Smart Bitches, Trashy Books

That letter gives me the warm fuzzies.

Thanks for sharing, Sarah.

I’m quite happy to see men reading romance novels.  My husband still looks at me a little funny because of my reading habit, though he has said perhaps he should read one.  I’m trying to figure out which one to give him.  I figure I’ll start out with the SF ones since he’s a SF reader. 

I feel like I still need a little validation for my romance reading.  Just this week, I had one friend tell me she was very surprised to find out I read romances since I didn’t seem the type.  The term “bodice rippers” came into the conversation and the awful man-titty covers.  I feel like just because I’m an intelligent woman, I should not have to defend my reading choices.  It demeans all women to have to do so.

It’s funny that the definition of romance as “just for women” gets my hackles up. It’s as if it’s being dismissed for such huge variety of weak reasons that I grit my teeth. That labelling frightens guys off as much as saying “chick flick” or “honey, I need some tampons, could you…?.

The opposite idea would hold true, if I could actually think of any genre of fiction that is defined as “just for men”. Alas, I cannot, and perhaps suffragism and feminism has battered down the seals to those sacred tomes as well as they have in many area’s of “men’s only” activities.

Does anyone know of any “men’s only” fiction I should be reading? I don’t really think there is any, as nothing is held sacred to “guys only” stereotyping. I mean, gals read everything. Crime, mystery, academic tomes, erotica, Playboy, Maxim….

Anyways, I can only appluad the guys who have toed the line and can handle reading romance in stride, as a normal activity. As well they should.

That’s lovely.

Warm fuzzies here, also.

I so want to know Charles’s list of favorites!

I would love his lists of faves too.

I think it is great that men are comfortable writing into you and letting us know that they are reading romance.

I would love to know what they have told their friends? Do they make the same stupid comments that we hear when people find that we read romance? Do they pick on them or look at them funny? Inquiring minds want to know.

As for those here that are unhappy with the recent events- do what i do and don’t read a blog if it isn’t of interest to you. No biggie.

What a lovely letter to start off a rather dreary morning here in DC. I would LOVE to see his list of favorites!

My hubby read a few romance novels. He really liked Welcome To Temptation and doesn’t get the whole historical fascination. Now, he mostly reads one if I have a recommendation for him; otherwise he sticks with the sci/fi fantasy stuff that he prefers.

Personally, I’ve always gotten way more flack for reading and writing romance from other women rather than men. My sister and another dear friend look very condescendingly at reading romance. My sister just prefers different genres—mostly mysteries and thrillers so I don’t mind so much.

My friend only reads literary fiction which mostly bores me to tears or leaves me depressed for days.  What I hate is the sort of “What a mental lightweight you must be since you read romance” attitude. The whole assumption that I must be stupid to read romance really pisses me off.

And now I’m mad all over again at my poor friend!

Dreamy!  I’d like to find out about his favorites list, too.

Sarah, I am a bit baffled as to why anyone would give flack for featuring men who read romance novels. Is there something wrong with that? Because in my not-so-humble opinion there is not. Personally, I love Doc Turtle and Scrin’s views on the novels they have been given to read.

I also think there are many more male romance readers out there but I think they’re in hiding. Which is sad because no one should hide what they read. And if someone doesn’t like what you read then I say ‘whatever’ and under my breath call them a moron.

I love stories about how/when people started reading romance—- no matter what the reader’s gender is—- so thanks for that!

To KatherienB I’m not sure there are ‘for men’ books you should be reading—- it’s all about romance for me—- but some ‘men’s fiction’ that I never hear women discuss are W.E.B. Griffin’s war & police books, Lee Child’s Jack Reacher series, The Executioner series by Don Pendleton and Westerns.

I read romance, and I happen to be male, however I can’t actually remember a time when I didn’t read romance, so I don’t have one of these stories for y’all.

I assume my situation is just the sort of thing that happens when a third of the books in the house are romance, and you’re the sort of child who reads anything they can get their grubby little hands on voraciously; with parents who are relieved that they have something, *anything* that stops the little blighter from dismantling the furniture :)

I am a bit baffled as to why anyone would give flack for featuring men who read romance novels.

Maybe because that they’re men is emphasized quite a bit? And they’re given their own running commentary blog posts while female readers aren’t (excepting that the site is run by women, of course).  If this, “I am always eager to hear new opinions on the genre as readers of any gender are introduced to how good, how amazing, how truly enjoyable romance is,” is true, then why should it matter that they’re male? Why make that a selling point of the blog post(s)? Why don’t intelligent female readers get featured so prominently/with such excitement, or is it enough that there’s this site, DearAuthor, and likely a bunch of others that are written by women?

I’m not trying to scare away male readers or saying they shouldn’t post or whatever, but I tend to think that when their guest reviews/postings are held up because they’re male, then, yeah, it sorta drifts into the ‘needing men for validation’ area. I have to admit the “oh, the men are here to validate the genre” thought did cross my mind when those posts went up… but it also goes against what this site is about, so I’ve been trying to ignore that part of my brain (except for right now, which is to say I can see where those criticisms are coming from).

(Then I wonder if, say, the roles were reversed and a comic book blog run by men featured special posts for women readers if I’d have a problem with it. And, I don’t know, probably I wouldn’t have such a knee jerk reaction to that. Because there isn’t, to me, the same perception of needing women fans in order to gain respect for the medium, unlike with romance books and other, everyday feminist/female stuff.)

This is you and Candy’s blog, Sarah. You can talk about whatever you want.  I don’t think you need to defend yourself; your attitude and respect for the romance genre is implicit. I think it’s judgemental and harsh to tell you off; maybe it’s just the consumerist attitude populating America that is dominating people’s ideas. You’re not a corporation who has promised us a certain blog with certain content all the time. I love the way you guys write and I love the way you run your ship.

If you don’t post what’s interesting to you as a person, this blog will die. If you don’t feel like you have the freedom to say whatever you want to say, this blog will die. It will die because you would cease to love doing it. Yes, you have a certain audience from which accepting constrctive criticism is crucial. But, also, you must always experiment.

As a reader, I trust you to be true to yourself which is what entertains me and what I love.

I personally love any person’s perspective on Romance and find the exhibits from guys fascinating. It is a fact that men (and usually snobby women) don’t read romance, which is something that makes it invariably INTERESTING when they do. If you don’t like the fact a lot of romance readers find this fascinating, try and not to censor this blog due to a misplaced view that being interested in this somehow implies men’s opinions count for more, somehow violating pro-female beliefs. Let’s try and not be chauvinistic here.

It’s probably more feminist to try and not judge each other, assuming we’re on the side of the evil male gender and that our motivations are impure (especially despite the mountains of evidence to the contrary in previous posts!).

When my ex and I first moved in together, I brought boxes and boxes of books to his apartment. His first reaction? “You’re not putting those romances on my shelves!” Needless to say, the romances went on the shelves, and two years later we broke up. One of the reasons was his continual non-acceptance of my reading choices. It wasn’t enough that I read sci-fi and fantasy, but I read romance too! His literary-snob-heart couldn’t take it. And frankly, I’m better off without.

I’m sending him this letter to show him that real men not only can accept romance, they can enjoy it!

handyhunter, I can see your point of view but I don’t agree with it. I don’t think that posting a male opinion of romance novels is saying that we need to have a man’s opinion to validate ourselves because if you’re a regular Smart Bitch reader you know that’s defintely not the case. I think it’s about posting a point of view that isn’t seen all that often to begin with.

JoanneL—

but some ‘men’s fiction’ that I never hear women discuss are W.E.B. Griffin’s war & police books, Lee Child’s Jack Reacher series, The Executioner series by Don Pendleton and Westerns.

I love Jack Reacher and devoured the whole series as soon as I discovered The Killing Floor.  I also love Stephen Hunter’s Bob Lee Swagger and Barry Eisler’s John Rain.  Back in college I read all the early Destroyer novels by Murphy and Sapir with glee. 

But it’s true.  I can discuss these books with men and women and no one backs off and goes “Euuuwww!”  But if I try to interest non-romance readers in the latest Jayne Anne Krentz or Mary Balogh, the usual response is, well, “Euuuwww!” 

It’s not that having men read romance validates us so much as it helps broaden our discussion base.  Every man who steps forward and says “I read romance, and I like it!” helps break down another stupid barrier.

because if you’re a regular Smart Bitch reader you know that’s defintely not the case.

Yeah, I think I said as much in my previous post. :)

I think it’s about posting a point of view that isn’t seen all that often to begin with.

I think that’s the intention too. How it comes across. . .well, that’s another thing, sometimes.

I so want to buy Charles a bottle of wine, you have no idea.

Me, too!

Does he still live in Boston? If so, the Wine Emporium delivers…
http://www.thewineemporiumboston.com/

What a beautiful letter.

I can think of one male-only (or male-dominated) genre that used to exist but doesn’t really anymore: the adventure. I’m working on a book about the 19th c. adventure genre right now, and I am constantly struck by a) how much it was geared towards men/boys, and b) how the genre has diffused into other sub-genres and gradually evaporated in the 20th century. Westerns still exist, and Sci-Fi can be classified as a kind of adventure, but books like Treasure Island or King Solomon’s Mines seem to have vanished, while other books that could be called “manly” have developed very diverse readerships (like thrillers and spy stories). Yet “women’s books” (romances) have retained their readership and grown even stronger. Fascinating, yes?

That’s my 2 cents, anyway, and I’m still working out the whys and wherefors. I’d be interested to hear if anyone thinks that the adventure isn’t dead, or thinks that it isn’t just a masculine genre.

I respectfully submit that adventure books do continue to exist, they are merely re-marketed as teen and juvenile books, which are another area that seems to have some clear boundaries for some readers…as a librarian, I can’t tell you HOW many people think a book sounds interesting until they realize it’s not in the adult section.  It can take some fast talking to get them to try it anyway!

Sorry, off the topic of men reading romance….but through13 seems like an appropriate spam word for a tangent about reading teen books, no?

as nothing is held sacred to “guys only” stereotyping. I mean, gals read everything. Crime, mystery, academic tomes, erotica, Playboy, Maxim….

At a forum for a gaming magazine that I read, I apparently created quite a shock in a conversation about books we “judged by their covers,” as in what did we pick up just because we liked the cover and did it deliver.  My contribution?  Flashman, which I picked up because of the Canadian cover while I was on vacation and kept reading back in the States even though I never thought the covers here were as nice, and as a (when I started) teenage straight girl I wasn’t wild about carrying books with pictures of scantly-clad women on them to school.  It turned out that at least one of the other posters had never thought of teenage girls reading Flashman, although it sounded less like he couldn’t imagine women reading them ever as like he couldn’t imagine the combination of teenage and female describing a fan of Flashy.

I would imagine that ties in with Hydecat’s suggestion that the most male-dominated genre might be the 19th century adventure.

My romances are more mystery or action adventure, but they’re definitely housed in the romance section of the bookstore.  A while back, I was in a mixed-gender on line critique group, and the subject of romance came up.  One gentleman said, “I’ve never been able to get past page 10 of a romance.”  I pointed out that he was reading page 151 of mine and had yet to indicate he was having trouble in any of his crits.  He was surprised to learn how broad the genre really is, and how much it’s changed.

I like the male approach because the majority seem to have that blanket dismissal of the genre.  And I always appreciate the XY input, because we’re all writing male and female characters, and I think we all want to get them ‘right.’

I think I glow a little brighter when I get feedback from a guy who’s enjoyed my books.  Of course, the ones who say, “I was pleasantly surprised to find out how good it was” get under my skin a bit, but at least they’re admitting they liked it.  (I will confess hubby falls into the above category)

I’m highly amused by “preen, preen, preen for the peen”. I hadn’t thought of those posts like that before. Just thought: Oh look, a rare sighting: male romance reader (who admits it publicly). And it is interesting to also read newbie romance reader’s thoughts. I never saw it as validating the genre. Oh well. Everyone brings their own perceptions to the table.

I agree with handyhunter. I’m always a little wary about commenting here now because I don’t want to be perceived as a whiner, when I’m completely in love with the vast majority of things about this site.

It’s nice to get an outsider’s POV of the genre, but I think there is just as much resistance to reading romance among some women is there is for men in general. I know that when I picked up my first Heyer from my sister’s bedroom, after having bounced off a few of her chick lit novels before, I was incredibly wary, and slightly ashamed. I thought I would be confronted with arrogant alpha males of the type I avoid in real life like the plague, anti-feminist gender stereotypes, rape as romance, too many sex scenes, and possibly poor writing. The only reason I took the risk and kept a fairly open mind was because of this site and others like it.

In conclusion, not that it’s my site or anything, I’d like to hear from women who have been resistant to reading romantic fiction getting into the genre.

thanks to reading romance, I also have an undying hatred for verbal forms of the word “cup.”)

Which just goes to show that romance-reading men are smarter, sexier and funnier than non-romance-reading men.

A handful of semi-random thoughts:

Others have mentioned the “men’s action/adventure” category (the Executioner, the Destroyer, various others).  It’s a diminishing market, though, and—as most of this readership likely knows—Gold Eagle, the last remaining publishing imprint devoted exclusively to men’s a/a, is owned by . . . Harlequin.  Or Harlequin’s corporate parent, anyhow.

The demise of men’s a/a may in large part be a by-product of the catastrophic implosion of the ID (“independent distribution”) retail channel for paperbacks.  I rather think the lion’s share of men’s a/a moved via spinners in truck stops and 7-11s and Stuckey’s along the nation’s interstates, and those spinners (and the local drivers who stocked them and knew what would sell in those stores) have long since vanished.  Nowadays, there’s no retail market channel for books that’s really capable of targeting male readers that narrowly, and without that channel, the market for “men’s a/a” has fizzled.

I agree with MzSpell that “old-fashioned” adventure novels are alive and well, but my own sense is that most of them now manifest as “tie-in” fiction—novels attached to franchises from Star Trek to CSI to Indiana Jones to Buffy the Vampire Slayer, etc. etc. (as well as to author brands, as witness V. C. Andrews, Tom Clancy, Robert Ludlum, and James Patterson).  I’m not sure of the numbers, but I suspect that tie-ins as a whole have the largest paperback fiction market share after romance itself.  These books are the lineal descendants of the pulp-era serials (the Shadow, Doc Savage, Zorro, etc.), although at the same time they’ve evolved and matured much as the romance genre itself has.

And of course, there’ve been adventure novels marketed to women readers—though perhaps not well marketed; I’m thinking in specific of the late and short-lived Silhouette Bombshell line, which is one of the avenues I’ve followed into the romance/“women’s fiction” world.  As a recent arrival here, I’d be curious as to how those books were viewed and discussed in this space; if someone can point me at relevant archive-posts, I’d be much obliged.

shewhohashope, I was resistant to reading romantic fiction. Although I read Victoria Holt and Mary Stewart in my teens, as an adult, I was much too sophisticated/intelligent/whatever to read anything that smacked of romance. I can still recall, with a great deal of shame, my “I can’t believe you read that, you’re so smart” comment to a colleague when I learned she read romance novels. My road to romance is a story for another time.

I have to agree with SBSarah: the comments section should make it very clear that female readers are very well represented here, and that many of us did not initially embrace this genre we now love.

In conclusion, not that it’s my site or anything, I’d like to hear from women who have been resistant to reading romantic fiction getting into the genre.

I used to be one of those women.

For the first three decades of my life, I was a full-fledged romance snob.  NEVER read romance.  Ever. 

I’ll spare you the long and winding road of my path of romance discovery, but I will say that I owe oodles of thanks to one of my co-workers who cajoled me into trying my first romance novel. 

Now my shelves are packed (well, they’re actually overflowing) with romances of nearly every genre.  And I thank my friend and co-worker for prodding me along.

In conclusion, not that it’s my site or anything, I’d like to hear from women who have been resistant to reading romantic fiction getting into the genre.—shewhohashope

But here’s the thing, we already do hear that story, frequently, from the largely female commentators.  So many times here I have read women say something like, “I was afraid to read romance because people would sneer at me or I thought all those bad stereotypes of the genre were true!” or “I used to hide my romance reading because ____ but now I proudly display my romance reading.” We women here at SBTB have all heard some variation on this theme or even had personal experience with it.  From the covers to the copy, there are so many things that we women can feel embarrassed by and ashamed about in Romance—even if we know we don’t need to feel that way!

But to get an outside perspective, a different narative entirely, well, that is interesting and also, I think, part of what makes SBTB full of win and awesome.  The Smart Bitches here are constantly pushing the boundaries of the old Romance genre stereotypes to help the world see just how fantastic a genre it is.  Whether they’re pointing out that we don’t all wear fanny packs or that the genre really isn’t
girl porn, the Bitches are there in the trenches.  I don’t see the male featured commentators as being “preen for the peen,” but I do see them as being one more sledge hammer blow to the wall of stereotypes that keeps so many people from giving a Romance novel a try. 

And I guess because I enjoy some things that have been male dominated subjects and activities where the lone female voice can big a big damn shock for people, I hate to think of making long time or even new male readers of the genre feel like they are unwelcome in this Bastion of Female-Centric fiction. If the genders in this conversation were reversed, I would be beyond pissed off and hurt.  I would certainly scuttle back into my shell of secrecy.  Anyway, I have come to think—especially after reading this here blog—that Romance is not women’s fiction, it’s people’s fiction.

Well, I have much enjoyed the contributions by the guys—I think mainly because they’re romance newbies, because there are several men on romance mailing lists and forums I read, so it’s not like male opinions are completely new for me. But I confess to feeling a slight bit irked the second time, because it seemed like this dude was coming out of nowhere to be an honorary Bitch, just because he’s a dude. And I’m sure more thought went into it then that, but it did come across that way.  I would never have complained—hey, your site!—but since it came up…

I suspect that if SB Sarah came across a woman who had never read romance but was willing to give it a shot, especially if she had a wonderful witty writing style like our good buddy Doc Turtle, we’d get some posts from that perspective.  It’s not like she went out hunting for men to add to the site, but when the opportunity to “convert” presented itself, I sure was glad she blogged about it, and had them do the same.

By including the male POV when it “popped up” (hey, SB Sarah said “root,” snigger), this site avoids the cliché of “we’re a girls’ club, and we don’t want boys,” which is refreshing.  We all know that mostly women read romance, just as mostly women read this blog, but the diversity and the inclusion are nice, IMO.  Dialog about it is good, of course; it’s interesting to explore people’s reactions.

I loved Charles’ letter!  I will never see the word “cup” as a verb and not think of him. I found myself wondering how many readers have been turned off of romance (or any other genre) because the first one they tried hit their “uh-uh, no way” buttons.  I know that I stayed away from historical romance for many years, because the few examples I had read featured rape, really weak heroines in need of rescue, or men who throbbed at their women but didn’t seem to respect them.

to KatherineB

If you want to see an example of “for men” titles, look for John Ringo’s Ghost series. 
(Check out this must-read review for more details:  http://hradzka.livejournal.com/194753.html)

Women who do manly things are cool.  Girl mechanics = cool.  Girl jet pilots = ubercool.

Men who do womanly things are suspicious.  Male housekeepers = weird.  Male daycare operators = potential perverts who need to be watched closely.

We could get into a long, long debate about why things associated with women are devalued by society, but I don’t think that’s really the point.

The main message of SBTB (I think) is that Romance is a genre rich in excellent, well-written, exciting, interesting, beautiful books, and that anyone who judges and dismisses them without trying them is missing a lot of really good literature.  I don’t get the sense that we’re squeeing for the peen as much as squeeing that, hey, cool, our message is getting out there.  We’re converting people!  Which is awesome.

If we could convert some literary-snob women, I’d enjoy hearing their takes as well.  If one of you former snobs wants to write a piece exploring your introduction to the world of LURVE, and the Bitches posted it, I’d enjoy reading it.

I was a big fan of “Men’s Adventure” back in the day, reading Able Team, Phoenix Force *and* “The Executioner”. At least two female friends of mine did so as well. I also read the S.O.B.‘s or “Soldiers of Barrabbas”, and “Blade” and “Endworld” series by David Robbins.

Not that everything I read was good. There were a couple of books I stopped reading because of rather sexist stuff that turned me of “The Crime Minister” by Ian Barclay had a line about a female character which proclaimed, “Her center of gravity was her twat.” and I didn’t read any others of his books after that one.

Spamword- soon18… nope, passed that milestone by long ago!

John Ringo’s “Ghost” series

I tried to read that. 
At first, I thought I was reading a parody.
Then I realized it wasn’t a parody.
I stopped reading.

Totally empathize with the ‘cup’ bit.

I have a whole bunch of words that make me twinge, but perhaps none more so than ‘honey.’ Not as a verb, obviously, but I’m sure you all know what I mean. Romance novels have taken this poor word and forever ruined the sweetening of tea, herbal cough drops and “Honey, I’m home” for me.

Raising my hand as another woman who loves the Reacher books. I actually think that they have a fairly large female audience.  My impression is that the various W.E.B. Griffin series are more of a boys club.  I’m reading my first one now and I’m not far enough in to really have an opinion. 

On the issue of treating men who read romances as “more important” than women who were resistant to the genre I would add one thing.  I think that a huge part of the reason that romance is treated with such disdain, both by men & by many women, is that it’s perceived as publishing’s chicks only ghetto.  As a rule, women will read things that are primarily targeted at men, but men don’t read things that are targeted at women.  Getting men to read & acknowledge romance shifts that dynamic in a way that reduces the stigma for everyone.   

I’m not saying that it should work this way or that this is fair, but I do think it’s true.

“thanks to reading romance, I also have an undying hatred for verbal forms of the word “cup.”  “

Hahaha!  I hear you, Charles!  Mine is ‘broad shoulders’.  Have never come across a single other kind in the genre.

For me, I’m interested in the men’s reviews because I want to see the male perspective. Do authors get the male psyche right? Do men talk like that (that being how male characters talk in the novels), think like that, etc.

I think, based on the comments here, and other places like Dear Author and Karen Knows Best and DIK, that the female perspective is widely discussed. The male perspective, OTOH, is not.

Anyway, just my two cents.

JoanneL-

Westerns

I grew up reading Zane Grey and Louis L’Amour and still periodically reread them (if I’m in the mood to) when I come across them at the library or someone’s summer cottage. I enjoy them - but then, they do always feature a love story…

Hey, Maya M. ... I was driving someplace yesterday and noticed a road sign (you know, the yellow, diamond-shaped kind) that said “SOFT SHOULDER” and just naturally thought, “He caressed her soft shoulder.”

After awhile, certain phrases just stick.  It’s like “found romance” the way people have sites for “found porn”—you know, the naughty town name or penis-looking rock on a playground, etc.

I love it when men do and enjoy things that are typically seen as female. I like men who aren’t slobs and who do actually enjoy housework. I like men who like shopping and who maintain high grooming standards. I like men who are as nurturing as they are providing. And when all that comes in a heterosexual package, it’s even better, because it’s someone breaking a stereotype.

I like that the SBs have brought us a few male perspectives on romance because, as others have said, this blog is about breaking that “bodice ripper” stereotype that continues to hang around the term “romance fiction.”

Romance is not—shouldn’t be—a girl’s-only genre. I think we all agree on that. And yet someone took SB Sarah to task when she featured a few romance newbies who were also men? Not cool.

I can’t help but think that if someone’s first thought was “oh great, now Sarah shows her true colors by finally expressing her need for penis validation”, maybe that involves a bit of projection. It never entered my mind that Sarah brought a few males to the party to validate us as romance readers, but then, I was raised by a smart bitch who read romance and was never exposed to the idea that romance was less worthy of my time.

but some ‘men’s fiction’ that I never hear women discuss are W.E.B. Griffin’s war & police books,

Joanne- you must have missed some of the stuff I have said (or maybe it was on another site). LOL
Hubby and I both devour Griffin. Not only do I have everything (and some of it under his pen names, so they are originals) in MM, but in HC as they came out that way, on audio and now we both have it on our ereaders.

I love going through his books and finding the story lines and characters that tie into other series’. It’s subtle but there.

I am just getting into Lee Child. I also read Michael Connelly and a few others. And I am always on the lookout for someone I have missed!

@Lori

My impression is that the various W.E.B. Griffin series are more of a boys club.

You will find everyone of his stories has romance running through it, in fact they carry on with lots of HEA’s!! Which one are you reading??

Another mostly male genre (that’s dying off)—the Longarm Western.  They are westerns, but with a bit more sex.  Of course, like romances, I’m sure there are gender crossers.  There’s no book that checks M/F before it’s lets you open its pages—thank God.

@ev

You will find everyone of his stories has romance running through it, in fact they carry on with lots of HEA’s!! Which one are you reading??

By Order of the President.  I’m only on about page 20, but the set up is sucking me in. 

I’m actually not surprised that Griffin has romance in his books.  IME pretty much all the thrillers, spy novels and other “guy books” have a romantic element.  It’s presented differently than books marketed primarily to women, but it’s always there and often really sweet actually.

@Lori-

That’s the new series. I started, with a garage sale find, The Brotherhood of War, The Lieutenants. I was hooked by chapter 1. Then I found this author J. Kevin Dugan. Fell in love with his stuff too, as it was so much like Griffin. This was a police series.

Then one day, I got curious and checked pen names- imagine my surprise, and joy, when I found out that they were one and the same! I was really pleased when they re-released his stuff all under his name. Now his son WEB IV is helping to write the books too.

spamword- gone69. Too easy.

Techno-thrillers seem like they are written for men. Or maybe for boys. (The geeky boy in the adult man.) Men who rarely read fiction are willing to read techno-thrillers.

Robert Ludlum’s Bourne novels - have you ever tried to make it through one of these? The story of Bourne Identity is so great, (well, I guess it is romance) but the clunky technology and spy stuff triples the book.
And Tom Clancy. ugh. I have never made it through a Tom Clancy.
But in 1989, if you wanted to know all about a spy satellite and how cool it would be to use one, these were your guys. I haven’t kept up with their successors, but I’m guessing that they are out there.

As far as having men blog as they fall for romance, I have enjoyed this. I would enjoy anyone who previously disdained romance trying a few and writing honest responses. Every true reader loves to share their favorites with the uninitiated.

@CourtneyLee:

I love it when men do and enjoy things that are typically seen as female. I like men who aren’t slobs and who do actually enjoy housework. I like men who like shopping and who maintain high grooming standards. I like men who are as nurturing as they are providing. And when all that comes in a heterosexual package, it’s even better, because it’s someone breaking a stereotype.

What is this…man…of which you speak?

I may catch some flack for being a misandrist (which I’m not, really), but in my experience, women have never been less than or not as good as men. In many cases, quite the opposite, in fact.

I have two bosses, one of whom I once fondly called the “wife” of their partnership. He was understandably annoyed, until I said, “Well, you get up earlier than he does, don’t you? You’re more organized and competent and have a better sense of responsibility to the business than he does, don’t you? You start working and keep going, when he takes any opportunity to put his feet up, isn’t that right? When he’s sick, he whines like a baby, but when you’re sick, you soldier on, right? You funnel your extra money to your kids, or back into the business, but he spends his own on himself, doesn’t he? If something happened to you, this place would fall apart, wouldn’t it? If he fucked off for a week, we’d barely notice, would we? There you go. You’re the wife.”

IMO, in a lot of ways, it isn’t women who’ve been catching up to men for the last hundred years. It’s men who are finally catching up to women.

I see the “male romance reader” posts less as currying male approval for the genre, and more like bringing men out of their knuckle-dragging ways and into a more civilized place.

I think it’s true that a lot of techno thrillers are very geek oriented, and geeks still skew a bit male.  I know that the geekiness is a huge part of what I like about them.  They’re like action movies but with lots of tech info thrown in.  When it’s badly written it’s clunky and painful, but when it flows it can be a lot of fun. 

Clancy can get a little long-winded, but skipping over the techno babble doesn’t hurt the book.  And not all Ludlum’s or Clancy’s are created equal.  The more recent titles published under both names were written by other people and mostly suck.  It’s like the “guy book” equivilent of V.C. Andrews.

@ev: I’m looking forward to finishing a stupid paper I’m working on so that I can dig in to the Griffin.  It’s hella long so if I read in small chunks I’m never going to get done.

Darlene Marshall> I &heart; the John Rain books as well.  Definitely a big fan. I grew up reading Sheldon and Clancy (due to having my uncle live with us for a while).

Hold your horses y’all, I don’t have a friend, co-worker, or acquaintance who reads romance novels. No one in my real life world does, so stumbling upon this here blog, has been a huuuuge deal for lil ol me. It was a wake up call for me to see the hundreds of comments and discussions about a genre that I had been captivated and infatuated with for all those years…completely alone.

So I appreciate ANYBODY of any gender sharing their mutual love for reading about Romancelandia here on the interweb.

In regards to Manly Type Books - I could never get into Flashman or the Patrick O’Brian English Navy series (both of which my dad lurved) but did read and highly enjoy all of his Sharpe’s Books by Bernard Cornwell as well as his Travis McGee by John D. McDonald which greatly improved my dad’s and my conversation content! Although neither of which had a HEA, I would still recommend them.

Wow, it’s discussions like this that make me realize how many books there are in the world that I still have to read.

Here’s and interesting article about gender and reading : Why Hemingway Is Chick-Lit
http://www.inthesetimes.com/article/2780

I’m a fan of boys who read, generally.  Seriously, it beats just looking at the pictures…  ;)

Anyway, speaking of pictures, this is off topic but have you guys SEEN these: http://rolcats.com/

OMG.  Who needs men when there are Soviet lolcats to be had?

@Lori-
Let me know what you think. Drop me an email.

Ah, the Flashman books…I’ve heard good things about those. Thanks for all the recommendations! Griffin, westerns…I have work to do.  I appreciate your putting forward some guy-oriented stuff.

But that just the thing, isn’t it? I still stand by my original statement - that there is no “just for men” genre in books that is dismissed in the same knee-jerk reaction the way romance is. Guy-oriented is as close as we get. I kind of laughed - every time someone threw down some manly man authors, another chirped up and commented on how they loved it! Ladies, you all are very broad readers, I love it.

Me? I lurved the O’Brian novels. The right mix of historical tech, Austin-like conversation and the rough company of navy men. Ludlum I read in my teens - I enjoyed the first two. Clancy? Meh…read it, not bad.

But that just the thing, isn’t it? I still stand by my original statement - that there is no “just for men” genre in books that is dismissed in the same knee-jerk reaction the way romance is.

I think it may be because women read what they want and aren’t ashamed about it. So you can call it guy fiction all you want, but if we aren’t ashamed or embarrassed to read it, why should men, or women, have to hide the fact that they read and enjoy romance? 

I think the more men that we have step up here and admit that they read it and enjoy it, the better we all will be for it. I would love to talk to the women in their lives and see if it makes them a better partner.

I love the Horatio Hornblower series and that was before it became a great TV series. I wish they would finish it.

I love the Horatio Hornblower series and that was before it became a great TV series. I wish they would finish it.

This is so true.  I think lots of Bitches would like the movies, even if they’re not that interested in reading the books.  They were really good. 

Sadly,  after those Fantastic Four movies I think Ioan Gruffudd is way too expensive to do any more of the movies and it wouldn’t be the same if they recast the part.

The same thing is true for the Sharpe’s stories.  I liked both the books and the British TV show based on them and there won’t be any more shows because Sean Bean is now too expensive

I JUST added the Horatio Hornblower series to my TBR last week! After I checked on Wikipedia for a HEA of course!

On a hopeful note, I can’t find the cite right now but a year or so ago I read that the number of men reading romance has jumped by a lot in recent years.  The increase was in the hybrids—-IIRC romantic suspense & futuristics mostly.  That makes sense to me.  As ev & I both noted, there’s often a romantic element in “guy books”, the proportions are just different.  Lots of men who like those books would probably like the romance hybrids if they tried them.

“So you can call it guy fiction all you want, but if we aren’t ashamed or embarrassed to read it, why should men, or women, have to hide the fact that they read and enjoy romance?  “

Yes yes yes! That’s it! My thought exactly.

I watched Hornblower, loved it, haven’t gotten round to reading it yet. But hey, if Winnie Churchill endorsed it, I sure would like to see what the fuss is!

For those who are thinking about dipping into the suspense or thriller genres you may be able to get some ideas from the read & review challenge that J Kaye is hosting here:

http://j-kaye-book-blog.blogspot.com/2008/12/suspense-thriller-challenge-post-your.html

I think the advantage of this for newbies is that there are a wide variety of reviews.  There are about 50 people signed up & (in theory) each person will read 12 books, each in a different sub-genre.  I’ve been reading other things so far this year so I have yet to complete any reviews for this challenge, but I have high hopes for the Griffin. 

FYI, she lists a bunch of the different sub genres on the sign up page:

http://j-kaye-book-blog.blogspot.com/2008/11/2009-suspense-thriller-reading.html

And yet someone took SB Sarah to task when she featured a few romance newbies who were also men?

Well, no, that’s not quite it. It’s not that she “she featured a few romance newbies who were also men”; it’s that she she featured a few romance newbies because they were men.  Had they been reluctant female readers, their replies in the comments would have been sufficient. I see a little imbalance there. If the emphasis had been more on “reluctant romance reader” and less on “men”, I don’t think it would have tripped me up so much.

It’s also a little odd to me to claim not to need men to validate the genre, yet needing their responses specifically (ie, not reluctant female readers) in order to further discussion or for romance novels to be taken seriously by non-fans. But then, I don’t have a problem with romance novels being marketed towards women (in part because so many other things get marketed towards men*); I don’t think only women should read them, but for me, a man reading a romance novel isn’t really cause for celebration either (‘course my stakes in it aren’t that high. I don’t write romance novels, I don’t have a problem buying and reading them, and I happily genre-hop).

(Now, anyone else reading the Kate Shugak series by Dana Stabenow, since we all seem to be recommending “boy books” - although this one might not qualify, being that it’s written by a woman about a female protagonist - and found in the mystery section, would cause me to leap for joy. Or Dennis Lehane’s Kenzie/Gennaro series, but I don’t think that one needs quite as much help finding an audience. Or comic books, speaking of “boy books”.)

All that said, this isn’t my site, and I don’t want to tell Sarah or Candy what to write about; there’s a lot about this site I like. If they want to have special book reviews by men, that’s fine; I’m just not sure how interested I personally would be in it just because they were from the male perspective (it would depend on the book that was being reviewed: I read the ones about Bujold’s The Sharing Knife, because I love that series, and not the other one because…I can’t remember why not now); if they also just as prominently featured reluctant female readers, I also wouldn’t mind that. (I don’t think gender viewpoints are so discrete that there’d be a big difference between the responses of a reluctant female reader and a reluctant male reader.)  In any case, there are enough other people who are interested that SBTB wouldn’t be lacking for viewership.

*I tend to think that is why women in general are more likely to read/watch/participate in “boy stuff”—because what other option did/do we have? If a lot what’s out there is about the straight, white male, then, yeah, I think if you read enough of it, you’re going to find something/someone to relate to or that you enjoy reading about.

It was just my luck to be traveling yesterday, so I missed this whole discussion as it was happening.  But as the author of the letter Sarah quoted, I just had to say, “Wow.” 

To everyone who wrote in:  you’ve given me a bunch of stuff to think about—including my own (unconscious?) motivations for what I read (e.g., why do I read so few contemporaries?).  Thanks a lot!

Sarah:  Thanks for calling me a gentleman—believe me, you’re being more than kind.  And if you ever come up to Boston, we can share that bottle of wine.

Finally:  in retrospect, I’ve decided that I was too hard on poor little “cup.”  After all, I cup my hands to collect water every time I shave, and I forgot about the historical, “medical” sense of cupping.  So, let’s just emend my “undying hatred,” and say that it’s limited to participial forms used in an erotic context.

I read WEB Griffin’s books on my mother’s recommendation. She loves military history, the Aubrey-Maturin seafaring novels, and political espionage stuff. She did her graduate work in political science, which I gather was also pretty much a “boys’ club” back in the 1960s. She now reads romance as well.

Oh, and if anyone wants to try a very gentle intro to westerns, I highly recommend Pratt’s The Strange Adventures of Rangergirl.  It is a mixture of western, sci-fi, and comicbook-style action set in modern Santa Cruz.

I’ve never known a man who read, or admitted to reading romance, so the letter from Charles gave me some insight to a mans perspective.  Thanks for letting us read the letter as well.