The media courage of 50 Shades continues, long and frequently enough that there are some themes emerging. One fantastic example: mommy porn.
In two words, there are a lot of things wrong with Mommy Porn. Add to that “Mommy’s naughty reader” and the rhetoric that women are ashamed of their erotic reading material and thus buy and read it digitally, as the Wall Street Journal suggested yesterday, means that the shame-wagging-finger gets bigger.
I have a different finger to use in reply. It’s the middle one.
Romance has struggled with the pornography label for a long time. And I give the middle finger to that label as well. I’m sure you’ve heard it: “romance is porn for women!”
There’s a lot of things wrong with that statement, too, almost as much as “Mommy porn.” I realize this is a long ass entry, so if you read only two sentences, let it be these:
Romance is not porn for women.
Porn is porn for women.
There is nothing wrong with either one.
And whatever a woman employs to satisfy her own sexual curiosity and hornypants is her business, not yours.
The coverage of 50 Shades and the number of women willing to discuss their own arousal, and the equation of their reading material with pornography makes me ponder seriously the lines of demarcation between romance and erotica, erotica and pornography, and – hold on to your hatpins – romance and pornography.
I will be the first to admit that I get really twitchy when someone says romances are pornography, or “porn for women.” It’s a complicated yes/no answer. Yes, some romances are explicit and erotic and they do create arousal. But no, not all romances do, and thus romances cannot be accurately equated with pornography. Romances are not merely porn for women.
But as I was discussing with anyone who would listen to me rant, anyone who labels romance as “Porn” is most often being derogatory, because “porn” is also often declared bad, shameful, and something that ought to cause embarrassment. People say “porn” in the same tone of voice they’d use for the word “smut.” And if women are indicating interest in pornography, that same derision is applied to them. “Nice girls” don’t look at pornography and shouldn’t do so. Neither should adult males who used to be stars of children’s programming (Hi Pee Wee!).
Many of the articles about 50 Shades make much of the idea that women are ashamed to be reading explicit books, and hide their arousing material on digital readers. The furious whisper virality of 50 Shades of Grey and the media coverage adds to the shaming and hiding, because several women went on record saying reading the book turned them on, and that they hid their reading on Kindles or smartphones. Yet again, women are reading erotica (true) and reading it digitally (true) – but are they reading it digitally because of shame and embarrassment?
My reaction to that: yes and no. Yes, women do sometimes hide their erotic reading material on digital readers so that they have privacy while they read. But no, I don’t think all women feel shame about it. Moreover, I don’t think they SHOULD feel shame.
It’s not so much that women automatically feel shame for being aroused. Politically and culturally we are instructed that we should feel shame for our own sexual curiosity and arousal. Take a look at the current political climate of my home country, the US of WTF:
In Texas, Gov. Perry has blocked funding to Planned Parenthood. The decision has left more than 300,000 women without healthcare access such as annual ob/gyn exams.
In Virginia, the governor signed into law legislation that requires transvaginal abdominal ultrasounds prior to an abortion. (Correction via Avery F.) Several states have similiar laws.
Meanwhile, Rush Limbaugh publicly and repeatedly ridiculed Sandra Fluke for testifying before Congress about the need for birth control.
The subtext here: your vagina is not yours, neither is your uterus, and various state governments can dictate what you can and will be doing with it. Women are embarrassed to publicly stand up and defend their own gynecological healthcare needs because of the resulting humiliation and publicity, and we watch as someone who testifies on their behalf gets an assload of asshattery dumped their way.
So is it any wonder that healthy sexual curiosity and arousal are something women might prefer to keep to themselves? God forbid Rush Limbaugh see you buying a book that’s sexually explicit or that congress hear you defending your own right to sexual arousal.
So, no, many women (myself included) are not ashamed of reading explicit material. But yes, some prefer to keep that material and the purchase thereof private – for a variety of reasons, sanctimonious douchbagging asshats among them.
Regardless of whether anyone does or does not want to keep their reading material private, it still begs the question: why is reading explicit material something bad? Why is this a “naughty” thing we ought to be ashamed of? Many of the recent discussion of 50 Shades underscore that negativity: “mommy porn” is one term I cannot WAIT to hear more of. Not.
Most of the Superbowl commercials featured male sexual fantasies. I lost count of how many women in bikinis I saw on television. Male sexual fantasy and sexuality is standard public consumption. But female sexual fantasy and arousal are shameful (i.e. “Mommy’s naughty reader”), or held up for ridicule (“Mommy porn”), or both*.
*ETA: To be clear: I referenced the “Mommy’s naughty reader” comment here not because of who said it, but because in the article, from what had to be a longer interview, that was only quote used after identifying the source. Of everything Tori likely said (confirmed by Mandi below), that was the “salient point” to be made in the article, and thus emphasizes the idea of presumed shame.
Take the attention given to the bookshelf at AllRomance ebooks (they sponsor the bookclub hereabouts) when many of the titles that appeared on the main page were exceptionally explicit and featured covers with a great deal of nudity. I saw more than a few conversations labeling the books as “porn” – e.g. ‘That’s not romance. That’s porn.’ Given that the site name is “AllRomance,” and thus promised romance ebooks, the difference was and is important, especially for a consumer looking for one and buying the other. But can those books and stories be accurately judged by their (salacious) covers? Can the determination of romance/erotica/pornography be made without reading the content? I don’t think so. One person may consider a book erotic romance while another considers it porn. Moreover, labeling something as “porn” instead of “romance” or “erotic romance” is also making a value judgment about the material itself, and that’s equally troublesome.
So what is pornography? Surprise, surprise, it can be difficult to reach an agreed-upon formal definition – I’m sure you’ve heard “I know it when I see it.” Another shocker: my definition of “porn” may differ from yours.
My definition of pornography may not be entirely accurate, now that I’ve done some research. I thought of “pornography” as visual: movies, images, and not text so much. But the definition located at Wikipedia says pornography is “the explicit portrayal of sexual subject matter for the purposes of sexual arousal and erotic satisfaction.”
Not just visual then. But what’s the difference between pornography and erotica? Wiki suggests (and yes, I’m aware it’s not the strongest resource for definitions) that erotica is “the portrayal of sexuality with high-art aspirations, focusing also on feelings and emotions,” which differs from pornography because porn focuses on “the depiction of acts in a sensational manner with the entire focus on the physical act so as to arouse quick intense reactions.”
Some, such as this MIT newspaper article cited in the Wikipedia definition, argue that porn is the depiction of sexual acts, and erotica “seeks to tell a story.” I disagree with that. Some pornographic movies tell a story. Moreover, some depict emotional connections between the characters. The store Good Vibrations used to label the films they sold in their catalog with tags that included, among other things, “chemistry between the actors.” Their website also makes distinctions between films offered. They have a section for “all sex no plot” movies, and movies that are “feature films,” and all of these are housed under the relatively bland term, “Adult films.”
Here’s an example: there is one film, Love’s Passion, that depicts a romance novelist writing a Civil-War-era romance, with scenes that take place in her historical romance in progress and in the present. The reviews mention the characters “expressing love and affection during sex” and the “tender lovemaking.” (NB: I own it. Some of the dialogue is HILARIOUS.) That’s an “adult film,” though not housed in the “all sex no plot” section. It has a story.
So is that erotica or pornography? Arguments could be made for either label. It’s still difficult to define the difference.
The other source cited in the Wiki article says,
“One point of view is this: eroticism is the exploration of the feelings and emotions inspired by sex and sexuality. Pornography however, focuses entirely on the physical act – be this in writing, photography or film. Pornographic images, for instance, tend to dwell entirely on the sex act. They are voyeuristic in nature and only involve the user in the most alienated way – as an onlooker. (emphasis mine)
…The stories in pornographic magazines for instance, all use a string of ‘Buzz words’ to describe various parts of the anatomy and sex acts. These words and descriptions are used for the sole purpose of titillating the reader. What we read is, ‘It felt so good when he did this…’ as opposed to, ‘It felt so good when he did this because…’
Therein lays the difference. A piece of erotic writing will try to explain or explore why something feels so good, or indeed, bad. Pornography does not. One of the key points about eroticism is that it can also uncover the darker side of sexuality. It has the ability to do this in a much more analytical way.”
[Pardon my inner 12 year old snickering at the idea that the difference between erotica and pornography is “Analysis.”]
So let’s use that as the “working” definition of porn vs. erotica. Porn is the depiction of sex in written or visual media, without focus on emotions, cause or effect, while erotica includes the depiction of sexual acts with additional analysis of the reason why that sexual act works. To put it another way, with pornography, you’re not included in the character’s minds or motivations, and with erotica, you are.
Thus erotic romance is the story of a courtship or establishment of a romantic relationship… with a heavy focus or presence of explicit sexual scenes, and may include analysis or insight into emotion and motivation beyond “I wish to have the sex now.” Moreover, with erotic romance and erotica, the sexuality is integral to the development of the story; it’s not just embellishment to the sex scenes.
So erotica and erotic romance have more in common with one another than they do with pornography, gravity-defying sex notwithstanding. That is not surprising.
And I want to make something clear here: Porn is not inherently bad. There is nothing wrong with pornography. I’m not talking about child pornography or situations wherein there is not consent. I’m talking about all the various depictions of consensual sex between adults.
Romance isn’t pornography, but defining the difference does not mean elevating one above the other.
Moreover, some people read explicit romances to be turned on, because the explicitness arouses them physically. Are they employing romance in a manner similar to someone who watches films depicting sexual acts? Are they using romance the way others use porn? Maybe. And it’s their right to do so. But everyone’s arousal is different. Some people might find dryer sheets or women’s shoes or David Beckham in his undergarments similarly arousing, and those things not freely labeled with the word “porn.”
Why is this important at all? Well, aside from the ever-enraging political climate, Paypal thought this distinction was of the utmost importance – or they did until recently when they backed waaaay up on their decision to censor explicit ebooks. Paypal had tried to blame their new policy on credit card issuers as Visa and Mastercard, but when Visa and MC issued statements that they had no policies about the content of ebooks that did not include explicit images, Paypal had to back up.
As long as romances have sexual scenes in them – and as long as those scenes become more and more explicit as has been the trend for awhile now – the equation with pornography will continue. It’s not accurate, and even though there is nothing wrong with the existence of pornography, it’s still used as a demeaning insult.
Romances are not about sex; romances are about courtship. Sometimes there’s sexuality in them. It’s an important difference.
But the way in which romances are used by readers is still subject to demeaning coverage, especially when that coverage includes the frank admission of female readers that the material they are enjoying turns them on. Some women are sexually excited by reading some erotic romances. They are employing those novels, deliberately or accidentally, in a manner conducive to arousal.
It is their choice to do so, and no woman should be shamed for it. But it’s also unfair to presume that anyone who picks up a romance is only after physical arousal and titillation.
I wish things were very different, especially the way folks talk about sexuality in books predominantly written by and read by women. I wish that female arousal wasn’t mocked, laughable, or demeaned. I wish it were as acceptable for a woman to say, “Hot damn, that turned me on,” as it is for a man to say the same. I wish that a desire for reading privacy wasn’t instantly equated with personal shame. And more than anything, I wish it were possible to examine the ways that some romance novels have become more erotic, more explicit, and more determined to arouse without engaging comparisons meant to be insulting and demeaning to the genre as a whole. I wish it were possible to talk about all of these things without it leading to shades of shame or embarrassment.
The Time article by Erika Christakis echoes many of the reactions I’ve seen online, and said out loud:
The buzz about this book seems to be that women, apparently, have unregulated fantasy lives. Big deal. Women have been reading erotic fiction for eons. Is there something “phenomenal” about women enjoying sex, or just the possibility of it? Today’s cultural narrative about female sexuality has no shades of grey: young women are being portrayed as louche sluts who need government interventions to control their badly behaving bodies yet, by age 40, turn into spayed harpies with libidos in the dumpster who would happily sacrifice their sex drives for a man who does laundry.
…we still act shocked that women have grown-up desires. After decades of advocacy and progress, it’s hard to believe the staying power of some of these one-dimensional portraits of women. The hype around 50 Shades of Grey feels more like 50 shades of condescension.
Yesterday I was corresponding with some folks in a publicity department of a publisher, and one of them said, “The fight against mainstream condescension never ends.”
In this case, the condescension isn’t just about a specific book, or a specific genre. The condescension is also focused on female arousal, that females with hornypants are something to be controlled or laughed at, depending on whom you’re asking.
This is amazing to me, especially since so much of the romance genre, going back to old skool Woodiwiss and Rogers, is about the exploration of female arousal and autonomy.
On Good Morning America, if you watched, after the segment on 50 Shades aired, the anchors were trying to playfully get their hands on the book to see what was in it. Why? I do not think it’s merely because there’s sex in the book. Good Morning America is filmed in midtown Manhattan, for God’s sake. If anyone in that room wanted depictions of sex, real or simulated, it was not that far away – a subway stop at the most.
I think the real temptation and curiosity for those people and many, many others was that many women were saying “This is great for my sex life. This is great for my marriage.” Better sex? Who is saying no to that?!
I certainly wouldn’t, though 50 Shades did not crank my engine the way it has for so many other women. But I remain stunned by the fact that yet again we’re repeating the same assumptions, and answering with the same assertions. We cannot examine female arousal without demeaning condescension. And that is a shame. I wish it were possible to speak candidly about what books turned women on, and why. It would be fascinating to see what those books have in common, and why some work and some don’t.
So one more time, with feeling:
Romance is not porn for women.
Porn is porn for women.
Women have active sex lives and sexual desires.
All of these things are ok.
I am the one who called their e reader-“mommy’s naughty reader. “Satan’s Tool” was taken and “mommy has questionable books on this reader that are not appropriate for you to read” doesn’t quite roll of the tongue as well. There is a very funny story behind it, but it doesn’t matter because I’m not ashamed to call it that. I’m not ashamed I read erotics. I don’t hide my love of them but I’m also not ashamed that sometimes I blush and like to keep quiet about what I read. That article took much out of context about what I said and spinned it for a more titillating article. What I spoke about in the interview was that everything could be deemed erotic if the definition of erotic was stringently applied. That the term was misleading and archaic. AI talked about how women need not feel embarrassed for wanting to read about love, hot men, and sexual escapades.
It seems a bit hypocritical that you write an article about mis judging people and a genre all the while judging me on a single sentence.
WSJ is dumb for so, so many reasons. Thank you for so articulating a few of them. You are my new favorite person.
Thank you for a well thought out and well written post on this subject. All the other issues about Fifty Shades aside, it has brought to light the infuriating double standard of women’s sexuality. We are constantly being bombarded in all forms of media by male sexual fantasy images, because it’s a proven fact sex sells. Well, guess what? It sells for women, too, as this recent issue proves. I read and write romances for that emotional high and low, the feeling, the connection to the characters and the sensation of being transported into another world for a little while. And when I want something more intense, more sexual, I happily turn to erotica. It pisses me off that anyone would try to make me feel guilty for either.
Very good article! I’m a fan of both erotica and pornography (whatever the distinction is—a whole lot of overlap), and I’m always amazed and saddened how celebration of sexuality is so demonized. It’s as if fantasizing about anything else is fine, but sex somehow becomes horrible to enjoy, when in reality it’s both natural and damn pleasurable!
Well written and well thought out.
I have this “yes-no” moment agreeing with you. I see romances, maybe not the Christian based ones, as books that focus on the sensuality and sexuality of the characters. The whole build-up of the courtship is a physical release (all puns intended!).
At least that’s how I have always looked at those books in the romance section. It’s really the way I perceive them, from the first romance I picked up in my teen years to now. I see YA novels (the current crop) as more focused on courtship.
I think the important thing about the eReader shouldn’t be “SHAME ON YOUR EYEBALLS AND BRAIN!” pushing but more “Hey, I could buy this on my eReader and not have to look at that HORRID COVER DEAR GOD WHAT IS WRONG WITH HER HIP????!?!!?!?!” or “I could buy this book and be forced to look at the freaky, stupid looking naked people on the front, wait while it’s shipped to me, pay extra for the shipping AND the hard copy, run out of room on my bookshelf, have to dust the damn things… wait why am I buying this? NEVER MIND!” mentality.
The eReader made ALL books more available. To push romance as porn is far far far more sensational. That 50 Shades of Shit book just gives them a platform. Remember the news media wants sensation not honesty. They don’t want to REALLY know that maybe reading a romance novel puts me more mentally in the mood to have some quality time with the Mr. after a long day of wiping baby butts, cleaning up, fighting the dog, raking leaves, and doing things that DO NOT IN ANY WAY MAKE ME FEEL LIKE A WOMAN. But more like a step stool for everyone’s needs. They DO NOT want to hear that. Because it punches so many holes in the preconceived ideas of how people behave and isn’t so exciting.
Long and short: Who cares what they say? If it flicks the bic and fills the twinky and you are happy? Nothing of what the talking heads matters.
THIS THIS THIS. Thank you, Sarah, for this post. I am a recovering genre snob, and it pains me when I read and see and hear how ignorant people are of what romances and erotica are all about, because I’ve been there. I’ve been one of them. (As I said, I’ve recovered.)
But communication really is the answer. It’s how I was converted, honestly. Because my college roommates cared enough to sit me down and say, in well meaning ways, look give this a chance, it’s not what you think, it’s not what you’ve heard. (Point of reference: My conversion initially started with sci-fi. More specifically, they started with Buffy.) It deserves a chance because it is awesome, and it has all of these things that you already like, so why not, one chance? See if it sucks. And because they were awesome, non crazy people, I listened and I tried and I have never been the same, thank god.
I liken it to everything else: there is a lot of crap entertainment out there. There are more bad movies than great ones, more self-indulgent Literature than awe-inspiring prose, and more of crappy songs that sound the same than something unique and beautiful. Doesn’t mean they don’t have their place and time. I don’t need all my entertainment to be perfect. But it makes finding the best stuff even more awesome.
For whatever reason, romance always gets held to the lowest common denominator. It’s seen always at its worst, because its best always gets co-opted by another genre. I don’t know what the solution is to that one other than widespread paradigm shift, but you’d think we’d be past all this by now.
Oh, no. Crap. I was not judging you at all, and I apologize that it seemed that I was. I was judging the term isolated for the article, not you for using it. But looking at the paragraph, it seems that way, and I apologize.
I agree with pretty much all you’ve said, and I read both erotica and romance. But one thing I should point out that one of the other commenters said is that erotica is not necessarily romance with the sex ramped up. It’s true that most erotica has typical romance elements, including the very necessary HEA element, but I’m sure there are plenty of erotica short stories featuring one-night stands or some other aspect between the characters that brings them together sexually, but is not a romance.
But regardless, I don’t think women should have to be ashamed for reading any of these, OR for watching porn. Whatever happened to equality of the sexes?
That’s okay. I’m not happy about the way the article played out nor the whole overblown reaction to *gasp* women read books with *gasp* sex in them. It’s also ridiculous that we are forced to defend ourselves for enjoying this genre. I read what I want and everyone can bugger off. 🙂
Sarah, thank you for this website, it always gives me a lift when I read your posts and the comments. Thank, too, for sharing your thoughts on this topic. Each person has to determine what is good (or not) for them and as sexual beings why shouldn’t women use whatever helps us. Several years ago, my libido took a nosedive when I went through menopause. It was hard on me and on my hubby of 35 years and I couldn’t take HRT. When it started to come back, you know what really helped it along? Yep…Romance novels, and we’re both very grateful I discovered authors like Nora, and others, who write such great stories. For me, I need the emotional and physical tension of the characters and the women have to strong, not perfect, but with flaws and quirks, like all of us. The same with the men. And I love the sex…there, I said it. Whew!! And until there is a little blue pill for women to help things along, then why not read romance or erotica, or whatever, if it helps.
I feel very badly that you thought I was judging you. I think you’re awesome. The hyperventilation of women reading books with sexual content is ridiculous, as is the use of three words of your interview. I am sorry.
You said hornypants! Tittering here.
Seriously, I’m going to go write something hot about sex. This is inspiring. I just may title my next book 50 Orgasms Out Loud.
Shame. Sex. Women. Been there.
“…sanctimonious douchbagging asshats…” Sigh. I just LOVE how you can turn a phrase SB Sarah! Seriously, I so enjoyed this post and all of the comments. The SBTB community is totally cool and I love to start my day here with a hot cup ‘o joe and a chuckle or a good think.
Oh, and “hornypants” almost made me spew coffee. Beats the crap out of reading WSJ!
The term “Mommy Porn” is so condescendingly awful that my hate knows no bounds. First off, porn for men isn’t called “Daddy Porn.” Why not? Because men are teh sexy and Dad (and Mom) are non-sexual term. So porn that is made for men is made for teh menz! Whereas this 50 Shades and stuff like it? Must be under-sexed moms who need some lift to their sad sex lives and so resort to teh dirty books.
So the term neuters and shames at the same time. Oh so lovely.
I cannot hate it enough.
Great post!
Well said. Public figures have to stop pointing to women and saying enjoying sex is wrong for you. Especially since in private all men, including public figures, claim to want to have sex with a “hot” woman. I have yet to meet a man who would turn away a woman who wanted sex!! But to be completely fair, since porn is okay, the people who write it should own up and accept it. Who cares if what they write is porn or erotica? Splitting hairs perhaps. I don’t care what someone else wants to read as long as it is between consenting adults. And no one else should either. Good post.
Wow, if real women didn’t read erotica – real men wouldn’t be getting laid. It would be up to the man in the drawer to see to her closeted needs. In my opinion someone needs to talk to the real wives.
Example: “Hey, Mrs. Dr. Drew, what kind of reading floats your boat in the sex department so you can sail that stuck-up, unmitigated ass you’re married to? Inquiring minds want to know.” Personally, I was onboard with (Hey, I’m going with the nautical theme all the way with this analogy, folks) getting Dr. Drip a Domme who’d definitely make him question his stance on his “BDSM equals abused woman” clap-trap theory.
*sigh*
Or, you know, women could put the male participation on this subject aside, because who gives a rat’s ass about their condescending misconceptions on the subject, and us girls could woman-up and own our rights as a collective whole, instead of drowning in the fractured spill-over that history keeps re-pouring for us…and we keep swallowing up.
Great post, Sarah.
Chris, have you ever read a romance novel? Yes, some may have very purple prose, but most do not. Check out Nora Roberts, Loretta Chase, or Jennifer Crusie, who all write amazing stories without the purpleness a lot of people associate with romance novels.
I don’t think we should put male participation on this subject aside for many reasons – the main one being that some of the truly misguided men use those misconceptions to make policy against us.
There are men raising daughters, men who are loving husbands and partners, and men who care about women getting a fair shake. Anyone who brings a thoughful, non-judgemental opinion is welcome at my table is as long as they don’t try to force those opinions on anyone else. And if you bring a sense of humor so much the better!
Okay, I will be the first to admit I read BDSM novels. Does that make me a sexual freak or deviant? Maybe…..but I’m not ashamed of it. I’m a grown woman married for many years and it works for us. I also read erotica, paranormal erotica, paranormal romance and just about any other “dirty book” that comes my way. I’m a sexual person underneath this “spayed harpie” facade (love that term).
And I hate the phrase “Mommy Porn”. Its erotica, romance, whatever. And it is not all written well. Some is really, really bad. And some is really good.
I credit erotica novels (‘spank me please!’ novels) for spicy up my marriage. I started reading them about three years ago and wow, the ideas that come out of those books. Even though I’m almost done with my degree in English Lit.(my second degree I have a geology one), these are my favorite. I usually go to class with my text book, reading some 17th century European text while reading something like “Training Amy” on my Kindle. Oh yeah.
I have said before that i have never read 50 Shades of Grey and that I do not plan on reading it. The fact that this book is still everywhere is ridiculous. People act as if women have never read erotica before. I think the reason it has been blown so out of proportion is because it is harder to ban books today. In the past, anything that the conservatives deemed too hot was shelved and people were told that it was no good for them. (Interestingly, it is always books like Lady Chatterly’s Lover that get banned but not books like the Catcher in the Rye, which seems to have an odd effect on psychopaths and also happens to be required high school reading in many places.) However, this doesn’t really fly today (thank god), so instead of saying you can’t read this, people point fingers saying “You read THAT? It’s SMUT. It’s PORN FOR WOMEN. MOMMY PORN.” They want to make us feel bad about our reading habits in the hopes that we’ll voluntarily “ban” them because if there isn’t a demand for THOSE BOOKS then the supply of them will go down and we’ll be left with depressing books.
I honestly feel that real men don’t care what women read. It is the ones that are uncomfortable with any kind of sexuality that isn’t what they consider normal that feel they have the right to decide for us what is good and what is bad. These are also the same men that think women are defined only by the fact that they can have children, and the fact that so many of this type of man are the ones that hold the power in the country is frankly terrifying because they can make it impossible for us to make our own decisions about our bodies—whether that means aborting an unwanted or dangerous pregnancy or avoiding pregnancy as much as possible through contraceptive means. No one has the right to tell me what I can and cannot do with my body and I am not going to be quiet until everyone understands this.
I’m incredibly heartened. For my personal porn needs I usually turn to kink.com, and since I’m a mommy I’ve been assuming that was all “mommy porn”. But since so much of the BDSM dynamic is about emotions and the psychology of sexuality, I can now refer to all those Mark Davis videos as “erotica”! WINNING. /sarcasm
The “mommy porn” thing makes me all rage-face, because honestly. If I “hide” my erotic romance (or any other romance novel I might be reading that has titillation in it, whether emotional or physical) it’s only because I have kids who are too young to be reading explicit material like that. Not because I’m embarrassed about it. It’s the same reason I usually have my computer screen facing away from the room. But it’s also because I don’t always want to have to be aware, as I’m reading a book, that I’m engaging in some sort of act of rebellion, daring people to react to the cover. If e-readers are enabling more women to read stuff they find satisfying – on whatever level – without having to put up with shock, scorn, or other condescending bullshit, then I say good for e-readers. The privacy is a feature, not a bug. If anybody DOES engage me in the “romance is porn for women” thing, I’ll engage – I’ve had that discussion many a time. But please don’t interrupt my reading to make me do that.
One of the most eye-opening experiences I ever had about my own subconscious attitudes on open discussions of sexuality came when I first attended a conference of erotic romance writers. A whole hotel full of women around my age, all of whom spend a great deal of time thinking and writing about relationships that include sex. Lots and lots of sex, in all its varying messy, wonderful permutations. It was truly liberating, because all the filters fell off. And until that happened I really didn’t realize how many filters there had been, because I consider myself pretty freakin’ open-minded about this stuff and make no deliberate effort to hide that. I think everybody should be exposed to that sort of uncensored, freewheeling discussion, so they can see that in fact the world does not come to an end when women talk out loud about sex.
Here here! I’m a “mommy” and I hope I’m a good one (my daughter thinks so so thats good). Once a baby is born, we don’t lose our need for sex and affection. We aren’t all soccer moms. I’m a woman and I’m sexual. We aren’t all June Cleaver. I don’t drive a minivan. I drive a small car and a really big obnoxious redneck truck courtesy of my husband (I love driving that to my daughter’s ballet class as the other minivan and sedan moms are horrified). So I’m not going to be “vanilla” in my reading either. I read news magazines, National Geographic and yes, I read my erotica, BDSM, paranormal, menage novels. I’m into that and I’m not ashamed. And *gasp* sometimes I watch porn.
With all of this talk of erotica, porn, and romance, I think what these journalists aren’t talking about is what drives the derision of the romance genre; the commercial success of romance versus other types of fiction. I highly doubt that what has most people up in arms is the idea that a mother is sitting somewhere all worked up and flushed. They are angry because she bought Nora Roberts instead of the next big literary giant who belongs in the canon of great American fiction. I absolutely agree with Sarah that there are some disturbing social myths about female sexuality and personal agency that have yet to be debunked—I am ill over the idea that Dr. Drew thinks women are out looking for their personal Christian Grey—but I do think that the women buying the novels of other women in droves has a lot to do with it. If this were a male dominated genre, we’d be having completely different conversations about what the wimmens were taking away from these kinds of books. I’m not sure some of the critics of romance even realize their argument against the genre is more Victorian and antiquated than any historical romance.
I still think that separating romance and porn is buying in to the devaluing of porn specifically and sexuality in general. It’s a high art/low art thing, creating barriers where they need not be. Ingres, Velazquez, Rubens, Bernini, a zillion others – they all managed to make art pornography and pornography art. Saying it isn’t pornographic because it’s good is just baffling, like saying that romance novels are badly written, so if it’s well written it’s not a romance novel but a *real* novel. Romance, specifically courtship, is a turn on for many people, even if there is no explicit sex. It seems many people find it more satisfying if there isn’t explicit sex, just the build up. There are plenty of others that want it wildly explicit and with all kinds of kinks. Probably most of us enjoy differing but wide ranges of the whole gamut.
My working definition of porn is that it’s meant to make you feel like having sex. I’m not saying that there is no difference between getting off and making love, and if people want to call one erotica and another romance, or one porn and the other ideologically approved procreation, or however they choose to parse things, and these labels help people find more specifically what they’re looking for, great. But I think the labels are employed to separate what is allowable sexually from what is not, and that is not so great.
If we agree that romance novels are about exploring fantasies, exploring sexuality, and more often exploring women’s sexuality, and women’s fantasies, why is it such a leap to say that it’s women’s porn? My problem with the label isn’t the porn half, it’s the women half, as if men wouldn’t or shouldn’t also enjoy them.
Romance novels aren’t shameful. Neither is porn. Of course when people call romance porn they are trying to denigrate it, but it only works if you agree that porn is somehow lesser.
“Romance is not porn for women.
Porn is porn for women.”
Longish? I couldn’t tell. I got distracted by the picture of a near nude David Beckham. Would he be considered porn for women?
I think what’s most interesting about the 50 Shades phenomenon is not that it’s about sex, but that it’s about kinky sex. And I think that’s what’s causing the “giggling behind the hands” reaction. I write erotic BDSM romance (http://www.kasialexander.com), and I find it fascinating that the people who buy erotic romance like a little kinkiness in their stories, even though they aren’t interested in doing it in real life. It’s most likely related to the old “bodice-rippers”—fantasy that verges on slightly dangerous, almost non-consensual sex. We like danger in most of our other kinds of entertainment (movies, video games, adventure stories), so why not in our love stories?
I think there are 2 ways most men (at least the ones I know) get romance novels the wrong way. one is they tell me “romance novels are porn for women in book-caliber”. the other one is that they think romance is something for old inhibet grandmothers… if I explain it to the 2nd species that there IS something like sex described in romance novels, they switch to species one and ask me if I would be alright with it if a man would have a whole bookshelf full of porn…
if for example Ken Follet writes about sex in his books it’s okay, because they are historical books and he is a famous author. if we watch movies about relationships and there are sex scenes then it’s okay as well.
But if women read books about relationships – and we ain’t 12 anymore, we know grown ups have a sexuality, then its porn and bad. I won’t ever get it…
This was all so much easier when I was the only one controlling my body and my reading tastes…
Great post, as a Brit living in the U.S. I always scratch my head at the interesting dynamic here about sex/shame. I blame those Puritans we exported to you.
Thanks for this post Sarah. On a somewhat related note, I can only hope that the condescension and attacks against women’s sexuality and reproductive health rights by the media and some politicians is going to wake us from our complacency (to a lesser extent it’s happening here in Canada as well, but it doesn’t seem to be gaining as much traction as in the U.S. … yet). I am just livid that so-called “experts” dare to tell me that my reading choices are “unhealthy” – that’s the kind of BS that women had to put up with 50, 100 years ago. Women fought so hard and for so long to be in control of their own sexuality and bodies and what is happending now should be galvanizing us to action to prevent this (and our other basic rights) from being taken away.
Yeah, listen. I’ll fish that tea out of the harbor if we can undo that Puritan thing. Deal?
The original bill, however, DID require transvaginal. It was only after reports surfaced that people as insensitive as those pushing this bill realized they maybe, possible, had come close to perhaps venturing too far. (I lived in Virginia for 20 years and have lived in neighboring Maryland for 10; for me this is alas local news.)
Really good article. It all seems a bit baffling to me, and I wonder how much of the criticism or shock is exaggerated by the pundits out of personal embarrassment, just so absolutely nobody thinks someone like ME, a sensible upstanding pillar of the community would ever enjoy something like THAT! Haha, ridiculous….
Loved the post. Tired of hypocrites. Plenty of explicit sex in mystery novels/thrillers and no one calls them porn.
“I wish it were possible to speak candidly about what books turned women on, and why. It would be fascinating to see what those books have in common, and why some work and some don’t.”
The book A Billion Wicked Thoughts did a fairly good job, I thought. They used internet search results as their data, among other things, and they came up with some interesting thoughts on all kinds of sexual expression, male and female.
As a minivan driving mom with kids in dance class, when we comment on an article about not shaming women for having wildly varied tastes in reading material, can we also not shame and stereotype each other for driving minivans or having kids who play soccer? What do you think, can we do that?
Not sexual expression. (grrr) I meant, sexualized input/entertainment.
I agree with your definition of porn as depiction of sex for the purpose of sexual arousal and/or satisfaction, but I think of erotica as a depiction of sex with a purpose other than or in addition to sexual arousal. All erotica is not romance. Some of it can be pretty gruesome. I recall reading a short story describing a woman watching a hanging and getting all worked up. Erotic? Yup. Romantic? Hells no!
I have to say though, that there is more than shame at work when women, or men for that matter, don’t choose to share sex-related reading material, information or interests. I suspect that many people still have the old-fashioned notion that sex should be private, and the reason is not necessarily shame but courtesy. Because sexual openness still makes a lot of people (myself included) extremely uncomfortable for whatever reason, taking a reserved approach to sexuality is just considerate in certain circles.
I shamelessly love bawdy humor, but dead serious blow by blow (heh!) descriptions of the act do make me seriously uncomfortable. I like SmartBitches way more that some of the romance that the site celebrates. I have no problem reading the romances I do like in public, but I’m pretty much hardened to condescension from others, whether it’s a response to my tastes in entertainment, my sense of humor, or my weight. Maybe this makes me something of a hypocrite because I have an extremely bifurcated attitude toward public depictions of sex.
At times I am just appalled by the blatant sexualization of our culture. It bothers me that kids are exposed to images and information that they aren’t ready for. I don’t think the solution is censorship, but I am troubled to perceive a problem that can only be solved by instituting a different problem. I guess my point is that while I am enraged by the tactics of Limbaugh, Paypal, Komen, and various politicians who still wage war on women, I will always feel a little ambiguous about unfettered sexual openness and a little uncomfortable with the 50,000 shades of gray that frame it.
After reading your article, all I can say is one thing – AWESOME. Thank you for making those distinctions. (So I had more than one word…)