Smart Bitches, Trashy Books

1. 

   December Quinn/Stacia Kane said on 05.14.08 at 03:53 PM • [link]

   I unfortunately won’t put f/f in my books anymore, because having it there means the sales numbers for that title drop. It’s a noticeable difference.

   I also had a reviewer once call one of my extremely brief—barely a passing mention, really—f/f moments “nauseating”. She gave the book itself a terrible review and mentioned that was one of the reasons. (And for the record, she had every right to her opinion etc. etc. etc., I’m not saying she was wrong for it or complaining, I’m just saying since you asked. Also for the record, it was nothing more than a one-paragraph scene of vibrator use, not fisting or anything.)

2. 

   rebyj said on 05.14.08 at 03:53 PM • [link]

   “someONE” was offended? What kind of business is she running that she rushes to apologize because of one or even a few complaints?

   Is there bias? Evidently so! There shouldn’t be in this day and age though.

   Look at the tv , The L Word is on Showtime (BIG FAN!), LOGO is succeeding well, the gay and lesbian community has a voice now unlike any other time in history. For this online store to take the moral high road over lesbian erotica when they had no problem selling other types of erotica is blatantly hypocritical.

   Let them go to PG13, they’ll change their minds when their sales start to go south. It’s customers should be vigilant in emailing the owner on any books that pass the PG13 criteria. If they’re going all Falwell then someone needs to monitor them and make sure they don’t sell ANYTHING offensive.

   Maybe their 13 and under audience spend more money there than one would think? lol

   I hope your book does well. Beautiful cover on it!

   
   (sorry for my grammatical errors, I couldn’t remember what the possessive of “IT” is. In my defense I’ve been out of school for 100 years.)

3. 

   Darlene Marshall said on 05.14.08 at 04:07 PM • [link]

   I’m confused (and apparently, very naive).  Are the same people who are willing to read m/m erotica objecting to f/f erotica?  Why would one be less objectionable or more acceptable than the other?

4. 

   Esri Rose said on 05.14.08 at 04:19 PM • [link]

   My impression was that people were positively blase’ about lesbian love. One of Jennie Crusie’s books had a f/f kiss, for crying out loud, though it didn’t go anywhere, and it’s gotten to be a pretty regular thing on cable TV shows of every stripe

   Also, although my local independent bookstore doesn’t have a romance section, they do have an erotica section, and it is probably 50% lesbian erotica.

   So yes, color me confused, too.

5. 

   Cat Marsters said on 05.14.08 at 04:23 PM • [link]

   This topic comes up occasionally on my author loops.  Several authors I know would love to write a f/f story, but the publishers (of erotic romance) always repeat that it doesn’t sell.  It’s barely worth the author’s time, let alone the editor, cover artist, etc etc.

   Why was this, we asked last time.  When a reasonable proportion of authors wanted to write—and by extension, read—it, why not the general readership?  The thing is that m/m erotica sells really well, and to a readership that’s largely female—despite received wisdom and reader feedback suggesting women like to read books where they can put themselves in the heroine’s place.  Clearly, this can’t be the case for a m/m book.

   The only conclusion we could come to was that readers didn’t want to read about women having sex with each other, because if they enjoyed reading about it, that might men they’d enjoy doing it, and that might make them lesbians.  It’s okay to read about gay men, because there’s a distance factor, and besides, straight women are allowed to fantasise about men, whether said men are straight or gay.

   Whether that conclusion was right or not we didn’t know.  Maybe as erotica authors we just have fewer boundaries to worry about.  The bottom line was—well, the bottom line.  If readers won’t buy it, publishers won’t publish it.  Which does sort of prevent it ever becoming mainstream.

   I’ve written f/f scenes in a couple of books (although not as the main focus).  A reviewer on one book made a point of warning readers about it, as if it was a habit to turn people’s stomachs, like admiring Hitler or dissecting live puppies.  Reader feedback on the idea of a f/f book has brought up such reactions as “It makes me feel sick.”

   But you know what homophobia really says about you, right?

6. 

   Cat Marsters said on 05.14.08 at 04:26 PM • [link]

   I’m confused (and apparently, very naive).  Are the same people who are willing to read m/m erotica objecting to f/f erotica?

   Yes.  Yes they are.

7. 

   Robini said on 05.14.08 at 04:30 PM • [link]

   @ Darelene

   Has this company released any M/M fiction? It’s not clear from the list of titles I see, and I’m not *quite* gutsy enough to go surfing their webpage at my all-internet-traffic-is-monitored workplace ;-) The fact that they mention gay erotica that is *forthcoming* (as opposed to stuff that is already out there) makes me think that maybe the fact that it’s chick on chick is incidental, and the real issue is that it’s the author/publisher’s first same-sex release.

   Can anybody access the website and verify this?

8. 

   Victoria Janssen said on 05.14.08 at 04:39 PM • [link]

   I am sad to say this doesn’t surprise me.  LGBT is shelved in its own “ghetto” in most bookstores; given that AA books are generally shelved separately as well, PURPLE PANTIES had two strikes against it.

   I’ve published quite a number of lesbian erotica stories (as Elspeth Potter), and in all but one store, those anthologies were shelved with the GLBT material or in a separate section of the erotica books.  (The exception, a college bookstore, had the erotic anthos shelved indiscriminately among the other lit anthos.)  In my experience, and I live in a large city, readings and those sorts of events take place only at GLBT or feminist bookstores, or at non-bookstore events specifically marketed as erotica readings.  I remember once, maybe ten years ago, a joint reading of BEST GAY and BEST LESBIAN EROTICA in my local Borders, and that’s it.  I’d like to know if other peoples’ experiences vary.

   Here’s hoping the extra publicity gives PURPLE PANTIES lots of sales!  I remember the call for submissions; it sounded like a good idea, and I was bummed to be on deadline and unable to submit.

9. 

   snarkhunter said on 05.14.08 at 04:43 PM • [link]

   Coming at this from a fandom perspective, I can tell you that the same people who adore m/m slash fic object deeply to f/f and (often) to m/f. One of the underlying reasons is this pervasive sense that “girl parts are icky.”

   And online, fic-centered fandom is something like 90% female.

   I am not saying that’s entirely the case here, though I am sure that it’s part of it. We are not taught to love our bodies as beautiful. Society perpetuates ideas of women’s bodies as unclean, icky, whatever. (Well, not women’s bodies. That’s not true. I mean women’s *genitals*.) So there’s a certain internalized misogyny that I think we’re not even aware of.

   And then there’s the fact that if you’re a straight woman, what’s hotter than a nekkid man? TWO nekkid men! I think it’s honestly the exact same thing as straight men’s fascination with lesbians. This is much less sinister than the other explanation, but I think both are true.

10. 

    Termagant 2 said on 05.14.08 at 04:45 PM • [link]

    I don’t see any more problem with f/f than with m/m.  I personally won’t buy or read either form, since it’s just not my thing. I suppose that means I have hangups. That’s fine. I don’t jam my preferences down anyone’s teeth, and I won’t allow you to jam yours down mine.

    How come, though, one person’s preferences are fine-and-dandy, and mine are hangups? Just curious.

11. 

    Kerry said on 05.14.08 at 04:51 PM • [link]

    When I worked in the library in the 95% AA city, we could not keep Zane and the street lit on the shelf—it was constantly checked out/vanishing, and rather indiscriminately read. I think Zane’s right on the money when she alludes to the idea that it’s not the style but the f/f content and homophobia that it causing the fuss. And that she can write heterosexual erotica and no one would bat an eye.

12. 

    Erastes said on 05.14.08 at 04:51 PM • [link]

    This doesn’t surprise me, it’s been the story (in my case for m/m) since I started to write.

    It doesn’t sell, there’s no market, no-one’s interested in it, it can’t be put into shops, RWA find it offensive, You name it, I’ve heard the excuses.

    I was hoping that things were changing, too. *makes face*

13. 

    BevQB said on 05.14.08 at 05:01 PM • [link]

    There is a HUGE difference between objecting to f/f fiction and just not being interested in it. I don’t understand the former, if there no objections to m/m stories, it boggles my mind that a cry would be raised objecting to f/f stories.

    I fall squarely in the latter category- f/f just doesn’t interest me.  And no, I’m not afraid that, as has been commented on previously, I will discover I’m a lesbian. I can appreciate looking at a beautiful woman, but in much the same way that I can appreciate a beautiful horse, or a mountain, or a sunset. Therefore I cannot relate to the attraction between the characters in a f/f story because I am not attracted to either of them.

    However, since I am attracted to men, I can easily empathize with the attraction between the characters in a m/m story.  And, as Snarkhunter said, it’s two nekkid men… what’s NOT to be attracted to?

14. 

    Ri L. said on 05.14.08 at 05:19 PM • [link]

    I’m a straight woman, and I have to say I find f/f boring.  I also have no idea what the fuss is over m/m.  I can’t stand slash, but I think my real gripe with it is slash fanfic, because of its forcible aspect: quite often characters who are not gay are turned gay solely for the purposes of the author’s amusement.  I take issue with that because it’s not who they are and the author is appropriating someone else’s (even a fictional someone) sexuality for their purposes.  Fic written about a gay character getting it on with a member of the opposite sex makes me feel the same way.  (I’m looking at you, Nuriko.  You’re not in love with Miaka.  You’re gay as hell.)

    But it’s anger over that appropriation of sexuality that alternately stems from and fuels my frothing at the mouth about stuff like this.  Someone else’s sexuality, simply put, is not yours, and as such you have no right to control it, limit it, or censor it in any way.  Where does this country get off, I wonder, squicking so hard about anybody’s harmless, personal sexual indulgence and expression?

15. 

    phadem said on 05.14.08 at 05:20 PM • [link]

    Termagant 2, your reading preferences are not hangups at all, and if someone you know/spoke to or something you read somewhere suggests that they are so, that’s wrong. Your preferences are your own and it doesn’t suggest or insinuate a hangup at all.

    I don’t read m/m or f/f either. It’s nothing to do with disgust, not at all. It’s about disinterest; it’s not what floats my boat when it comes to reading (I do indulge in some m/f/m though). Yes, I’m probably a typical gal in that I find the idea of m/m more on the hot, kinky side, and I’ve even found some women to be extremely attractive, but the latter more in the sense of admiration, not attraction. Bottom line is, just because it’s a more controversial subject matter, if you don’t read it, it does not mean you or anyone else naturally has a “hangup” on said subject matter. Unless a person comes out and says so, it’s asinine for anyone to jump to that conclusion.

    My first reaction to Zane’s letter was one of extreme annoyance. So a few complain of being offended and once again the rush to action is to censor/discriminate in some way the purveyor of the “questionable” material? What a freaking joke! This country is just way too crazy in the sense that a few whiners complaining get more respect and acknowledgment than the general concept of having enough common sense to realize we’re not all the center of the universe and everyone is entitled to that opinion. So OK, some didn’t like the sound of Zane’s f/f story, that’s understandable because we’re all different. No big deal. Others will like it. It comes, it goes. Move on, say your piece and move on. One-sided opinions shouldn’t be the ending, deciding factor in something like this.

    But holy crap, to ban all erotic books on this online mag as a result of a few not liking f/f? That’s just astounding to me. I’m wondering what the thoughts of the magazine employee were at the time.

    Even though I don’t read f/f and probably never will (snort, NO, I’m not afraid there’s some inner lesbian just waiting to jump out. Now THAT is a joke), I hope Zane’s book does well, and from the tone of the letter, it seems it is.

16. 

    Robin said on 05.14.08 at 05:55 PM • [link]

    I definitely think part of this is the phallocentrism of sexual fantasy books sold to women—even in erotica, in other words, there must be at least one “hero.” 

    BUT, I also don’t completely trust that publishers have the accurate pulse on reader desires, especially when you think that in print publishing they are trying to predict a year or two out.  Although if they’ve already got a market that’s growing and selling like crazy (I had to correct that from “swelling” lol), like m/m, I can see where they would have no interest in expending some effort to grow an f/f market, as well.  Whenever I hear “readers don’t want that,” I always translate that into “publishers are making plenty of money the way things are,” instead.

17. 

    Angela Toscano said on 05.14.08 at 05:57 PM • [link]

    We are not taught to love our bodies as beautiful. Society perpetuates ideas of women’s bodies as unclean, icky, whatever. (Well, not women’s bodies. That’s not true. I mean women’s *genitals*.) So there’s a certain internalized misogyny that I think we’re not even aware of.

    Thank you, Snarkhunter. That’s just what I was thinking. I’ve been thinking alot about how insidious misogyny is and it is issues like this that remind me how much it affects us, even when we think it doesn’t.

18. 

    Charlene said on 05.14.08 at 06:00 PM • [link]

    The sad part is that there are religious groups out there who marshal volunteers to write complaining letters by the hundreds when books like this are published. Generally, none of those writing the complaining letters have even seen one of these books before; they just want to make sure this type of book is kept off the shelves, so nobody can have access to it.

    It’s common enough, and smaller booksellers and reviewers are far more likely to be influenced because they haven’t been subjected to this form of censorship before. Larger corporations like amazon and Chapters have seen it before, and generally know enough to ignore it.

19. 

    SonomaLass said on 05.14.08 at 06:04 PM • [link]

    I *think* (and I’m sure I’ll hear if I’m wrong), that when some commenters refer to “hang-ups” about f/f, or suggest that fearing it (homophobia) may suggest fearing that you actually would like it (teh horrors!), they don’t mean Termagent 2, phadem or Ri L.  There’s nothing wrong with reading what you like and avoiding what doesn’t do it for you, and I don’t think anyone here means to suggest otherwise.

    Where we get into hang-ups and homophobia, IMO, is where people seem determined to enforce their reading preferences on others (which I’m not hearing from anyone in this thread, but which is exactly what Zane seems to be facing).  It’s the judgmental attitude that says a book is bad because it has f/f sex in it, while straight sex is okay.  I think when it is some kind of moral judgment that results in real or attempted censorship, a line has definitely been crossed.  Is that sad?  Hell yeah.  Surprising?  Not in the good ol’ US of A, I’m afraid—especially not in some parts of it.

    My sense, as a reader and an observer rather than a writer, is that the weird area here is in the industry, where m/m is okay but f/f isn’t.  That certainly could be homophobia, if the people making the judgments are female.  Mostly it gets presented as a market perception: “it doesn’t sell; female readers (the overwhelming demographic) don’t buy it.”  That market perception could certainly lead to a publisher, or a bookseller, avoiding f/f books and it could lead a reviewer to extend her personal distaste for f/f erotica to a “warning” in a review (“I don’t like it personally, my perception of the market is that most readers don’t like it, so I will warn them it is there”).  But avoiding publishing it or labeling it as “icky” (as a general judgment, rather than a “not to my taste, could be yours” kind of way) could also be lesbian-specific homophobia, too—humans are really good at justifying biased behavior with other motivations.

    Certainly there’s a “last frontier” feel about this—mainstream books have become more steamy, m/m has gone from taboo to hot taboo, and it isn’t hard to find bondage, slash, whatever in a lot of bookstores.  Is f/f the next big thing?  Will publishers be slow to realize that, but eventually jump on the bandwagon?  Is there no market for f/f because one hasn’t been allowed to develop?  More questions than answers.

    Me, I like a good romance regardless of the race, gender, and sometimes even species of the participants!  It’s an emotional thing, more than a sexual one, to the extent that I can separate the two.  I just tend to like longer story arcs and complicated relationships, so I don’t usually buy short fiction anthologies.  I celebrate the diversity of what entertains and excites my fellow beings, and hope that changing technology will continue to make a wider variety of books available (ebooks, self-pubs, the lot).  Then if f/f sells, the bandwagon will start up, I’m sure.  Meanwhile, I’m going to be looking for some f/f romance, preferably with strong plot elements and a relationship that really has time to develop.  Suggestions??

20. 

    Jill Sorenson said on 05.14.08 at 06:10 PM • [link]

    I haven’t read any m/m or f/f, at least not in the erotic romance category, but I think I prefer f/f. 

    I wrote a historical romance with an f/f subplot and was told to cut it before submitting to editors.  The book still didn’t sell, probably for other reasons (like, historical accuracy, cringe).
    
    Although I really don’t understand the fascination for m/m, neither do I get why anyone would be disgusted by f/f.  Girl parts are “icky”?  Um, even our own? 

    I’m considering doing an f/f subplot in my next project, a romantic suspense.  I’d like to see if I could get away with it.  Perhaps part of the reason for the bias is just unfamiliarity.

21. 

    Cora Zane said on 05.14.08 at 06:37 PM • [link]

    The only title I’ve had in my catalogue that has faced any real controversy has been Wicked Temptation, which includes a brief M/F/F and M/M scene. To me it seems relatively tame now, but right after it’s release, I received emails from some readers who called it disgusting, as well as reviews that labeled it as “disturbing”, “disappointing”, “too dark”, and even the dreaded and generic “not my cup of tea”.

    An acquaintance contacted me privately not long after the first batch of reviews for W/T, (at a time when I was really down from all the “not for me” commentary) and she told me not to take it personally, but the f/f scene really bothered her. This struck me as odd at the time, since I knew that particular reader reviews m/m romances.

    I did a little research after that, and all I can gather is that f/f is simply not as acceptable as m/m. Who knows why that is?  Quite a few men I know will watch two women together, but not two men, and that’s the kind of vibe I get when I ask about f/f. Then again, who am I to try and pick apart the psychology behind it?  If a person doesn’t read it, they don’t.

    Whatever the case, I have noticed recently a shrinking market for lesbian and femme dom material. One of my publishers is no longer accepting lesbian romance, and another company I was thinking of submitting to has placed a small tag on their website that says they are not accepting femme dom anymore. I can only guess that is in reflection of poor sales, but of course, I have no data to base that on. Whatever the case, I’ve suspended a series because I don’t know who would take the story if I finished it.

    My hat’s off Zane for fighting the good fight with this one. I’m interested to see how this one plays out.

22. 

    Ciar Cullen said on 05.14.08 at 06:40 PM • [link]

    He? What’s this about society and a negative view of female genitalia? I don’t know the statistics on porn (online and otherwise) marketed mostly to males, but unless I’m missing something, they seem to do quite well. As for a phallocentric romance community, isn’t that because statistically, most women are straight? I don’t think that f/f books should be banned. I’m not homophobic, and I’m not hung up on much of anything. I’m just straight and uninterested if f/f books. I don’t want to be called repressed or whatever for that. It works both ways, folks.

23. 

    kirsten saell said on 05.14.08 at 06:42 PM • [link]

    And then there’s the fact that if you’re a straight woman, what’s hotter than a nekkid man? TWO nekkid men! I think it’s honestly the exact same thing as straight men’s fascination with lesbians. This is much less sinister than the other explanation, but I think both are true.

    I think both are true, too, since the above would be more likely to make a woman go “Lesbians, meh” than “Eeew, lesbians, that’s just sick”.

    Me, I like a good romance regardless of the race, gender, and sometimes even species of the participants!  It’s an emotional thing, more than a sexual one, to the extent that I can separate the two.

    I’ve said elsewhere, gender means little to me, although I really do enjoy well-written f/f (or m/m, or m/f, or various permutations of them all). If I can become emotionally involved in the characters and their journey, the sex is gonna do it for me, regardless of the number of tabs or slots.

    There are f/f scenes in my first book (already out), and in the second (due to release in August), and in the third (a m/f/f tentatively slotted for October). I know finding reviewers willing to even look at them, let alone give them a chance, is going to be an uphill battle, even though two of those three novels are het romances at heart.

    And I just find the attitude surprising, considering the popularity of shows like the L-word. I can understand not reading it because it doesn’t float your boat, but to be an avid consumer of m/m and then turn around and be offended by f/f is so hypocritical I can’t even find the appropriate word for it.

    I hope Robin is right and there’s an untapped market out there ready to take off, because the few times I have gone looking specifically for f/f or even m/f/f erotic romance (rather than erotica) there has been a dearth of it. You end up wading through a morass of m/m to find one or two titles that may or may not be of decent quality. If authors won’t write what they would love to write for fear of reviewers flaying them, or readers shunning and denigrating them, I find that sad. As in December’s case, it’s one thing to not like a book, and to say so. To warn others away from it because of content that may not even offend them is something else again.

24. 

    MMACali said on 05.14.08 at 06:46 PM • [link]

    One of the underlying reasons is this pervasive sense that “girl parts are icky.”

    And online, fic-centered fandom is something like 90% female.

    Wow, that’s just depressing. Now, I’m not sexually attracted to girl parts, but it makes me sad to think that that many women find parts of themselves “icky”.

25. 

    kirsten saell said on 05.14.08 at 06:49 PM • [link]

    I’m just straight and uninterested if f/f books. I don’t want to be called repressed or whatever for that. It works both ways, folks.

    Pretty sure no one would call you repressed, Ciar! What people are saying is homophobia can be gender-specific. No one’s criticizing anoyone for not being interested in f/f. Just for the attitude that “m/m=fine, hot, yay!, but f/f=nasty and gross, offends me, no one should be writing it, f/f content automatically=bad book”.

26. 

    Snow said on 05.14.08 at 07:00 PM • [link]

    I think a lot of it has to do with the fact that society is much less likely to accept or appreciate female sexuality in general - unless there’s a man involved somewhere.

27. 

    snarkhunter said on 05.14.08 at 07:03 PM • [link]

    What’s this about society and a negative view of female genitalia? I don’t know the statistics on porn (online and otherwise) marketed mostly to males, but unless I’m missing something, they seem to do quite well

    (Quick disclaimer: have never seen porn. My only glimpse was a few minutes of a lesbian porn accidentally seen in a hotel room when I was 12.) My guess is that a lot of “mainstream” porn is sanitized in certain ways, but I think porn is a slightly different animal than what we’re talking about here. It’s already taboo and is *meant* to be a little shocking or whatever.

    “Girl parts are icky” is an attitude that is promoted by feminine “deoderants” (the ones designed for the nether regions, rather than the armpits), by the recent influx in baby-wipe style “cleansing cloths” marketed at women, and by the emphasis on “cleanliness” that one can see in some men’s discourses. (I remember reading an article about the prevalance of an insistence on “clean” women in online dating ads.) Waxing is promoted as the only way to go (pubic hair? HORRORS. <—shades of Ruskin, there). And “vagina” is a dirty word, while “penis” can be said on prime time.

    So, yeah. I think women’s genitalia ARE marginalized, and, again, I know for a fact, having actually seen people say this, that in the fic communities, many slash fans are literally *disgusted* by women’s genitals…even though they themselves are women. Men don’t seem to have this same reaction. (Though I can think of this one fic, by a man, featuring a m/m/f (or m/f/m, depending on the characters’ moods!), where the female character always wiped herself with a little disposable cloth, and there was all this discussion of her “taste” and how she did it for health reasons. Never mind that those things actually increase the chance of infection.

28. 

    KG said on 05.14.08 at 07:15 PM • [link]

    Look, even on the online erotic epubs are starting to turned down f/f romances. They don’t sell very well. But as to why it is being rejected so soundly AFTER it’s been published, I’m not quite sure. Very strange indeed.

    snarkhunter, I’ve heard both ‘penis’ and ‘vagina’ used on tv, so I don’t know what shows you’re watching….i would actually say men’s genitalia in movies is the thing that is ‘taboo.’ Some how if the penis is erect, you get slapped with an X rating. But bare breasts can be shown all over the place. There is rarely a film with any kind full frontal male nudity…it does exist, but naked women by far outnumber the naked men.

29. 

    Cotton said on 05.14.08 at 07:22 PM • [link]

    I would have been able to take the whole thing more seriously if they hadn’t taken the opportunity to mention every book they’re going to release in the near future.

30. 

    kirsten saell said on 05.14.08 at 07:46 PM • [link]

    I also had a reviewer once call one of my extremely brief—barely a passing mention, really—f/f moments “nauseating”. She gave the book itself a terrible review and mentioned that was one of the reasons.

    The more I think about this, the more it bugs me. If I reviewed books, I would avoid reviewing, asy, BDSM romances because they usually don’t appeal to me and I personally find some of the stuff in them objectionable. As I know others do not feel that way, I would leave the reviewing of those types of books to them. Likewise, I would not hesitate to rec a book that was good, even if one or two scenes hit me in some personal soft spot. I might mention in a review that “This scene is not my type of thing, but it was competently written, and those who enjoy it would enjoy this book because of it”.

    To pan a book because of one paragraph of f/f just makes me think this person should not be reviewing books at all.

    Not to mention, how could a woman (granted, not any of the women here, from the comments) find women’s genitals icky, but think a man’s (or anyone’s) butthole is clean? Shaking my head.

31. 

    Karen Scott said on 05.14.08 at 07:48 PM • [link]

    Karma is certainly a bitch.  Back in 2006, Zane wrote a long-arsed rant re the Millenia Black case, and she felt it was ok to publically slap Black down for trying to sue Penguin for discrimination.

    Next time, she might be a bit more sympathetic methinks.

32. 

    Amie said on 05.14.08 at 08:42 PM • [link]

    I’m with Cat and Kirsten (I hope I spelled that right) and Cora…Frankly I’d rather read f/f than m/m but that’s MY preference. I think there’s a market for it but it’s small (and maybe in teh closet). Lucky for me, Kensington didn’t blink when I threw some f/f action at ‘em LOL
    I’d love to do another….but it’s not on my radar right now.

    LOL My verification word is Police67

33. 

    Flo said on 05.14.08 at 08:52 PM • [link]

    Color me confused as well.  At the VERY VERY FRONT of a local Borders Books and Music there was a looong isle of black fiction that included erotica.  It backed right up to the next row which was the latest sci-fi/ fantasy which is why I noticed that there was a HUGE section of erotica.  Specifically lesbian.  It had a shadowy group of gals on the front doing whatever.  So if Borders will sell that.  Why not this one?

    There are also numerous erotica anthologies that have lesbians and are for lesbians in this Borders.  I checked out a different Borders and it did not have the same display.  However one was in an urban area and the other (without) was a more suburbia based bookstore.  The erotica section in BOTH stores was ample.  And it was not in the back behind a curtain of shame.

    As for people being less comfortable with f/f than m/m welllllll…. I liken it back to the whole Japanese manga ideal.  That it’s written not with gay men in mind, but FOR women to fantasize those men as women.  That the gender bending isn’t really bending.  It’s more of a lean toward the woman being able to associate herself as either of the effeminate men.

    That’s not to say that all writers write with that in mind.  But that’s kind of how I look at it.  The f/f has typically been the domain of the male fantasy and these books are FOR WOMEN GODDAMNIT!  They will protect their HEA fantasies!  Whether it’s super kink or vanilla as can be, they don’t want it touched by a traditional male fantasy.  Which makes me giggle.

34. 

    Anna J. Evans said on 05.14.08 at 09:03 PM • [link]

    Two things:

    Snarkhunter: amen. I think you are 100% on the money. Women are taught in a hundred subtle and insidious ways that our girl parts are icky and it starts when we’re two young to even know what we’re learning. I see this in action in my youngest stepdaughter who is repulsed by seeing the female nude form—as in classical paintings in my bathroom or the rare occasion when her sister or myself dashes through the house on a hunt for dry bras from the laundry room. She’s already received the message loud and clear—women’s bodies are gross—and she’s in no hurry to grow up and look like us. (And her sister has the cutest figure in the world, so there’s certainly nothing icky about the way she looks.)

    F/F erotic romance: There is definitely a bias against f/f books. As December said I’ve seen numerous reviews slamming a story for simply having a scene of f/f interaction, let alone a major or minor plot line involving female lovers. It seems clear to me that f/f is not as accepted as m/m, and I’m inclined to agree with the internalized misogyny camp.

    Anna J. Evans

35. 

    Candy said on 05.14.08 at 09:05 PM • [link]

    F/F in mainstream porn is pretty much de rigueur, but that’s because it’s exposed to the male gaze. I’ve talked to some male friends in the past about how they feel about penises in their porn, and some of them like seeing an erect cock, but they also seem to prefer it disembodied—it’s the Universal Cock, in short, and not actually attached to the Dude Who’s Not Them And Actually the One Doing the Banging. There’s this interesting tension whereby the men love having a penis on the scene, but are at the same time kind of squicked by it because OMG WHAT IF IT MEANS THEY’RE GAY? This tension is sometimes sublimated into more arousal.

    (I also have male friends, most of them with a distinctly geeky small-liberal-arts-college bent, who have no problems with the presence of cocks in their porn; these are the ones who don’t have issues with presenting as less than masculine, or violating gender norms by wearing skirts or make-up.)

    M/M in erotica and erotic romance isn’t quite as widespread as F/F in porn, but it’s definitely getting there, and I think some of the same dynamics are at play, except with books, it’s more difficult to dissociate the various rods and orifices from the people—part of the process of reading involves getting into the headspace, whereas it’s very easy to become a pure observer with visual media. M/M erotica and erotic romance are also different because they’re being subjected to the female gaze; I don’t know enough to tell whether the effects are the same as the male gaze.

    I also wonder how much of the “OMG F/F is disgusting” reaction stems from a reaction to the way F/F is used in porn? I know that I approach F/F with a bit more caution mostly because of that. Ultimately, I’m with the people who say that as long as the quality of writing portrays the emotional and sexual tension convincingly, I don’t really care about the gender mix. I like it all, though I admit I’m more easily pleased by M/M because holy crap, two nekkid boys, yay.

36. 

    KG said on 05.14.08 at 09:09 PM • [link]

    I have a 10-year-old daughter…so I think I have some expertise in how a girl feels about a woman’s body…it’s a weird time. Can no one remember how embarrassing it was to go from flat-chested girl with no body hair to boobs and all kinds of stuff growing in new places?  I don’t think girls are taught to be repulsed by their own naked bodies. I think it is just the whole embarrassment of acknowledging what is going to happen to them eventually.

    Just like kids turning away from the tv screen when people kiss…it’s not really ‘gross’ per se, but embarrassing to think of men and women engaged in some kind of sexual activity.

    I’ve NEVER had a woman in my life say that her naked body or genitals was gross or disgusting. In fact, most of my college friends and I used to think why were women’s naked bodies so beautiful - curvy and secretive - while men’s body were really kind of odd with that ‘thing’ hanging out down there.

    My daughter just went through one of those ‘health’ classes at school. There was no speech about girls’ changing bodies being gross or disgusting…only something new and wonderful. But with that change…which unlike boys going through puberty…comes the embarrassment of the outward signs of it. Breasts being the most apparent physical manifestation, which is impossible to hide.

37. 

    Courtney said on 05.14.08 at 09:13 PM • [link]

    I have sympathy for the publishers who have to think in terms what will sell and what won’t. They can’t always go out on a limb and publish something that right now isn’t popular. Publicists and bookstores have to make the same considerations.

    But wasn’t it the same with m/m not so long ago? Personal preferences aside, the industry would listen more if they saw the kind of sales with f/f the way they started to with m/m. Who knows what the future will bring?

    As far as female genitalia being considered icky or dirty because of feminine hygiene products, you have a point. But do women really use them all the time? Those personal cleansing cloths are nice for when the red river is flowing or when the little yeasties have a party. Pregnancy also wreaks havoc on the vagina’s biochemical balance, as do certain medications and illnesses. We have an obsession not for feminine cleanliness, but for cleanliness in general. Body odor, no matter it’s source, is not viewed very positively.

    There are just as many smell-good-not-bad products out there for men as well as women and I’d bet that the only reason that someone hasn’t come up with a bestselling product to make male genitalia smell appealing is because their plumbing is external and they can wash it easily.

38. 

    Gail said on 05.14.08 at 09:16 PM • [link]

    I’m with many of these others who say that f/f erotica or romance, either one, leaves me flat, while I can totally get into the m/m variety. I’m straight. I like men. That said, I’m not going to say that the f/f variety shouldn’t exist or try to prevent its publication. I’m not going to go out of my way to buy it, though, since it really doesn’t do anything for me. And since I suspect the majority of readers—who are also female and straight (lesbians are still a numerical minority)—are doing the same thing, publishers are going to buy less f/f erotica—or romance—than the other varieties. Women read most of the books, remember? Guys like pictures, which is doubtless why there are so many boobs, etc. in the movies.

    That said, I have read a f/f romance. I was recently shipped four books to read for a contest. One was a series romance published by the series romance monolith company. One was a small press male-written romance. One was a hardback British paranormal-romancy-mystery-thing, and one was a f/f romantic suspense. I read the series romance first, since it was a known quantity, and of the expected “good read” quality. The f/f story made me nervous—I’d never read one before, didn’t know how I would react to it, so I put it off and slogged through the small press book.

    Lordy, Lordy was it TEDIOUS. And preachy. And rather offensive in its lecturing. And it had a horrible, total crap ending. I didn’t give it a very good mark—and I should have marked “Not a romance,” but I didn’t. Then I read the spooky book about metaphysical witches and dragged myself through the endless murky moody descriptive muck. The language was often lovely and lyrical, but very little actually Happened, which is not my favorite thing, and the ending was tragically obscure and might have been romantic, maybe, if it had been a leetle clearer. I didn’t mark it “not a romance” either, and probably should have. Then I took a deep breath and picked up the romantic suspense.

    And found a crisp, tightly written romantic suspense bodyguard-protectee story. I’ve been looking for the title and author (who is also a journalist, so no wonder it’s well written), so I could share it with you, and don’t have the book or any references here at my work. Honestly, it was the best book of the bunch and I scored it higher than the series romance. That said, I still won’t go out looking for f/f romance, because I missed the hard pecs and manly shaft…but it proves the point that a good book is a good book, even if the action doesn’t necessarily float your boat (so to speak).

    THAT said, I’ve heard for years that fem dom doesn’t sell and publishers won’t buy it. Well, nobody ever tried to sell it to me. I’d really love me some good fem dom erotica—THE SWITCH by Diane Whiteside is as close as I’ve ever been able to find. So if anybody has any to recommend, Please DO. K Thx.

    *Off to buy Wicked Gentleman m/m fantasy mystery romance thing that was in the DA BWAHA competition, cause I do like me some hot men*

    Sorry for all the longwindedness…

    Codeword: well31 I have dug myself 31 feet deep into this well…

39. 

    Erin said on 05.14.08 at 09:17 PM • [link]

    I was shocked when I learned that the Victorian(?) era term “bosom buddies” referred to a quasi-lesbian relationship (the term has, of course, evolved over time). It was women practicing marriage on other women, baby, and it’s why my alma mater (a women’s college) has been having a drag ball since the 1800s, even when it was a religious institution. Though sex per se may not have been involved, there was sure as hell romance.

    That being said, it’s probably no surprise that I’m fine with f/f and m/m and whatever else you want to throw at me (eew…okay, please don’t throw it at me…). Whenever an instance like this comes up, I’m always reminded of the episode of South Park where Cartman walks naked across a stage, and the audience in front of the stage reacts to his nudity with terrible shock and outrage…even though the boys had been beating the crap out of each other with real weapons right in front of that same audience. U.S.A., thy name is hypocrisy.

    But yeah - just remember what “bosom buddy” actually meant next time you read your favorite piece of classic literature…

40. 

    Kismet said on 05.14.08 at 09:50 PM • [link]

    I find myself terribly saddened the we women (yes that would be the royal we) find our own anatomy “gross” or “dirty”. I know that I felt that way not long ago, and am thankful that I came into myself after a fashion. It saddens me that we know so little about our own bodies (relate back to discussions on hymens). When I think about these issues, it reminds me of a discussion in sex ed in middle school (which was really just a lesson on why we would get our periods, and how to use a tampon) where the teacher said “boys don’t get the same discussion because boy parts are on the outside, and they discover them as soon as they can move their hands. Girls have to be taught where their parts are, why they have them, and how to deal with them.”

    < roll eyes here>

    . While I understand what the teacher was trying to say, I am still disturbed because the talk only glazed over issues, and really propagated the “ick factor” instead of relieving it.

    I find myself saddened that the sexuality of girls is not accepted. Now, I am not a mom, but I know that I learned nothing from my mom. All I knew was sex causes pregnancy, and I should remain a virgin until I married

    .  Whereas my husband’s father handed him his first playboy at age ten.  I’m not sure we should be handing girls vibrators at 12…. but surely there is some middle ground.

    I find myself saddened that it seems like each sex cannot accept homosexual relations amongst their own. Guys seem ok with F/F and women seem Ok with M/M…. but not vise versa. Someone already mentioned the “2 is better than 1” theory that I heard over and over in college.

    I am truly saddened by a conversation with my dad a week ago, after a Greys Anatomy episode. He vented about being frustrated by network TV having an “agenda” to make homosexuality appear to be a societal norm. My point… that it is a norm. It has always existed, so why should it not be accepted? “Keep[ing] it out of the street so it won’t scare the horses” is no longer an acceptable solution.

41. 

    JenB said on 05.14.08 at 10:26 PM • [link]

    Sad.  I read mostly M/F and M/M romance, but I’ve read quite a few F/F romances and while they’re not my first choice, I certainly don’t avoid them.  I don’t see anything disturbing, dirty, or uncomfortable about F/F romance.  Emma Holly writes great F/F scenes.  I wonder if she had this kind of trouble selling her books.  The Black Lace imprint has tons of F/F content, and I see them all the time on mainstream romance shelves.  What’s the difference?  I’ve always wondered why the M/M market is booming, but people still seem to have such a problem with F/F.  I wish I knew the answers.

42. 

    Madd said on 05.14.08 at 10:27 PM • [link]

    How come, though, one person’s preferences are fine-and-dandy, and mine are hangups? Just curious.

    I don’t think it’s considered a hang-up unless you are trying to shove your preference on to someone else or use that preference to sensor/ repress others.

    I think both are true, too, since the above would be more likely to make a woman go “Lesbians, meh” than “Eeew, lesbians, that’s just sick”.

    Not necessarily. I think my husband is a typical male where sex is concerned. He likes to watch f/f, but gets really squicked by m/m. We’ve discussed threesomes and he’s all for f/f/m, but against m/m/f. He’s not the least bit comfortable with homosexuality where it pertains to men, but has no problem with it when it pertains to women. I think some women are like that as well.

43. 

    Leslie said on 05.14.08 at 10:44 PM • [link]

    I am gazing into my own personal Marketing crystal ball, (I predicted the paranormal and fantasy boom in 1996 in the local RWA newsletter so my balls are pretty good!) And I predict that the f/f m/m etc market will begin to expand in five years or so and will continue to grow to a pretty fair plateau.

    Here is the deal. I have a 19 year old neice and got to hear (ENDLESSLY my poor auntie ears!) about her friends’ sexual exploits. (they might not talk about their own, but gossip endlessly about others) a surprising number of her buddies tried the other side of the street or thought about it. They will not have the same attitude as readers that are holding the genre back right now.

    I think the IDEA of same gender sexuality will become rather commonplace and the market will expand to the level it should actually represent.

    Two caveats: Lesbian fiction and f/f sex are NOT the same thing. One is cutlural and the other isn’t. I even predict ‘sweet’ Lesbian romance becoming a fairly hot item.

    It sort of follows the timeline of other romance. Sweet sells first then sensual, sort of dinner before the kiss.

    The other caveat:  The market superstar. Somewhere out there is someone who can write a lesbian romance so good that straights will enjoy it even if they skip over the sex scenes. (I know a TON of middle aged ladies who do that with overly spiced romances now.) 

    Writing is about STORY. From literature to porn, a good story draws readers. The best example is that wordy but still VERY hot
    Fannie Hill. Now over a hundred and fifty years old- that dangerous lady has a new edition due out in June ‘08                                      

    My point is, don’t throw out those MS. They may yet find a home.

44. 

    Katie said on 05.14.08 at 10:46 PM • [link]

    I have to say, the reason I don’t find F/F romances/erotica appealing is because I associate the images with porn, and, fairly or unfairly, I probably expect the quality of the writing to be approximately the same.

    I am also not crazy about explicit covers of any romances/erotica, whether “normative” or not, because makes me less likely to read the book (I fear the cover image is overcompensating, in an attempt to hide bad, unsexy writing).

45. 

    Leslie said on 05.14.08 at 10:47 PM • [link]

    OMG I just did the math! Fannie Hill is actually 260 years old this year!

46. 

    oakling said on 05.14.08 at 10:54 PM • [link]

    I am sad to say this doesn’t surprise me.  LGBT is shelved in its own “ghetto” in most bookstores; given that AA books are generally shelved separately as well, PURPLE PANTIES had two strikes against it.

    But wouldn’t that be immaterial? My experience has been that the “erotica” thing trumps them all; most mainstream bookstores I’ve been in like to segregate the sexy stuff even more than the identity-based stuff. So all erotica would go together, possibly with sections within the erotica area depending on the store.

47. 

    lijakaca said on 05.14.08 at 11:15 PM • [link]

    snarkhunter expressed everything I was feeling and didn’t know how to say…someone said that they had never heard a woman or girl say their parts are icky - but I think that’s just a symptom of the problem. How many women grow up NEVER discussing or mentioning anything about their genitals except perhaps, when their mother first shows them pads/tampons? On the other hand, guys are forever talking about their equipment,  naming it, etc…it’s commonly known and more or less ‘accepted’ that guys masturbate, but how many young women would admit to ever touching that part of their bodies except during their periods?

    You may see more nude women than men on TV and in movies, but have you EVER seen an actual vagina? Most women’s pubic hair covers it if you’re standing up, and even if it’s shaved, there’s not much to see unless she has her legs open.  But there have been a few penises shown in mainstream media.

    Anyways, though neither m/m or f/f interest me, I’m sure there’s a market for it, however ‘niche’, so any excuses of that nature ring totally false to me.

48. 

    Bridget Midway said on 05.14.08 at 11:19 PM • [link]

    I don’t write lesbian or gay erotica exclusively, however, I have written and gotten published a book about swapping partners called FASCINATION STREET. There was an all out orgy scene in it, F/F scenes, M/M scenes, M/F/F scenes. You name it, it was in there. So far I’ve signed it at Waldens and Barnes and Noble without a problem. Of course, the cover of the book is way more tamer than Zane’s PURPLE PANTIES. I don’t know if that makes a difference.

    BridgeT
    http://www.BridgetMidway.com

49. 

    Marcella said on 05.14.08 at 11:43 PM • [link]

    From my point of view, the issue at the heart of this discussion isn’t if there is a market for lesbian sex or f/f in the romance genre.

    The issue for me is that publishers are actively saying no to even receiving f/f content, or asking authors to take it out of their work.  Reviewers are actively dismissing (or worse) f/f content—not books, but paragraphs or scenes in otherwise hetero books.  And booksellers are apologizing for letting one of those pesky f/f books slip through the cracks?! 

    Doing those things isn’t a matter of taste or preference, its not even a question of quality of the work itself—its dismissing something because its lesbian. 

    I makes it hard for me to believe the “no market for it” explanation when its the very forces in the marketplace which are dismissing f/f content—the publishers, the reviewers, the authors, the booksellers.

50. 

    Kassiana said on 05.14.08 at 11:44 PM • [link]

    Are the same people who are willing to read m/m erotica objecting to f/f erotica? 
    —I don’t read f/f because it has the same effect on me that a cold shower does…it turns me off completely. I wouldn’t buy f/f for the same reason. Conversely, I would read m/m because it turns me on and would gladly buy it. I don’t “object” to f/f erotica per se. If people want it, they should be able to get it, just like those of use who want stories with the h/h ending up with babies should be able to get them. I just want to know about it ahead of time so I don’t have to buy what I don’t want.

    Why would one be less objectionable or more acceptable than the other?
    —Why do some people really love chocolate cake and hate chocolate ice cream? People have different preferences, sexually as well as otherwise. Why should I like f/f erotica when I don’t? Why shouldn’t I like the idea of two men getting it on?

    As I said before, I’m not the audience f/f writers want. I’d prefer to know about f/f content, as it would mean I wouldn’t waste my money or time on something I dislike. But if you like it, go ahead and buy it in bulk. Just don’t rail at me because I dislike it. I dislike some other romance elements that others on here adore to the max. It happens.

51. 

    robinb said on 05.14.08 at 11:59 PM • [link]

    I can’t get over the fact that this is Zane.  Zane, for crying out loud!  The fact that there is a bookstore in the world (aside from a religious bookstore…...which I assume wouldn’t sell any erotic romances)  that wouldn’t sell a book by Zane is astonishing to me.  ZANE!!!  She could slap her name on an Aldi’s ad and I would have to buy 200 (150 of which would be promptly stolen…...) for the library because the demand would be through the roof. 

    Crazy. 

    As for the f/f vs. m/m vs. m/f thing…...I haven’t read any f/f books.  I can’t get excited about the m/m books because I’m too busy wondering what they’d be like with ME not with him.  :) 

    Seriously, not selling or hosting Zane.  Wow.

52. 

    Cheyenne McCray said on 05.15.08 at 12:23 AM • [link]

    As far as readers complaining about f/f… My novels have always been heterosexual, but some of the ebooks a few years ago had a little f/f in some scenes.

    The few complaints I remember receiving about a few of my books were the f/f scenes. They were playful scenes, not serious relationships. Usually the male was around somewhere. But women felt uncomfortable with the f/f part. Personally I feel more comfortable with f/f than I do with m/m for some reason, even though I have nothing against it. Now m/f/m is fun. :)

53. 

    Amie said on 05.15.08 at 12:31 AM • [link]

    someone said that they had never heard a woman or girl say their parts are icky - but I think that’s just a symptom of the problem. How many women grow up NEVER discussing or mentioning anything about their genitals except perhaps, when their mother first shows them pads/tampons?

    WORD
    Girl you took the words right out of my mouth*—literally! My mother could barely tell me about my period and we NEVER discussed sex. It’s not what we’re told but what we’re shown.

    *for the record I’m 38

54. 

    Mina said on 05.15.08 at 12:33 AM • [link]

    Even my conservative 87 year old grandmother doesn’t mind reading about f/f. I pick out interesting books for her to read (she doesn’t get out too much) and recently, with a little trepidation, got her Fingersmith by Sarah Waters. It’s a beautiful story that happens to have an f/f love story in it. I didn’t tell grandma about the romance, but she asked me about it later. We talked about it and she felt the story was real and touching, not to mention a darn good story. Since then I’ve shared more Sarah Waters’ books, Karen Joy Fowler’s books and other lesbian-themed books with her. Neither of us are lesbians, but love is love. If it’s a compelling story, we’ll read it.

55. 

    Anna J. Evans said on 05.15.08 at 12:36 AM • [link]

    I have a 10-year-old daughter…so I think I have some expertise in how a girl feels about a woman’s body…it’s a weird time. Can no one remember how embarrassing it was to go from flat-chested girl with no body hair to boobs and all kinds of stuff growing in new places?  I don’t think girls are taught to be repulsed by their own naked bodies. I think it is just the whole embarrassment of acknowledging what is going to happen to them eventually.

    Totally. I’m sure that’s part of it. I remember being feeling awkward about it myself…but not to the point I would burst into tears and talk about wanting to kill myself because it was so gross to grow up. (But perhaps that’s just my messed up kid, lol.)

    As far as thinking women’s bodies are beautiful, I always felt that way too as did my self professed feminist girlfriends in college…yet not one of them had ever taken a mirror and looked “down there” and not one would admit to giving herself pleasure or exploring her own sexuality because that was “gross”. And I graduated form a very liberal NY school in 2000. These were recent times and girls from across the country who were so repressed and skeeved they didn’t want to explore their bodies. Only the future smut writer admitted to such things.

    So anyway, not saying the points in quotes aren’t valid, but there are other POVs as well. And there are at least some of us out there who felt like the odd bird out for NOT thinking it was rather gross to be a woman. Or at least gross to be a sexual woman in touch (literally and figuratively) with her genitals :).

    Anna J. Evans

56. 

    Laura Vivanco said on 05.15.08 at 12:55 AM • [link]

    I’m not entirely convinced by the argument that f/f would be found “icky” by most readers of erotic romance because it involves vaginas. The reason I’m not convinced is that even “hot” but not “erotic” romances quite often include long descriptions of the hero masturbating the heroine with his fingers or tongue, and there are plenty of descriptions of how dripping/damp/wet the heroine is getting in response to the hero. If that sort of description of female bodies/vaginas is acceptable in m/f romances, that suggests to me that the main problem that people have with f/f is not to do with the presence of descriptions of vaginas and other female body parts.

    That’s not to say that some women don’t find vaginas “icky” or even women’s whole bodies “icky,” just that if large numbers of women readers don’t want to read f/f but do read m/f or m/m of an equivalent level of “hotness,” then I think it must have more to do with something about f/f that isn’t the presence of descriptions of vaginas.

    [and the security word is member81, which makes me wonder if the security system has a preference for m/m orgies]

57. 

    Wryhag said on 05.15.08 at 01:01 AM • [link]

    ...women like to read books where they can put themselves in the heroine’s place.  Clearly, this can’t be the case for a m/m book.

    But, Cat, it IS the case.  This seems real simple to me.  Men wanting men is not all that different from women wanting men.  We’re attracted to essentially the same things. 

    Quite frankly, lesbian erotica is a huge turn-off for me; gay male erotica, just the opposite.  I suspect most erotic-romance readers—who are, let’s face it, largely straight women with a smattering of gay men—would rather read about the glories of hard dick than of “slippery folds” and oozing va-jay-jay.  I know I would.  The latter just has way too much squick factor.

    Ellora’s Cave (and who better to know this?) claims that f-f erotic romance just doesn’t sell.  So, based on my own reactions and EC’s assessment of the marketplace, I’m not surprised at the widespread resistance to f-f erotic romance.  And, yes, it does have longstanding porn associations, so there’s the backlash element, too.

58. 

    GrowlyCub said on 05.15.08 at 01:02 AM • [link]

    Count me in with the women who love m/m and are left un-titillated by f/f.  The male movie porn depiction of f/f may have something to do with it, but primarily it’s because I identify mostly hetero.  And two guys emotionally involved is just a powerful female fantasy as far as I’m concerned.

    Two women emotionally involved isn’t that much of a mystery to me, so I agree with the poster who said f/f is boring.  I’m a woman, I know what I feel and how I react to emotionally and sexually charged situations, but seeing in writing what a guy feels, that’s interesting.

    So here’s one reason why there is a market for m/m and not for f/f.  There’s no doubt in my mind that there are women who are homophobe and disgusted by the idea of f/f, but it’s not the only reason for the lack of interest in f/f.

59. 

    Laura Vivanco said on 05.15.08 at 01:09 AM • [link]

    I suspect most erotic-romance readers—who are, let’s face it, largely straight women with a smattering of gay men—would rather read about the glories of hard dick than of “slippery folds” and oozing va-jay-jay.  I know I would.

    Ok, maybe I need to revise my opinion of the level of ickiness some people associate with vaginas relative to male genitalia. So are there lots of straight female readers of erotic romance who avoid m/f because of the presence of descriptions of ““slippery folds” and oozing va-jay-jay” and therefore almost exclusively read m/m?

    [and the security word is now ball52. I’m more convinced than ever that the the security system has a preference for m/m orgies.]

60. 

    kirsten saell said on 05.15.08 at 01:19 AM • [link]

    So are there lots of straight female readers of erotic romance who avoid m/f because of the presence of descriptions of ““slippery folds” and oozing va-jay-jay” and therefore almost exclusively read m/m?

    I hate to ruin anyone’s squeaky-clean buttsecks fantasy by reminding them just what can and does occasionally get all over the place when those who indulge in the practice do not undergo a preparatory enema? Although I grant you that, like hemmorhoids and anal fissures, it probably doesn’t find it’s way into too many erotic romance novels.

    Not that I have anything against the buttsecks, in fantasy or IRL—just trying to be clear about potential squick-worthy elements…

61. 

    Leigh Ellwood said on 05.15.08 at 01:27 AM • [link]

    I’ve written all the letters of the alphabet: M/M, M/F, MMF, MFF, etc. The Dareville books I have with limited F/F scenes do well, and the M/M does very well. I don’t mind F/F erotica, and would be willing to write it, but as others here have testified, it doesn’t move as well.

    Of course, maybe I worry that I wouldn’t be able to market it properly.

62. 

    Wryhag said on 05.15.08 at 01:39 AM • [link]

    Re. the issue of “hang-ups”:  Come on, let’s be honest, we all have hang-ups.  So OWN THEM!  (By the way, Oprah told me to tell you this.)  Do you gag at the idea of eating roadkill out of a crockpot?  I’ve known people who do.  Are you grossed out by toe-sucking?  I knew a man who got off on it, and there are probably many more like him. 

    Really, truly, deeply, I don’t give a rip if my preference for a pillar of purpling man-meat far outstrips my desire to see and/or play with and/or read about a clam in a fright wig.  To hell with political correctness; I prefer the pillar.  So say it loud: I’m gay/straight/bi and I’m proud!

    In terms of f-f being available?  Hell, yeah, it should be!  My libertarian conscience says, To each his/her own, as long as it isn’t hurting anybody.  It’s all the PC pussy-footing (no pun intended) that offends me more than anything.

63. 

    Flo said on 05.15.08 at 01:47 AM • [link]

    OMG@ the “Bosom Buddies” thing.  Anne of Green Gables and her Diana are FOREVER changed in my eyes!  Oh the warping!

64. 

    kirsten saell said on 05.15.08 at 01:48 AM • [link]

    I agree, it should all be available, and I’m not ragging on anyone who would rather read m/m than m/f or f/f. I just think it’s weird to find female gentalia gross, when you consider the comparative squickiness of the “slot b” featured in most m/m sex scenes.

65. 

    Rowan McBride said on 05.15.08 at 01:49 AM • [link]

    I’m with SonomaLass.  I don’t think Zane is saying that people who aren’t interested in reading lesbian erotica have hang ups.  My impression is that she’s pissed, and rightly so, at the hypocrisy of these people saying her books are too racy and hence cannot be signed in public, included in a bookclub, or must be apologized for when her personal history shows this has never been a problem before.  And whether or not people are interested in f/f in general, the fact that she states her sales rates aren’t that different with “Purple Panties” from her previous books, gives me the impression that a good amount of people are interested in *this* f/f.  The only reason for *this* book being shunned seems to be the f/f element, and that bites.

    But wouldn’t that be immaterial? My experience has been that the “erotica” thing trumps them all; most mainstream bookstores I’ve been in like to segregate the sexy stuff even more than the identity-based stuff. So all erotica would go together, possibly with sections within the erotica area depending on the store.

    Not at my Borders.  When I’m looking for GLBT fiction, I’m always relegated to the other end of the store to the Social Sciences section.  A few shelves of Women’s Studies, a shelf of gay/lesbian studies, and then two shelves of GLBT literature, erotica,  and romance all crammed together.  The first time I tried to find a GLBT title there, a bookstore employee had to trek all over the store with me to hunt it down, since the computer listed it as being in “Gay/Lesbian Literature” when in fact there was no such section in the store.  {Sigh.}

    As for the squick factor, every once in a while I read on one loop or another that an m/m author got into it because the words used to describe female body parts are gross.  Now, writing an m/m because it’s who you are?  Great.  Writing an m/m because it turns you on?  Also great.  Writing one because your own body parts wig you out?  That’s a problem.

    ...so my balls are pretty good!

    {snerk}

    security word:  behind89
    {also snerk} 

    :)

66. 

    Wryhag said on 05.15.08 at 01:56 AM • [link]

    So are there lots of straight female readers of erotic romance who avoid m/f because of the presence of descriptions of “slippery folds” and “oozing va-jay-jay” and therefore almost exclusively read m/m?

    Obviously not, Laura!  I think women (most women) don’t mind reading about their “stuff” when their stuff is reacting to or working in conjunction with a man’s stuff.  Know what I mean?  I suspect problems arise when straight women have to imagine going down on other women or using strap-ons, because men aren’t part of the picture.  Those images, I suspect, just push the envelope too far.

    (Oh, yiy, why don’t I just sit on my damned fingers?)

67. 

    Willa said on 05.15.08 at 02:00 AM • [link]

    There’s a big difference between not liking a type of story and objecting to it. Not liking something is perfectly valid. This is something else.

    snarkhunter, I’ve heard both ‘penis’ and ‘vagina’ used on tv, so I don’t know what shows you’re watching….i would actually say men’s genitalia in movies is the thing that is ‘taboo.’ Some how if the penis is erect, you get slapped with an X rating. But bare breasts can be shown all over the place. There is rarely a film with any kind full frontal male nudity…it does exist, but naked women by far outnumber the naked men.

    Maybe snarkhunter was thinking of the origins of the word vajayjay, which might even have been discussed on this site, can’t remember. Quoting: “[The] producer of the show [Grey’s Anatomy] explained that even though they use the word ‘penis’ on the show in several episodes, without any problems from the broadcasting standards board, ‘vagina’ got the board too riled up and the writers needed to look for an alternative. An intern suggested ‘vajayjay’.”

    Interesting.

    Quote from here:
    http://www.dollymix.tv/2007/10/women_and_words_vajayjay_the_l.html

    This story also can be found in a NY Times article.
    http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/28/fashion/28vajayjay.html?adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1194192194-s1ezQqM/nDtsVytqXJBs5Q

68. 

    MB (Leah) said on 05.15.08 at 02:03 AM • [link]

    I suspect most erotic-romance readers—who are, let’s face it, largely straight women with a smattering of gay men—would rather read about the glories of hard dick than of “slippery folds” and oozing va-jay-jay.  I know I would.  The latter just has way too much squick factor.

    Wow, that kind of blanket statement is interesting to me. I’m most definitely a straight woman but I like to read f/f. Of course, it’s not as much a turn on as m/f, but I like it none-the-less. And I don’t feel a “squick” factor at all. But I know that I’m in the minority.

    I don’t associate it with the male porn POV either. The f/f I read in erotic books is completely different.

    I’ll pretty much read anything if there is an emotional connection between the characters. I don’t care who’s doing what to whom as long as it’s a good love story.

    What I don’t get is the discrimination against f/f. That’s what I find interesting. So it’s not popular. Just because it’s not a turn on for many doesn’t mean it should be across the board dismissed.

69. 

    Willa said on 05.15.08 at 02:06 AM • [link]

    Urp, sorry for the long web addresses! I hope they didn’t screw anything up.

70. 

    Wryhag said on 05.15.08 at 02:40 AM • [link]

    I hate to ruin anyone’s squeaky-clean buttsecks fantasy by reminding them just what can and does occasionally get all over the place when those who indulge in the practice do not undergo a preparatory enema? Although I grant you that, like hemmorhoids and anal fissures, it probably doesn’t find it’s way into too many erotic romance novels.
    Not that I have anything against the buttsecks, in fantasy or IRL—just trying to be clear about potential squick-worthy elements…

    This is a reallygood point, Kirsten, and one that started dogging me as soon as I began writing m-m sex scenes. 

    The only answer is, I guess, that “clean sex” becomes part of the reader’s suspension-of-disbelief process.  Getting into the enema thing would definitely ruin the moment.  Just like douching would. Or dealing with one’s period.  Or swabbing smegma from beneath foreskin.  Or all kinds of icky stuff.

    Writers must conveniently overlook bunches of biological realities to keep readers “in the moment”.  And I don’t think readers mind.  I even blogged about a book I love to pieces because one of the partners in a sex scene had long, pointed teeth.  It tripped me up a bit . . . but didn’t keep me from getting lost in the well-told story.

    Guess it’s all about what we’re looking for in fiction, sex or no sex.

71. 

    Mary Winter said on 05.15.08 at 02:48 AM • [link]

    As a straight woman who is writing a m/f/f story with her partner (a guy) really because I joked it was the only menage HE would write, who has BFF lesbian friends, (so much so that when we were first hanging around together my mom said “Is there something you like to tell me?” (me laughing, no mom, I drive stick shift.)... I have to say that I have heard that about f/f too. I’ve also heard that it’s done respectable numbers at a few places too.

    I think the female form is beautiful. So is the male form. I would have no problem reading, or writing, f/f fiction, but I also understand that I may not be the “norm.” I will also add that Pink Petal Books, my company, would definately be open to f/f fiction (as well as all LGBT) fiction as well as M/F. After all love is a beautiful thing, no matter the gender of the individuals involved. Or at least that’s my personal opinion.

    ones23- yes, it is ones personal decision.

72. 

    Jennifer Armintrout said on 05.15.08 at 02:58 AM • [link]

    I, too, have heard that f/f doesn’t sell well.  Not that I was going to write it, this was from a friend who is an Ellora’s Cave author who was forced to remove a m/f/m/f scene on the basis that the women touched each other.

    As a reader, I don’t like f/f, but that’s just because I’m as straight as a line between points A and B.  Women interest me sexually about -10%, so a scene with two women is not going to turn my crank, and that’s pretty much what erotica is there for.  I love m/m, but that’s because I think men are hot.  Two men doing it?  Even hotter.

    However, I could never see being so outraged and offended by someone else choosing to write or buy f/f erotica that I would need a bookstore to apologize to me for selling it.  I mean, I don’t read Christian Inspirationals, either, but I’m not going to demand Barnes and Noble stop selling them.

73. 

    Wryhag said on 05.15.08 at 02:59 AM • [link]

    Which reminds me . . . how many romance sex scenes contain the all-too-common queef?  “Her pussy suddenly made a sound worthy of a fat man’s arse, and the accompanying explosion of air nearly replaced my Adam’s apple with at least one of my balls.”
    
    Bet you don’t read that too often!

74. 

    Cheryl Dragon said on 05.15.08 at 03:11 AM • [link]

    I write it all and read it all! Great characters and great sex is hot stuff!! Love f/f.

    In fact the first book of mine to get ‘Recommended Read’ from any reviewer was my f/f Sorority Girl Pledge Time. I think because it was unique, very hot, and genuine. I had the idea and I couldn’t get it out of my head…big selling genre or not. The best books are ones where the writer isn’t trying to be trendy but channels that great muse to write the book they’re meant to.

    Loose Id has been great!! I have another book coming from them in July. The main relationship is m/f but there are f/f and f/f/m scenes so I think there are options out there for the f/f writer.

    And Sorority Girl Pledge Time go a really hot cover! I have to share that..
    http://www.loose-id.com/detail.aspx?ID=615

    With EC, no the f/f stuff is out. I do get away with a f/f/m scene in one Exotika (Black on Blonde) but it’s not a romance story and it’s got a lot of magical elements with the sex.

    Just my thoughts as an erotic romance writer who goes from m/m to f/f and enjoys it all:)

    Cheryl Dragon

75. 

    Nonymous said on 05.15.08 at 03:13 AM • [link]

    Maybe we’re talking about a different kind of fandom here, but most slash fen I know like both m/m and f/f (just, they like m/m more). I also know a surprising number of them are lesbian or bisexual. I found that the overwhelming consensus that slash fen thought f/f was icky a little startling.

    They come from anime or game fandoms, mostly. Is this why?

76. 

    kirsten saell said on 05.15.08 at 03:28 AM • [link]

    a friend who is an Ellora’s Cave author who was forced to remove a m/f/m/f scene on the basis that the women touched each other.

    See, now this just annoys me on so many levels. Being “forced” to remove something, for one. And because the women touched each other? That just makes me think about that part in Harold and Kumar go to White Castle, where Kumar’s into a three-way, but Harold isn’t because, “No way, man, I don’t want our dicks touching!”

    I mean, if I’m going to read a scene with more than two people in it, I’d rather they all get down with each other: m/mf/f/f/m/m/f/m/f/f/m/m/m/f. Or whatever.

    However, I could never see being so outraged and offended by someone else choosing to write or buy f/f erotica that I would need a bookstore to apologize to me for selling it.

    I’m at least as concerned about reviewers as stores and customers. I think people need to ask themselves if you’d give an otherwise good book a negative review because it contained one or two sex scenes that a large percentage of the population wouldn’t find objectionable but pushed a personal button for you. If the answer is yes, maybe you shouldn’t be reviewing romance, erotica or erotic romance. Or, at the very least, you should leave the review of that book to someone else.

    “Her pussy suddenly made a sound worthy of a fat man’s arse, and the accompanying explosion of air nearly replaced my Adam’s apple with at least one of my balls.”

    All right, I’m glad my mouth wasn’t full when I read THAT!

77. 

    Emmy said on 05.15.08 at 03:50 AM • [link]

    Roughly 95% of what I’ve read in the last year or so has been slash, with the occasional m/m/f thrown in. I rarely read het anymore, and lez not at all *urps*

    I’m the unabashedly bisexual daughter of two very happily married lesbians, and love women almost as much as I like men. Two hot guys going at it gets my motors running big time. Reading about two women smexing squicks me in ways I just can’t explain. Seriously, even the thought of reading lez makes me nauseous. It’s absolutely inexplicable to me, but that’s how I feel. I’m not worried that reading a f/f book will pull me over to the dark side, cuz I’m already there. 

    F/F doesn’t sell because the majority of the romance market is women, and they tend to have the same reaction I do to the books, for whatever reason.

78. 

    Cora said on 05.15.08 at 04:47 AM • [link]

    Maybe snarkhunter was thinking of the origins of the word vajayjay, which might even have been discussed on this site, can’t remember. Quoting: “[The] producer of the show [Grey’s Anatomy] explained that even though they use the word ‘penis’ on the show in several episodes, without any problems from the broadcasting standards board, ‘vagina’ got the board too riled up and the writers needed to look for an alternative. An intern suggested ‘vajayjay’.”

    So that’s where that stupid term comes from!

    I don’t watch the show, so I’ve never heard it there. I just noticed that it suddenly started cropping up all over the place.

79. 

    Anne Douglas said on 05.15.08 at 04:48 AM • [link]

    THAT said, I’ve heard for years that fem dom doesn’t sell and publishers won’t buy it. Well, nobody ever tried to sell it to me. I’d really love me some good fem dom erotica—THE SWITCH by Diane Whiteside is as close as I’ve ever been able to find. So if anybody has any to recommend, Please DO. K Thx.

    You and me both Gail. The Switch was great, and although Joey Hill’s Mistress of Redemption was an awesome book, I’m not that much into BDSM. But my publishers tell me Fem Dom will be a hard sell - yet I know plenty of women who would be into reading a story where the woman is the top, especially without the heavy BDSM aspect.

    F/F doesn’t float my boat so much for my own reading, but I’m all for it being published. A girlfriend of mine needles me once and a while about when I’m writing a m/f/f, as she’s one who’d much rather get it on with another girl than with another guy and her man. Different strokes for different folks really even though were both pretty much as straight as a road in Florida :)

    I think the difference in acceptance of m/m to f/f comes down to the fact f/f has been in long standing the domain of male fantasy - and one thing we all know is that (in the majority) men are so not about the romance, so I wonder if that is where some of the ‘ick’ factor some people experience comes from? The ‘dirty over sexed man’ quotent?

    I made this comment on the Dear Author post on the state of GLBT publishing, it might apply well here too:

    I wonder if the mm over ff preference comes more from the conflict factor? As in with two women we know there will be drama/cattiness/emotions/tenderness/happiness etc etc just because they’re women, whereas with two men there is a lot more of a physically wrenching journey to get them to the story/emotional resolution. Men as a stereotype are supposed to not be as emotional/wearing their heart on a sleeve, so to see that happen pulls the reader in more?

    I also wonder if the concept in general of women loving women has been more socially acceptable over the ages (especially when viewed from the men are the superior sex standpoint), whereas men loving men has until just recently been tarred with a much darker brush than their sapphic opposites? So, although it might not be concious choice, women find the concept of two men intriguing because in the past the concept has been very well hidden, whereas a ff relationship has been more than just a fantasy for men for a long time now and is more of a staple and has reached a level of acceptance?

    Level of acceptance meaning that the majority of women don’t find it as intriguing as the m/m alternative.

80. 

    orangehands said on 05.15.08 at 05:11 AM • [link]

    I have a 19 year old neice…a surprising number of her buddies tried the other side of the street or thought about it. They will not have the same attitude as readers that are holding the genre back right now.

    I’m in this generation, and I think part of it is we (general we) are learning to see sexuality as more fluid, and that when you find someone attractive, they’re attractive, and it’s not always in line with your genetalia preference. Also, I think Kinsey may finally be hitting it big (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinsey_Scale). :)

    I do agree with above comments that part of it we are taught to see our bodies as “nasty”, part of it is homophobia, part of it is some people just don’t want to read it, and part of it is publishers think no one wants to read it . There’s probably a lot more factors at play, but those seem to be the main four.

    The thing is, we aren’t really taught to love our sexuality, to play with it, to experiment with it. When Kismet wrote “I’m not sure we should be handing girls vibrators at 12”, my attitude was why not? Masturbation is natural for both sexes, so maybe not go so far as to hand out vibrators, but let females know it’s ok to be curious, it’s good to check it out yourself. You don’t have to be with someone (male or female) to learn about sexual pleasure. We teach/allow/are ok with boys playing with themselves, why not girls? I’m in college, and one night I was having a discussion with about ten/twelve female housemates. Two of us have touched ourselves, and the rest had a mix of reactions going from interested “hmmm, maybe I should try” to horrified “you do what? and then you kill puppies, right?”

    That said, Zane’s post annoys me for two reasons, and both are just personal this-shit-annoys-me things. 1. All the name throwing; if I wanted her backlist I would have looked it up and 2. The “honary lesbian” line. Writing f/f scenes and not getting your book out is way different then the daily struggle lesbians have to go through.

    But anyways, I’m personally not a fan of m/m/f (f/f/m was a little better but not much), but I’ve enjoyed m/m and I’m willing to try f/f.  Actually, Cheryl, yours will probably be the one I tried. When I was looking for my first e-book, I came across yours and was like, hmmm, that sounds interesting. But I am having a lack of money at the moment, having bought almost all of JL Langley’s backlist (damn her). 

    I’m curious for those who said they don’t like f/f (which is perfectly valid, we all have preferences), but how many have tried it? Not saying you have to, to have that opinion (h/h rape is a big fact NO from me, and I didn’t have to try it to realize), but just curious how many gave it a shot first?

    Cora: It’s been around before the show, it just became more popular since then.

    rather36: rathe rhave a good book then anything else

81. 

    orangehands said on 05.15.08 at 05:15 AM • [link]

    hmmm, Good Author has a really interesting point, but not sure how much I agree with it. Must think more.

    And sorry for the grammatical/spelling errors. Like “tried” instead of “try”, etc

82. 

    Di said on 05.15.08 at 05:30 AM • [link]

    My two problems with f/f in the epub world?  They are mostly short or short than short stories.  I need me some story, please!  Please save me from the anthologies.  I hate anthologies.  And then, many of the places that do pub f/f are epubs from which I just don’t buy.  Two of the places, I will regularly buy might have 3 f/f stories per year.

    I am more picky about f/f, than m/m which I predominately read.  I don’t like f/f as much as m/m, much for the same reason I’m not so into m/f, I have a hard time relating to the f.  I’m just not the sort of girl that makes it into a lot of m/f romances or even f/f.  And not that I can’t experience the story from a foreign perspective, but sometimes that just doesn’t work for me….especially with erotica.

83. 

    Shannon said on 05.15.08 at 05:45 AM • [link]

    I havent read all the comments yet, so sorry if I repeat anything already stated.

    My personal preference, is that I love m/m, dislike f/f, and adore fem dom.

    For me, part of what I like about it is thats its different. Normally the guy tops and the girl is all weak and trembling before his power. Its nice to have a role reversal and see the lady running the show and bringing the guy to her knees, and being poised and in control while doing it.

    As to m/m and f/f…I can fully appreciate the female form. Its quite awesome, I do agree, very sexy, aesthetically appealing. But f/f still holds no appeal to me whatsoever. I think its because yes, I do get uncomfortable thinking about another girl hitting on me, not because I’m homophobic but because in my head at least, being around girl’s is a comfort zone, a place where you can go and not be oggled. And for me, you take that away, make it a place where someone is just as likely to be staring at your chest as anywhere else, and I get nervous.

    Its not that I have a problem with anyone being a lesbian, its that I am not one (to the best of my knowledge), and have this awkwardness over the possibility of being hit on by a girl. I would be flattered. I would also be uncomfortable. Thats just the way I think it is for me. Plus, as I have no desire to go touch/stroke/lick/do anything else to a girl’s body, it doesnt appeal to me to read about another woman doing those things.

    With m/m though…I love guys. They’re wonderful, so I have no hangup with two men being together and loving each other and fully enjoying reading about the experience. I would love to touch and stroke and do whatever with men, so reading about a woman or a male doing whatever doesnt bother me, because it reflects my own personal preferences and desires, and I can relate to it. I cant relate to f/f, though, because I just dont feel it.

    And on the “ew, girl parts,” subject….I do think that to a degree women in America (or at least in the younger generation) feel that their genitalia is not beautiful. I’ve heard numerous comments along the lines of “ew, did you see that girl’s bush? why doesnt she shave it off? Thats just disgusting.” Things like that dont inspire that many feelings of comfort and beauty in your body, when the general consensus seems to be that your body as it is is pretty nasty.

    Some of that probably relates to America’s ongoing fetish with hairlessness, but I think a large part of it is the thought process that guys have penises and erections, awesome, cool, thats wonderful…lets not talk about those woman parts though. Guys will freely admit to masturbating, women will not. To me, at least, it seems like male sexuality is much more accepted than female, and that male genitalia is a more acceptable and common object than female. And if you remove the male part from the equation, I’m not all that surprised it doesnt sell.

84. 

    Eisenkreis said on 05.15.08 at 05:52 AM • [link]

    How many people in on this discussion are actually lesbians? Raise of hands, girls.

    Me personally, I identify lesbian, and have been continuously disgruntled and disheartened by the trends in lesbian fiction and the attitudes towards f/f situations in fiction, fanfiction, you name it. Presented in cinema, f/f situations are ‘nonthreatening’ sex scenes that, as someone else mentioned, ‘have a male lurking somewhere in the background.’

    F/f is often sublimated for the sake of m/f interactions, that it isn’t a ‘real relationship’ until a man is involved, or the f/f thing is just a phase. This is in terms of Hollywood—so there’s a lot of messages out there that flat-out say that two women together are incapable of reaching the depths of a male/female relationship, or a male/male one for that matter. I have been around plenty of gay men and while they have some pretty colorful things to say about straight people, the scathing lesbian commentary is let loose like you wouldn’t believe; I think some of them are more biased against lesbians than frightened straight men thinking they’re being emasculated.

    This is just part of the problem, though—and when I say these things, I’m speaking in terms of mainstream outlets, that all of us are exposed to when we’re younger, growing up, and dealing with this kind of thing.

    Me personally, I love girl parts. Adore them. Can’t get enough of them. They’re gorgeous, they’re a massive turn-on, and I could bury my face in that for *hours*; I love every nuance,  every movement, every contraction, and I never see f/f sex described in the way that I’d like to see it. Intense, visceral, incredibly desirous, intoxicated with one another’s tastes, scents, touch… Needless to say, if any of you know any fic like this, please, pitch it my way.

    I won’t repeat what snarkhunter said except to say that I remember my first sexual experience, I was terrified of ‘the smell,’ and was wondering what anyone would want to do with something tha could get the nickname ‘furburger.’ So anyone who says we aren’t programmed to think our bits are subhuman isn’t paying attention.

    Back to the ‘no one likes lesbians’ song and dance:

    Recently, BSG had two female characters being intimate with one another, inferring that at least one of them was flat-out lesbian. Both characters were explicitely hated characters in the series, or at least ones that had been the cause of a great deal of damage. Every time I’ve seen lesbianism pop up in the mainstream, there’s always something about it that screams ‘THIS IS EVIL AND WRONG. GIRLS.’

    I won’t deny that men don’t have it easy in cinema either; they don’t. If you want more info on how CINEMA treats this subject, go watch ‘This Film is Not Yet Rated’—seriously, do it.

    Otherwise: Where men tend to write off lesbianism as just a phase, or feel threatened by it (if we’re talking generalizations here), women tend to think even less of it. I hate that this is what we’ve come to, and as a woman who is TOTALLY about other women, I never stop feeling more insulted by *other women* in concerns to this topic in the fiction and fandom communities.

    Saying nothing of the fact that m/m has even more ‘fantasy rape’ than m/f fiction. ‘It’s not rape though! He said yes eventually! HE WAS SAYING YES WITH HIS EYES!’

85. 

    RfP said on 05.15.08 at 06:21 AM • [link]

    I suspect most erotic-romance readers—who are, let’s face it, largely straight women with a smattering of gay men—would rather read about the glories of hard dick than of “slippery folds” and oozing va-jay-jay.  I know I would.  The latter just has way too much squick factor.

    Straight female erotic-romance reader here, and I don’t fit your generalization.  I don’t see any innate squick in either set of parts—the only squick is in that choice of words.  “Oozing” is gross for ANY body part.

    Which parts I’d rather read about depends on the point of view during the scene, the characters’ own attitudes toward those body parts, and whether the scene strikes me as pure erotica or as advancing plot or relationship.  Perhaps it also depends on whether a scene invites identifying oneself with the hero or the heroine—but I’ll have to think about precisely what I mean by that.

86. 

    spinsterwitch said on 05.15.08 at 06:35 AM • [link]

    I can actually believe that there would be a lack of interest in f/f erotica among publishers who typically sell to straight women.  M/m erotica is interesting to straight women, as is f/m erotica.  But f/f erotica may be more interesting to straight men and queer women.  So if you want to sell the f/f erotica you need to actually target those audiences. 

    This is something that publishing houses have missed out on with the lesbian community in a big way.  I would bet Zane’s book would sell even better if there were targeted ads in queer women’s magazines or websites.  Although there are queer women who read romances and f/m erotica, the numbers aren’t huge so you need to find different ways to advertise from them.

    It’s interesting because queer women (some anyway) really dig m/m erotica and porn.  I wonder if this is because they are exposed to it in the same queer bookstores.

    I remember shopping at B & N and getting really confused looks from salespeople when I’d bring up my copy of Girlfriend or Curve and the latest Jude Deveraux.

87. 

    rebyj said on 05.15.08 at 06:37 AM • [link]

    The hypocrisy is what bugs me as well. It’s just wrong and a discredit to the company that chooses to take that stance.

    Since so many have expressed opinions on gay romance, I’ll dip my toes in as well.
    
    I am a straight,  mid 40’s,  white woman. I’ve read few f/f stories but not because I don’t like f/f romance but mainly because the synpsosis of f/f that I’ve read, one or both of the main characters are usually very young.  I find reading about 18-25 year old (college age) characters boring in ANY format, I’ll pass it up and choose something else.

88. 

    orangehands said on 05.15.08 at 07:02 AM • [link]

    Both characters were explicitely hated characters in the series, or at least ones that had been the cause of a great deal of damage. Every time I’ve seen lesbianism pop up in the mainstream, there’s always something about it that screams ‘THIS IS EVIL AND WRONG. GIRLS.’

    This kind of piggy-backs on a class I’m taking called Violent Women, where we study violent women in movies/TV shows. In almost all the cases we’ve seen, the women who are violent are portrayed with subtextual hints- at the very least- as lesbians. So it’s not just that lesbians=wrong, it’s that violent (aka bad) women= lesbians too. Passvity becomes a heterosexual female trait, and women who don’t fit this become painted as bi or lesbian.

    For people who don’t like reading f/f because they don’t enjoy reading about women’s bodies being carassed, etc- what about in m/f when the male carasses the female’s body? (since you can’t read body language online, I’ll add to say I’m asking this as a curious question, not accusing).

89. 

    Ehren said on 05.15.08 at 07:26 AM • [link]

    It’s not surprising that no one is wanting to sell it, really, though I’m sure Barnes and Noble would do it since I can personally attest to them having a gay/lesbian section with racy stuff on the shelves. (Harry Potter release bash and a friend and I were trying to hide from the crowd.) As far as I can tell most people find the gay scene rather squicky or just generally uncomfortable. Yes, it’s bias. Serious bias because most people in America don’t actually want to BUY it nor do they want to see it. I know I don’t like it, but I’m not going to force people to do what I want just to satisfy me. Most are more willing to look at yaoi (gay boi stuff) than yuri (gay grrl stuff) on account that girls don’t like to read about girls doing it with other girls, though that doesn’t stop the yuri fangirls doing it. I still don’t understand the fascination with either.

    just saying that while it’s very irritating that America can’t just get a grip and send it off to the Gay/Lesbo section of the store where it belongs rather than stomping on it before it can even get that far it’s also very understandable.

90. 

    December Quinn/Stacia Kane said on 05.15.08 at 08:27 AM • [link]

    I personally have never been asked by an editor to remove any f/f stuff from my work. I honestly think if you’re beng told to take it out, you need to go over your editor’s head and complain.

    And I think I’m the only woman here who is not really into m/m (or did I miss a few others?) I could take it or leave it, I don’t seek it out at all.

91. 

    kirsten saell said on 05.15.08 at 08:57 AM • [link]

    A lot of m/m has really left me cold, but the same could be said of any other gender combination out there. I do have my preferances, but I really am open to anything, as long as it’s well written and emotionally involving. I have found wonderful m/m stories almost as hard to find as great f/f—the only real difference seems to be the high ratio of gay:lesbian available.

    Two recent books I purchased, a f/m/m/m and a f/f, didn’t hold me past the first 50 pages, even though the sex was competently written. I just didn’t feel anything for the characters, and that’s something I need, not just in romance, but in erotica as well.

    We all know that phrase, men who think with their dicks? Well, apparently, I have sex with my brain. The mechanics of the process don’t matter so much. It’s a lot more complex than body parts for me.

92. 

    Cat Marsters said on 05.15.08 at 11:34 AM • [link]

    But, Cat, it IS the case.  This seems real simple to me.  Men wanting men is not all that different from women wanting men.  We’re attracted to essentially the same things.

    But there’s no heroine to put yourself in the place, of, was my point.  when I’m reading m/m I don’t go, “Mm, I wish he was doing that to me!” because, well, I don’t have the stuff he’s doing it to.

    As for EC….maybe their policy’s changed.  My title Almost Human actually opened with the heroine in bed with a other woman, and I was never told to change that.  Although I did notice it wasn’t used for the website excerpt.  TPTB also allowed mention of a f/f/m scene, again with the heroine, after she’d met the hero.

    I’m sure, round about the time I was first submitting to e-publishers a couple of years ago, that EC and several others said they were actively interested in acquiring gay and lesbian fiction.  Since EC is very driven by the bottom line, I can only assume that it just hasn’t done well for them.

93. 

    Peaches said on 05.15.08 at 11:55 AM • [link]

    the whole MM over FF thing just smacks of hypocracy.  I’m not saying yaoi fans should read yuri if they dont want to, but I am saying that to discount femslash while promoting guy on guy is like saying ‘It’s only okay for men to be homosexuals, because I think that’s hot’.  Telling one to come out and play and the other to keep it in the closet is just a twisted step backwards for gay rights.

    Personally, if I were to read slash erotica, I’d much rather read FF than MM.  Practically all my friends are into the guyrotica, but I could never get on board.  I’m all for boy couples, but I dont need the details (and yet my gay neighbor comes over and tells me them anyway….)  and that is a personal prefrence.  Mainly, my prefrence for not reading anything to do with anal sex.  I just dont find the anus sexy—in fact I think it’s the least sexy part of the human body.  But that’s my opinion. 

    And that said, if I were to come accross a MM scene in a regular hetero book, or a MF anal scene—-I’d just skip it!  I wouldn’t red flag it just for a paragraph, I truely dont think that’s necessary.  If half the book is something some folks wont like, fine, point it out in reviews by all means.  But just a scene?  Page hop, you won’t die.

94. 

    Anon said on 05.15.08 at 12:15 PM • [link]

    Yes. I have. I pitched a book to my editor who declined it without seeing it when she found out there was more than one f/f scene.

    *shrugs* Two of my favorite books have f/f scenes.  Sasha White’s novella in Secret Thoughts: Erotique and Amie Stuart’s Hands On. Both beautifully and exquisitely written. And hotter than Vegas in the summer.

    I understand f/f isn’t everyone’s thing but why is m/m more than acceptable and f/f treated like an evil perverted stepchild? I’m not going to say I’m straight, hell I believe in the right time and place any person is only as “straight” as their options. I just really appreciate how beautiful people are. Male, female, in between.

    spam verif word: close48 :|

95. 

    Lisa said on 05.15.08 at 12:45 PM • [link]

    Am I the only straight woman in the world who dislikes m/m and likes f/f? I’m afraid it’s going to sound homophobic when I say that m/m squicks me out, but I genuinely don’t mean it that way. My mother and father having sex squicks me out, too. I think it’s just that it’s a bedroom I have absolutely no desire to be in. And I know they wouldn’t want me there, either - so m/m to me always feels voyeuristic, or even porny. Although maybe I just have unpleasant associations from high school friends who got into yaoi in a very shallow and objectifying way.

    F/F? Now that sounds hot. Women’s bodies are fantastic. I would gladly read about women enjoying sex with other women. M/M, not so much.

96. 

    lizziebee said on 05.15.08 at 01:49 PM • [link]

    I grew up in a rather sheltered household, with an Italian step-Dad, and a quite naive mother (who had never heard the word Blow Job, or understood what it meant until she was in her 30’s), where it was quite clear that I was never to be different. Despite this, I’ve grown up so, and am happily attracted to girls as much as I am boys. At the age of 28, I’ve been aware of my sexuality for 10 years now, and happily entertain myself with both M/F, M/M and F/F fiction. Not only that, I’m an avid reader of fan fiction (and I like M/M as much as F/F in that arena), and have been for over a decade now. I don’t understand, although I’m quite aware of it, the fact that many female readers who love M/M fiction can’t stand F/F fiction. Don’t get it.

    I agree with Peaches, who said that the preference of M/M over F/F smacks of hypocracy, however it’s a personal choice. HOWEVER! If you’re squicked out by a woman’s body being caressed on the pages of some F/F erotica, I seriously hope that you have a similar problem reading a M/F sexual scene, which also writes about a woman’s body being caressed. I personally believe that it is the way that society has (a) sidelined (honest) discussion about the female body amongst females, and (b) treated M/M or F/F relationships. They’re more accepted now, but they sure aren’t STILL amongst sections of the community, who will support an indivdual’s choice, but will be horrified if their son or daughter choses thus.

    I think it’s quite sad that F/F erotica is being so sidelined. Order it, and put it in the right section (NOT in a section on it’s own, chucked down the back somewhere), and stop being so squeamish about having authors sign in stores. You wouldn’t be squeamish if Sarah Waters were coming along to your city, would you.

97. 

    Trix said on 05.15.08 at 02:12 PM • [link]

    Here’s another lesbo putting her 2c in.

    I do get uncomfortable thinking about another girl hitting on me, not because I’m homophobic but because in my head at least, being around girl’s is a comfort zone, a place where you can go and not be oggled. And for me, you take that away, make it a place where someone is just as likely to be staring at your chest as anywhere else, and I get nervous.

    I don’t want to seem like I’m picking on you, but unfortunately, this is a form of homophobia. It’s not at all like the kind where you think us queers are the spawn of Satan and deserve to burn in hell… but the assumption that us dykes would automatically be checking out a straight chick’s chest is a form of prejudice. I’m not going to lie and say I don’t occasionally notice attractive women, but I also don’t to ogle complete strangers, covertly or overtly. Just think - 5% of the women you encounter (at least) are gay or bi. Do you feel like one-in-twenty women is checking you out? I doubt it.

    Getting back to the topic at hand, someone said they thought f/f erotica would be stocked in the erotica section because erotica supersedes any other genre. Not as far as I can tell: all the lesbian erotica I’ve found (which is probably different to straight-oriented f/f stuff) is in the gay ghetto in the bookshop.

    Lesbian erotica is its own genre because of the avoidance of men in its universe. You can find plenty of mainstream erotica that has some f/f action… but you will never find lesbian erotica that has m/f action. Like many subcultures, the boundaries can get policed a bit more rigorously. I would hope, though, as more queer-tinged stuff finds its way into the mainstream, there would be a bit more relaxing of that boundary.

    Having said that, there is a big cultural difference between queer-orientated fic and the straight kind. While I like reading some het erotica, I can get quickly dropped out of my WSOD by sexist bullcrap, manly macho posturing, submissive and TSTL behaviour, housewifery, babies, or battle of the sexes or mars/venus “humour”. I know I’m much less likely to find any of that rubbish in queer fic. There are other cultural differences - the HEA isn’t (generally) marriage, for example, and others that I can’t put my finger on right now - which means that the range of het erotica I read is going to be limited.

    As for why (straight) women don’t like f/f content, I think it’s likely to be a combination of things that others have mentioned. Firstly, I think a disgusted reaction is definitely a form of homophobia or internalised misogyny. What someone said earlier about “knowing how a woman responds” typifies what many straights think about lesbian sex - that it’s all hand-holding, hearts and moons, and a bit of sweet cunnilingus. Try having sex with a typical butch sometime, and see just how much their responses are like your own. Hah, and there’s a cultural trope you’ll never find in a straight-orientated f/f scene. Of course most lesbians aren’t into butch/femme, but some of us still are, and there’s often a tinge of that element in many dyke relationships.

    I understand a lot more if there’s a “meh” element about f/f scenes. I don’t see that as being any different to reading about anal sex - if it doesn’t work for you, a butt-fucking scene or two probably isn’t going to ruin your enjoyment of an otherwise hot book, but it’d be unlikely that you’d pick up Hot Buttseks Bounty III. And fair enough too. Some people mentioned about being squicked by “lesbian” porn - I am too!!! I refuse to watch lesbian porn; it’s vile. And incompetent (an example I made of what I’m talking about. NSFW!). And not hot in the slightest. I actually prefer watching gayboy porn - no sexism, they look fit, they don’t make that annoying ooh aaah sound, and I don’t feel like an object. I’m pleased to report most f/f written erotica is much better (other than that written on porn websites, of course).

    I do hope the boundaries get a bit more blurred, and we have a few more f/f scenes (or even, OMG relationships) in mainstream books. One thing I like very much about the Kushiel books, for example, is that one of the protagonist’s major relationships is with another woman - in fact their interaction informs the entire story arc. More of that, plz.

    Also, will nobody think of the bisexual women!? :-)

98. 

    Julie Leto said on 05.15.08 at 03:09 PM • [link]

    As for why (straight) women don’t like f/f content, I think it’s likely to be a combination of things that others have mentioned. Firstly, I think a disgusted reaction is definitely a form of homophobia or internalised misogyny.

    You’re kidding, right?  If I, a flaming heterosexual, don’t like to read f/f content, I either hate gays or I hate myself?

    WTF?

    How about…f/f doesn’t turn me on.  F/f is not my personal preference.  I’m not interested…end of story.  I’m about the man and the woman.  What’s wrong with that?  Nothing, that’s what.

    To be fair, f/f doesn’t disgust me, but it’s also not what I look for in good erotica.

99. 

    Ri L. said on 05.15.08 at 04:59 PM • [link]

    I do get uncomfortable thinking about another girl hitting on me ... being around girls is a comfort zone, a place where you can go and not be oggled. And for me, you take that away, make it a place where someone is just as likely to be staring at your chest as anywhere else, and I get nervous.

    Funny you should say that.  One time back in college, I was all tarted up in a corset for my school’s drag ball, and I was hanging out with a group that included my future boyfriend.  It made me nervous that he was looking at my chest, so I went and hid in my friend’s room.  She’s bi, and she ended up ogling my chest far more than he did!  Yet somehow I still felt more comfortable with her.

    I’m glad to hear people talking about girl bits being icky.  I’m very self-conscious about mine.  I don’t like them one bit, and that’s definitely a hangup.

100. 

     kirsten saell said on 05.15.08 at 05:19 PM • [link]

     Also, will nobody think of the bisexual women!? :-)

     I would hope most m/f/f menage type romances center around a bisexual women. I have often wondered how difficult it would be for a bi woman to be forced into a permanent monogomous relationship with either a man or a woman. Wouldn’t she always feel like she was denying a part of herself? My latest book, under consideration with my editor, explores this—I hope in a convincing way, although I could easily have gotten everything horribly wrong, lol!

     I will agree that with f/f, it’s largely all about its intended audience. F/f written by men (or the visual stuff aimed at men) will get me hot, sure, but leave me feeling hollow and kinda in need of a shower. But the stuff written by women for women tends to affect me in a very deep and positive way. I think many women’s ideas of f/f are tainted by the scads of male-oriented material out there, and project those feelings of objectification onto all of it.

101. 

     Jennifer Armintrout said on 05.15.08 at 05:40 PM • [link]

     You’re kidding, right?  If I, a flaming heterosexual, don’t like to read f/f content, I either hate gays or I hate myself?

     WTF?

     THANK YOU!  I thought I was losing my mind, reading all of this, “Oh, we as women are trained to hate our sexuality/sexual organs/smells/etc.” No, I don’t hate my vagina.  Just because I won’t let it out to play with other vaginas doesn’t mean I’m ashamed of it.  It prefers to hang out with a different kind of crowd.

     And I’m not a straight woman preferring to read about guys because I’m homophobic.  The last time I checked, being attracted strictly to the opposite sex was called heterosexuality, not homophobia.

     I love how the discussion veered away from “Is it wrong for this author to be discriminated against because she writes f/f scenes,” straight into “You have to want to read about women doing it or else you hate gays and also your lady parts!”  If you don’t want to read it, it’s not your thing.  If you don’t want anyone else reading about it, then you have problems.

102. 

     lijakaca said on 05.15.08 at 06:02 PM • [link]

     I think that Trix was specifically talking about the strong ‘disgusted’ reactions, and not the people (like me) who are just not interested in f/f (or m/m, for that matter).

     I mean, I personally don’t ‘get’ the appeal of yaoi, but it doesn’t repel me - heck, I even hosted a discussion group of it during a con and picked some up to have materials. It was an interesting discussion actually, because there was a few women and one gay man in the group, and I always wondered how gay men viewed yaoi, since it’s not written by or with them in mind.

     Anyways, same deal with f/f - it doesn’t appeal to me, but it doesn’t repel me either. If a m/f romance had some f/f or m/m in it, I might skip the bedroom scenes, but I might not if they were well written - I dunno, I’ve never read one (except for one SF novel when I was really young, in Titan or something by…Frank Varley? something like that. It surprised me and made me feel uncomfortable at the time, but I’ve matured in the intervening 18 years…) And I wish there were more non-het relationships shown in romances - it would reflect reality a lot better. As long as it’s not the homo character = BAD thing, whenever I see it (quite often in older romances) it pisses me off.

103. 

     Amie Stuart said on 05.15.08 at 06:06 PM • [link]

     December/Stacia…count me in as not excited over m/m. Lisa…come sit with me and December *ggg*

     Anon I could hug you.

     I just really appreciate how beautiful people are. Male, female, in between.

     WORD…..I have nothing else to add. I think ya’ll have all said it for me.

     And my verification word is BOTH39 ;)

104. 

     Willa said on 05.15.08 at 06:09 PM • [link]

     I love how the discussion veered away from “Is it wrong for this author to be discriminated against because she writes f/f scenes,” straight into “You have to want to read about women doing it or else you hate gays and also your lady parts!”

     Paraphrasing for time:

     I don’t think that’s how people are framing it. A few people seem to be getting upset at being labeled homophobic. I don’t think that’s going on. People do seem to be saying that a knee-jerk OTT reaction to lesbian sex/relationships indicates homophobia, not disinterest. If you don’t have a knee-jerk reaction, then don’t assume you’re being called homophobic.

     /paraphrasing. And quasi-mini-lecturing. Hm.

105. 

     kirsten saell said on 05.15.08 at 06:10 PM • [link]

     I love how the discussion veered away from “Is it wrong for this author to be discriminated against because she writes f/f scenes,” straight into “You have to want to read about women doing it or else you hate gays and also your lady parts!”

     Jennifer and Julie, I’ve been reading the same comments as you, and I’m not seeing that at all. There’s a big difference between not reading it because you find it “meh”, or you can’t get into it, or you just prefer other things, or even find it a turn off—and finding it so disgusting that one scene of it would color your entire reaction to an otherwise good book.

     I think readers find it interesting that some of the women who consume m/m like it’s going out of style are the same ones who won’t touch f/f because they find descriptions of female parts—THEIR OWN DAMN PARTS!—squicky. No one here is saying that’s you. Christ, you’re allowed not to like the stuff. Just like I have no idea why D/s is so appealing when I find it kinda annoying and a turn off. Doesn’t mean I’d write off a whole book because it contained a bit of the stuff.

106. 

     Jill Sorenson said on 05.15.08 at 06:17 PM • [link]

     I don’t think that women who dislike f/f are repressed or homophobic, or that women who prefer m/m makes are “more heterosexual.”  I’m straight.  I like guys.  Penises are awesome!  I don’t think I could get any more hetero than I already am.  But m/m doesn’t turn me on, and f/f doesn’t turn me off.

     This has been an interesting thread.

107. 

     Jill Sorenson said on 05.15.08 at 06:21 PM • [link]

     Oops.  Wish I could edit my post.  The first sentence should be:

     “I don’t think women who dislike f/f are repressed or homophobic, or that women who prefer m/m are “more heterosexual.”

108. 

     SB Sarah said on 05.15.08 at 06:36 PM • [link]

     I suspect that the idea of “omg vaginas ew gross get it away booo!” is a mentality that may be informing some of the newsletters and bookstores Zane cites who are refraining from hosting signings and allowing ads in their newsletters. So in that sense it is germane to discuss why penises are ok, but vaginas are not - but the idea that Zane is facing a battle to even promote the book, despite being a high seller, despite her books being stolen out of the library and the bookstores, despite demand for her erotic anthologies, she can’t advertise carpet-lovin’ hot women? What the shit? my understanding was that in all things, money triumphs. Is it possible that the almighty wang of profit is no match for the power of anti-lesbian or anti-vagina sentiment?

109. 

     SB Sarah said on 05.15.08 at 06:38 PM • [link]

     Jill: You should be able to edit your post. There’s an [Edit?] link right next to the time and date stamp of your comment.

110. 

     Eisenkreis said on 05.15.08 at 06:39 PM • [link]

     I wanted to add a note here, even though I already commented already:

     Someone mentioned that it seems like ‘a lot of lesbians’ are into m/m—to which I say that someone’s earlier assertion about how feminizing men in fanfic tends to be a common trend. This much is true: I’ve tried reading m/m before and ... unfortunately I know too many men, and too much about male sociology, to buy half of the drivel that’s written about that kind of pairing. That having been said: m/m written by women is an immediate, horrifyingly fast turn-off for me. Even when it’s written by a man I almost never enjoy it, and yet most of my male friends are gay.

     That having been said: I actually do discriminate in my fiction. A m/m interaction that’s overfeminized will make me put a book down immediately. So will buttsex.

     This may be a complete non-sequitor, but I find it interesting that I’ve had this preference ever since I picked up my first erotica book. The only scenes that really got me going in the m/m category were interactions between guys who were *obviously guys*, and they were written by Clive Barker, who is an unrepetant flamer himself. The thing is, I realized that m/m written by women usually squicks me for the same reason f/f written by men does: it’s unrealistic and the portrayel is one that TENDS TO BE (but is not always) gussied up in some genderbent fashion that makes no sense (saying nothing of most male writers’ inability to understand that women don’t get off by penetration alone, a fallacy which is doubly unforgivable in female writers).

     With f/f, I fought against being so enthralled by it by writing a lot of hetero material and focussing most of my energy on describing the woman involved—largely because that’s where my interests were directed. If there was too much focus on the male, I had to really, really, REALLY like the character for it to sink in, and even then I found myself skimming anything having to do with male masturbation and etc, unless the situation had an extra flare of kink to it (a female witness, perhaps?). Needless to say, I COMPLETELY understand a straight woman’s compulsion to avoid f/f, but I also think that it does have to do with the same reaction men have towards gay men, which is to say that there is definitely an element of homophobia amongst the ladies.

     As it’s been said, preference counts for a lot, but I wanted to make a secondary comment so as to better illustrate that part of my own response to all this.

     Amusingly, I was watching Will and Grace a whole lot none too long ago and found myself starting to flinch at the digs towards female genitalia and lesbians just because they were getting to be so numerous. Granted, Will and Grace takes digs at some of the fallacies in gay MALE culture as well, but it’s not nearly so cut and dry and usually by the end of the episode a pleasant face has been painted on it. So it’s not a matter of ‘is there more discrimination?’—there is no question. In the mainstream, as I said before, lesbians tend to get shit for their relationships being transitory or ‘less than’ anything involving THE ALMIGHTY MANHAMMER.  So of course, women both straight and lesbian are going to be affected by this in one way or another.

     http://www.bettydodson.com is a site all of you ladies should really check out. Not work safe!

     Also: to the girl who said something about being ‘uncomfortable’ around dykes… I hate to put it so bluntly, but first thing you have to do is get over your ego :) Just because a woman is into women doesn’t mean she’s going to be *into you*. So yes, I couldn’t help find that comment slightly homophobic and just shy of funny. I’m not trying to make fun, but really… I mean, we all laugh at guys who say the same thing.

     I know I do, anyway.

111. 

     kirsten saell said on 05.15.08 at 06:43 PM • [link]

     Is it possible that the almighty wang of profit is no match for the power of anti-lesbian or anti-vagina sentiment?

     I think that anti-lesbian/anti-vagina sentiment is more pervasive than people realize. And it’s disheartening that a National Chain would tell an author, “No, you can’t promote that here because our decent, god-fearing customers might be offended, but sure, we’ll still carry it, ‘cause hey, you’re a big seller and we’re still happy to profit from you.”

112. 

     kirsten saell said on 05.15.08 at 06:53 PM • [link]

     Trix, I just went and looked at your lolporn, and almost had to give myself the Heimlich maneuver I was laughing so hard! It perfectly showcases everything I hate about male-produced lesbian porn, and how they still manage to make it all about the penis.

     Honestly, if this is what most women think lesbain erotica is, no wonder they avoid it.

113. 

     orangehands said on 05.15.08 at 07:35 PM • [link]

     The only scenes that really got me going in the m/m category were interactions between guys who were *obviously guys*

     This is one thing that annoyed me. Now I haven’t had anywhere close to a large enough sample yet, but it seems like they have to have a “feminate” man and a “masculine” one. I’m not saying couples aren’t like that or that it’s right to even label characteristics “feminine” or “masculine”, but it just gets a little annoying. Thanks for the Clive rec.

     I’m so weird. While I’m liking the m/m stories (despite a few flaws), not big on anal sex at all (never a big on m/f anal either). So my question- what’s some good m/m romances that aren’t erotica?

114. 

     snarkhunter said on 05.15.08 at 07:39 PM • [link]

     There is a HUGE difference between going “f/f? meh.” and “f/f? EEEEWWWW OMG WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU?!!!21!!” And those of us who are gesturing towards internalized misogyny and, yes, homophobia are very keenly aware of this difference. If you’re not into f/f, so what? Don’t read it. I could care less. It’s the latter reaction that disturbs me.

     Most people have already clarified much of what I was getting at earlier (couldn’t participate! Was on a plane for seven damned hours), but I do have two other things to add.

     First:

     snarkhunter, I’ve heard both ‘penis’ and ‘vagina’ used on tv, so I don’t know what shows you’re watching….i would actually say men’s genitalia in movies is the thing that is ‘taboo.’ Some how if the penis is erect, you get slapped with an X rating. But bare breasts can be shown all over the place. There is rarely a film with any kind full frontal male nudity…it does exist, but naked women by far outnumber the naked men.

     The penis vs. vagina thing has already been addressed, but I will add that I know it’s true just for network prime time. “Vagina” is not considered an appropriate term for that audience. Cable may be different.

     And breasts are not genitalia. They’re not. Women’s breasts are adored and fetishized. Women’s *genitals* are stigmatized. THAT’s what I’m talking about. Penises will garner you an NC-17, but a bared vulva that’s visible to the camera? No way that would even fly at NC-17.

     Second, I don’t know if you were intending to do so, Wry Hag, but this:

     rather read about the glories of hard dick than of “slippery folds” and oozing va-jay-jay.  I know I would.  The latter just has way too much squick factor.

     just proves my point.

     Why is there squick factor in slippery folds, but not in “man seed” spurting all over the place? (The most disgusting thing I have EVER read in any piece of erotic (though I’d say this was anything but) fiction anywhere was the phrase “ropy strands of cum.”)

     I’m not saying you should like f/f, but I am saying that finding descriptions of women’s genitalia squicky is a fundamental part of this internalized sense of girls = unclean.

115. 

     snarkhunter said on 05.15.08 at 07:41 PM • [link]

     Oh, and let me throw in my voice with the “straight woman who loves f/f” crowd. I also enjoy m/m and threesomes and m/f, so…I guess I just have very catholic tastes. :D

116. 

     SB Sarah said on 05.15.08 at 07:47 PM • [link]

     “ropy strands of cum.”

     NO NO DO NOT WANT.

117. 

     Eisenkreis said on 05.15.08 at 07:58 PM • [link]

     This is one thing that annoyed me. Now I haven’t had anywhere close to a
     large enough sample yet, but it seems like they have to have a “feminate”
     man and a “masculine” one. I’m not saying couples aren’t like that or
     that it’s right to even label characteristics “feminine” or
     “masculine”, but it just gets a little annoying. Thanks for the Clive rec.

     ‘Sacrament’ is the main book Barker wrote that has a lot of gay scenes, one of which is between two *older* men, one of which is described as not particularly hot, but I found myself really enthralled by the interactions which actually had me in an identity crisis for a moment there *laughs*. There’s a HUGE amount of homosexual content in that book (as well there should be since the lead character is gay) and I couldn’t for the life of me put it down, which is totally rare for me.

     ‘Imajica’ has a lot of genderbending in general, and homosexual overtones on BOTH sides of the fence (Clive can write as much f/f as he wants, I’m totally for that). ‘Coldheart Canyon’ has a wide array of gender pairings and is beautifully written in concerns to the hedonistic scenerios.

     He does explore some squicky material in both, but his erotic works are so intense and outright beautiful. That man can seriously turn a phrase.

     Otherwise: You’re right. The sample you’ve got is pretty much the basis of a lot of fanfic and fiction overall. I am all for male characters exploring their sexuality, but honestly, I have to see inclination first, and turning them into a woman in a man’s body—I may as well be reading about women, you know? So in the end, it’s worth repeating that I realize that my aversion to m/m is thanks to the target audience *being* women, and most women needing something to relate to in the characters. It just so happens that the parts turn them on at the same time.

     It’s just ten times worse when authors feminize a character that is CLEARLY a tough guy without trying to be ironic about it.

118. 

     Shannon C. said on 05.15.08 at 08:04 PM • [link]

     Wow. This was a really interesting thread, and one about which I have a lot to say.

     First of all, I identify as bisexual, and primarily read M/F or M/M/F when I’m reading romance. I would *love* to read an F/F romance, if I could find one that wasn’t just a short quickie story and which had depth. I got hugely, hugely into uber-Xena fanfiction around the time I was coming to grips with the fact that I wasn’t as straight as I’d always figured. (Uber fanfiction, in this context, refers to writing stories about original characters who, in this case, happened to physically resemble Lucy Lawless and Renee O’Connor.) My favorite of these stories was B.L. Miller’s Accidental Love, which you can read here:
     http://blmiller.net/room/romance/accidental1.html
     If memory serves, this story is about as explicit as your typical mainstream romance.

     Anyway,I wish I knew where to look for stuff like this that I could buy, because there are obviously a few of us out there who would read it. I also write romance reviews on another blog, and would go out of my way to read and review F/F books if (1) I knew about them and (2) I could get ‘em in e-format. So obviously I wouldn’t be the sort of reviewer who’d pan a book because of a one-paragraph scene.

     All that being said, I agree with a comment someone made earlier. The F/F I *have* seen and read did feel porny. They were quick scenes, and in one particularly egregious case, the F/F stuff was mostly so that the virginal heroine could get primed and ready for a man. The entire time she was fantasizing about the book’s hero, and so the scene felt really exploitive to me.

119. 

     kirsten saell said on 05.15.08 at 08:17 PM • [link]

     “ropy strands of cum.”

     Is it weird that I’m actually more okay with the “ropy strands” than with the word “cum” spelled that way? I mean, I have used “come” in reference to the products of both male and female orgasm, and it looks fine to my eye. But “cum”? Bleh.

120. 

     Nadia said on 05.15.08 at 09:14 PM • [link]

     Is it weird that I’m actually more okay with the “ropy strands” than with the word “cum” spelled that way? I mean, I have used “come” in reference to the products of both male and female orgasm, and it looks fine to my eye. But “cum”? Bleh.

     Me, too!  “Cum” jars my internal editor and screams porn, not erotic.

     I’m a straight female, and I do love me some well-written smut.  My husband also enjoys the side effects. ;)  I don’t have an extensive collection of romantica or erotica, and have yet to pick up anything with a f/f scene, so I can’t say if it does or does not do it for me.  But I’m thinking that if it’s well-crafted, it’s gonna get the motor running, regardless of my real-life experiences -  same as the m/m, f/m/m or BDSM stuff that I’ve previously enjoyed.  How the words are strung together is going to be more important than the body parts in question. 

     Feeling79:  Oh, I could definitely be feeling it.

121. 

     Gail said on 05.15.08 at 09:38 PM • [link]

     So it’s not just that lesbians=wrong, it’s that violent (aka bad) women= lesbians too. Passvity becomes a heterosexual female trait, and women who don’t fit this become painted as bi or lesbian.

     Hijacking the thread to go back to the fem dom thing. I think this is why it’s not popular. The woman is supposed to be passive and submissive and not ask for (demand) what she wants, but be grateful for whatever the man gives her. Of course, erotica written for women tends to have dominant males who give the woman uber-orgazms in a dominatingly powerful way. And yet…

     Go back—WAY back—to the original romantic ideal from the medieval era. The woman was put on a pedestal (not my favorite place to be) and worshiped by her humble adoring knight who carried out her every command. He was still manly, fighting in her honor in tournaments and stuff, but she commanded him.

     Then again, it’s the submissive who is supposed to be in charge, in a D/s relationship, the submissive who says when to stop. Or so I am told.

     Then again, again, there’s a sociology/psychology study of longterm successful marriages out there from several years back that discovered the statistical fact (for what that’s worth) that the most successful marriages were the ones where HE did what SHE wanted…

     Damn straight.

122. 

     DS said on 05.15.08 at 10:30 PM • [link]

     Wow, this took me back.  I remember when Naiad Press was said to be the lesbian Harlequin—it was meant as an insult.  I went to see if Naiad still existed and found that it had closed down but the authors were with something called Bella Books.  However,  no ebook versions!  Not even on Amazon—is no one thinking of profit here?

     Anyway, I was starting in the direction of mentioning Curious Wine by Katherine V. Forrest when I wandered off track.  Although I am not sure how it has stood up—it was considered hot in its time—1983—is is still in print.

123. 

     orangehands said on 05.16.08 at 12:14 AM • [link]

     Eisenkreis: thanks so much for the recs.  and when you wrote It’s just ten times worse when authors feminize a character that is CLEARLY a tough guy without trying to be ironic about it, yes, exactly!

124. 

     RfP said on 05.16.08 at 07:08 AM • [link]

     This is not at all directed at anyone here, but I think internalized misogyny is both real and common, and it depresses me to hear about more instances of its strength.  However, my reading this week is surprisingly cheering on the homophobia front, if not the “girl cooties” issue.

     A few days ago I read Suzanne Brockmann’s All Through the Night (in which Robin & Jules marry).  I was glad to see tasteful m/m sex scenes in mainstream fiction; I think Brockmann manages to show Robin & Jules’ relationship as normal, healthy, and (I hope) unthreatening to her readership.

     Coincidentally, today I picked up the new Amanda Quick, The Third Circle.  Among the secondary characters are a lesbian couple:

     Like his lover, Adam Harrow, Pierce was, in reality, a woman living life as a man. The pair moved in a strange netherworld inhabited by other females who had chosen a similar masquerade.

     Yes, it’s yet another gay best friend, but this time it’s a woman and it’s in a Jayne Ann Krentz.  It doesn’t get much more mainstream than that, so perhaps the next barrier is on its way down….  What could it be next, a Nora Roberts heroine with a female ex? ;)

     Pollyanna over and out.  Will resume normal Oscar the Grouch attitude in the morning.

125. 

     MFL said on 05.16.08 at 03:03 PM • [link]

     I must have missed something here. The signings were not allowed because the book is lesbian erotica? Can someone please tell me this is a misunderstanding, my misunderstanding. Feels like we have just stepped back in time

126. 

     Darlene Marshall said on 05.16.08 at 04:15 PM • [link]

     Rfp—Jayne Anne Krentz has had positively portrayed lesbian characters in her books for years.  One of her early Amanda Quick historicals showed the heroine being raised by a lesbian couple, which gave her insights into why the hero had been dumped by his former fiancee.

     Michelle Martin, who wrote the lesbian Regency Pembroke Park, over 20 years ago also has done contemporaries with lesbian couples as friends of the heroine and hero.

     So that’s why my original comment on this was along the lines of “color me puzzled”.  It’s not like the whole idea of F/F relationships has never been touched on in Romancelandia.

127. 

     Vyc said on 05.17.08 at 12:34 AM • [link]

     I have often wondered how difficult it would be for a bi woman to be forced into a permanent monogomous relationship with either a man or a woman. Wouldn’t she always feel like she was denying a part of herself? My latest book, under consideration with my editor, explores this—I hope in a convincing way, although I could easily have gotten everything horribly wrong, lol!

     Speaking as a bisexual, I have to say, that’s one of the most common misconceptions about us out there. Being bisexual is about having the choice between either gender, not the requirement to have both. I appreciate your desire to be sensitive about this subject, but monogamy is just as possible and likely with bisexuals as it is with lesbians/gays/straight people, so you’re, um, kind of working from a misconception in the first place…. (I hope you’re not too far along in your book!)

     I’m also a fanfic writer of m/m and f/m (or m/f), but almost never f/f. This annoys me, as I’d love to write more f/f, but I don’t often run into series with numerous women that a) interest me and b) make sense to be paired up (although my current love, Fire Emblem 10, has about 70 playable characters, so I’m not having nearly as much of a problem as usual!). I’m thinking about that movie rule, although I can’t remember what it’s called. Something about only watching movies where two major female characters can have a conversation that isn’t about men. Anyone remember this one?

     Back on topic, the trend of feminizing one of the two men in m/m really makes me cranky. The reason I read and write about the two men in a given pairing is because I like the way their characters interact, and if one of their characters has to be warped beyond all recognition for them to get it on, then, uh, no thanks. I’d say I’d go read het if I wanted to read about a man and a woman in a pairing, but then that gets into sexist traditional gender roles, which is another big DO NOT WANT right there.

     [/$0.02]

128. 

     Vyc said on 05.17.08 at 12:40 AM • [link]

     Also forgot to add: I’m not quite sure why my favourite characters in the (usually Japanese videogame or animanga) series I’m involved with are usually men. I’m thinking it’s either the roles and personalities the men are assigned as opposed to the ones given to the women, or (yikes) internalised misogyny on my part. I’m not quite sure which I should hope for—internalised misogyny is embarrassing and upsetting, but much easier to fix than the larger societal problem of the roles and personalities women tend to be given….

129. 

     Kassiana said on 05.17.08 at 04:03 PM • [link]

     “Am I the only straight woman in the world who dislikes m/m and likes f/f?”
     —Dunno. I’m straight (so straight that I’ve told my husband if I were to switch sexes, I’d be extraordinarily gay) and I like m/m and don’t like f/f. I was also raised by two feminists and ‘60’s liberals and am a Unitarian Universalist Pagan. So no, I wasn’t taught to hate gayness or my own body or nonsense like that. I just don’t get off on f/f.

     And on caresses…believe me, it matters who’s caressing whom. There are numerous guys out there who I wouldn’t let touch me at all. But if given a choice, I’d rather have a guy caress me sexually than any woman.

130. 

     RfP said on 05.17.08 at 07:42 PM • [link]

     Jayne Anne Krentz has had positively portrayed lesbian characters in her books for years. ... So that’s why my original comment on this was along the lines of “color me puzzled”.  It’s not like the whole idea of F/F relationships has never been touched on in Romancelandia.

     I do see a big difference between a gay secondary character and a protagonist who’s gay or a sex scene with gay characters.  But it was a cheering coincidence in my reading that I ran across two romances in a row with positive portrayals of same-sex relationships.  Not because either m/m or f/f particularly hits my buttons, but because
     1. I like variety in my reading
     2. I like seeing the genre expand to include more readers and more inclusive messages
     3. If vampires can have happy endings, ANYone can have happy endings.

131. 

     Trix said on 05.21.08 at 01:17 PM • [link]

     Thanks lijakaca and snarkhunter - it was precisely the disgusted reaction I was talking about with regard to homophobia and internalised misogyny. Perhaps I should have italicised the word “disgusted”. But if the people complaining about my wilfully-incorrect characterisation of them had bothered to read the next paragraph, I mention the fact that I totally grok the “meh” (i.e “not for me”) reaction and draw an analogy between lesbian seXX0rs and straight buttsecks if you’re not that keen on either. If the book is otherwise appealing, then you’re probably not going to mind an occasional scene along those lines.

     kirsten saell - I’m delighted to assist with adding some humour into your day. :-)

132. 

     Eisenkreis said on 05.21.08 at 02:55 PM • [link]

     Thanks lijakaca and snarkhunter - it was precisely the disgusted reaction I was talking about with regard to homophobia and internalised misogyny. Perhaps I should have italicised the word “disgusted”.

     The use of the word ‘disgusted’ is generally the problem since regardless of the contest it’s used in, or even the VERBALIZED tone it takes, it tends to resonate a very singular message whether or not you want it to. If you meant something else, choose a word that is legitimately fitting; I for one would have raised an eyebrow even if it was stated to me in a sarcastic light in a face to face confrontation; I always have. I don’t take it lightly from gay men and I don’t take it lightly from anyone else. ‘Disgusted’ is ‘disgusted.’

     So what EXACTLY do you mean if you don’t mean that? Italicized tends to mean EMPHASIS in case you forgot, and this remains true for nearly every printed or published medium. Maybe if you used the latin variant of the term we might be playing a game of semantics, but sweetie, honey, darling—

     —we really have to give you a status update re: words and which ones you can italicize and legitimately change the meaning of. ‘Cause wow.

133. 

     Andi said on 05.24.08 at 03:38 AM • [link]

     Hi, all—this has been a great discussion! Much appreciated! I’m late to the game, but glad to be here. I write genre fiction (mysteries, spec fic, and contemporary) with primary lesbian characters, though my work always includes a veritable cornucopia of people (unless I’m writing spec fic, in which there are species other than human involved in the story). Some of my work includes f/f sex and romance and I’ve been puzzling about markets and why it seems that f/f “doesn’t sell” very well.

     Someone mentioned Naiad Press, which was a groundbreaker in the 70s and 80s because they DID publish books that featureed f/f romance and sex. Since the early 90s, there are more presses that do lesbian fiction. Bella Books is indeed the inheritor of the Naiad list and they are, in fact, doing ebooks. Not to the extent I personally think they should, but hey. Bold Strokes Books is probably the leading press in lesbian fiction and they publish maybe 30-40 new titles a year. But you’ll also now find Regal Crest (which is publishing a couple of my novels), PD Publishing, Intaglio, Spinsters Ink (they’ve been around a while), and Blue Feather. A number of other houses like Torquere (I’m published with them as well) and Bedazzled Ink take f/f fiction, as long as it’s a good story. [And please, forgive me, publishers I didn’t mention—space limitations.]

     Reading the comments here makes me realize that whoa, maybe part of the issue is that not many people know what’s out there with regard to f/f fiction and don’t know about the authors who are currently writing it. I grew up reading authors like Edgar Rice Burroughs, Ray Bradbury, and Frank Herbert and I always wondered why the women in those books weren’t kick-ass strong characters, period. I also wondered why they never seemed to hook up with other women sexually or romantically and why, when literary lesbians DID hook up, invariably they got killed or committed suicide or lived these godawful heinously depressing lives. That wasn’t my experience, so I started writing kick-ass women who know who they are, who have issues and hang-ups, good points and bad, but hook up with women. And I found some women writers who wrote those kinds of characters. Like Marion Zimmer Bradley’s Darkover series. And Anne McCaffrey’s Pern (which, yes, can be a bit heterosexist, but DANG those dragons were cool and the goldrider women did kick some serious ass) and some of Ursula K. Le Guin’s stuff.

     At any rate—I’ll be the first to admit that I have read some poorly written f/f (we in the biz call f/f “lesfic”). Hell, I’ve written it myself, in my nascent writer days. I’ve also read some poorly written non-f/f fiction, as we all undoubtedly have. But I now know which f/f writers are going to give me a dang good story as well as maybe some f/f action and there are probably at least 15 whose work I will buy sight unseen because I know I’ll be getting a hell of a read. I prefer a dang good story in conjunction with f/f action. I also read m/m now and again, but I’m one of those who prefers a good plotline in addition to the hot n’ sweaty. I read myriad genres as well as nonfiction, and I just like a well-written story, and if there are adults gettin’ it on and enjoying themselves in the logical context of the story, then that’s fine with me.

     So. Back to one of the issues at hand. Do y’all think that maybe part of the issue with f/f “not selling” might be due to the fact that a lot of readers might not know what all’s out there and what’s good (i.e. a good story)? I certainly don’t expect women who identify as straight to get off on one of my stories or books because I sometimes include a little f/f action. But maybe they’d like the surrounding plotlines. Would, like, a developing romance between two women and then a sex scene totally turn some of you off even if the book was a good story? I’m curious, because I’m trying to figure out this “f/f doesn’t sell” thing. And is it because maybe not many readers know what’s available and what’s a good read in f/f?

     Thanks a bunch, all, for the conversation.

     cheers,
     Andi

134. 

     Kassiana said on 05.24.08 at 06:51 PM • [link]

     Would, like, a developing romance between two women and then a sex scene totally turn some of you off even if the book was a good story?

     Yes, it would.

135. 

     Eisenkreis said on 05.24.08 at 11:10 PM • [link]

     I hate to be the first to make a troll-like comment here but:

     Sucks to be you, then, Kassiana.

     I will say here that reading this thread has been a practice in finding only a few shards of light amidst a buttload of disappointment. Women like to think they’re better than men in repsects to a lot of things—but homophobia and the dislike of relations between two women is so rampant amongst lol breeders lol that I’m failing to see how straight women could EVER claim to be better than their male counterparts, aside from the obvious fallacy re: humans are humans are humans etc and it doesn’t matter what’s between they’re legs.

     The only thing that seems to make this easy to stomach is the fact that many of the lol breeders lol decided to say that in spite of the fact that is was a ‘huge turn-off’ (hey girls, do you know why good looking guys aren’t in LOL BREEDER LOL porn? because guys are afraid of getting turned on by other guys) they don’t think it should’ve been kept from publication. And even then it seems like a feeble attempt to seem politically correct.

     I think the issue of female homophobia should probably be addressed in this day and age, much less feminine dislike of their own genitalia. Otherwise Kassiana’s little ‘comment’ is what blew it for me. Sorry to—whomever started this, but I’ve really had enough of I GET OFF ON SAUSAGE FESTS ONLY LOL ETC.

     If I wanted to listen to this, I’d've kept living with/occasionally sleeping with the gay men you ladies (WE HAVE A TERM FOR YOU YOU KNOW) are so desperate (wet, not much different than ‘hard and objectifying TEH LADIEZ cause lol lesbos are hot,’ but oh my god we’re women we’re so much better than that!!!!) to read about.

136. 

     Kassiana said on 05.25.08 at 08:37 PM • [link]

     I don’t like reading stories where men are castrated.

     I don’t like reading stories with graphic gore, like the descriptions of having one’s foot chopped off in Misery and how it feels to have one’s collarbone broken in Bonecrack.

     I don’t like reading stories that are clearly only male-oriented, like Alistair MacLean.

     Anyone going to say that makes me evil and bad and homophobic, like Eisenkreis did, just because I also don’t like reading stories with f/f content?

     I’m not trying to keep those stories from being published. I am part of no concerted effort to keep others from reading those stories. I just do not like them and will not give them my money or time. So fucking what? I support gay marriage in all states, not just California. I support equal rights for gay people in all ways.

     I’m not asking you to read m/m if you hate it so much. If you don’t like guys’ genitalia, go stare at your own or other womens’ for days. But daring to say that my dislike makes me bad is fucking stupid. If you want to be fucking stupid, I guess that’s your right, but don’t you dare use your fucking stupidity to libel me.

137. 

     Karen Scott said on 05.25.08 at 08:53 PM • [link]

     I’d rather not read f/f either, but that’s just a preference, and it doesn’t in any way mean I’m a raging lesbianphobe.  Come to think of it, I can’t stand m/m either.

138. 

     Andi said on 05.30.08 at 03:36 AM • [link]

     Hi, all—

     Hmm. Here’s another question. First, some context. I read Randy Wayne White’s mysteries/suspense books. He’s totally heterosexual and the character, “Doc” Ford is also heterosexual and does get some action in the books. I’m not heterosexual (I identify as lesbian), but I dig Randy’s books and I like the Ford character and the women he hooks up with and the way they negotiate their relationships/hook-ups. Because ultimately, intimate relationships between adults—regardless of the sex/gender of the parties—have common ground: how much do I like this person? Are we sexually compatible? Is this something potentially long-term? Is it just short-term and if so, am I okay with that? Who IS this person? How much do I need to know about him/her before sex? How important is that? Where are we going with this?

     These are questions that we all ask (one hopes) when we deal with sexual intimacy and regardless of the sex/gender of the partners with whom you engage, there is, I would argue, some common ground.

     So I guess I’m wondering why a good story with a lesbian protagonist who got a little action now and again would be a “turn-off” for some people and would dissuade them from buying a good book with a good plot. Especially if the character was cool and human and interesting and the plotlines were engaging. I read m/m as well, but usually within the context of mystery/suspense/sci fi because those are genres I’m personally interested in. And yeah, a lot of times, there’s an m/m pairing which is fine by me. I’m not reading to “get off” when I read these genres, but I’m always interested in how an author gets characters together (I prefer consenting adults) and how an author writes a relationship between them.

     Interesting. And if you think about it, most books that deal with mystery/suspense/sci fi or similar genres do often feature potential romantic/sexual hook-ups between adults. And if we’re talking mainstream, that’s most often heterosexual. I support authors who write engaging stories and characters. I’m not put off by consenting adult sexual/romantic relationships, whether gay, straight, bi, lesbian, or queer. Sex is a normal thing between humans and I don’t care what the physiological make-up is of the people having it. If it’s a good story and I like the characters (flaws and all), I’m going to buy the book and support the author.

     Anyway. Just another comment—I started reading m/m because I felt myself knee-jerking against it and I decided I needed to face that and see where my internal reactions were coming from. So I started reading m/m fiction and found some not-so-great stories, but I also found some really great stories with really great characters and I’m glad I took that journey because I found other talented authors. As a writer, I’m always looking to improve my craft and the more I read across genres, the more I learn. I’m not sure I could write a convincing m/m sex scene or relationship, but hey, I feel more confident about trying!

     Thanks again, all, for the discussion.

     cheers.
     —andi

139. 

     krsylu said on 05.30.08 at 04:34 AM • [link]

     Wow, this is quite the thread… I did not read all the gagillion comments, but I must admit that some of them had me quirking my lip and even shaking my head. Since I didn’t read them all, answer me this:

     Am I the only “breeder” (I have 5 kids and have been happily married for over 17 years.) here who likes to read f/f but can’t stand m/m in any form?

     I usually am the oddball in any group.

140. 

     lesbian dating girl said on 11.21.08 at 09:21 AM • [link]

     i also have kids krsylu, and cannot stand m/m but will read f/f at will hehe and this thread is out of control, shouldent we start a new one?

Care to comment?

Comments are now closed for this post.

Subscribe to These Comments