Bitchin' Blog Posts
Mills and Boon Goes Erotica
by SB Sarah | by SB Sarah | September 09, 2008 | Tuesday at 4:30 pm | 25 CommentsThere are two really, really great words in this article about the new line of Mills & Boon romances that will focus on more sexuality than you can shake an erect stick at.
Those two words are: Breezy Malone.
Wonder if she queefs? And if she’s having adventures in the Australian bush, does that make it Mills & Boon lesbian erotica? (I’m making really bad jokes to avoid the involuntary twitching at the repeated use of the word “porn” in the article. Feel free to join me).
Filed: The Link-O-Lator
Tagged: sexuality, mills and boon
Victoria Janssen said on 09.09.08 at 04:38 PM • [link]
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/2703593/Hardcore-Mills-and-Boon-series-to-reach-UK.html
Note headline of the Telegraph’s article.
HK said on 09.09.08 at 05:09 PM • [link]
Um, both the Independant and the Daily Mail refer to Blazes as
Have I been reading different Blazes? Inter-racial lesbianism?
kopperhead said on 09.09.08 at 05:35 PM • [link]
OK, fine by me, but only as long as Breezy isn’t trying to make some political statement here!
Bonnie C said on 09.09.08 at 05:43 PM • [link]
SRSLY? “Explicit erotica” and “hardcore porn”? I find that truly doubtful. Or maybe I am so hedonistic that I don’t have the proper perspective “on the Mills & Boon social barometer”. My husband will be intrigued to find this out.
I thought the whole article had a disdainful tone to it. Ugh.
Jill Sorenson said on 09.09.08 at 05:49 PM • [link]
Great article. Love this part:
Haha. A watershed moment, indeed.
Marsha said on 09.09.08 at 06:04 PM • [link]
“Sex for enjoyment”? As opposed to…?
Spamword: face65 (I guess they’re not ready for face69?)
Lori said on 09.09.08 at 06:29 PM • [link]
This was my first thought as well. It drives me nuts that there are still so many statements made that implicitly promote the tired old idea that women don’t really like the icky sexxering and are only doing it to please horny men or to make babies.
Suze said on 09.09.08 at 06:37 PM • [link]
“Book porn”? If the Food Network is Food porn, and Gunnutz.com is Gun porn, what exactly is Book porn?
I do kinda wonder about the part where the publisher’s rep is quoted as saying an emotional connection between the sex partners isn’t necessary in this new line. Seems iffy to me, taking it out of the romance bracket. Although, if they’re doing a crime and mystery line as well, maybe that’s what they mean to do.
Lori said on 09.09.08 at 07:05 PM • [link]
http://www.amazon.com/Libraries-Candida-Höfer/dp/3829601867
It’s a book of photos of fabulous European libraries. I received a copy as a gift a few years ago and I pull it out and drool when a need a little cheering up.
Marilyn said on 09.09.08 at 07:24 PM • [link]
Sex for enjoyment?? OMG! Perverts! It’ll never sell. LMAO
Spamword: Ready73. I was ready for this in 73.
Darlene Marshall said on 09.09.08 at 07:39 PM • [link]
Why is it that the news media still finds the idea of women having active, self-directed sex lives to be newsworthy? I’ve moved beyond 1950, and it would be nice if these reporters caught up with me.
SB Sarah said on 09.09.08 at 07:53 PM • [link]
Darlene FTW.
Joanne said on 09.09.08 at 09:01 PM • [link]
aw geeze… so this is what?
a shape-shifter who turns into a blackjack table?
Or someone is bound to a blackjack table? What is that?
I see all these people cuffed to tables while the cleaning staff works around them… Oh wait.. cleaning ‘staff’... hmmmmm
Marski said on 09.09.08 at 09:25 PM • [link]
‘featuring casual sex and bondage, in Britain’
Sounds like the monarchy to me!
katiebabs said on 09.09.08 at 09:28 PM • [link]
Instead of the Greek Tycoon/Sheik ravishing the innocent virginal heroine alone, his manservant joins in on the fun also.
Tara said on 09.09.08 at 10:05 PM • [link]
Y’all crack me up…
I guess “book porn†is actually supposed to mean “pornographic books.†Like Hustler is magazine porn and porno flicks are movie porn.
Poor writing.
I can’t imagine M&B;crossing the line from what I’d consider erotica into what I’d consider porn, but then I haven’t read any of the Spice line… yet. For me, I guess it’s a matter of quality. Porn is like those cheesy movies that are, supposedly, visually stimulating for guys, but don’t do me much good. On the other hand,
erotica actual works.
Seriously, have you ever been watching bad porn and, after you pass the 12 seconds of film that you found interesting, it just devolves into LOLPorn? You just keep hearing voices in your head saying things like: Oral secks. Ur doin it rong!
Kelly C said on 09.09.08 at 10:30 PM • [link]
I am assuming that this is from the anthology WHAT HAPPENS IN VEGAS . . . (which is/was a SPICE book)
In one of the stories, the hero (who is a blackjack dealer) and the heroine (who is a . . . .decoy, not the right word . . . she works for the casino and plays blackjack to lure other people into trying blackjack as well - - explaining this poorly)
decide to indulge in some sex for fun and the heroine says she’ll only “go out” with the hero 5 times and so in order to decide who decides what they do on said “dates”, they will play a hand of blackjack and the winner sets the rules for the “date.”
On one of their “dates” I believe the hero ties the heroine up.
Hence, blackjack bondage. Which is nothing like what the article makes it sound like. @@
Lori said on 09.10.08 at 12:41 AM • [link]
Not just me then. My inability to control my sarcastic response makes me the absolute worst person in the world with whom to watch porn for it’s, ah, intended purpose. Really—-I’m a total buzz kill. If, on the other hand, you’re interested in giving it the Mystery Science Theater treatment I’m your gal.
jude said on 09.10.08 at 01:24 AM • [link]
Re LOLPorn indeed… Never forget the one time my hubby managed to talk me into watching one with him. This was in the late 80s and video rentals had just made it to our rural area. Something about a bunch of way over-developed school girls on a bus trip that kept getting side-tracked. The thing that did me in was the bus driver - none other than Wilfred Brimley, he of the honkin’ Great White ‘stache. Have never been able to see one of his shows or commercials since without seeing him and all those “young” things….
Miss B said on 09.10.08 at 02:20 AM • [link]
@ Jude
Not Wilfred “Diabeeetus” Brimley! Late night tv commercials will never be safe for me again. *shudder*
Kathy said on 09.10.08 at 02:41 AM • [link]
I had this problem at my sister’s bachelorette party when the male strippers were trying to be serious and lovey dovey horny. I kept laughing every time they came near. And some women were taking the kissy face thing serious. Eww. Get away.
Bonnie C said on 09.10.08 at 03:54 AM • [link]
Tara! For the WIN!!!
ROTFLMAO!
Carrie said on 09.10.08 at 05:46 AM • [link]
Um… wow. Not sure about the articles. I got hung up on the fact that the dude on the cover looked like Robert Downey Jr with long-ish hair and a full beard!
Noelle said on 09.10.08 at 03:42 PM • [link]
Call me old fashioned but I don’t care how many whips, chains and extra people are involved I’m not interested if there isn’t an emotional connection. Give me some good heartfelt tension between the H/H and I’m happy to have whatever delicious goodies you want to add.
I hate that people are now thinking it has to be either or, it doesn’t.
Miranda said on 09.11.08 at 03:09 AM • [link]
That’s an interesting cover. Especially since if you don’t notice the flowing white thing is a shirt, then it looks like a robe, and the whole thing looks like a book that got left out the New Testament.
Get your hands off the Lord, wench!
My word is bad44. That cover is bad more times than that.
Care to comment?
Comments are now closed for this post.
Subscribe to These Comments