Smart Bitches, Trashy Books

First off, I don’t think any author should worry about what critics say regarding “reinforcing stereotypes” about black female sexuality. The thing about stereotypes is that believing in them requires no logic whatsoevah. Someone who believes women of color are walking around with no panties on waiting to do what-what at the drop of a hat is not going to believe otherwise because of a few tasteful fade-outs before coitus in Romancelandia. These people would be waiting for a group of nuns to drop it like it’s hot…so it’s perfectly fine for your characters to have sex-even kinkny sex-and like it.

That said, sex and romance go together like peanut butter and jelly/bananas/honey, et al. Part of love is sexual attraction and fulfillment, people. Unless I’m reading a book with a major plot point that requires no coitus/sexual healing, I’m gonna feel cheated. If one of the things these romances do is to reflect AA people accurately, then I hope good sex would fit in there somewhere!

Interesting topic, by the way.

There are quite a few of us out there reviewing black romance and considering the world these romances inhabit and the way they deal with relationships and issues such as infertility, politics, etc. The sites you mentioned are doing it, of course, but I’m also doing it at WriteBlack, as is the smart lady who runs Reading While Black. 

Heck, a couple hundred or so fans and authors just returned from the Romance Slam Jam Conference (Google it) in Chicago this past weekend, where some of these issues were addressed.

I also would argue that black romance readers and critics are as diverse a lot as nonblack readers and critics, so the fact that a few have problems with expressions of overt sexuality is not an indication of such problems on the part of the whole. Some of the most raucous and hearty applause at the Emma Awards banquet came when the winner was announced for the “Favorite Steamy” novel.

I’m just saying.

I’m glad to hear the issue of the lack of “marriageable African American men” addressed. (Although that sounds so very Regency, doesn’t it?) I read some study that said AA women have only a 20% chance of getting married. And I know there are plenty of scary or depressing statistics regarding race in America, but that one just really disturbed me. Not that marriage is the most important thing in the workld. I guess it’s just the idea that if you’re a black woman in America, you get to face all those other scary or depressing things… alone. And sadly, most of my black female friends accept this as reality. (While every one of my white female friends already have their wedding dress picked out, regardless of whether or not they have a boyfriend. The idea that they may not ever get married literally never crosses their minds.)
Oh, and the idea that stories of love and commitment that happen to include sex will somehow back up stereotypes about black women… you know what? Totally true. It does in fact tell us that black women care about monogamy and love as well as a sexual connection. How terribly stereotypical.

Great post today!

I write some IR fantasies. Moon Shadow has a very black heroine in braids and the hero is white. But if you look at the cover, you can’t tell what race the heroine is. In fact, she’s Tina Catanzaro, and she couldn’t be whiter. I hear (and believe) that finding IR stock images is difficult, but one might also ask why that is. If more publishers used IR photos, more photographers would make IR photos.

I’m involved in the annual cover contest, and there are always great covers on many of the black romances.  I don’t think one made the finals this year but there was one last year and two or three the year before.  (What makes the finals is always kind of random.)  I like looking at people on my covers, and it seems like many contemporary books don’t have couple covers any more.  I just love to see a beautiful couple on a romance cover - and whether that couple is black or white doesn’t really matter to me.

On the other hand, I run across a lot of “gangsta” covers, and I always wonder who these covers are appealing to.  They don’t say “romance” to me, especially since the covers often feature two or three women fawning over one man (usually a man with a gun).  But I guess they aren’t aimed at a reader like me.

This is kind of off topic, but I read Rachel Buttler’s THE ASSASSIN, and the heroine is part black. It’s a terrific book and I wanted to read more like it, so I went to Amazon and tried looking for books related to that kind of suspense. When I visited her Amazon page, nothing came up but multi-cultural books as suggestions for other books to read. Now what the f***? The book can be classified under multi-cultural, sure, but it’s not even a book that concentrates on race at all. THE biggest damn thing for me is that all multi-cultural books should not only be under that category, unless they choose that. They should also be put in the damn category that relates to their book. Suspense, paranormal, women’s fiction, whatever. Don’t pigeon-hole the books. Put them out with the rest of their genre so people can actually see another book is available in the genre they like to read. No matter what the race of the heroine or author is, the book should not be classified by race. That pissed me off to no end. I searched and searched for books like Rachel’s and they didn’t have ANYTHING related to the subject matter. Just categorized by race. That is so wrong.

Now since then, Amazon DOES suggest other books in the same genre for THE ASSASSIN. I hope someone chewed their asses out and good.

I’m glad to hear the issue of the lack of “marriageable African American men” addressed. (Although that sounds so very Regency, doesn’t it?) I read some study that said AA women have only a 20% chance of getting married. And I know there are plenty of scary or depressing statistics regarding race in America, but that one just really disturbed me. Not that marriage is the most important thing in the workld. I guess it’s just the idea that if you’re a black woman in America, you get to face all those other scary or depressing things… alone. And sadly, most of my black female friends accept this as reality.

When I first started writing, being unable to visualize myself or my friends (a bunch of who have gone to scary/absurd lengths to find a “good” black man) with a black man due to their scarcity was one of the reasons I chose to write interracial romance.  I didn’t want to give up on happily ever after just because black men were becoming an endangered species and I thought that exploring romance outside a comfort zone would add interesting tension to the h/h relationship.

I’m wondering if authors who write IR romance do so because it is a reflection of their reality or in response to the dearth of black men that Ms. Redd speaks about or a combination of those two things or for some other reason entirely.

They [romance novels] offer a substitute for those who have resigned to never really being able to find a fulfilling love in their actual lives.

Wow. Really? That old tired nugget?

  They [romance novels] offer a substitute for those who have resigned to never really being able to find a fulfilling love in their actual lives.

Wow. Really? That old tired nugget?

Seems backwards, doesn’t it?  I think I would find lack of fulfilling real-life love an excellent reason to avoid romances like I’d avoid stampeding rhinos.

The stealth covers drive me crazy.  Mia Zachary’s 9 1/2 Days is one of those.  It’s a Harlequin Blaze, and it took a bunch of Googling and reading the author’s comments on Amazon to figure out the characters were black.  (It was important for me to know this because I write category and it had been a no-no for so long, I wanted to know how someone slipped one by - and this was before the Silhouette Desire Brenda Jackson debut).
As a black author and reader of romance since I was ‘introduced’ to them by my grandmother in the ‘70s, I have read black romance on and off for years.  I generally don’t read them now because I feel they stopped evolving, in some sense, in the 1980s.  When Harlequin (and all the subs they subsequently purchased) moved past the bedroom door, the black romances didn’t keep up.  As even NY got into the act with erotica, etc., I feel like many of those books are still stuck in the sweet romance world - which worked for me until puberty.  My preference would be to have all authors no matter race writing for all genres so that my reading could have a little diversity without having to travel hither and yon in the bookstore, and so I could get my sensuality in different colors as well.

I’m glad to hear the issue of the lack of “marriageable African American men” ... I read some study that said AA women have only a 20% chance of getting married.

Many black women are quite resistant to marrying outside the race.  But recently there has been a rise in IR marriages bewteen black women and non-black men.  Part of it is propinquity.  Professional black women work with and also socialize with non-black males and thus find themselves more open the the idea.  The other part of it, is frankly, they are becoming increasingly aware of the dwindling pool and are re-evaluating their options. 

There is a movie starring Sanaa Lathan and Simon Baker (hot!) called Something New which could be the template for the perfect IR romance novel and also addresses so many issues that have come up in this forum: it acknowledges racial differences without preaching about it, anyone, white or black, could identify with this woman as she struggles with her professional life as well as her own personal assumptions about what makes the perfect mate, and, sadly, it was marketed as a ‘Black film’ so it didn’t get a big distribution. 

In the film Sanaa and her friends discuss the very issue of marriageable African-American men.  They are single, professional, upwardly mobile and not close to getting married.  And, true to what I’ve experienced among my own friends, resistant to marrying outside the race.  It takes a change in thinking for her to consider it.  and when she does she falls for her hunky landscape architect.

The film does a great job of looking at (but not in a heavy way) race but also class.  She is the upper class one.  Her family is educated and wealthy.  He is the blue collar one.  And what is even more awesome when she does meet the perfect mate (she has a list!), the delicious Blair Underwood, she can’t even appreciate him because she’s already fallen in love.

I’m forced to comment because my spamword is matter67.  What does race matter in romance?  Everything and nothing, simultaneously.

I have nothing of substance to add (being fishbelly white, and having my acquaintance of people of African descent limited to people actually FROM Africa or the Carribean, but no anything-American on the mix), so I’ll toss in some trivia.

I read an interview with Jada Pinkett-Smith about how she chooses roles, versus how her husband does.  I watched Kingdom Come, a movie about a family getting together for their father’s funeral, and it was hysterically funny.  My roomies and I rented and watched it something like 5 times, and it never really registered that it was a Black Film until I read this interview.

She (Jada) said that she tends to think about (wildly paraphrasing here) the socio-political impact, and looks for Black roles in Black projects, whereas Will looks for colour-neutral roles, like Independence Day or Men in Black.  That is, the roles he played were perfect for him, but could have been played by anyone of any ethnicity.

I have read black romance on and off for years.  I generally don’t read them now because I feel they stopped evolving, in some sense, in the 1980s.  When Harlequin (and all the subs they subsequently purchased) moved past the bedroom door, the black romances didn’t keep up. As even NY got into the act with erotica, etc., I feel like many of those books are still stuck in the sweet romance world

I’m not sure what you mean, Jessica. There have been plenty of sexually explicit scenes in the AA romances I’ve read, including those in Harlequin’s Kimani Romance line.

I read interracial romance because I can connect with the heroine [who is usually black] and as a young black female [turning 20 in June] I used to wonder what was wrong with myself, and black females in general over the fact that we don’t seem attractive to other races or are looked at as wifey material. I have a cousin who only dates white girls because black girls are loud and brawling and bring drama.

As someone who has seen girls of every race fight over foolishness or bring drama for no reason I just didn’t buy that, or if black guys do want to date you they never seem to want it to be long term or it’s always the mixed girls that get all the love [nothing against mixed chicks half my siblings are mixed, cuteness all around, lol].

[Bit of topic] My father has three bi-racial children, has only dated either super light women [my mother is ‘high yellow’ almost hispanic in complexion] or white women but he got on this huge high horse about his daughters should only date ‘African Kings’ and blah blah blah, but we need to keep our temper in check, etc. And it’s real hypocritcal of him I think since he’s dark skinned but he has never evendated someone who is brown, always either mixed looking or white but he would be upset if I dated someone out of my race.

So interracials are sort of like ‘fantasies’ to me, my favourite ones are the ones were the racial aspect is dealt with but it’s not subtle, it’s mainly the characters [usually the female] dealing with it and coming to terms with having to introduce him to her family and yet they also have other problems that every couple has to struggle through.

One of my favourite IR books has a line where the male [white] fell in love with the female almost at first sight but she was the one being difficult about it [her black ex-fiance thought she was ugly when she decided to go natural while the white hero adored the texture and the curliness, etc] and there’s a line where she comments on that and he says ‘I love you because the colour of your skin, the way your hair is and everything about you.” and she says something along the lines of ” I love you *despite* the colour of your skin” and I found it really interesting that he embraces her colour instead of pretending it’s not part of who she is but she does her best to ignore it and she didn’t realise until he said that, showcasing the way she felt about herself as a black female and yeah, rambling, lol, but that just hit a chord with me. She’s the biggest block to her own happiness just because she wants to believe he wants to change her to fit a view of the perfect women that she has in her mind he’d want, not what he actually does.

I also enjoy reading about IR couples from the POV of an Asian girl and a male of another race since there are still racial undertones but it’s more family based and the prejudice can spread to a Korean girl dating a Japanese guy or Chinese guy etc.

@Jage—I think I might be in love with your entire post.

I read some study that said AA women have only a 20% chance of getting married.

I knew that was an issue facing AA women but I didn’t realize it was that horrible.

While it is completely wrong to not have black couples on a book because they are black, I’m personally not big on people (of any race) on a book. There are a few good cover exceptions, but for the most part…eh.

Suze: really interesting re: Jada and Smith. Just saw a movie she was in last night for class- Set It Off.

Jage- what’s the name of the book? It sounds good.

I really should’ve read that over twice before posting.

my favourite ones are the ones were the racial aspect is dealt with but it’s not subtle,

Not shouldn’t be there.

By going natural I mean she stopped getting her hair chemically straightened.

Sorry for the typos, and glad my rambling made sense, lol.

@orangehands: It’s an online story, here’s the website for it:

http://www.bjthornton.com/SUB01.html

The author has another one up at fictionpress [online review community]:http://www.fictionpress.com/s/2452302/1/Preaching_to_the_Choir

Second one is basically about a young mixed girl who switches church because her priest betrays her brother’s trust and denounces him when he tells him he’s gay. So she goes to a new church where the pastor’s son[white boy] gets a crush. They’re opposite not just because of the colour of their skin but their values as well since he’s a ‘good’ boy and she’s not ‘bad’ but she sleeps around, drinks, etc. and he’s saving himself for marriage.

Two of my favourite YA IRs have to be Romiette and Julio by Sharon M. Draper and If You Come Softly by Jacqueline Woodson [though note, the second one doesn’t have a HEA but I love the message and the way it was written.]

@Laura - Maybe I’ll have to give them a try again.

@Suze - I loved that movie - mostly because of Simon Baker.  I used to watch his TV show - just for him.

Something New sounded interesting to I went to add it to my Neflix queue and lo and behold it was already in it! I’ve moved it to the top.  Thanks for reminding me Eva_baby.

I read some study that said AA women have only a 20% chance of getting married

.

You know, I’m sure that that study is fine, but I know plenty of black women who have married.  My family is bi-racial (through adoption), and my sisters have been able to find husbands.  Unfortunately, 2 of them are now divorced, but they divorced for the reasons anyone does—their husbands were jerks in the way that men can be, regardless of race.  From what I’ve seen, our society does tend to give young black men a raw deal, and it’s ridiculous.  I’ve been around long enough now to see that any one can get involved with drugs, be promiscuous, commit a crime, drop out of school, neglect your child,or do something violent—it has nothing to do with race—I suspect economic status is more the culprit….although we all know plenty of well-off people who do these very same things.    I had something else to say, but I can’t think while my son is yelling for a popsicle….oh, yeah!  Love (not just lust, or infatuation) is hard for anyone to find, and when we find it, we should embrace it, no matter what color it comes in.  (All those family members will usually chill out, esp when the grandchildren come alone ;) )

Spam:  looking85—you know, I first dated the guy I was looking for in 1985….

Jessica, I’m now thinking that different people’s “heat” meters might be set differently, so maybe it would be better to give examples. So, here are links to

Rock Star Weddingthe mini-sequel to Rock Star by Roslyn Hardy Holcomb.
A Lover’s Touch by Brenda Jackson.
Never Too Late, a Kimani Romance short online read by Brenda Jackson.
Got Milk?, not romance but “Literary Erotica” by Monica Jackson.

Jage, I found your comments really intriguing because of how they reflect a reversal in the types of common IR relationships. Back in the bad old days it was much more common for white men to go after black women (and I do mean ‘go after,’ because the women weren’t willing). Obviously those relationships were NOT about love, but about (male) sexual gratification and power. Black men in those days were likely to lose their lives in the pursuit of a white woman, whether she was willing or not. But you see the opposite now and I find that veeeeeeeeeery interesting.
I’m probably stirring a hornet’s nest with this question, but do you really think that black men are less likely to pursue black women because, like your cousin, they think black women are “loud and brawling?” Or do you think that some kind of “Off Limits” sign has been removed from the pursuit of white women and the novelty hasn’t worn off yet? Your cousin may be dating meek women, not “white” women because women bring drama, period. I don’t care what you look like, a woman who is passionately in love will holler and scream over her man. He may be confusing “white” with “quiet.”
And just to give the hornet’s nest one more stir, as a member (and by-product) of an IR marriage myself, I know there is still hostility over them. The most vitriolic hate that has ever been directed at me hasn’t come from “good ol’ boys” or “white-power” idiots – it has come from black women. I wonder if I just ran across a few nasty women, because women can be mean to each other over men regardless of race issues. Do you think that black women feel like they should have preferential access to black men, even if intellectually they may not assert it?

I just wrote a huge response and the server ate it or something so I’m going to go cool down then come back and rewrite, just felt I should share that.

Jage, thanks so much for the story link!  I just read it this afternoon and it was amazing.  Really, really great.

And yes, I read it all this afternoon.  It was dangerously compelling and didn’t allow me to do much else!  [Sorry baby, I’ll have to change your diaper later.  And don’t worry, Daddy will feed you.  ;-) ]

Does any one else have a problem with terminology here? I understand that romances about black folks have been excluded from the romance genre. But the term “Black Romance” seems to perpetuate the idea that that there is something essentially different about love stories that focus on black people.

To put it another way, you dont routinely hear about “black science fiction” or “black mystery”. Granted these genres werent quite as exclusionary as romance. (And I know that science fiction as a genre isnt some wonderful paradise of racial inclusiveness… but still).

And then there are other terms that might be more inclusionary. Multicultural romance- same problem. Also lacks specificity cause that just means people from different cultures. So conceivably you could have a “Multicultural Romance” with a German and an Australian. “Interracial romance” also suffers the same problem. Its seems so problematic that any of these terms would be used to signify subgenres.

It seems ass backwards to name a subgenre based on the skin color or ethinicity of the people falling in love instead of naming a subgenre based on thematic differences or elements.

Also Trash Addict and Jage, I am not even going to address your posts( while interesting) here. It may sound cliquish or elitist but its like trying to explain American electoral politics to a French person in 20 minutes. You need a history lesson. And a much longer and nuanced conversation is needed. If the SBs promised to review more romances featuring people of color then maybe…

Author Gwynne Forster has also done an article on romances with black protagonists, for Affaire de Coeur.  You can read the online version here.

Jage, I second the thanks for the link.  That story was all kinds of wonderful.  The present tense made it kind of poetic, and some of the turns of phrase just stopped me dead in my tracks.  I’ll be going back there again.  Holy crap, it’s 4 hours later!

@Collette and Suze: I found that link during exam time, lol, it is extremely addictive. I haven’t finished the sequel although I think it’s looking at the issues more from the male view this time.  I wish she had comment boxes although I think I’ll email her just so she knows people are reading it and enjoying it.

@Trumystique: I understand where you’re coming from but I think people are saying Black romance because it’s considered exotic for someone from say Australia to hook up with a Greek tycoon, any mix of someone who is ‘white’ and another person who is white is relatively mainstream if you look at Harlequin’s past listing but stories with Black characters, or Asian aren’t that popular. I was going to say middle-eastern as well but there seem to be a lot of shieks showing up.

I think that as long as people are being judged by your skin, if you mention skin colour in relation to your characters it will be assumed to be a part of the conflict. The same goes for some religious stories where the main characters are say Christian and Muslim, it’ll create conflict [obviously]

And I think here is a good place to start since it gets people who might not have even thought of things from that POV interested or give them enough insight to look deeper if they haven’t already.

The majority of stories I read tend to IR [black women/white man or asian woman/white man although online hispanic guys are popping up a lot]

@Trash Addict:
I don’t think it’s an exact reversal however because girls from other races aren’t really going after white guys or what not, and those who do no matter their race are likely to get labelled as being ‘white washed’.

The problem is a lot of guys think meek and white are synonymous. Not just black but other races. And if they’re not meek they’re crazy or ‘act black/ghetto’.

To be honest I’ve never really thought about that ‘off limits’ aspect, but if that’s the case then why hasn’t it occured with coloured females? Or females of any race outside of white? [not saying it’s not frowned upon by some people to see a white female with someone of another race but they do tend to be more predominant to date outside of their race] Sure we tend to be more cautious about entering a relationship with a man outside of our own race based on what we hear, our family’s reacions as well as just the way we feel about it, but shouldn’t they be going after us more?

While I was typing this I wanted to say excluding the guys who think they’re black and believe dating black girls give them some sort of ‘in’ and guys who have weird fetishes about certain cultures [you have all seen those asian porn pop-ups and pictures when you’re googling something anime related] which probably says quite a bit about prejudices I already have in my head, lol, even though I’m trying to get past it.

The most vitriolic hate that has ever been directed at me hasn’t come from “good ol’ boys” or “white-power” idiots – it has come from black women. Do you think that black women feel like they should have preferential access to black men, even if intellectually they may not assert it?

Probably. Or more a case of default [this may come out wrong but bare with me] as in, you know for a fact that you’re attractive to males of your own race and then you see them going out with girls who are able to date anyone they want [in your mind, this might not be the case] it just ticks you off.

As well, it has to do with the fact that every day you see someone telling you that something about you isn’t that pretty. I know I stopped being friends with one girl because she was explaining to me that biracial people are ‘perfect’ in that they aer attractive to all races unlike others, and that pissed me off but then you hear your guy friends talking and they love so and so because she has ‘good hair’ [curly and soft] or she’s the perfect complexion [light skin] and it’s like, well damn. Or, vice versa depending if you’re light skin in a predominantly black neighbourhood. My sister has been called white n**** before because she’s light by another black girl, it got real heated.
One time I heard this boy [white] who I was acquantices with make a comment that he didn’t see anything wrong with dating a black girl if she was pretty, but he’d never seen a pretty black girl so ...

And those things build up, and depending on your personality you might start to hate yourself and end up taking out your insecurities on the girls who they see as being competition. Lately I’ve noticed a trend of mixed/light girls lashing out out at darker girls, maybe in response to the negative attention they recieve or because now black girls have started to be considered pretty on main stream beyond the ones that are mixed?

I write both IR and AA romance.  I will keep writing both, though lately I have been writing mixed characters (The heroine in my WIP is a Black Cuban Jewish woman).  So why do I write them?

I write AA heroes and heroines because I think it’s important to show that black men and women can be successful and educated and meet and fall in love and commit to each other in holy matrimony.  It’s an homage to my brother and SIL, and to my sister and BIL.

I write IR couples because I think it’s important to show that people are people, and they all want the same things: love and acceptance.  That what is most important is to find someone who understands you, not who looks like you.  That it’s not color that’s the end-all and be-all, but similar interests and hopes and goals.

Am I including messages?  Not in a beat-you-over-the-head sort of way.  My goal is to entertain first.  If your view is expanded just a bit at the end of my story, that’s a bonus.

OK, I might just be pulling this all out of my ass, and sorry if I offend anyone, but I’m just throwing down some of the random thoughts I’ve been having as I read comments.

Does anyone think that the reason only 20% of black women get married is a cultural thing? Because from what I’ve seen of “hop hop” culture (admittedly not a whole lot), it seems that promiscuity in men is glorified a great deal, and women who are willing to wear skimpy clothing and shake their ass, etc etc are the ideal. So those two things together there, if its a widespread cultural thing (and it seems to be in my school, which is possible Whitest School Ever yet still manages to bring that over), then could that be part of the issue? All those bad standards and behaviors that arent conductive toward happy monogamous relationships keep getting reinforced as positive?

Also, I found the comment about romances with black characters reinforcing negative black female stereotypes interesting. Historically, IIRC, it was always black male sexuality that was feared (with good reason, there be some damn good looking black men) by white men. So could this be a case now of white women fearing black female sexuality? There is always this idea in people I’ve talked to and media I’ve seen that black women are just more sensual and sexual (not in a bad way), better dancers, better lovers, and yeah, more wild in bed…but is that necessarily a bad thing? To me it seems like black women got a reputation for things that arent necessarily bad, and maybe white women felt threatened by that. They have been the standard for beauty for so long, what are they going to do when all the white men start chasing black girls?

And just wondering here, but why is there this idea that it is mostly black men who are gay, adulterous, felons, etc etc? Seems to me that it isnt race that makes you any of those things, its personal choice. A matter of environment, that mostly black people find themselves in? Or is it just that only the black crimes really get highlighted?

Random final thought: Seems to be that a lot of the crap that goes with this racial stuff in romances is all fear based, for lack of a better word. People are safe dating and marrying within their race because its what they know, and when someone leaves that and enters an interracial relationship, people get uncomfortable because its breaking the norm, and then maybe people start to wonder what would happen if their lover or crush or whoever started to prefer something that they couldnt change, like skin color…and so they get scared, and shit like this starts to happen.

Shannon, you started by saying you were pulling comments out of your ass. I dont know how old you are or where you are from.  But because I am charitable and am trying to make this a teachable moment… Please Please Please reread what you wrote and think a little bit.

Does anyone think that the reason only 20% of black women get married is a cultural thing? Because from what I’ve seen of “hop hop” culture (admittedly not a whole lot), it seems that promiscuity in men is glorified a great deal, and women who are willing to wear skimpy clothing and shake their ass, etc etc are the ideal. So those two things together there, if its a widespread cultural thing (and it seems to be in my school, which is possible Whitest School Ever yet still manages to bring that over), then could that be part of the issue? All those bad standards and behaviors that arent conductive toward happy monogamous relationships keep getting reinforced as positive?

Also, I found the comment about romances with black characters reinforcing negative black female stereotypes interesting. Historically, IIRC, it was always black male sexuality that was feared (with good reason, there be some damn good looking black men) by white men. So could this be a case now of white women fearing black female sexuality? There is always this idea in people I’ve talked to and media I’ve seen that black women are just more sensual and sexual (not in a bad way), better dancers, better lovers, and yeah, more wild in bed…but is that necessarily a bad thing? To me it seems like black women got a reputation for things that arent necessarily bad, and maybe white women felt threatened by that. They have been the standard for beauty for so long, what are they going to do when all the white men start chasing black girls?

But I can say that many of your assumptions show ignorance or a lack of knowledge. Let’s see some of your assumptions/assertion below:

Assertion 1 Promiscuity is a cultural phenomenon

Assertion 1a Promiscuity is a trait of African American culture

Assertion 2 Hip hop culture equals African American culture

Assertion 3 Hip hop as seen in popular media encompasses/truthfully depicts all of hip hop culture

Assertion 4 Historically only black male sexuality has been feared

Assertion 5 Stereotypes of black female sexuality are based in truth and thus are depictions of reality i.e. by nature black women “are more sensual and sexual (not in a bad way), better dancers, better lovers, and yeah, more wild in bed”.

I will come back to comment on this when I am calmer.

Assertion 2 Hip hop culture equals African American culture

Assertion 3 Hip hop as seen in popular media encompasses/truthfully depicts all of hip hop culture

I think that is misconstruing her words. When I read what she said I thought of it more along the lines of media influencing the youth, not of it being a truthful depiction.

Example; people who said that the Sweet Valley High books caused them to develop eating disorders because they weren’t a size six or they hated themselves because they didn’t have blonde hair and blue eyes. That is the media influencing the people who are reading them.

As such, since certain forms of hip hop is mainstream [50 Cent, Nelly, Ying Yang Twins, Lil’ Wayne etc.] and a main source of black role models, black youths will see that and view it as the norm and as acceptable behaviour, and *they* will view it as something to attain to be ‘black’ not that it is a truthful portrayal of the black culture.

The media influences everyone in some way, and just as people think Paris Hilton is OMG amazing and think that is the high life, there are people who hear 50 Cent talking about drug deals and what not and will follow that.

There is always this idea in people I’ve talked to and media I’ve seen that black women are just more sensual and sexual

She’s speaking about things the way it has been presented to her, and as she mentioned herself she goes to a predominantly white school she probably hasn’t been around people who could dissuaded her from these assumptions though I don’t think she stated it as a fact but more as that from what she’s gathered people may be threatened by these stereotypes whether they be true or not.

Sorry if I’m not making sense

Shannon, I have to say that your post is… well, it’s very ignorant.  You’re judging black culture based on how your predominantly white school has appropriated it, as well as how it’s interpreted in the media.

And do you really not see anything wrong with the stereotype that black women are more sexual?  Really?  Because despite what the media or the people at your school may think, it’s just that: a stereotype.  And such a pervasive stereotype is damaging to black women… or do you think it’s okay that they’re propisitioned far more than white women because, hey, they’re more sexual.  Or that they’re denied a sense of purity and innocence because of it.

Jage: Thanks for the links (*not looking till I’m done with my essay, not looking till*...oh crap, I’m gonna look…no, no, be strong, wait till tomorrow) and I’m loving your comments.

Not doing this nearly enough justice, but to start…

Black men in those days were likely to lose their lives in the pursuit of a white woman, whether she was willing or not.

Black men were likely to lose their lives in those days because they were black. (Not much has changed there). The excuse of saving white woman’s purity/place on the pedestal was one excuse for lynching black men, but as for all these bm/ww couples? Not very likely at all…

I’m probably stirring a hornet’s nest with this question, but do you really think that black men are less likely to pursue black women because, like your cousin, they think black women are “loud and brawling?”

Know it wasn’t aimed at me, but I figured I’d take a crack at it too. I think the reason black women aren’t being pursued is because the media/society has taught us that they are ugly, loud, ball-cutters (as in will cut your balls off), and other very negative stereotypes, and those have been subtly and not-so-subtly reinforced in a variety of ways since the beginning. It’s only been x years (not sure of the number but not that long) since black women have been gracing magazine covers, movies, etc, and the majority of the time it was light-skinned or bi-racial black women that were given the “beautiful status”. There are very few images that say black women’s features are beautiful, and since we get extremely ingrained by what society calls beautiful…

pay34: Yes, I will pay for spending time at those links now by getting a 34% on my essay…and yet I still head towards them…

Historically, IIRC, it was always black male sexuality that was feared (with good reason, there be some damn good looking black men) by white men.

Images of black-women/

It isn’t as “positive” as you think.

Black men in those days were likely to lose their lives in the pursuit of a white woman, whether she was willing or not.

I forgot to add: I was reading a book about “Negroes in Chicago” that was published in the 1930s and bm/ww pairings weren’t as rare as everyone likes to think. Sure, many of the white women who married black men were recent immigrants (German, Polish, etc), but it happened—so white women were not seen as “forbidden fruit,” and the fact that these black men and white women were willing to weather the discrimination and hatred from society and their families meant it was love that brought them together, not the allure of the “other.” A somewhat amusing story was told in the book that recounted a huge lawsuit brought against a millionaire who married his black housekeeper by his white children. I found it fascinating to read these stories because love is such a powerful thing.

Oh, Racialicious has a great post on the IR subject:

Interracial/Interethnic Relationships

Angela: No, that’s a really good point. I read a similiar book (I don’t think it’s the same because I don’t remember a millionaire who married his housekeeper…then again, I have the memory of a gnat). But no, bm/ww weren’t that rare. But the black rapist myth that survives from that period is very damaging…I should worded my comment above better.

Jage: I *heart* you. That story was amazing. (My friend interrupted me right during the airport scene and talked for over an hour, damn her, or otherwise I would have finished it sooner). Very poetic writing, great characters, all of it. The present tense was throwing me off in the beginning (my mind automatically put it in past tense), and sometimes I’d get knocked by a headhop, and there were a few small things, but yeah, overall it was very enjoyable. When you email her (I’d do it myself but I didn’t see it on her webpage), please tell her she writes gold.

I copied the quote you mentioned yesterday:

“No,” Lucas says slowly. “I know that we’re different, Marlowe. But I love you.” He shrugs. “Not in spite of - because of.” She purses her lips. Lucas disengages their arms and turns to face her. “For you, it’s in spite of. Right?”

She nods slowly, awkwardly. “I’m sorry.”

Lucas shrugs again. “Maybe I should be upset, but I’m not.” He clears his throat, looking over her face. “Maybe I think that’s brave.”

“Brave?”

“Yes. Have you ever done this before?”

“No.”

He nods. “You could have told me to go to hell. Instead, you’re going through it. I respect that,” he says firmly, deeply.

BTW: You are to be blamed when I fail this essay. Because I just noticed she has a sequel to it and I’ve already proved I have no willpower…dammit. 

SBs will be the death of my schooling. :)

How do people feel about the AA sections in bookstores? Most non-AA readers never even browse the section, thus aren’t even exposed to these works as an option. However, lots of our customers request the AA section (or urban romance). 

Is this respectful or segregation?

Okay, first of all:

He may be confusing “white” with “quiet.”

He can’t possibly have spent any time around white women if he’s that confused.  Yeah, I’m a loud bitch, baby!

Also,

Because from what I’ve seen of “hop hop” culture (admittedly not a whole lot), it seems that promiscuity in men is glorified a great deal, and women who are willing to wear skimpy clothing and shake their ass, etc etc are the ideal.

You can’t get accurate information from music videos.  Back when they first started airing, music videos showed big-haired, skin-tight-and-artfully-ripped pants-wearing, mascara-ed, skinny rockers living in post-apocalyptic streets with skinny tarts, er, “video vixens” as being the Metal Ideal.  (Chainmail bikinis, so very practical when fighting off mutants.)  Promiscuous men, women willing to wear skimpy clothing and shake their asses.

It’s the Rock n Roll Dream, and it never changes, regardless of the style of music or the colour of the musician.  The gender of the musician, sure, but if it’s a man, you have not know he wants to be promiscuous with lots of semi-nekkid wimmin.

Er, please read “you have to know” where it says “you have not know”...

This is very true - people talk as if rap & hip hop videos were the first to have underclad females jiggling around.  (I take no particular stance on underclad jiggling females, by the way).  The white guys were at it a long time before.  In my opinion, it’s a music video thing, not a Black thing.

So I’ll talk out of MY ass for a little bit:  Regardless of how “loud” individual white women may or may not be, a group of African Americans being “loud” will always get more flak in the U.S. because they will be seen as representative of a race, not as individuals who happen to be loud.  (In my area, South Asians are starting to get the same kind of flak, especially Caribbean-born, South-Asian-ethnic people. [and they’ll get a great deal of that flak from Asian-born South Asians.] The demographics are changing, so the dynamics are as well.)

And yes, because American society teaches black woman that we are ugly (some of the hair-relaxer ads from the 80s were atrocious, but that was hardly the start of it) black women can look at black men who date white as being traitors.  I am not saying jack about it, because I have dated my share of lovely white guys (due to my major at my tiny college, the tininess of aforesaid college, my geek pursuits, and my subsequent career choices and their demographics)—however, I have been told by men both white, black, and mixed that they “just don’t find black women attractive” (but had no problem making me their “friend,” “one of my best friends,” “you’re my friend, you’re not like a GIRL-girl,” “oh, you’re such a good listener, I feel like I can tell you anything, so let me get your advice on this blonde girl that Swede, and this Italian girl that I’m dating/fucking/trying to fuck”)  that this:

One time I heard this boy [white] who I was acquantices with make a comment that he didn’t see anything wrong with dating a black girl if she was pretty, but he’d never seen a pretty black girl so ...

...is really, really upsetting me right now, to the point where I’ve had to close my browser twice to just blink for a bit. (I’ve also heard a Japanese guy say that wassername, Chilli?—the long-haired one, I think?—was the only pretty member of TLC—because he was not American he had fewer qualms about forthrightly saying “because she isn’t so black looking.” This sort of thing makes me wonder, against my will—is it really socially-imparted, this universal disgust with us? Or is it ingrained in the DNA and objective somehow?  And I will never be able to tell because I am so immersed in the historically racist American milieu. So yes, I’m upset and making an effort not to outright wibble right now.

I have had black African and Caribbean men attempt to pick me up with the line: “You’re not like these African American women; you’re so quiet.”  This is disturbing to me as a bi-cultural woman—often I DO feel more quiet/shy/reserved/introverted than my strictly African-American-raised colleagues (there are some big cultural differences), but I HATE that this difference is associated with negativity instead of just cultural difference. (I also hate it when one group of the other—but primarily the U.S.-raised—deny that there even is a difference.) I am often torn.

My mom is still mad at Sidney Poitier for divorcing his black wife and marrying a white woman, and loves Denzel Washington, regardless of his comparative merits, because he didn’t do that.  (My preference is exactly opposite, but has nothing to do with their private lives.  I love me some Poitier.)  But my mom was born in 1937.  I don’t KNOW, I know nothing. Blah. I need coffee.  Or chocolate.  Mmm, chocolate.

And just wondering here, but why is there this idea that it is mostly black men who are gay, adulterous, felons, etc etc? Seems to me that it isnt race that makes you any of those things, its personal choice.

Shannon, please try not to suggest that being gay is a choice, or that it is on par with crime.

I DO feel more quiet/shy/reserved/introverted than my strictly African-American-raised colleagues (there are some big cultural differences)

(By which I do not mean to suggest that any type of personality is more inherent to any group—just that different societies tend to reward different types of behavior.  What gets you promoted in the U.S. will fry your ass in Japan, for example.)

(my sign-in is “death11.”  Ouch, ominous!!!)

Wow! What an interesting post and so many stimulating comments! I will say that when I saw the title of the post was “Black Romance,” I wondered if that was something like “black comedy.” I’d only ever heard this sub-genre referred to as “African American Romance,” before, so I was a little thrown. However, I am very interested in AA romance and IR romance and I’m as white as they come! Half my friends are non-white and I’ve dated many non-white men, so I’m always interested in reading romantic fiction that involves other races. I also saw “Something New” and absolutely adored it. And I just finished writing an IR novella (sitting on Brava editor Kate Duffy’s desk right this moment) with a white heroine and an African-American/Costa Rican hero. Race really isn’t much of an issue in the book, though it is dealt with in a humorous way in the beginning to sort of break the ice on the issue. But it is simply a romance between a man and a women without any stereotypical charicterization. In the end, it’s simply a romance.

And I just have to say that even though I and most of my female friends (regardless of race) are certainly of a marrying age, we are all finding it hard to find ANY man that is marriage material. Perhaps it is because I live in Los Angeles and half the men in this city are actors or models whoring their way around town in hopes of wooing (is that spelled right?) an influential producer/director/Studio exec/what-have-you to get their careers off the ground. My point is, finding “the one” is a tough battle for most women and I think we can all relate to such storylines no matter what our ancestry.

Just my humble opinion…

Lucie

How do people feel about the AA sections in bookstores? Most non-AA readers never even browse the section, thus aren’t even exposed to these works as an option. However, lots of our customers request the AA section (or urban romance).

Is this respectful or segregation?

Danish, there was considerable discussion of this on a recent thread here.

Whitesnake on a Plane:  Here I go again on my motherfuckin’ own!

stay25: I wish!

Mac, your whole comment is frying my synapses.  North American standards of beauty are so… ingrained, overbearing, EVERYWHERE! I don’t realize how much I’ve internalized we’ve made them until something like this hits me in the face.

OMG – Jage, I heart your brain…

I don’t think it’s an exact reversal however because girls from other races aren’t really going after white guys or what not, and those who do no matter their race are likely to get labelled as being ‘white washed’.

You are right, not really a reversal, just a change in the tide, and I think it matters where you live. I live in Vancouver, BC where more than 50% of the population is non-white and interracial marriages have tripled in the last 5 years. It’s one of the things I love most about this city. That and the food. If you aren’t at least open to possibility here, your dating life will be very sad.

To be honest I’ve never really thought about that ‘off limits’ aspect, but if that’s the case then why hasn’t it occured with coloured females?

Now that you mention it, I get that ‘off-limits’ thing more from my husband than from feeling disapproval from others, which I don’t really care about. Over his life he has felt that taboo, and felt in danger over it and it was talked about a lot in his family (possibly because he grew up in a predominately white area?). He himself wanted to marry a black woman, his family wanted the same thing. He couldn’t find what he was looking for.

As well, it has to do with the fact that every day you see someone telling you that something about you isn’t that pretty.

I think everyone can relate to that! Your ego will take a thousand hits a day depending on your media exposure and how many idiot white guys you are standing next to (Seriously? “I don’t see anything wrong with dating a black girl if she was pretty, but he’d never seen a pretty black girl so ...” He said that? What a total ass!) What percentage of “beautiful women” in the media are blond haired, blue-eyed, big-boobed but otherwise stick thin? Wayyyyyyyyy too many as we all know! But I think the big thing to recognize is everyone feels that weird pressure to be a wax mannequin; women that may be considered conventionally pretty will still feel insane pressure about the things that aren’t perfect. I don’t think that women that starve themselves TO DEATH or very nearly feel that great about their appearance. All those models hate themselves as much as anyone. Sad for them that they have nothing else of value to offer the world.

Lately I’ve noticed a trend of mixed/light girls lashing out at darker girls, maybe in response to the negative attention they receive or because now black girls have started to be considered pretty on main stream beyond the ones that are mixed?

That sucks. I hate that women are always the first to attack other women. I would put it down to insecure women who can’t handle the competition, like you said.

@ Trumystique

Of course you are absolutely correct. We can’t even scratch the surface of this topic here. I just had such a crush on Jage that I had to find out what she thought…

@ Orangehands

the media/society has taught us that they are ugly, loud, ball-cutters (as in will cut your balls off), and other very negative stereotypes, and those have been subtly and not-so-subtly reinforced in a variety of ways since the beginning.

Exactly what I think!

@ Lucie

My point is, finding “the one” is a tough battle for most women and I think we can all relate to such storylines no matter what our ancestry.

Exactly what I have been trying to get at. You will have to excuse me if I’ve taken the long and contentious way around. I’ll stop babbling now…

I don’t think it’s an exact reversal however because girls from other races aren’t really going after white guys or what not, and those who do no matter their race are likely to get labelled as being ‘white washed’.

I’ve known quite a few women of color who treat being married to a white man as a badge or a special “club,” and have been exhorted by their mothers to have pale babies ASAP, so I don’t know how true that is. I know one woman whose mother stopped speaking to her when she divorced her blonde German husband and married a black Bajan man, and only started speaking to her again when the first grandkid learned to walk. (Granted, this is not as much a phenomenon in the U.S.—I think it’s that not only are we more separated, we are more physically spread out.  Our population density is like six times less than that of your average European country. Hence all that driving we do, too. :-D) Her dad used to sneak over and visit, though.

I think everyone can relate to that! Your ego will take a thousand hits a day depending on your media exposure

The difference being that with most white women in the West, the things being criticized are individual traits, not big sweeping racial ones (one might not like one’s fine, straight hair, but no one is going to tell you it’s not work-appropriate or look at it like an alien lagoon creature.  And every mainstream beauty mag will have loads of tips for it). Of course, neither thing is very cool or pleasant for the woman, whatever shade, who is weathering these nasty comments and false ideals.

My point is, finding “the one” is a tough battle for most women and I think we can all relate to such storylines no matter what our ancestry.

Hence why the genre is popular!  :-D I agree, I think. I doubt I’d have ever even known I was supposed to have special difficulty had I not been confronted with this data in the media—it’s certainly not so evident in my daily life.  (I mean it’s there if you look, but you don’t spend all your days especially thinking about it!)

(“natural43”!  Ha!  *wears curls*)

American society teaches black woman that we are ugly [...] So yes, I’m upset and making an effort not to outright wibble right now.

Mac, this reminded me just a little bit of how I felt in response to some recent cover snark here at SBTB. I didn’t say anything at the time because in the scheme of things it was very minor, and was written with no intention to be hurtful, but all the same it stung a little when I clicked on this post, looked at the pictures and then read “Heroine with absurdedy big, absurdedly curly hair”. Because my hair (although in dark brown, not red, and a little bit shorter) looks pretty much exactly like that of the heroine with the “absurdedy big, absurdedly curly hair.” In fact, my hair’s probably even bigger because it’s curlier. And I’ve noticed in romances that quite often the heroine feels she looks ugly because her hair’s gone frizzy in the damp. Mine looks like that pretty much all the time.

I really like my hair the way it is, but I’m always aware that a lot of other people probably think it’s a bit weird/ugly.

Anyway, I’m not trying to derail the thread or make it all about me, just saying that I sympathise with you and your wibble.

@Laura Vivanco—If you haven’t read “Curly Girl” by Lorraine Massey, you REALLY should!  All those testimonials from curly-haired women of all kinds of ethnicities were pretty darn inspiring.

When I was a bit younger I remember feeling quite terrible when my friend, who was Jewish (for the record, we were both adults, but I was newer to the adult thing—maybe 21 or so?) told me that she didn’t feel DRESSED unless her hair was straight.  Just from years and years of her mother cutting her hair off at the chin and straightening it (and it never got glossy and swingy, either, it was just sort of a barely-contained frizzish helmet thing).  And when she’d go home from college, her mom would say things like “aren’t you going to do your hair?” and “oh.  You’re going out like THAT?!”

And there I am thinking, in my naive way “oh CHRIST—if even WHITE girls are getting this nonsense there is no hope for the planet.”

My point being, Yay Lorraine Massey!  (I’m not a “real” writer, except for tax purposes :-D, but I have been scribbling intermittently on a story where the characters engage in all kinds of African hair care, without ever actually calling them “black” people—it’s a fantasy and I don’t think they’d have that concept internalized.  Lots of moisture, and finger-combing only!  It winds up being quite a familial bonding ritual.)

(Oh, and your hair sounds gorgeous to me.  ;-D)

Thanks, Mac! I’m very fond of my hair now, but in the past I wasn’t so sure about it and thought that perhaps it would be better to have a short, straight bob of dark hair or long straight blonde or auburn hair.

My mother (who also has curly hair, but she’s always had it short) never suggested or did anything like what your friend’s mother said/did, but she did tend to keep asking if I’d brushed my hair at times when (although she didn’t know it) I’d only just brushed it. Again, not a comment that was designed to be hurtful, but the implication seemed to be that my hair would always look a bit untidy, however recently I’d brushed it.

I like a quote from the description of Massey’s book: “let their hair break free.” I think we all need to break free from restrictive, discriminatory beauty ideals, and letting our hair break free is a good place to start.

Juliana: I agree completely. There are many ills in the world for which I hold Whitesnake entirely accountable.

THIS!

I’ve gotta say one of the big problems black women have (and I think women of color in general) is that we’ve internalized hundreds of years of being viewed under a racist lens.  Black women have been viewed as mammies, aunt Jemimas, loud ghetto/welfare queens, hoochies, and church girls.  Asian women are viewed as exotic and submissive.  Latina women are viewed as sultry or long-suffering madonnas.  Women of color did not control their images and they did not control their sexuality, until now.  I have said before that the sexual revolution never happened for us—one reason that many women of color envy what we perceive as an openness that white women have.

Of course we don’t see ourselves as beautiful because we’re using a paradigm created and maintained by racist patriarchy.  The thing is though, if we’re as “ugly” as the conventional wisdom would have us believe, then why are so many non-women-of-color going out of their way to have our features?  Full lips used to be considered an unattractive trait, but not any longer (and no, do NOT give that credit to Angelina Jolie).  Hips, butts, darker skin, even hair styles once considered “too ethnic” have found their way into the mainstream (I’m sure many of you remember Bo Derek’s cornrows in 10).  And frankly, we couldn’t have been TOO ugly if the slavemasters couldn’t keep their hands off of slave women—just as Thomas Jefferson.

Okay, so the thing is this, until we women of color stop giving power to hurtful internalizations, finding love with ANYONE is going to be a struggle.  One of the greatest aspects of the AA romance is reading about strong, intelligent and BEAUTIFUL black women being loved and cherished by a strong, intelligent, RESPECTFUL black man.  This is not a fairy tale because it happens everyday and I am the product of a forty-three year old marriage between two strong and proud black folk.

Vixienne, its not about the problems of women of color- its about the problems of white women. The fact that someone fails to find me a beautiful woman has just as much to say about him/her than it has to say about me. I am all about self-love and decolonizing minds.

So really this post/thread isnt about critically analyzing “Black Romance” rather it should be on the whiteness of Romance. In another way lets talk about White Romance because thats what is being reviewed and talked about in 95% of RomanceLandia. People should be asking themselves “Why am I blind to the love stories of people whose only difference from me is the color of their skin?”

I have been lurking on these sites for years and have only recently delurked. But I am so sick of the same cycle that is often repeated. It goes like this:

1.Someone brings up the whiteness of Romance or racism/segregation in Romance
2.Someone says we didnt know
3.Someone says I dont see color and I would read them if I could find them
4. Someone else say but Author X has a ( insert name of racial/ethnic group here) so thats not really true that Romance is like that
5. Someone else says I am not a racist but “I just want to read a good book”/“I dont want to be preached to”
6.Someone else says I want something I can “relate to”
7. There is much discussion, ignorant comments are strewn about and there is wringing of hands and some “cant we all get along?”
8. Someone else blames the whiteness in romance on the publishing industry and marketing departments
8. Someone else blames it on the bookstore
9.Someone else blames it on the lack of blogs reviewing romances with non-white folk as heroine/hero
10. Someone else say but it helps writers of color to have their books segregated
11. Someone else asks for some recommendations because again all they want is “a really good book”
12. Multiple someones provide authors and novel for the TBR list
13. There is much discussion, wringing of hands and some “cant we all get along?” and then there is self-congratulation for being so openminded
14. Then the topic is ignored for many months to come.
15. Cycle. Rinse. Repeat

So really my question is what is different about this. What are all the smart, witty SBers that get incensed about homophobia, sexism, plagiarism, literary snobbism going to do about this ?

I suggest people see this powerful five part movie on the lens of whiteness http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pAljja0vi2M

Vixienne, its not about the problems of women of color- its about the problems of white women. The fact that someone fails to find me a beautiful woman has just as much to say about him/her than it has to say about me. I am all about self-love and decolonizing minds.

I agree with you to a point, but I was actually responding to an earlier comment.  However, the decolonialization process works both ways, and one of those ways is to take the imaginary power that people of color have give to whiteness all these years.  It’s like what Frances Cress Welsing wrote in The Isis Papers about white people getting tans.  Why darken one’s skin, and risk skin cancer, if such a trait is supposedly unattractive?  There’s a huge hypocrisy in white supremacy that seldom, if ever, gets discussed.  It makes no sense whatsoever, and the intellectual hoops one has to jump through to make it fit…wow!  The fact that women of color through choice or circumstance can read books by white authors and that feature white characters and somehow rise above the race to find that common human denominator, and yet some white women readers seemingly cannot (or will not) do speaks volumes.  It’s ignorance and it’s fear.

My favourite example of the whole ridiculousness of placing whiteness on a pedestal is the origin of the bustle.  The bustle was not solely to give a drape to the voluminous skirts at the time, but was designed to simulate the hips and buttocks of African women—whom at the time were actually the favoured mistresses of many members of European royalty.  There’s actually a famous painting, I believe it’s either at the Louve or the Hermitage, depicting the African mistress of some Swedish noble.  From there when I go shopping at Macy’s or Nordstrom and see things like Spanx or the fanny pads and girdles at Fredericks, I just snicker because I know who they’re made for and whom such items were created to emulate. 

Oh, and your list is dead-on accurate.

Holy mackerel, Trumystique, that list is an absolute bullseye. I’ve rarely seen a summary so perfectly done.

So really my question is what is different about this. What are all the smart, witty SBers that get incensed about homophobia, sexism, plagiarism, literary snobbism going to do about this ?

Trumystique, I can’t speak for anyone else, but I know that what was probably another cycle of “Rinse. Repeat” for Monica Jackson resulted in some columns being put up at AAR about AA romances. I was one of those people who said I didn’t know about them and then I went off and tried to find some of the books that had been discussed, bought some, read them, and found out where to look for reviews of more AA romances. I don’t suppose the number of romances I buy is going to make any significant difference, but it’s one thing that I’m doing. As an independent scholar I’m not responsible for anyone’s syllabus choices, but I know that some of what might have seemed like “Rinse. Repeat” discussions about the topic have affected my colleagues’ syllabus choices. I’ve got some AA romances that I’m planning to write about.

I don’t think I’m doing a great deal, but I suppose my personal experience is that what might seem to some people like a “Rinse. Repeat” may actually be having an effect on some other people, even if it’s perhaps a very tiny and not very noticeable effect.

And thanks for the Youtube link. As you say, it was powerful.

Trumystique, your list is darned accurate.  Here’s mine:

1) Some people will do something.
2) Some people will do nothing.
3) Some people will change their minds just a little bit.

Progress

Oh man. Maybe I should have just stayed lurking, and sorry that I couldnt respond until now, I had school and sports eating up my afternoon when much of this seemed to be going down.

@Trumystique

I think you took what I was saying in the wrong light. I know full well that it isnt just AA females that are promiscuous or good in bed. And I know full well that hip hop doesnt mean AA culture. But you cant deny that the majority of people in hip hop, or who are presented as the best artists in hop hop, are black. And, to me at least, hip hop and really white culture as well, too a degree, congratulates the male for promiscuity. And do you ever see a well dressed business women in a hip hop video portrayed as some symbol of desire and lust?

As it is portrayed, or as the majority of people I know see it, those are the ideals that seem to come across. I’m not saying they are the ideals actually held, or the actual truths, or any of that. Its just what gets seen, and what perpetuates rumor and stereotype and bias, because all thats ever seen is the same image and the same stories reinforcing the same half truths.

As to the fear of black male sexuality, yeah, I know it isnt the only thing feared. I dont believe I stated that it was, and if I did then I apologize, because I misspoke (mistyped, whatever). I was just noting that it was enough of an impact that my history book designated a full three paragraphs to talking about it. Therefore, I assumed that maybe it would have some impact on the discussion about black romances and sexuality, and so I mentioned it.

And not to say that all stereotypes are true, but they are all based in small part on fact. Otherwise they would never come to exist in the first place.

@paradigm

I cant deny that I dont know a whole lot about black culture because I’ve never experienced it. I was just saying what I as a white girl was thinking as I read through the discussion. I would be quite shocked if it perfectly jived with the actual truths of black culture and lifestyle.

With the sexual stereotypes, to be quite honest it isnt as full blown from what I personally have seen and encountered than what you describe. Yeah, stereotypes are wrong, agreed. But as stereotypes go…maybe not such a bad one. I wouldnt mind having a reputation for being an awesome dancer. Would I mind having a reputation for being an easy lay? Yeah. But I think that, no offense, you dont just get that. Girls in my school dont get that kind of reputation from no where, they earn it, the few black girls included. I just assume that that extends beyond my high school. If it doesnt, I apologize. Again, I’m just working off of what I know.

@Mac

Sorry bout that one, agree completely. Didnt realize I had included it in the “choice” statement I was directing toward adultery and felonies until after you made mention of it. I apologize for that.

Well, I’m super late, but figure I’ll weigh in anyway. Oh, and for the previous posts sorry for the cut off sentences I was tired and my brain was hopping from thought to thought so I’d go to add/change something then think of something else and move on, then when I reread it I guess I just filled in the blanks, lol.

@orangehands: Join the club, though I did well on the final so that saved me, lol. I read about 1/3 of the sequel before I had to choose between finishing my work and packing or reading it and then having to pay $50 bucks for moving out late. I decided to get in gear, lol. I think I’ll copy and paste the comments instead of paraphrasing.

@Trashaddict:
*head inflates* mutual crush, it works, lol. And to get back on topic:

I live in Ontario, which is considered multicultural [I don’t know any stats] but depending on the area you live in you get a totally different experiance. Here, well in the surburbs here, it’s easy to stick with your own race/culture which is great when you want to visit ChinaTown or Little Italy or whatnot but makes the mingling aspect still a bit foreign.

I grew up in an area that was mainly brown people and asians, a medium sized amount of black people and then a handful of white, there was one white person in my grade eight graduating class. I started highschool down there and aside from a few ‘ooh, I see so and so likes some cream with her coffee *wink*’ comments mixed girls were just as accepted as others when it came to mingling with other groups.  Then I moved to a predominantly white area and although it was ‘safer’ I experianced the most racism there, intentional and not, like with the no pretty black girl comments, he really didn’t think he was being offensive. Because it was ‘true’. I didn’t really handle that well since I had to rant about it to my friends who told their friends and every black girl and their friends for the most part, white or black, treated him like he had syphillis and the black guys took huge offence and in a small school that leads to a sort of black vs. white type of mindset even when it’s just one person’s opinion.

But yeah, there people expected you to pick a race and stick with it, and if you didn’t choose theirs they wanted to know how come you were so close-minded [I’m sure this happens to all bi-racial kids but the lines were drawn a lot clearer here]. I have a friend whose boyfriend has pretty much been delegated as her ‘cute little white boy’ he has no problem with it and it’s caught on but after reading this I wondered how fast I would’ve broken up with my boyfriend if he’d refered to me as his ‘cute little black chick’ instead of just his girlfriend.

Then I moved to Windsor where there are a lot of transfer students from Africa and I saw the thing that Mac was talking about, where Africans or people from Carribean descent acted as if black females all act a certain way and if you didn’t you were an anomaly instead of a product of your upbringing//culture.

I have had black African and Caribbean men attempt to pick me up with the line: “You’re not like these African American women; you’re so quiet.” This is disturbing to me as a bi-cultural woman—often I DO feel more quiet/shy/reserved/introverted than my strictly African-American-raised colleagues (there are some big cultural differences), but I HATE that this difference is associated with negativity instead of just cultural difference. (I also hate it when one group of the other—but primarily the U.S.-raised—deny that there even is a difference.) I am often torn.

It was mainly interesting to me on the fact that I have never met a black person over here who didn’t claim descent from an island [Jamaica] or didn’t have family from Africa still, as in they were first generation Canadians, so when they were surprised that I wasn’t loud or that I wouldn’t fight someone over foolishness I didn’t get where they got that impression.

And then I was talking to my sister and she mentioned that for the most part you put a group of people who are the same race in a room they will start speaking in their language and they’ll get louder in an attempt to talk over people, they’ll blast their music and mingle and at some point there will be an argument. A lot of the people at my school met each other at parties or knew each other before hand so they were comfortable with each other, where as I’m shy and unless you’re family the chances of me mingling is extremely slim. And at a largely African party where the music and the dancing style is different than what I’m used too [depending on the music/song. I can’t dance to most hip hop as I was raised largely on reggae, dancehall, soca and calypso] I will sit in a corner and just chill because I don’t want to look a fool, not because of my skin.

On the other hand, over here I’ve seen people agreeing that there are cultural differences, even when it comes down to Trinidad vs. Jamaica vs. Guyana etc. Although the differences all tend to be negative stereotypes we have against one another.

On that note, I’m dead tired and just wanted to say I found this whole discussion interesting and enlightening. I usually lurk but I wanted to comment and I’m glad I did.

Shannon, re “And not to say that all stereotypes are true, but they are all based in small part on fact. Otherwise they would never come to exist in the first place.”

I disagree. There are quite a few other possibilities. With some racial stereotypes/myths it is easy to prove that they have absolutely no “fact” to them at all. For example

In 1348 there appeared in Europe a devastating plague which is reported to have killed off ultimately twenty-five million people. By the fall of that year the rumor was current that these deaths were due to an international conspiracy of Jewry to poison Christendom. (Jewish History Sourcebook

and there was the “blood libel.”

Sometimes the grain of “fact” in the stereotype is tiny and distorted, as when some Romans believed that Christians were cannibals: “The charge of ritual cannibalism was probably based on confused accounts of the Christian eucharist” (Ancient History Sourcebook).

Stereotypes can be based on people’s projection of their own fears/desires onto others:

Projection theory is often applied in the study of stereotypes. A general claim of projection theory is that stereotypes reveal more about the stereotype holders than they do the group depicted. With respect to the Black rapist claim, Brundage reports that “Black men were said to represent for white men a sexual liberation that they wanted but could not achieve without contradicting their race’s professed mores.” White fear of imagined Black potency could therefore be seen as symptomatic of internal conflicts about about Whites’ own sexuality. Stereotype projection can also be seen in terms of guilt arising from the discrepancy between a repressive ideal and actual behaviour. For Christians who murdered Gypsies, Blacks, Jews, and Native Americans, while ostensibly following the teachings of the Prince of Peace, such a discrepancy is not hard to imagine. (Erickson 121)

Oh, and Shannon, I’d like to comment on this bit too:

Would I mind having a reputation for being an easy lay? Yeah. But I think that, no offense, you dont just get that. Girls in my school dont get that kind of reputation from no where, they earn it, the few black girls included. I just assume that that extends beyond my high school. If it doesnt, I apologize.

If you think about the evidence you’ve presented, you’ve actually said that most of the girls with a reputation for being “easy” are non-black, since there are only a “few black girls included” among the group of girls with “that kind of reputation.” If one really did assume that that “extends beyond your high school,” the implication you should be drawing is that white girls are “easy” since most of the “easy” girls you know are white. In any case, this would be a false conclusion, because even if the majority of girls in the “easy” group are white, there are probably more “non-easy” white girls in the school than “easy” ones. So why focus on the “easy” ones rather than on the larger group who aren’t “easy”?

I’ll take an example about women drivers, from an article by Deborah Tannen, in which she demonstrates how stereotypes are not necessarily based on a correct analysis of date, but rather on people picking out the examples that match an existing stereotype and ignoring examples which would contradict it:

My father, like many men of his generation, held the belief that women were incompetent drivers. During my teenage years, family car journeys were invariably accompanied by an endless running commentary on how badly the women around us were driving. Eventually I became so irritated by this, I took to scouring passing traffic for counter-examples: women who were driving perfectly well, and men who were driving like idiots.

My father usually conceded that the men were idiots, but not because they were men. Whereas female idiocy was axiomatically caused by femaleness, substandard male drivers were either “yobbos” - people with no consideration for others on the road or anywhere else - or “Sunday drivers”: older men whose driving skills were poor because they used their cars only at weekends. As for the women who drove unremarkably, my father seemed surprised when I pointed them out. It was as if he had literally not noticed them until that moment.

At the time I thought my father was exceptional in his ability to make reality fit his preconceptions, but now I know he was not. Psychologists have found in experimental studies that when interpreting situations people typically pay most attention to things that match their expectations, and often fail to register counter-examples.

Jage: LOL. You are stronger than I. My friend told me tonight as we were making dinner that I wasn’t tracking her at all, so though I think I did well on my paper…there’s a good chance I made absolutely no sense at all. (Damn engaging stories). But I have to say, didn’t like her sequel nearly as much. (Still read the whole thing before writing my essay as I am a complete waste, but it wasn’t as great). I can’t fall asleep right now (I’m an insomniac half the time), so I tried reading her fanfic piece but had to stop after a few pages [I’m really not big on cheating and had no clue which author she was “fanficing” (did I just make up a word?) so I wasn’t invested in the characters] and her suspense just wasn’t doing it for me. Did you like her other stuff more? Hope she sticks to romance for the upcoming one.

Trumystique: Poison Ivy wrote it better, but you (general you) never get more than an inch done each time. (I do volunteer work, and I do political work, and if you get one person to become active, that’s more than most). Extremely frustrating, I agree, but this stuff only changes because we (general we) keep rerinsing and rerinsing and rerinsing until the hair is about to fall out…and then we see a little, teeny tiny change. Very rarely does the difference come in leaps and bounds. At least that’s my two cents (or wherever the economy is at). What’s the saying? You run a mile to make an inch?

Laura: you’re hair is perfect. Fuck the rest of them

The thing is…how do you fight something that is bombarded at you minute after minute in so many ways…I think the statistic is the average kid hears 432 negative statements per day, but only 32 positive ones.

Shannon (not to pick on you) but two things…

Would I mind having a reputation for being an easy lay? Yeah. But I think that, no offense, you dont just get that. Girls in my school dont get that kind of reputation from no where, they earn it, the few black girls included.

Maybe your HS (college?) is different. There’s the possibility. But at my schools (HS and college now, and yes, semi at MS), girls have gotten that for having one one-night stand, for being raped (ever hear of a train? Very few, if any, do those willingly), for doing it with more than one boy (or even just one boy), for not even going all the way, for having rumors spread about them, for being pressured into sex/sex acts, for talking about sex openly, and probably many more reasons I’m blanking on right now. And not trying to sound hostile, but when have you referred to a guy doing the exact same thing as a slut/easy lay? (Maybe you do). I’m not in any way suggesting there aren’t promiscuous girls out there. But the label girls walk around with…mostly viciousness. Not nearly close to being true. I’m curious- the girls known as easy lays. Have you seen them having sex with someone new every time? Have they told you they were screwing someone new each day? Or is it that rumor…she does it, did you hear what she did, she’s done all the guys on X, etc.

Yeah, stereotypes are wrong, agreed. But as stereotypes go…maybe not such a bad one. I wouldnt mind having a reputation for being an awesome dancer.

All stereotypes hurt. What happens when you aren’t a good ___ (dancer, in this case)? You fail as a woman and you fail as a member of that race. I don’t have that innate skill. What’s wrong with me? What will people think? And self-esteem drops some more.

Another example: Asians are all good in school. Sounds cool, right? See an Asian, think they’re smart. But this ignores a) the dedication they have to put into their schoolwork (well sure X got an A, s/he’s Asian), b) the historical context on why Asian parents push their kids (same thing the Jews did earlier in the C.), c) ignores the Asian parents who don’t push their kids, d) ignores the kids who do bad in school, e) creates low self esteem in those who don’t do well, f) gives another reason to hate a race (an issue in Asian-Latino/a relations), g) helps perpetrate the idea that a race is a monolithic entity, h) helps perpetrate the idea a person’s race is linked to their smarts…and so many more letters that I’m just not thinking of now.

Also, just throwing this out there. I like to watch people, and I try to pay attention to a lot of factors when doing so. (What are my biases? How is what I see just one aspect of them? etc etc). Anyways, to cut to the chase, my college had a group of little kids (I think ten year olds, but not positive) visiting the dining hall I was at yesterday. And if you don’t believe in segregation…one table of white boys, one table of white girls, one table of Latino boys, one table of Latina girls, and one table of mixes (whites, latino/as, and the two Asian kids). This is not the first time I’ve seen a group break like this, and it won’t be the last.

Laura: just saw your last two posts. The reason why I love you so, right there. (I’ve read theories based on projection theory in relation to stereotypes, but never had it said “projection theory”; and yes to finding examples to fit the stereotype, not break it).

ooo, two more things (I think at one point in my life I knew how to shut up, but that point has long passed)

one, thanks for the youtube link, Trumystique.

two: I heard this really great analogy of (fighting) racism that I’ll share, because I feel like it fits for most activism.  You have the people running/walking on the treadmill of blank (for example, racism), you have people standing there (not actively participating but not stopping it either), and you have people walking/running against the treadmill. Active racism, passive racism, and active resistance.

anyway, I’m gonna go before I really start talking out of my ass… :)

I think the statistic is the average kid hears 432 negative statements per day, but only 32 positive ones

And you’ve just added two positive ones to my day :-) Thank you, Orangehands!

I’m very glad you pointed out all that about how how problematic it is to categorise anyone as “easy.”  It’s a good reminder that when it comes to the idea that “there’s no smoke without fire,” the cause of the fire may be an arsonist and not the person whose house has just gone up in flames.

I think I’ve come up with another reason why the so-called “positive” stereotypes can be harmful. I’ll go back to that article by Deborah Cameron (sorry, I got her surname wrong the first time I mentioned her). Again, she’s giving an example related to sexism, but one can see how this would also apply to “positive” racial stereotypes:

A few years ago, the manager of a call centre in north-east England was asked by an interviewer why women made up such a high proportion of the agents he employed. Did men not apply for jobs in his centre? The manager replied that any vacancies attracted numerous applicants of both sexes, but, he explained: “We are looking for people who can chat to people, interact, build rapport. What we find is that women can do this more ... women are naturally good at that sort of thing.” Moments later, he admitted: “I suppose we do, if we’re honest, select women sometimes because they are women rather than because of something they’ve particularly shown in the interview.”

The growth of call centres is part of a larger trend in economically advanced societies. More jobs are now in the service than the manufacturing sector, and service jobs, particularly those that involve direct contact with customers, put a higher premium on language and communication skills. Many employers share the call-centre manager’s belief that women are by nature better qualified than men for jobs of this kind, and one result is a form of discrimination. Male job applicants have to prove that they possess the necessary skills, whereas women are just assumed to possess them. In today’s increasingly service-based economy, this may not be good news for men.

But it is not only men who stand to lose because of the widespread conviction that women have superior verbal skills. Someone else who thinks men and women are naturally suited to different kinds of work is Baron-Cohen. In The Essential Difference he offers the following “scientific” careers advice: “People with the female brain make the most wonderful counsellors, primary school teachers, nurses, carers, therapists, social workers, mediators, group facilitators or personnel staff ... People with the male brain make the most wonderful scientists, engineers, mechanics, technicians, musicians, architects, electricians, plumbers, taxonomists, catalogists, bankers, toolmakers, programmers or even lawyers.”

So, to get back to racism, what happens to people in the “sexy” group? How will that affect their likelihood of getting employed in “non-sexy” professions? Will it be harder for people from a racial group associated with being good at sports and dancing to get into professions which are associated with brainpower? Will the people from the racial group thought of as “smart” be seen as too cerebral to be employed in sensitive, caring professions?

@Laura Vivanco

I will mention that there are a total of I think 9 black girls in the entire school, so my perceptions are again based on what I see, which is not a whole lot.

As for focus on the easy ones, people like sex, they like scandal, they like to gossip and pass rumors and think they’re better than other people. Thats why I think that focus is always on the “easy” girls, because they’re a sensation, something to talk about. I think that extends beyond just HS rumors, too. Media focus on the negative, celebrity scandals, all that, I think, can be attributed to people wanted to feel better about themselves because hey, at least they arent in that situation.

To your article (just thinking out loud here), I’m thinking that maybe some stereotypes are perceived as more lasting (not exactly the word I want) than others? Like from my own personal experience, no one that I know gives any credit at all to the whole “Jewish girls have big noses” thing, because we all know plenty of Jewish kids with noses just like everyone elses. But then maybe “Latino guys are all players and dont treat women well” gets a bit more credit in my school, because there’s a huge number of Latino guys….and thats what the vast majority seem to do.

With women drivers, all I can say to that is that women arent naturally possessing (in most cases), the same skill set as guys that allows them to automtically be good at things like video games and driving and whatever. So that little thing there, where women were learning for the first time and having to be compared to guys who had been driving for years, is maybe what started some of that, and keeps it going now. (Because God knows, I just got my permit and I cant keep going at one steady speed. Everything else is great, speed control, not so much).

And also there’s just plain bias and prejudice and crap people choose to believe to justify their own actions so they dont feel like major dickheads for treating people badly.

To the women just being assumed to have certain skills thing you just posted, it sounds a lot like something we learned in history that pervaded through 100+ years and just appears now in other forms rather than disappearing. Its called “spheres,” where theres the guys sphere and the female sphere, and in each sphere are the acceptable tasks and behaviors and desires and all that stuff of each gender. If you arent in your sphere, you better get there fast. IIRC, it was used by a number of state legislatures to smack down women’s rights legislation in earlier years before the movement got any momentum. Theye would say that it wasnt in their sphere, so obviously they cant be good at it and it cant be God’s will that they do it. Otherwise it would be in their sphere.

@Orangehands

Sounds like you had a rough school to go to. Mine doesnt seem to be like that at all. The girls who get the reputation are (as far as I know, speaking about the girls I know in my grade who I’ve talked to and suchlike) the ones who wear the skirts that could pass for hand towels, and the shirts with their boobs popping out the top. They talk about how they hooked up with this guy last weekend but he wasnt as good as this guy two weeks before. They’re the once at parties who are full on grinding with all their dance partners and each other and lifting their skirts and things like tha.

So maybe its just isolated in my school, but you tend to earn it, and if someone gets branded unfairly people figure it out. It doesnt take very long to see someone and be able to discern the difference, if there is one, because its usually pretty apparent.

With the guys being an easy lay…that was what I was getting at but not saying. Male promiscuity is seen as favorable and positive and awesome and hey, your a player, your not a man-whore.

And maybe I’m just different with stereotype/perception things since I tend to not hang around with that great a group of people, but I dont really feel that I’ve failed as a woman or a person or even a dancer because I dont know “Solda Boy” and cant “drop it like its hot” without falling on my ass (have tried, it happened).

And I do completely acknowledge that all stereotypes are bad and harmful in some way. But just saying, some worse than others.

With the little kids sitting, its like that every single day in elementary, middle, and high school. You join a click and that click is all you want and all you need, and you dont leave it for anything. You arent in a click, well then whats up with that? Do you have friends? Why dont you hange out with them? I see it everyday, that kind of purposeful separation. With it happening on racial lines…I guess there’s some of that, but I dont think I really see it as much in my particular lunch period, though I’ve heard it happens during the other ones. My thoughts there is that you stick with what you know and what makes you comfortable. If I find myself one of six white people in a room of 70 Latino kids, then I’m going to gravitate to what I know and where I feel safe.

Long post again

I think you took what I was saying in the wrong light.

Shannon: No in fact I didn’t take what you said in the wrong light. It is there in black and white. Instead of owning what you said and how shitty what you said is you are making excuses.

Here is what you said:

Does anyone think that the reason only 20% of black women get married is a cultural thing? Because from what I’ve seen of “hop hop” culture (admittedly not a whole lot), it seems that promiscuity in men is glorified a great deal, and women who are willing to wear skimpy clothing and shake their ass, etc etc are the ideal. So those two things together there, if its a widespread cultural thing (and it seems to be in my school, which is possible Whitest School Ever yet still manages to bring that over), then could that be part of the issue? All those bad standards and behaviors that arent conductive toward happy monogamous relationships keep getting reinforced as positive?

So lets recap. You suggested that perhaps the reason black woman are married in such a low percentage is because of culture. Hip hop culture promotes promiscuity and promotes scantily clad and booty shaking women. Those cultural mores of hiphop culture would be the reason for black women not being married in high numbers because those standards from hip hop arent conducive to monogamours relationship. That is exactly what you said.

You have many underlying assumptions here that are clear. First, that there is a some intrinsic cultural reason for black women not getting married. You suggest that hiphop may be the culture to blame and thus are assuming that hip hop culture is African American culture. Further, you assume that hip hop as presented in popular media is actually an accurate representation of the culture.( You completely ignore all the other expressions of hip hop especially of the underground variety that arent misogynistic or promote promiscuity, booty shaking that are part of hip hop culture)  You assume that hip hop as presented by Clear Channel and other media conglomerates which puts forth 50 Cent, Snoop Dogg and others is the hip hop culture. And you assert that hip hop culture( as seen in popular media) promotes promiscuity and that the reason black women arent getting married is because of the culture promoting promiscuity and downplaying the importance of marriage. You pay no attention to the fact that hip hop is a form that is maybe 30 years old and that the trends in black women’s marriage pattern predated hip hop. Maybe you didn’t know. You can own up to that and the fact the you were totally and completely talking out of your ass. Admit it- don’t say that I put words in your mouth.

Then you go on to say:

Also, I found the comment about romances with black characters reinforcing negative black female stereotypes interesting. Historically, IIRC, it was always black male sexuality that was feared (with good reason, there be some damn good looking black men) by white men. So could this be a case now of white women fearing black female sexuality? There is always this idea in people I’ve talked to and media I’ve seen that black women are just more sensual and sexual (not in a bad way), better dancers, better lovers, and yeah, more wild in bed…but is that necessarily a bad thing? To me it seems like black women got a reputation for things that arent necessarily bad, and maybe white women felt threatened by that. They have been the standard for beauty for so long, what are they going to do when all the white men start chasing black girls?

You say that you think that the discussion in the article SB Sarah quoted was interesting. Because historically black male sexuality was feared by white men. And you say black male sexuality was right to be feared because of all the attractive black men you see. You suggest that in current times white women are beginning to fear black female sexuality because of jealousy on the part of white women who fear that black women are true to their stereotypical reputation as more sensual/ sexual, better dancer, and more unihibited lovers.

That’s what you said Shannon- not me. You critically accept stereotypes as truth. You blindly assert that all stereotypes are in part true and wouldn’t be stereotypes unless they were grounded in a little truth. You try to make yourself look better by saying that stereotypes are bad and nobody should hold them. But as the same time you talk out of the other side of your mouth and say “But they are kinda true- at least from my experience”.

Again, you no historical perspective. Yes, white men feared black male sexuality. But part of their fears were transferred. They were dealing with repressed sexual ideas of the time that said proper ladies didn’t like sex and proper gentlemen didn’t force sex on ladies of breeding. So they elevated wives and mothers unto these pedestals of white virginal beauty. And they put black man as the demons who with their rampant sexual urges were trying to dirty that virginal purity of white women. But that stereotype had more do with what white men were thinking and feeling than what black men were doing

If you read Regencies you have a feeling for some of these ideas. The rakish hero has sex with many a lightskirt and lower class woman of the demimonde but never with a proper lady. The rakish hero always is sad that he has to get married and do his duty and produce an heir. Part of doing his duty is laying on top of his wife and getting the job done. No pleasure is expected for either partner and usually the heroine thinks there is something wrong with her if she enjoys sex. It’s a recurring theme in Regencies that echoes what was happening in those times and before.

Again, the stereotypes of black women have more to do with white men and women than it has to do with black women. So black women were cast as overally sexual and more sensual beings always ready for sex. How convenient for white Americans and white colonialists the world over! All these willing black women for them to use for their sexual desire and gratification. “Oops its not my fault I had sex with her this black temptress used her wiles on me”. The myth of the oversexed black women has worked for white upper class women too. It allowed them to look the other way at the indiscretions of their husbands. “It wasn’t his fault he had to work it out with this black whore- men will be men after all1”. Did you know that up until recently a black woman couldn’t accuse a white man of raping her and sucessfully prosecute him? http://www.brandeis.edu/projects/fse/Pages/victimraceandrape.html

Instead, Regencies use the same outlets. Many, Regencies novels will show an entitled lord, duke or what have you “using” the maids. Cant use his wife like that or any proper lady but he can use a woman of the lower classes because everyone knew they were “easy” and had “base morals”. Its no wonder that more historical romances are not set in the American South than you would have to deal with that Negro Problem and that historical legacy. So instead writers pretend that black folk didnt exist in Europe or the US.

Shannon, you need to think a little and question more. Just because you think it doesnt make it true.  You need to learn more about the world outside of your high school . I suggest reading Black Looks: Race and Representation by bell hooks for a start. Maybe you could do it for a book report. And just because you think it doesnt mean you have to speak it. Your comments came across as ignorant and bigoted. Learn something from this, own it and move on.

Sorry there were may typos above. Please excuse them. One of the worst.

That’s what you said Shannon- not me. You critically accept stereotypes as truth. You blindly assert that all stereotypes are in part true and wouldn’t be stereotypes unless they were grounded in a little truth

.

Should be:
That’s what you said Shannon- not me. You uncritically accept stereotypes as truth.

Laura, I hear what you are saying. And I appreciate that the cycle of rinse and repeat may be changing things slowly and incrementally. And I think you are doing a wonderful job of critically analyzing romance on your blog. And yes its like a pebble into a pond and there are ripple of effects. And I think that you underestimate the power of what you are doing. Because as you blog, write, teach and make syllabi you are developing a cannon of popular romance literature. And if you include other voices, that have a different narratives, have a different POV and have protagonists of color than the whitewashing of romance and the exlusion of WOC will be a little less powerful.

Still,  I am dissappointed that more of the SB community is not more incensed and not committing to do more. Its been years that this issue has been raised. If you look at the sidebar of links you see many SB regulars who have blogs and could do something with their voices, wallets or what have you and dont. This level of silence and inaction saddens me-especially when I see that this community can be moved to action for things that they care passionately about. The fact that they seemingly dont care seems to speak volumes to me.

But it is not only men who stand to lose because of the widespread conviction that women have superior verbal skills. Someone else who thinks men and women are naturally suited to different kinds of work is Baron-Cohen. In The Essential Difference he offers the following “scientific” careers advice: “People with the female brain make the most wonderful counsellors, primary school teachers, nurses, carers, therapists, social workers, mediators, group facilitators or personnel staff ... People with the male brain make the most wonderful scientists, engineers, mechanics, technicians, musicians, architects, electricians, plumbers, taxonomists, catalogists, bankers, toolmakers, programmers or even lawyers.”

As someone who never matched the standard gender stereotype (you’d be hard pressed to find a less nurturing and less diplomatic individual than me, even though those are supposed to be my female strengths), I dislike the reductionism of the male/female brain theory. And of course, the most notable thing about those jobs for female (brain)s is that they are far lower paid and have less prestige on average than those for male (brain)s. The call center agent example actually reinforces this, as at least in my country call center agent is a job with low prestige and bad pay. And here as in the example from the Guardian, the majority of call center agents are women.

I’ve been puttering about, trying to think of a way I, personally, can respond to the challenge Trumystique issued yesterday.  And when I got to the bottom of the comment thread, I found my verification word to be color97, so now I have to respond, because it’s like an omen.  The literary gods are speaking to me.

Publishers and booksellers will always attempt to fill a niche in the market if they think they can make money from it.  So my mission would be to (help to) enlarge the Black Romance niche, and then merge it with the generic Romance niche such that the distinction effectively disappears.

What I, as a consumer of Romances, can do is:

a) buy Black Romances, and
b) review them in as many venues as I can, thereby
c) raising awareness of their readability, thus
d) increasing demand, so that
e) more people will buy Black Romances.

If I add one specifically Black romance to my purchases even every second week, that’s 26 books that I might not have picked up, unless I’d gone looking for them, and 26 books that I may be recommending to my reading buddies.

So, my criteria are that they have to be romances, and they have to feature character(s) who are not white.  And it may be that I’d normally pass them by because they don’t leap screaming into my arms, which is how I normally purchase books, but now I’ll buy them specifically .  (If the books don’t scream, I try the library or UBS, because I don’t want to spend my limited book budget on non-screamers.)

I’ll adopt this practice for a year, at which time I’ll revert to buying screamers only.  I fully expect that, by the end of the year, some of these niche books will become screamers.

I’m differentiating between non-white characters and non-white authors.  I think the point of this thread was that we want to see more books with non-whites IN them, regardless of the pigmentation of who WROTE them.

So that’s my plan.  Hopefully, when this topic comes around again (as it probably will), I’ll have made the mainstreaming of Black Romance at least 26 books closer to done.

Laura:  :)

And of course, the most notable thing about those jobs for female (brain)s is that they are far lower paid and have less prestige on average than those for male (brain)s.

I’d change that to, these jobs for females are lower paid and less prestigious jobs because they are traditionally by females or use traditional/stereotypical female behaviors.

Shannon:

First, you shoudl check out this article by Peggy McIntosh called “White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack” (Esp pg. 2 and on):
http://www.case.edu/president/aaction/UnpackingTheKnapsack.pdf

So maybe its just isolated in my school, but you tend to earn it, and if someone gets branded unfairly people figure it out. It doesnt take very long to see someone and be able to discern the difference, if there is one, because its usually pretty apparent.

First, based on my experience of the human race, I don’t really see a (harmful) label being dropped as people go, “oh, we just got it wrong”. You’re branded as a slut, you stay a slut. Second, I would caution against basing people on how they dress or a dance style- that’s a generation thing. The fashion industry makes it very hard for someone to dress in items that aren’t like that, and the dance style is grinding. I like going to clubs, but I normally stick with my girlfriends because ever guy in there just wants to grind against my ass, not dance. I’m not saying there aren’t girls who hook up with random guys all the time (though again, talking vs doing, big difference), but I’d caution basing your whole opinion on a person by how many guys she’s kissed (and kissing is different from sex). There are many different reasons that label gets placed for, and once the label lands it stays.

And maybe I’m just different with stereotype/perception things since I tend to not hang around with that great a group of people, but I dont really feel that I’ve failed as a woman or a person or even a dancer because I dont know “Solda Boy” and cant “drop it like its hot” without falling on my ass (have tried, it happened). And I do completely acknowledge that all stereotypes are bad and harmful in some way. But just saying, some worse than others.

But that isn’t your stereotype, is it? I’ll try another example since the Asian-school sterotype didn’t seem to work. People automatically assume a Latino/a person can speak Spanish. And when they can’t, they are looked at as less authentic, more white-washed, less “real”, and so on, by people in their “race” and outside of it. So don’t you think that would affect how they see themselves, since we are all influenced by those outside of us? 

My thoughts there is that you stick with what you know and what makes you comfortable. If I find myself one of six white people in a room of 70 Latino kids, then I’m going to gravitate to what I know and where I feel safe.

That was my point. We need to examine and pay closer attention to why we think we can’t connect with people outside of our race, our social class, our sexuality, our experience. We need to see why we always have to feel “safe” instead of seeing the person for who they are, which yes includes but is not in any way limited to race.

Shannon:

But as stereotypes go…maybe not such a bad one. I wouldnt mind having a reputation for being an awesome dancer.

Oh wow, you are really young.  *hugs you* 

Okay, you’re in high school, and you’re learning, and you have your entire life ahead of you to learn more.  And so I don’t want to yell at you, but you are saying some extremely old and extremely hurtful things here.

Look—it’s all very well having these “positive” stereotypes until you’re the black kid who can’t dance (or doesn’t want to) or can’t sing or would rather read a book—then when you’re asked to “perform” like a monkey, and you can’t or won’t, or happen to be shy, or happen to not WANT to perform on cue like a circus animal, somebody accuses you of not being “black” enough—as if that had ANYTHING to do with your pigmentation, hair type, or bone structure.  (Why yes, this has in fact happened to me. “Hey, MAC can do it, why don’t YOU dance for everyone???” Thankfully, not much since high school.  And thankfully, high school is not at all representative of the actual world.)

Male promiscuity is seen as favorable and positive and awesome and hey, your a player, your not a man-whore.

Oh god—again, Shannon, the post-high-school world—especially the non-homogenous, post “whitest-school-ever” world—is VERY different.  Black male promiscuity is NOT seen as a positive.  It’s the reason why the Susan Smiths of the world can get away with killing their children and saying that a black man did it—and why they will STILL, in the twenty first century, be believed, sending out manhunts to harrass innocent black men.  (Did you see “Freedomland”?  Or hell—did you see “Harold and Kumar go to White Castle”?  Did you understand why the black-guy-in-jail scene was funny?)  It was an excuse for hanging black men from trees and setting them on fire in the United States for hundreds of years. (Have you read or seen “To Kill a Mockingbird”?  Read any James Baldwin?  I reccommend “If Beale Street Could Talk” and “The Fire Next Time.”) It’s the reason candiates for president can gain millions of votes by talking about protecting the US from “welfare queens” (that is to say, black women who have illegitimate children on purpose to score more money from the government) even though welfare exists for the majority—white people (there’s only 11 percent black people in America, and the majority of them are NOT on welfare, so only a tiny fraction of this money is going to black women, yet the stereotype is so pervasive that it has been hurled at black American women by MALAYSIANS.  IN MALAYSIA.)

In light of that, your comment here is PARTICULARLY squicky.

it was always black male sexuality that was feared (with good reason, there be some damn good looking black men) by white men.

EW.

I understand you’re not trying to justify Jim Crow and lynching by saying it was done “because black men are hot,” but you are coming pretty close.

Would I mind having a reputation for being an easy lay? Yeah. But I think that, no offense, you dont just get that. Girls in my school dont get that kind of reputation from no where, they earn it, the few black girls included. I just assume that that extends beyond my high school. If it doesnt, I apologize. Again, I’m just working off of what I know.

No, you really don’t know.  And no, it doesn’t extend. It really, really doesn’t not extend beyond your high school with the nine black girls in it.  You are living in a VERY UNIQUE microcosm, there. I am glad you have never encountered, as I have, rather often, a cab driver you never met before who assumed that because you were a black American woman, you were an unmarried welfare mom who’d appreciate grossly sexual comments (including ones about your parents) and would be an easy pickup-and-discard. To put it politely. But this is not a universal experience.

Has “how many kids you got” ever been used as a “romantic” opening line to you by a guy?  “I love black women” while staring at your breasts?  Or holding his dick?  Shannon, I’m not a hoochie in a spangly butterfly top and hot pants on my way to a club at 1 am—I’m a grown woman in my thirties on my way to work in the morning in a business suit, is what I’m trying to describe to you here. (NOTE:  It’s NOT okay for men to treat women like crap based on how they’re dressed—what I’m saying sometimes how I am dressed doesn’t freaking matter.)  But according to your quote above:

Girls in my school dont get that kind of reputation from no where, they earn it,

...you’re saying that I must have done something to justify this behavior towards me.  Can you understand why I find that so horrifying?

black women are just more sensual and sexual (not in a bad way), better dancers, better lovers, and yeah, more wild in bed

You’ve heard wrong.  You’ve heard utter bullshit, really. Black people are PEOPLE.  They are not magic.  And—this is the important bit—they are not all the same. Any sentence you begin with “Black people are” is going to be an automatic lie.  (They will teach you this trick for your SATs—any true/false question that contains the word “always” or “never” is FALSE.)  Some black women are crazy freaky lovers, and some are only comfortable in the missionary position, and some of them are virgins, and some of them are repressed prudes, because race doesn’t automatically tell you anything about a person other than how they look.

I don’t care if it IS a wonderful thing to be sensual and wild and a great fuck if I, individually, am none of these things.  Or I may indeed be a great lay, but how dare anyone assume that just by looking at me?

Read “Mandingo”?  All about our “wild animal heat and sensuality”?” (Caveat—- I haven’t—I wasn’t allowed to.  My dad—a very quiet, religious and dignified Jamaican man—got so angry reading that book he ripped it into shreds and threw it at a wall.  “Beloved” by Toni Morrison might be a good alternative.)

You must consider that in this case, maybe the stuff you’re seeing on TV is based on the stereotype, and not that the stereotype comes from the televised crap.  This mindset predates your television—it predates your COUNTRY.

I am being a bit blunt, really, but you’re saying these things because you DON’T know. You need to read and experience more, and absorb opinions and experiences that aren’t your own. Because you are parroting some very bad things. 

I would LOVE it if an Asian woman to chime in here about why the pseudo-positive stereotype of being everybody’s “perfect woman” sucks ass too—because it took me (I think) way too long to realize that there wasn’t much to envy there.  Fetishization is fetishization.

(Good grief.  *reareading* Please nobody take my previous statement as some sort of anti-welfare or anti-single-mom rant, please.  It was not intended that way.)

It really, really doesn’t not extend

Yipe!  That should be “does not.”  No more editing from me.  Bedtime.

I think that you underestimate the power of what you are doing. Because as you blog, write, teach and make syllabi you are developing a cannon of popular romance literature. And if you include other voices, that have a different narratives, have a different POV and have protagonists of color than the whitewashing of romance and the exlusion of WOC will be a little less powerful.

Trumystique, I really appreciate the value you place on my work. I suppose that because I think of TMT as a tiny little blog (in terms of visitors per day) compared to the big review sites, and because I don’t work directly with any students, I might tend to undervalue its importance.

One other thing that I’ve been bearing in mind, after the various issues that arose with Amanda Marcotte, particularly the critiques there have been about her (and other white feminists) outright appropriating the work of WoC without acknowledging their intellectual debt to them, or, because of white privilege having a platform to discuss those same issues which the WoC don’t get, even though the issues are ones they live with on a daily basis, is that I don’t want my contribution to take attention away from the work being done on romance fiction by black academics.

And there’s also a moral that all white readers might draw from the discussions surrounding Amanda Marcotte’s career choices, and that’s that while it’s good for non-black people to discuss and read AA romances, we also need to support the AA authors, because they as people are marginalised in the industry. The inequality of it being possible for a white author to write about black characters and have that book shelved as “romance”, but when a black author does exactly the same the book tends to end up being marketed as “AA romance” means that to create real equality, white readers would need to support not just books written by white authors which include black characters, but also books written by black authors about black characters.

This, I think, is where I differ from Suze, who wrote that

I’m differentiating between non-white characters and non-white authors.  I think the point of this thread was that we want to see more books with non-whites IN them, regardless of the pigmentation of who WROTE them.

I’d also differentiate “between non-white characters and non-white authors” but I don’t think that mainstreaming fictional non-white people would be sufficient if real non-white people (i.e. the AA authors still stuck in the AA section) were still left out of the mainstream, their voices and stories unheard by the majority of romance readers.

Um, I think I phrased that last bit less well than I could have. I wasn’t wanting to imply that Suze doesn’t care about the inequalities facing AA romance authors. What I was trying to say is that while in an ideal, racism-free world it wouldn’t matter what “the pigmentation of who WROTE” the books was, I don’t think we can end the inequalities in the romance industry with regards to how AA authors are treated without thinking about how certain authors’ pigmentation does affect them, their careers and their books.

Oh wow, you are really young.

Hey, hey, hey, don’t be ageist. :)

Seriously though, I just want to throw out that just because a person is young does not mean they haven’t had a world (one of many) already pass through them. While young can mean less experience, less world knowledge, it does not always aquate, just like being a “grown-up” does not mean you are any less idiotic, fucked-up, racist, sexist, and/or etc. I’ve experienced some things in my short life that not everyone will during any of their years (and frankly, some of it is stuff I wouldn’t wish on anybody). Don’t deny the power of some youths.

Other than that, I love you Mac. I know how you intended it too; just thought I’d throw that out there anyways. I’m annoying that way ;)

(and other white feminists) outright appropriating the work of WoC without acknowledging their intellectual debt to them, or, because of white privilege having a platform to discuss those same issues which the WoC don’t get, even though the issues are ones they live with on a daily basis, is that I don’t want my contribution to take attention away from the work being done on romance fiction by black academics.

ugh. I’m glad you brought this up. One more in a long line of things the (white) women’s movement has done. (Don’t get me wrong, I’m a feminist, I appreciate what they’ve done, but not willing to ignore the history of racism, homophobia, and classism in the women’s movement, like some people *cough classmates cough*). Anyways, I think that by acknowledging the work others have done in your pieces (IIRC you reference other people in your posts) and pointing out AA’s who have written pieces about this (badly worded example: for more info, look at ___’s excellent critique), you become another member questioning this, not taking their work.

Mac: I realize that seems a weird thing to focus on in your post, age, but it is a little bit of a hot button with me. In MS and HS, but even now, I’d get the attitude of kid=stupid, which means nobody listened to what I had to say because why bother, obviously kid=stupid. [Not even close to all grown-ups in my life, but a large amount…actually, teachers really come to mind]

Besides, saying “ditto” to a post gets old, doesn’t it? :) 

General Q:
Is it better for industry records to buy a book in a bookstore or does it work just as well if I got it online?

reaction39: maybe I’ll stop reacting to age comments when I’m 39…oh hell, let’s hope it’s sooner

One article cited featured a quote from an unnamed magazine publisher who stated that romance covers featuring Black characters in “Afrocentric styles” might make white readers uncomfortable. This same publisher said that covers without people would be preferable.

(White reader Sarah says: “What a bunch of unmitigated poppycock.”)

I’m not sure if that statement is poppycock though Sarah.  I think that a lot of white romance readers would be put off by a black couple on the cover. There are obviously exceptions, but I’m willing to bet that a high percentage of the white romance readers here have sub-consciously by-passed books that have featured black protagonists on the cover.

I still believe that one of the reasons Dorothy Koomson’s My Best Friend’s Girl sold so well, was because of the clever/subtle cover (UK version that is, the US version sucks arseholes).  A lot of white readers confessed that they hadn’t realised that the heroine was black, until halfway through the book. The cover featured a blonde little girl, holding a black feminine hand.

Richard and Judy (the UK version of Oprah’s Book Club) admitted that they hadn’t realised that the heroine was black either.

I’m probably stirring a hornet’s nest with this question, but do you really think that black men are less likely to pursue black women because, like your cousin, they think black women are “loud and brawling?”

This is a myth that’s been perpetuated over the years, and honestly, I’m not sure where it comes from.  When a black woman refuses to be treated like crap, she’s aggressive and argumentative. It really pisses me off that people actually believe that black women are more aggressive than white women. Lorena Bobbitt anybody? 

The fact is, black men who go after white women do so because they want to.  Some black men only find white women attractive, period, and it would be nice if they just acknowledged that, rather than making up bullshit excuses.

I remember having this long rant about romance on one of my listservs in the mid90s. I was bemoaning why all romances seemed to be the same ( long wanged alpha heroes, punishing kisses, rosy nippled heroines why not brown nippled ones etc etc) and uncritically pound out the idea that the end all and be all of the HEA was little kiddies and a white picket fence. Someone responded to my rant by saying if I wanted to criticize romance then maybe I shouldnt be a romance reader. Clearly this was before Teach Me Tonight or the SBTBs. I think that wherever there is a critical analysis of the narratives of Romance that is a good thing.

However, I am heartsick by the silence around this issue. Granted its been talked about for many years without a lot of action. Maybe its all invisible action and what we see is the tip of the iceberg. I hope so but I dont think so. I have been really sick about this Marcotte issue ( just this horrible nauseau in my stomach—Hilary’s comments last week just sent me over the top) and I have felt this at many times. Its like someone you think is your friend and is working with you reveals she’s a backstabber and doesnt care about you—she’s working for herself. Its a profound sense of betrayal. Compound that with the fact that you are invisible in everyday life from the internet, on the bus, at work and in popular media. And I am invisible for so many reasons. People dont see me they see the stereotype. I am invisible because when people finally do see me they are like “Oh well I dont see color and you arent like other X people”.

That is what I am talking about- I need allies. I need someone who is willing to work with me and not pay lip service to working with me. Dont pat me on the head and say that sucks and keep doing what you are doing. If I tell you that this genre makes me invisible then please listen to what I am saying.

The inequality of it being possible for a white author to write about black characters and have that book shelved as “romance”, but when a black author does exactly the same the book tends to end up being marketed as “AA romance” means that to create real equality, white readers would need to support not just books written by white authors which include black characters, but also books written by black authors about black characters.

So I hear that you get what I am saying. And you are willing to be an ally. But frankly I think there needs to be a change in terminology. Romance is not Romance. For the most part I dont see myself or anyone like me in most of the romance novels on the shelves. There is nothing that is universal about Romance if it continues to silence, marginalize whole groups of people and their intimate relationships. If LaNora is a Romance author and Beverly Jenkins is a Black Romance author- there is a BIG FAT PROBLEM. Clearly is says that Jenkins is writing something different from Romance.

So we need to use different words and call it what it is. LaNora writes White Romance and so does Crusie, SEP, Laura Kinsale and most of the rest of those published in NY houses. And all the taglines on most blogs should change too. So the tagline for the SBs should change
“all of the white romance and none of the bullshit”.

But I dont think anyone is going to like that proposition. So another suggestion would be to come up with an acronym to replace AA Romance. Because the term AA romance reinforces the idea that there is something essentially different about the love stories of black people. So maybe to acknowledge that it should be RwPOC. So that would be Romances with People of Color. But again kinda lets the whitewashing of Romance off the hook. And of course my acronym doesnt speak to the fact that if romances are written by Asian women or Latina women they are shelved in the White Romance section. Hmm actually doesnt that reproduce what happens in this country when immigrants enter the US and they have been asked “Do you want to be with us or you want to be Negroes/colored/black folk?” We all know the answer to that question…

Anyway, enough of my rambling. I just want to thank you Laura, Suze and others who are thinking,  doing and acting as allies.

So another suggestion would be to come up with an acronym to replace AA Romance. Because the term AA romance reinforces the idea that there is something essentially different about the love stories of black people.

I agree the term is very problematic. I think that all the sub-genres within romance should be defined with relation to the type of plot elements or themes they contain (e.g. erotic, inspirational, suspense) and/or the time/place setting (historical, contemporary, futuristic, paranormal). AA romance, I/R romance and GLBT romance are defined with reference to something about the protagonists, and the implication is that the default setting for the genre is not-AA, not I/R, and not-GLBT. I don’t think that’s right, because, as you say, the effect is to “marginalize whole groups of people and their intimate relationships.”

However, until the marginalised groups are no longer marginalised, I’ll use the terms on the grounds that they’re a constant reminder of the inequality that exists within the genre, and of the change that needs to happen before equality can be achieved. That said, I only plan to use the terms when they’re relevant (e.g. in the context of the marketing, book segregation etc).

If I’m looking at a particular theme/element of the novel e.g. whether it’s a metafiction, or the author’s use of metaphors, then I’ll not describe the book as an “AA romance” because I’m dealing with it as a text which I’m analysing, not as a representative of “AA romances.” In those cases, avoiding the AA label makes a statement that I consider that romances with AA characters in them should not be separated out from romances featuring characters of any other race/ethnic group. Similarly if I were to review any AA romance (not that I will, because I don’t think I’d be much good at it. I tend to end up analysing the novel instead!) I wouldn’t label it as an “AA romance”. I would describe it as a contemporary, or historical or paranormal etc romance.

I may slip up on occasion, and I know it’s not the ideal solution, but that’s my current thinking on how to deal with the “AA romance” label.

Hey orangehands... After a good night’s sleep, I am much calmer now.  For the moment. :-D

Seriously though, I just want to throw out that just because a person is young does not mean they haven’t had a world (one of many) already pass through them. While young can mean less experience, less world knowledge, it does not always aquate, just like being a “grown-up” does not mean you are any less idiotic, fucked-up, racist, sexist, and/or etc. I’ve experienced some things in my short life that not everyone will during any of their years (and frankly, some of it is stuff I wouldn’t wish on anybody). Don’t deny the power of some youths.

I DO see where you’re coming from, I swear I do.  I don’t mean to imply that there’s anything necessarily deficient about young people as a group. But I’m instinctively more willing to try to understand the state of “having a lot to learn” from a sophomore in high school than I am from a forty-year-old.
It’s just a question of time.  It is certainly possible to have a very mature and knowledgeable kid, but in general people’s brains don’t fully physically mature (ability to think ahead, internalizing the concept of future consequences) until they’re about twenty-five.  They might have had a world pass through them at that age, but it’s far more likely (and excusable/understandable) if they have not.

So while I would never discount/dismiss the power of those advanced youths, I’ll just be more inclined to use my kid gloves on an individual youth who seems to need a careful boost, and would benefit more from my wording myself carefully than from a full on verbal lashing. Whereas, say, a Cassie Edwards would get NO quarter from me. It’s just a matter of approach—that’s all I was trying to say. :-)  I agree with your point!

Other than that, I love you Mac. I know how you intended it too; just thought I’d throw that out there anyways. I’m annoying that way ;)

(Aw, I’m loved!  *basks*)

You’re a Libra, aren’t you.  Aren’t you!  Confess! 

*is a Libra*  :-D :-D

Is it better for industry records to buy a book in a bookstore or does it work just as well if I got it online?

According to author Holly Lisle, it’s better for the author to buy from a bookstore.  If this link works, it’ll take you to the article she wrote explaining why:

http://hollylisle.com/writingdiary2/index.php/2006/12/01/selling-to-the-net-or/

Laura and Trumystique, do I need to redefine my criteria?  Am I working toward desegregation of romances featuring non-white characters, or am I working toward non-white authors being able to write, unrestricted by publishers’ expectations, romances featuring human beings (or aliens, I’m good with those too) regardless of colour?

Looking at my own question, I can see the obvious answer is the latter.  Okay, that will be more of challenge in that, much of the time, the author of a book is only a name, but still do-able.

This discussion has been really educational for me, my thanks to everyone who has taken the time and effort to articulate your thoughts and feelings clearly and rationally.

mac: no worries. I really do see where you’re coming from too. And no, I’m an Aries. ah, but for the grace of a couple of months… :)

Suze: thanks for the link (it worked).

Thanks everyone for the discussion

I can see the obvious answer is the latter.  Okay, that will be more of challenge in that, much of the time, the author of a book is only a name, but still do-able.

It’s usually not too hard, because the publishing segregation tends to mean that black romance authors end up published in lines/by publishers specialising in AA books. It might be a bit different with ebooks (I don’t know much about them).

So if you pick up a book from an “AA romance” line, e.g. most of Harlequin’s Kimani lines (one’s YA AA fiction. That looks a bit weird with so many capital letters!), or a romance from an AA imprint, e.g. Kensington’s Dafina imprint (which includes AA romance as well as other novels in other genres) or from one of the publishers which specialises in AA and I/R romance (e.g. Genesis Press and Parker Publishing), then it’s most likely you’ll be reading a book written by an AA author.

If you like reading short reviews before you buy, Romance in Color would be a good place to start. And as mentioned by Seressia Glass (in the other recent thread on I/R romances, I think) there’s the Interracial/Multicultural Romance Readers Yahoo Group.

There are a few black authors who’re published by publishers/in lines not marketed as AA: Beverly Jenkins, for example, has had novels published as “Avon Historical Romance"s (I’m not sure about her romantic suspense novels, because I don’t tend to read much romantic suspense), and Brenda Jackson‘s been published in lots of different places, including Harlequin’s Silhouette Desire line.

My point wasn’t that it would be a dreadful thing if you happened to find and read a romance written by a non-black author about black characters. It’s more that a white author like Suz Brockmann doesn’t need support in “breaking out” and becoming a big name in the romance community as a whole, whereas an AA author, who’s got little chance of reaching a wider audience of readers while she’s writing books that will end up in the “AA section” of bookshops and libraries, would benefit more from a bit of a boost in terms of sales/discussions about her books on sites/blogs which will reach non-AA readers who might not otherwise have heard of her.

There may be some black authors writing only about white characters, but going on what I’ve read online, part of the whole problem facing AA romance authors is that they tend to end up, on the basis of their skin-colour, being expected to write for AA lines, about AA characters (or I/R).

Something I’ve been very curious about…

The annual AAR and the (Oklahoma) RWA reader polls don’t seem to include African American romance as a category for nominations. At first glance, it seems like its the the only major sub-genre to be missing. Does anyone know the reasoning behind this? I’d love to learn more.

The only difference between mainstream romance novels and Black Romance novels is the “color” of the characters skin.  Believe it or not there are many successful Black people who own their own businesses, own homes, come from two parent households, go to college, etc. 

Newsflash!!! Single black women want the same thing as single white women.  We want the husband, the house, the white picket fence and 2.5 kids…so whoever told you otherwise is lying.

As far as good men, a good man is hard to find no matter what color of his skin, so please stop the stereotyping.

Its been years that this issue has been raised. If you look at the sidebar of links you see many SB regulars who have blogs and could do something with their voices, wallets or what have you and dont. So we need to use different words and call it what it is. LaNora writes White Romance and so does Crusie, SEP, Laura Kinsale and most of the rest of those published in NY houses. And all the taglines on most blogs should change too. So the tagline for the SBs should change
“all of the white romance and none of the bullshit”.

But I dont think anyone is going to like that proposition.—Trumystique

But talk about a move that would raise awareness!  It would be tongue in cheek snark, sure, but it is more practical than thinking of another name for an entirely race-defined romance sub-genre.  Call it what it is!

Folks always want to know what they can do.  Here are a few fresh ideas of mine that would quickly change the face of romance to be more inclusive of blacks.  Take what you like ;-)

What readers can do

Romance readers can urge that romance community, blogs and sites who treat romance by black authors differently than they treat other romances change their title and taglines to be more reflective of what they cover.  But instead of white romance, it should be Not Black Romance or Anything but Negro Romance-on the whole they seem to have no problems accepting Asian and Latina writers as romance authors.  What if romance was truly honest about what it is, even as a snarkilicious promo for a few days! 

People would be shocked, but best, they’d be enlightened and made aware.  And maybe those Everything But Black Romance sites could start treating a few black romance authors the same as they treat white authors.  It could be a start…Review a few black authors, romance review sites and blogs!  Pick a prolific, decent black romance author or two and actually read and review their upcoming books.  Treat ‘em as if they were white girls!  It’s not so hard. 

What could be done by authors

These nonblack authors who are happily writing or considering writing major black characters should do so—then demand to be put in the same racial niche black authors would go into—have their book labeled black romance and be as limited in marketing demographics and distribution as a black author.  This could enlighten and make publishing aware in a big way.  What about the black-only lines?  Hey, that’s racial discrimination!  Call ‘em on it.  Come and march beside black authors in the heated humidity, not ride in the special air-conditioned publishing bus that excludes blacks.  What could have changed if folks had to go into the black section to read about Alyssa and Sam?  [chortle!]

p.s.  Penquin settled with Millenia Black and she says she’s satisfied.  Yay!