Smart Bitches, Trashy Books

I agree with the books you mentioned, and I was especially intrigued by your analysis of Windflower.  While Merry comes across as a naive ditz half the time, she also shows so much strength from the very beginning that I just adored that relationship.

Alpha heroes who cross the line for me are the dude from Whitney, My Love because he assaults her twice, the hero of SEP’s Kiss An Angel because he’s so wrapped up in his own anger he can’t see the heroine as a human being who’s not trying to manipulate him, and every single Rosemary Rogers hero.  They just made me want to go after their nuts with a dull knife.

Cruel humiliation.  I can’t stand it if the alpha hero strips a heroine of her dignity.  Doesn’t help if said heroine is a helpless blow-up doll in need of blowing up either.  Classic example, Linda Howard’s h/h in All That Glitters.  I love me the old early 80s classics, mind you, and am a Harlequin Presents reader, so I can take some pretty crappy behavior from the alpha dude, but. That. Book. 

Gah. I’d stabbed that book with a steak knife many times, muttering in my bad Greek accent, “You will wear a pair of peach Speedos on your wedding and I will laugh at your mantitties.  And then you will cry like a sad puppy for two chapters while I dance with your best man. And you will crawl back to me begging for more.” ;-P Unfortunately, I can’t throw the book away since it’s part of my Goddess Linda Howard Collection.

I have a knee-jerk reaction to super-alpha-dom.

Recently I was on J.R. Ward’s website checking out excerpt for the next book.  And Vishous (I think it was him) just told his homies to take the doctor (who looks to be the heroine) with them back to the compound.  He’s doing that because his male possessiveness has suddenly kicked in—you don’t say.  That pushed all my buttons.  And even in a sanitized fictional environment I can’t accept that.

Diana Palmer.  The hero: “I loved you but I couldn’t have you so it made me cruel” OR “I loved you but I thought you were a slut even though you are a virgin” over and over and over again.  Makes me crazy. And as soon as the hero admits this~the heroine forgives him and then the epilogue he’s a much nicer guy. Gah!

SB Sarah: “I think the redemption of the alpha hero is necessary to prove the subtlety of the heroine’s power over him. Here’s this powerful man - socially, economically, emotionally, whatever - with alpha status, and he needs this lil’ woman to save him/redeem him/ fulfill him. The subtext of alpha-dom is all about power - who has it, and who has to give it up in order to reach fulfillment. The alpha has to give it up or at least somewhat compromise it quietly and acknowledge that fact to the heroine in order for her to fulfill their happy ending. I.e. there has to be some damn fine groveling, or at least admission of weakness for her.”  I agree with this.  The alpha male needs to admit that he NEEDS the heroine. Not just that he loves her.  Some version of “you make me a better man” etc.

I love me a well written alpha male! ;)

Unrepentant rape, being a general asshat from start to finish, using mind control to seduce the heroine and not getting why she’s so upset when she finally realizes what he’s done, blaming the heroine for his ex’s misdeeds despite an utter lack of evidence that she’d ever do that, seducing the heroine in the room next to her kid while commenting on how thin the walls are . . .

There are two major ways I’ve seen the alpha romance play out. In the first the man comes up against a woman just as strong-willed as he is.  This is satisfying because we get to see the power struggle play out, but neither one is really the top dog.  They have to learn how to compromise.

The other situation is that you have this wilting flower female, whose kindness and generosity of spirit turn the slavering alpha dog into a lap dog.  He’ll never try to domineer, only do what she wishes. 

Obviously, I find the second situation less interesting and also less believable.  I guess I can’t see that really working long term. 

One of the other problems with alphas is they also come with a shitload of emotional baggage, which often is just an excuse for them to act badly.  I understand they can be an irritable, high-handed group, but just being nasty and obnoxious quickly turns me off.  There had better be a damn good reason the guy is bordering on emotionally abusive.  Much of the time, the reason for the guy’s bad attitude is pretty weak.

Recently I was on J.R. Ward’s website checking out excerpt for the next book.  And Vishous (I think it was him) just told his homies to take the doctor (who looks to be the heroine) with them back to the compound.  He’s doing that because his male possessiveness has suddenly kicked in—you don’t say.  That pushed all my buttons.  And even in a sanitized fictional environment I can’t accept that.

I can understand that.  Although, personally, I’ve stumbled across enough kidnapping scenarios in books that it doesn’t really bother me.  The issue really becomes how it plays out afterward.  I’m willing to cut him slack if he is genuinely remorseful later.

Alpha males are prone to crossing the line of acceptabel behavior, but I can deal with it, if they own up to their mistakes later.

He’s a humbled alpha - but only to her.

SB Sarah wrote words that got me hot. Or maybe that was just me thinking about Firth’s Darcy being humble. Mmmmm. It’s the only way to do alpha. It’s the intentional cruelty and humiliation that bothers me intensely. I’ve been in those relationships, and they’re NOT SEXY. Darcy, as an alpha example that works, never humiliates Elizabeth or mocks her. His appeal is that he cannot have her—yet finds himself defending her (the “fine eyes” comment that just slips out, against his better sense).

If an alpha doesn’t come back with enough groveling to make up for the craphatness, I just can’t buy the HEA.

Okay, rape is a hard and fast rule for me on the no-fucking-way scale. One book that did this that I remember specifically is Fire Song by Catherine Coulter where the hero rapes the heroine, it’s called rape and the heroine still falls in love with the hero. Stockholm Syndrome or something, I swear.

Forced seduction is one thing, because in the end, the heroine is WILLING. She may not want to be willing, but she is. Rape? Oh. Hell. No.

The alpha can get away with a lot since I love to read them—and write them. But the girl has to be willing or he’s not an alpha HERO, he’s just and top dog assclown.

I think it works if the book is well written. If the characters progress. I can’t be doing with a man who remains an asshat throughout, and turns his life around on the last page.

Sometimes I read all sorts of things into the text that aren’t there anyway - I remember someone described a Jenny Crusie hero as an alpha and I just didn’t get it (Phin from Welcome to Temptation). I’d read him as almost the opposite. But then thats what a nicely textured characterisation will do for you.

I remember someone described a Jenny Crusie hero as an alpha and I just didn’t get it (Phin from Welcome to Temptation).

That’s funny.  Just a day or two, I commented here that I thought Phin was a beta hero.  He didn’t have that aggresive macho mentality that I so often associate with alpha (at least modern romance alphas).

I think part of the difference is that alphas tend to be more physically aggressive, whereas a beta (who isn’t packing 200 lbs of muscle) will be more likely to whip out his rapier tongue and cut his opponent down to size verbally. Phin had some great lines in WtT.

Like a few of you said, rape is a hard and fast line for me.  I simply won’t continue reading if the hero does that.  If he is able to do that, he has problems that I don’t even want to address, let alone think can be solved by the Love of a Good Woman.

I tend to like alpha heroes in general, but only if they are matched with a heroine who can stand up to them.  I don’t want to read about an alpha male and his wishy-washy mate.  I want to read about them coming head to head (why does everything I write look dirty this morning?) and living to tell the tale.  If a hero recognizes this and actually *wants* a woman who is going to be his equal, he gets big points from me.  I think that’s why I love both Darcy and Rochester - they’re attracted to the untameable natures of their partners, not just willing to put up with them.

When alphas think of the woman as less intelligent than they are and it’s not in an historical.  When there is no respect (because they hate women, mostly.)  I don’t love it in an historical, but I can bear it if done well and they’re redeemed.  In a contemp, if the hero treats her as dumb, histrionic, silly, foolish, childlike, etc. and she’s not, she’s just female, line is crossed.  If she IS, I probably quit reading anyway.

I second that comment about Rochester- Jane is not really the spitfire type, but she has the courage of her convictions and in the end Rochester sees that she was in the right.  Heathcliff, on the other hand, should have been drowned as a child.  I have no sympathy for him at all by the end of his book.

I looked up Alpha Male on dictionary.com. All it says is a dominant man, a leader of other men.

So when did the term alpha male become associate with asshole?

It’s possible to be an alpha male without being a jerk. Real men prove this everyday.

I’m tired of the hero trying to assert his dominance over everyone. There are so many ebooks out there where the hero barks orders during the sex scenes. “Ride this”, “Suck this”, “Bend over”. I keep waiting for the heroine to tell him to get lost, but she never does.

I think that’s my breaking point. During sex, if the dude is a jerk and only wants to assert his control, he isn’t redeemable in my eyes.

During my adolescent infatuation with Elizabeth Lowell I encountered a whole lot of alpha heroes, and a lot of them were dicks. Sometimes that was a good thing.

One that sticks out (heh heh) particularly is Archer in Pearl Cove, who’s madly in love with his bastard half-brother’s wife, and after the brother dies they get to boot-knockin’, but there is a misunderstanding involving baby-makin’ and Archer decides to act like a complete asshole for two-thirds of the book. Which is part of the emotional complexity, and the plot, yes, but he’s so goddamned high-handed about it that I want to smack him.

Lowell’s “Only” series also has a lot of those wiser-than-thou, cynical bastards who are only melted by - what was it, Candy? - oh yes, the Magical Hymen of Steel (I love you for that) That Proves She Is a Lady. They’re historicals, but I don’t think that gives the heroes carte blanche to be such stiff upper lippy pricks about it.

I think what pushes it over the line for me is when a battles of wills doesn’t involve equal capitulation. There’s always great sexual tension to be mined from a proud man and a proud woman breaking each other down (hard to prideful when naked and sweating, after all), but when he’s never humbled, he’s proven to be Totally Right By Virtue Of His Massive Wang Of Truthiness, and she’s the one who gives all the ground, that’s when I get pissy. There was one…yes, it was also a Lowell. To the Ends of the Earth. I could have cheerfully murdered the alpha dicksmack in that one. And the heroine, come to it. She spent most of the book acting like an invertebrate.

Or maybe that was just me thinking about Firth’s Darcy being humble. Mmmmm. It’s the only way to do alpha. It’s the intentional cruelty and humiliation that bothers me intensely. I’ve been in those relationships, and they’re NOT SEXY. Darcy, as an alpha example that works, never humiliates Elizabeth or mocks her. His appeal is that he cannot have her—yet finds himself defending her (the “fine eyes” comment that just slips out, against his better sense).

If an alpha doesn’t come back with enough groveling to make up for the craphatness, I just can’t buy the HEA.

lovelysalome nailed it in one for me in her response.  I have a problem with the characterization of the “alpha” trait in a hero relies on mental and/or physical cruelty toward the heroine.  Yes, he may be alpha, but I no longer see him as a hero.  Redemption can excuse a lot of behavior, but I’ve never subscribed to the idea that everyone can be redeemed.  So I have a low threshold for the hero’s behavior when it comes to how he’s treating the heroine and at what point he is redeemed by her. 

Darcy and Lizzy are examples of the alpha male and the redeeming heroine done right IMO.  No one is being raped, imprisoned, revenge-fucked or psychologically tortured.  Yet Darcy remains wonderfully alpha and brilliantly redeemed by the strong, unbroken (if more humbled) Lizzy.

Obviously, rereading SB Sarah’s analysis, this means I like to control the hero. No news there.

Candy, get out of my head!!! I was just about to guest blog about this for someone else! Blast!

Well, I guess I’ll just go forward with my pale imitation, because I’m too lazy to think of another topic. *sigh*

I’m not a big fan of the alpha heroes, and perhaps that’s partly because I think that label gets tossed around too easily.  Maybe my perception of the word is fuzzy.  Dunno.  But for me, “alpha” often equates with “giant douche-bag jerkwad.”  Mostly I hate them when they’re condescending toward the little woman:  she’s too stupid, or too inexperienced to take care of herself and therefore the alpha hero must take care of her.  Hogwash. But sadly, the heroine who is paired with such an alpha is often willing to overlook his obnoxious behavior because, after all, he loves her, and isn’t that exciting?

My number-one infuriating alpha schmero is Robert Cannon from Linda Howard’s Loving Evangeline.  Evie’s been on her own for some 12 years or so…has a successful business, owns a house, manages her life quite nicely.  Robert latches onto this idea that’s breaking the law—not only causing problems for him and his company, but betraying her COUNTRY, by God!—and so he steps in and coldbloodedly ruins her life.  He destroys her fragile finances, puts her in a situation where she has to sell her house, puts her livelihood at risk.  But of course that’s all okay because 1) he’s doing it for the good of his country and 2) by then he suspects she’s innocent, but he has to use her to trap the bad guy, and if it turns out that she IS innocent, he’ll step in and make everything right.  He loves her; he’ll take care of her.  She’ll never want for anything ever again.  She grows a backbone and tells him to get lost and he comes back to her—groveling?—and tells her that he’ll keep her barefoot and pregant and be at her 5 times a day and she’ll like it…because of course he loves her and that makes everything all right.  *shakes head*  Run for your life, Evie, you dipwit. 

Please.  Give me a nice, well-behaved, respectful beta hero anyday.  They generally seem to have something going for them other than a big dick and lots of testosterone.

Yes, the groveling is the key. Only for her. The groveling. Mmmmmmmyeah.

I love books in which the writer really gets the alpha hero - Loretta Chase’s LORD OF SCOUNDRELS is the perfect example.  Because a real alpha wants an equal match.  Not a doormat, not muse to worship:  a match. 

Being a pissy, argumentative jerk isn’t alpha:  being strong is.  And there isn’t just one kind of strength.  Gaaron, in Sharon Shinn’s ANGELICA, is an alpha hero. He’s quiet, rational, and fairly mild-mannered, but the entire world looks to him for guidance, and he accepts the weight of that responsibility.  That’s alpha.

~Heathcliff, on the other hand, should have been drowned as a child.  I have no sympathy for him at all by the end of his book.~

Thank you, dillene, I spat my coffee at the screen, laughing, and then cheered that someone has summed up all my feelings about him so neatly!

Alpha’s… love them. If you ask me Linda Howard defined them for me - but that’s only because I read her first.

Lowell’s Sil. Desire series - those guys were always brutal!!! But books that I remember loving when I was younger - teens, 20’s -  are harder reads for me now. Except maybe LH’s Kell Sabin - that guy never goes out of style for me.

For a brief second I thought I might be over the Alpha Hero. Then I read Chase’s LOS. I picked it up because of this blog - THANK YOU!!! - and yeah… wow.

That book was so perfect and reminded me of everything I LOVE about those heros. I finished it and thought… when can I read this again.

So bring them on. For my money I’ll take the strong sassy woman who comes with him rather than the doormat.

“Darcy and Lizzy are examples of the alpha male and the redeeming heroine done right IMO.  No one is being raped, imprisoned, revenge-fucked or psychologically tortured.  Yet Darcy remains wonderfully alpha and brilliantly redeemed by the strong, unbroken (if more humbled) Lizzy.”

Amen.

My pet peeve in an alpha hero is over-generalization—you know, “One X done me wrong, therefore every X is evil.”  Most often it’s “My mother/first wife/former favorite mistress was a cheating bitch, and therefore no woman can be trusted,” but it occasionally shows up as, “I’m a self-made man and one aristocrat done me wrong, so therefore that duke’s daughter over there must be a slutty bitch,” or, “I’m an aristocrat who once ended up on the wrong end of a business deal, so that Cit’s daughter over there must be a grasping, social-climbing slut.”  And it drives me crazy because it’s just so amazingly immature and idiotic that I can’t believe the author expects me to swoon over this loser.

I loves me some arrogant, ubercompetent fellows—as long as their arrogance is based on confidence springing from their ubercompetence. Abusive people are fundamentally insecure, and that’s completely the opposite of appealing.

Hijacking the thread a bit, I lost it on Magical Hymen of Steel That For Some Goddamn Reason is Mysteriously Located Three Inches Up Her Hoo Hoo. What is up with that? Why is that such a common convention in romance novels? Do the writers not know anatomy? Are there maybe some women with such improbably located hymens?

I really want to know, because the first time I ever came across this, I wondered what the heck was wrong with me. Then I remembered the filmstrip from sixth grade and realized I’m fine, but some authors are very peculiar.

I can only love an alpha if the author knows the difference between an alpha male and an asshat.  Darcy and Rochester are alphas done right, as Melanie said.  They are powerful, fascinating, proud men, but they never denigrate the women they claim to love.  Their words may be sharp and their behavior questionable, but in the end, they RESPECT their ladies.

I think respect is what it all comes down to for me.  A hero can behave like a total doucheberry and I’ll still end up liking him-if and only if he treats the heroine with respect.

One of the worst alphas I ever read was in the manga version of Penny Jordan’s Response.  He seduces her to avenge her brother’s rape of his sister (which of course didn’t actually happen), and then taunts her afterward because she liked it!  I’d have taken a screwdriver to his eyes.

BTW, what is with this patriarchal bullshit of a guy raping or seducing a woman because of something a male relative of hers did to him?  I’ll punish him by deflowering his sister/daughter!  That will teach him not to mess with me!  Is this really the 14th century and I’m just hallucinating that it’s the 21st?

“BTW, what is with this patriarchal bullshit of a guy raping or seducing a woman because of something a male relative of hers did to him?  I’ll punish him by deflowering his sister/daughter!  That will teach him not to mess with me!  Is this really the 14th century and I’m just hallucinating that it’s the 21st?”

Yeah, that’s some bullshit reasoning-for-honor-killings right there. Do not want.

I agree about cruelty being a big issue.  If the hero enjoys causing pain to the heroine that crosses the line from alpha to asshole.

There is an Amanda Quick book that I am blanking on the name where the hero seduces the heroine into marriage as revenge.(Is it Seduction?)  He knows her family is dependent on her financial skills to keep them afloat.  It is a really good book and I think it was handled well.

I can’t organize my thoughts into anything coherent so I believe I will simply ramble.

I think the heroine’s response to her alpha determines whether he is alpha or not.  The two are intrinsically linked for if she does not countenance him at all, he can’t be her hero, alpha or no.

For me the mere mention of an Alpha Hero tells me that more than likely, an Omega Female (the dreaded Too Stupid to Live heroine) will make an appearance.

Is he a homegrown asshole?  YES YES YES.

Does she stand up for herself in some way shape or form, even if it’s a peace-lovin’-low-key-Ghandi type response OR does she take it?

Alpha hero displays typical asinine behavior.  Do we still believe he’s an asshole if the heroine deals with him beautifully?  Jessica and Dain of Lord of Scoundrels for example.

Same alpha hero, same typically asinine behavior.  Heroine’s behavior makes it hard, if not impossible, to feel compassion/respect etc for her.  Dain and some imbecile for example.  Is he now a good alpha hero or a bad one?

“I can only love an alpha if the author knows the difference between an alpha male and an asshat.”

AHA! Kimberly summed it up right there! Jaci Burton once said (and I’m undoubtedly mangling this) “If you want to kiss and slap your alpha male at the same time, then you’ve written him right!”

For me, what I’ll tolerate in an alpha depends almost entirely on the sub-genre I’m reading.

I’m a little more tolerant of alpha behavior in Historicals because I assume that type of behavior was more accepted then.

In Contemporaries, alphas just piss me off because I wouldn’t put up with their asshattedness in real life. I’d have to hurt them. Bad.

But, give me that same asshattedness in an alpha with fangs or fur in a Paranormal, and he just flat out does it for me.

Go figure.

I love a well-written alpha, but not a jerk.  Rape is always out with me—and I’m not talking heavy seduction, I’m talking out and out rape.

I read a book once where the heroine woke up pregnant and didn’t even remember having sex.  Turned out the hero had drugged her and purposely impregnated her.  He didn’t tell her for most of the book!!! Had a huge argument with my sister who loved the book.  She said he suffered in the end—I say he didn’t suffer enough. She said he did it to save his father—I said he could have asked.

Yeah, I can be bloodthirsty.

I think you’ve got a valid point about heroines giving in too easily.  It’s one thing for a hero to be an Alpha In The Wrong, but I expect to see true regret on his part after he come to his senses (they always do) and—when appropriate—I expect the heroine to make him suffer.  The same goes in reverse, as well, if the heroine is the more Alpha of the two.  I was disgusted with Double Standards by Judith McNaught for just that reason.  Nick had Lauren forcibly escorted from the building and threatened to arrest her.  I mean, points for walking out on a multi-billion dollar business meeting to go to her (not that she was aware of it), but she gave in way too easily.  I wanted to make him walk barefoot over coals for the pain and humiliation he knowingly put her through.  God.  Haven’t read another McNaught book since.

The worst sort of alpha that springs to mind for me is the hero in ‘A pirate’s love’ by Johanna Lindsey, which a) nearly put me off romance for life, and b) remains the yardstick (sorry, no pun intended here) against which I measure heroes. If a hero lives up to the hypocrisy, cruelty and general ass-hattery of Tristan, the book gets ritually exercised in a small fire.

I agree with everyone who says it’s about respect. In my opinion there’s a big difference between being assertive and trying to be in control, and being a cruel and brutal bastard who’s constantly trying to break ther heroine’s will and spirit in an attempt to refashion her to fit with his own schemes and ideas. The latter doesn’t merit being called ‘hero’.

I think that some of the outward signs of seeming control and dominance e.g. being the captor and using that position of power to tyrannize the heroine, are in actual fact quite clear signs that the hero has completely lost all control over himself. In my humble opinion, such behaviour immediately disqualifies a so-called hero for being an alpha who I define as being strong -physical strength being another kettle of fish- rather than a weak control freak who’s taking out his own issues on others. If I wouldn’t touch him in real life with a barge-pole, I don’t want to read about him either, unless a heroine hits him over the head eventually.

Okay, rant nearly over, but this whole discussion reminds me of the issues that have variously arisen around discussions of Diana Gabaldon’s ‘Outlander’ (Cross Stitch in the UK), which does have a scene in which the hero administers a beating to the heroine for disobeying his orders. I know the author insists it’s not a romance, but I stumbled across it in the romance section, and am still in two minds about that particular scene and the following redemption of the hero. Anyone else read it and got any thoughts on it?

am still in two minds about that particular scene and the following redemption of the hero. Anyone else read it and got any thoughts on it? >

That scene never bothered me at all, perhaps because there was so much context surrounding the scene, and I thought DG did a good job of laying it all out.  Jamie was young and inexperienced and dealing with a wayward wife (who jeopardized his LIFE and the lives of others) in a manner that was probably rather typical for that time in history.  I also liked how after the beating, he went out of his way to “bare his soul” to Claire and recount numerous instances of his experience on the other end of the strap.  What I liked about that is that I felt he was trying to re-establish some parity between them, to put them back on the same level.  But Claire let Jamie know that going forward, this was NOT an acceptable way for him to deal with her.  He made a vow to her in that regard, and he’s kept it.  Thirty years have passed since that event and Claire still gives him grief over it every once in a while. (There’s a great scene in one of the more recent books in which she keeps referring to it as a “beating” and Jamie gets more and more pained as the conversation goes on.  “I do wish ye’d stop calling it that.”) Was the beating “okay”?  No, not necessarily.  But nor do I think that that one instance was enough to override all of Jamie’s other positive characteristics and COUNTLESS displays of the respect he has for Claire in particular and for women in general.  People—like over on Amazon—toss out the “misogynist” accusation, and I think they’re crazy.  There’s absolutely nothing misogynistic about Jamie Fraser.

I suppose that in many ways, Jamie is one of the finest examples of an alpha hero out there:  strong, capable, decisive, and a born leader, but someone who is willing to sacrifice his body (or even his life) to protect those in his care.  He utterly and completely respects and values Claire and never underestimates her and her contributions to their relationship.

Yes, Cecile, I have read it and was going to mention it earlier.  I’d imagine there are some who would condone the scene as historically accurate.  I call bullshit on that, because in many other ways Jamie is portrayed as NOT a typical man of his time, so why does he suddenly revert to type when it comes to beating his wife?  There’s also a subsequent sex scene (is it immediately after?) where Claire doesn’t want to, because she’s SORE from BEING BEATEN, and Jamie is all “ye’ll nay deny me, wumman” or something.  And then he’s mad for it, and she’s in agony while they have sex.  I was really disturbed by this whole business, and particularly by the fact that I wasn’t at all sure how Claire felt about it all.  She was indignant about the beating, but didn’t have any reaction to being told she could never deny her husband sex.  It doesn’t seem like her relationship with Frank would have prepared her for anything like this, but we get no sense of what she thinks about it.

I tend to like alpha heroes in general, but only if they are matched with a heroine who can stand up to them.”  Absolutely!! Great point. The mate for an alpha has to be able to stand up to him and tell him he’s being an ass when he is being an ass!  A weak female is not a good match for an alpha.

“Because a real alpha wants an equal match.  Not a doormat, not muse to worship:  a match.”   Again, nail on the head. This is exactly what makes an Alpha romance work.

One more quote: “I can only love an alpha if the author knows the difference between an alpha male and an asshat.” ABSOULUTELY!!  Perfect line.  There is a difference and sometimes the line between the two is very fine, but it’s there.  the term “alpha” is applied to any guy in a novel that is an idiot.  I don’t think he’s an “alpha” if he’s a total jerk. Then he’s just a total jerk.

An alpha is a strong man that doesn’t need to dominate 100% of the time to feel manly.  He knows when to lead, and when not to.

Yikes, I actually have a book with an Alpha who wants to get revenge on the heroine for things done to his family.  In my defence, the heroine’s father did maim and kill a large portion of the hero’s family, the heroine assassinated his brother, and when he calls her a whore it’s…well, because she is one.  Well, a courtesan, but that’s just a pretty title.

I’m not generally big on Alphas and I can usually only stomach them when they’re paired with a woman who can out-Alpha them (in the case above, she fucks him six ways to Sunday—literally).

What’s the ‘Too Alpha’ line for me?  When he uses his power to hurt her, whether it’s physical, sexual, or emotional, and she can’t—or won’t—fight back.  No weak women for me.  Tess of the d’Urbervilles cured me of that.

The book above is Almost Human, by the way.  See, I’m pimping my whore.

I guess I’m with Candy on hate hate HATING it when heroines are constantly in the wrong, constantly being forced to agree that the hero “knows what’s best” for her and will “save” her from the consequences of her folly.  It just makes me feel frustrated and powerless.  No matter how much the heroine may “deserve” it, I still end up thinking she should kick the hero in the balls and find someone who actually likes her the way she is.

I think for me, the alpha-hero line is all about the balance of power between the two characters.  The hero can be as big a shit as he wants (excluding rape and USUALLY forced seduction, which is weird because I actually really enjoy reading non-consensual sex in erotica, but in romance it just pisses me off, A LOT), so long as the heroine stands up to him and gets to be in control of the situation at least half the time, and is not ultimately forced to submit to his iron alpha will. 

So: I can love the Marquis of Vidal in _Devil’s Cub_ because Mary smacks him down repeatedly, deals with him on her own terms, and they end up in a marriage of equals.  The exact same behavior from an alpha hero would send me screaming for the hills if he were allowed by the author to run roughshod over the heroine.

Here’s a dialogue between Mr. Darcy, Mr. Rochester, and Heathcliff, from this entry in a blog I follow:

http://mistful.livejournal.com/98289.html

I think y’all will appreciate it.

This book reminded me of a dreadful TV show about Romantic Heroes, in which the opinion was expressed that every woman wanted to marry Heathcliff, Mr Rochester or Mr Darcy.

Not that Heathcliff and Rochester aren’t fabulous characters. But there are cases in which ‘Watch out, ladies, this one can’t be tamed!’ should contain the explanatory note: ‘Because this one’s rabid.’

sorry that was so massively long.  :/

Further to the comments about Jamie - I don’t think you can allow for an additional 3 or 4 900-page books worth of context in order to judge a scene from the first book.  Which is not to say I find the character misogynistic.  I find the scene incongruous in the context of the character, who is in all other respects exceptionally tolerant and enlightened for his time. 

There’s a scene in Captain Corelli’s Mandolin where a village man asks the doctor for advice about his wife, who is plaguing him now that the doctor has cured his deafness.  The doctor casually asks if the man has tried beating her.  The answer is ‘no’ or maybe ‘once and never again!’  To which the doctor responds that it’s probably just as well as “they only get at you in more insidious ways - like over-salting the food”.  To me, this exemplifies how I imagine the relationships between men and women in a historical context.  You’d have to be an idiot to routinely beat your wife, because she’d always find a way to get back at you.  Which is why I call bullshit on the historical accuracy justification for beatings. 

*Disclaimer: which is not to say nobody beat their wives in ye olde past tymes.  Just probably not everyone did.

Magical Hymen of Steel That For Some Goddamn Reason is Mysteriously Located Three Inches Up Her Hoo Hoo. What is up with that? Why is that such a common convention in romance novels? Do the writers not know anatomy?

I decided a while ago that I’d think of this, and various other romance-specific medical problems, as metaphors.

I was thinking about typical alpha behaviour not long ago because Jane wrote a glowing review of a forthcoming novel, Lord of the Fading Lands by C. L. Wilson. It’s a fantasy romance and Jane was praising the world-building for being imaginative and rich in detail.

So I went of to Wilson’s website and read a long (25-page) excerpt and what struck me wasn’t the worldbuilding but the way in which the hero was a type I’d read many times before. He’s the most powerful male in the world, he’s capable of violent rages, he has a very tortured past and he falls in love with an innocent, much younger woman. He’s so possessive he frightens her, and he reacts instantly to any threat (perceived or real) against her: “A Fey Lord reacted violently to even the smallest perceived threat to his mate” (22). Oh, and as if to symbolise/embody the threat/power of this male, he shapeshifts into a massive furred flying creature with fangs and the ability to breathe fire.

The heroine’s an orphan who’s something of an ugly duckling (perceived as ugly by her adoptive culture, coming into her own power), under threat and in need of rescue.

Anyway, it just struck me that while the worldbuilding may be innovative, the dynamic between the alpha hero and the heroine isn’t, at least judging from that excerpt. That’s an observation, not a criticism, though, because obviously lots of people love an alpha hero. I suspect that this is a heroine who’s going to be the strong rather than the weak kind, but I can’t be certain just from reading the excerpt.

Rape is a non-redeemable factor for me. Doesn’t matter what the reasons are or how sorry the alpha hero is afterward, I can’t get past that. I’m glad that trend in romance books seems to have largely disappeared. Give me an alpha hero who will do his damndest to seduce a woman, oh hell yeah. But she has to say yes.

And another unforgivable thing I read once. (Warning - very graphic description ahead) The hero ejaculated in the heroine’s mouth, then SLAPPED HIS HAND over her face and FORCED her to swallow. This was meant to show his “manliness”, yet I almost threw the book across the room! All I can say to that is, where’s Lorena Bobbit when you need her?

Power plays can be very sexy. I don’t have a problem with the man being the one with power when it comes to sex.

I do have a problem, not with heroines who make mistakes (who doesn’t?) but heroines who make STOOPID mistakes. You know, like the old plot of “I know the hero, have known him for several months, but when some gossipy bitch I barely know says he’s with some whore I believe her over him.” I HATE that. That is a stupid mistake. It shows the heroine doesn’t really trust or love the hero, and throws doubt on them having a future together, as it’s likely the next time some skank wants to lie about him, the heroine will believe he’s fathered someone else’s kid and run off and have a stupid fit.

Kassiana - I also hate this device in reverse.  Despite knowing the heroine for some time, and (probably) being married to her, our hero still believes some convoluted story about her and some other guy that she barely knows/is related to being secret lovers.  Moreover, the story is usually told by some gossip-queen or former mistress of his.  Yeah, reliable source.  I see why everyone believes this guy has got a razor-sharp intellect.

Michelle—I think the Amanda Quick novel you’re thinking of is “Scandal”. Emily’s father and brothers plan to keep her and her mad bookkeeping skillz forever because she was Ruined by an Unfortunate Incident. Simon of Somethingstone does some seducing and sneaks her right out under their noses. That’s my favorite Quick novel too.

Alpha heroes are fine, but there’s a reason the term “alpha”-whatever is generally applied to animals—it implies complete dominance on the alpha’s part. Sometimes that’s fun to read about, but not to the point of “you’ll do whatever I say because I’m the man and you’ll like it, little lady!” I’m mainly thinking of Catherine Coulter here. In “Night Shadow”, the hero Knight (yeah, that was subtle on her part) treats heroine Lily wonderfully—until he finds out that she is not his cousin’s widow, merely his fiancee and the keeper of his children. The first thing he does upon learning this is rip her a new one, the second is to go to her room in the dead of night and molest her (despite many repeated ‘No!‘s) until she comes despite herself. Which, to his mind, proves his point.

Cue me throwing the book across the room. Who does that? Who would fall in love with someone who does that?

(Hi, longtime SB reader, first-time poster!)

“There is an Amanda Quick book that I am blanking on the name where the hero seduces the heroine into marriage as revenge.(Is it Seduction?) He knows her family is dependent on her financial skills to keep them afloat.  It is a really good book and I think it was handled well.”

I think it’s Scandal.  She’s a redhead named Emily, he’s Simon (She repeatedly compared him to a dragon.) That story deals with family finances.  Seduction (w/ Sophie & Julian) has a similar plot; just no money problems.

Rape is always a deal breaker for me.  Even if the hero is repentant in the end - I can’t get over the fact that he actually raped someone.  Nothing gets my panties in a twist like rape turned love in romance novels.

I just finished reading Stormfire by Christine Monson. The hero was the mack daddy of all assholes. But for some sick and twisted reason it worked for me in this book. Usually this kind of cruelty is a deal breaker.

<

>