering to a female readership that crosses the Kinsey Scale.
Email me if you’re interested. 🙂
/thread hijack
I’d posit that the needs of reviewers/readers are vastly different than the needs of writers who might benefit from the chapter’s existence/programs/etc. If I were going to judge the quality of my first RWA chapter by their cheesy graphic designs (flamingos kissing?) I’d be in real trouble! And yet they taught me everything I needed to know to get published.
I saw nothing on the site that indicated that a writer of lesbian romance would be unwelcome. If anything, quite the opposite, as I’ve been writing a lesbian romance into my latest WIP and was toying with the idea of joining myself.
Wonderful news! I’ll go check out the website, can’t wait to see how this chapter grows.
Why yes, yes it is—-thank you for noticing. I can’t, in good conscience, take credit, though, as I am a sub-species, as it were, of Crombec, although a warbler of words more than song. Some have suggested I can be a Cormullion, but I’m sure we both know how utterly yesterday that trope is. Still, if I absolutely had to put a sub-genre slash status on it, I’d probably be fine with c/c. 😉
Why yes, yes it is—-thank you for noticing. I can’t, in good conscience, take credit, though, as I am a sub-species, as it were, of Crombec, although a warbler of words more than song. Some have suggested I can be a Cormullion, but I’m sure we both know how utterly yesterday that trope is. Still, if I absolutely had to put a sub-genre slash status on it, I’d probably be fine with c/c. 😉
Though it may bear repeating, I swear I didn’t say it twice. Btw, yes, thank you to the Smart Bitches for the coverage. It really means a lot.
I’ll grant you that.
But I don’t see how more visible diversity on the site would hurt anyone, either, or that it would be difficult to do. I’m sure f/f writers wouldn’t have complained if there were a second graphic on the homepage of, say, a woman wearing a rainbow t-shirt or something.
Why shouldn’t the design of the site accurately reflect the diversity of its members? Sure, not every site does—or has to, for that matter—but I can’t imagine there’s one good reason why they shouldn’t do it.
~Speaking as a reader and author who reads across the LGBT genre, and who writes romance from one end of the Kinsey Scale to the other.
Speaking as a reader and writer of lesbian romances, I have to say that I would argue very strongly against seeing a “f/f” tag next to my name. I would much prefer “lesbian romance.” I don’t write “these parts/those parts,” I write about women who identify as lesbian, and the “f/f” tag strips that essential aspect of the work. Also, as someone pointed out to me in another online discussion, a reader who doesn’t necessarily want a lesbian romance/erotic romance but who is looking for a sexual/romantic experience between bi-curious women could be misled by the “f/f” tag.
That’s certainly true, Stacia.
So the slash-tags won’t work. Would you object to “lesbian romance” being next to your name on the members’ list? Because yes, f/f and lesbian are not synonymous at all. Maybe it was an imperfect idea—although it would have made it easier for me to find authors who write what I like, for sure.
As far as site design goes, though, I mean, kissing flamingoes aside, you want your website to evenly reflect its purpose. I just feel that online, at least, f/f in all its permutations is very low key, sometimes virtually invisible, and it couldn’t hurt drawing more positive attention to it. There’s no real reason not to do it, is there?
I mean, they don’t have to, I guess. But it would be nice. *shrugs*
@kirsten: I’ve been thinking about it, and I think the easiest solution might be to list the appropriate letter after the author name. Instead of m/m and f/f, perhaps something like: authorname (G), authorname (B f/f), authorname (B m/m/f), or authorname (L). Perhaps combining the two would give a better indication of what the content is.
I’m not entirely sure that such labeling is necessary. As someone said upthread, this is already a special interest chapter, and I’m not certain that I feel the need to break it down by subgenre. This might be something for the RRW members to discuss.
I don’t quite understand the desire to provide precise labels.
If one is classifying erotica/pornography, books that are written chiefly to titillate, then I suppose the kind of sexual conjugations featured are important to readers, but if we are discussing romance (which I thought we were), then who cares? If a story is about human emotional relationships, about love, then I can’t see why it matters whether it is about a man and a woman, two men, two women or (up to a point) more than two. As a heterosexual woman, I am very happy to read a good story about a lesbian love affair, or a male homosexual one. Just as I am happy to read good stories about relationships between people of different races, colours, traditions and cultures than my own. Americans, for instance.
Maybe I have missed the point somehow. I am sure someone will enlighten me. Perhaps this is only about ‘erotica’ after all?
RRW is still new and as such, their website probably isn’t in its absolute final form. It wouldn’t surprise me if, over time, their graphics change and mature along with them. Just because they don’t have a ton of lesbian/FF graphics right now doesn’t mean they never will, IMO.
Well, it shouldn’t be necessary, and I don’t think it would be necessary if there had been an f/f or bi-female book cover—or more (or more sensual) f/f graphics if there were no f/f books to promote. I mean, I know there is at least one trans romance author at RRW—because there’s a trans romance on the bookshelf page.
I’m not so much concerned with whether they are open to representing authors of f/f romance—I know they are. But at the same time, I did have three people tell me: “I think it’s mostly an m/m thing,” or “looks like it’s all m/m romance, so I didn’t think you’d be interested,” or “do they even have any f/f authors there? I can’t tell.”
I know f/f is very successful in the print world, but the RRW website is an online venue, and online, f/f (whatever form it is) is already kind of a no-show in a lot of discussion forums, review venues and publishers. RRW may find that to help f/f authors maintain online visibility, they’ll have to compensate a bit for its lack of presence elsewhere. At the very least, they’ll have to understand that when readers and authors who are very active online don’t see f/f, even under the LGBT banner, they’ll often assume it isn’t there.
If tags are objectionable or unworkable (you and tthomas seem to have different views about why you don’t like them, so I think maybe they aren’t the answer), there are other ways to let visitors know who writes what. The members’ list could be embellished with a brief, author-penned bio and description of what they write, such as:
Amy Greatauthor—Amy, who lives in suburban Wisconsin with her partner and their two kids, writes lesbian romantic suspense set in Post World War II America, as well as contemporary lesbian fiction.
John Manlove—John, who lives in Chicago with his partner Chad, his dog Boomer and a stray cat who won’t go away, writes Science Fiction romance and erotica exploring gay themes.
Ginger Bicurious—Ginger lives a swinging lifestyle of PTA meetings and soccer practices, and in her spare time writes bi-female themed historical erotica and erotic romance.
Actually, I really like that idea, because it tells you a little about the members as well as their genres without having to click to their sites—kind of like author bios on publisher websites.
And as I said before, it’s not like they have to do any of this—just that it would be nice, and it would help dispell the misconception Jade mentioned that RRW is m/m-focused.
It does matter to many people. There are plenty of readers who will gobble up m/m and het, and not even consider f/f—and vice versa. But more often, people will read most anything, but will find some pairings (or multiples) appeal to them more than others. And that doesn’t even necessarily have a huge amount to do with the sex, really.
I’m with you. I read and write pretty much across the board, but my experience of a gay romance is entirely different from my experience of a lesbian one. The relationship dynamics are different and the characterization is often very different. It’s not just a matter of writing romances with two penises, or two vaginas—it goes beyond that, and part of that is the relationship outside the sex.
There are even subtle but distinct differences in how the relationship dynamics work in a lesbian romance and an f/f romance with two characters who identify as bi. Not everyone who would enjoy a lesbian romance will enjoy a bi-female f/f, because the dynamics of the relationship might not resonate with them. And women who are not lesbians may not enjoy lesbian romance, because they don’t necessarily identify with lesbian relationship dynamics or lesbian issues.
If there weren’t those differences in interest and experience, you wouldn’t find so many authors who only work within one subgenre (whether that’s het or otherwise).
I confess, titillation, both sexual and emotional, is one of the things I read for—-and I can get that from pretty much anything, from het to LGBT. But I have a specific soft spot for f/f/m menage, because I’m bisexual, and because I love the fantasy of being able to straddle the fence and keep one foot in each field (which seems to work better in fiction than in small town reality, heh). That’s partly about sex, sure, but it’s also about the emotional aspects of relationships that most resonate with me, and they’re often very different depending on whether I’m with a man or a woman. It’s not so much about the body parts, but how the characters relate to one another—which is why when f/f/m works for me, boy howdy, does it work. And when it doesn’t, it’s just ick.
So though I can read and enjoy just about anything, I will actively seek out f/f/m and bi-themed f/f, because I find the relationships as well as the sex appealing.
Hey! I like our kissing flamingos! It says FLORIDA. (Nevermind that the birds aren’t native…they actually do live in the wild here…escaped from Busch Gardens, no doubt, but I’ve seen them in the wild!)
Their necks are in the shape of a heart. Very cute and romantic.
Besides, the Miami chapter already took the heart-shaped palm trees. We didn’t have a choice.
🙂
Great job Jade, I’m thrilled we finally have a voice within RWA for all the rainbow genres and I’m proud to be one of the new chapter members. As an author of chiefly bisexual heroines (what does that make me: f/f/m? Bi? Queer? Poly?) I’ve already felt a welcome in the chapter and applaud the inclusiveness of the chapter goals. I do think brief bios that give a glimpse of author genres will help readers find what they’re looking for. Love=love=love, but as readers and authors we all respond differently to different combinations, and it helps to know where to find what we like best.