What is it about taboo relationship structures that trip our Sex-O-Meter so hard?
I was thinking about romantic relationships with set-ups that make us uncomfortable, but that speak strongly to many of us regardless. Boss-secretary. Aristocrat-servant. Guard-prisoner. Abductor-abductee. Guardian-ward. Hell, even stepfather-stepdaughter—I’d be lying if the mind-boggling and outright wrongness of the relationship in Karen Robard’s Morning Song wasn’t one of the primary titillations that kept me turning the pages.
For me, part of the appeal lies in the inversion of power and relationships, not to mention the frisson of disquieting sexiness inspired by the violation of social taboos. What I can’t figure out is: why do certain power relationships pique my interest, while others just gross me the fuck out? I’m not particularly interested in romances in which the brutal, forceful Greek tycoon forces his secretary to marry him, and we find out later it’s all an elaborate revenge ploy because the secretary’s father was secretly behind the downfall of the tycoon’s father’s second cousin’s hot-dog-on-a-stick franchise, but oh dear lord I have a weak spot for guardian-ward romances, which, as far as it goes, are even more disturbing.
And then, as I’ve explained before, I really enjoy the masochistic pain-pleasure of a high-stakes love story. Love and romance are high stakes, to be sure, but when you’re putting your professional and personal reputation on the line, when the love you hold for the other is forbidden and you have to resist as hard as you can because this love won’t just change your lives, it has the potential to tear apart the fabric of your existence (that’s right, motherfuckers, how do you like that melodramatic bit of phrasing?)—well, I’d just like to say “Hell YES,” and “More, please.”
And then that made me think about the proliferation of sub-genres and specialized niche romances, and I came up with the idea of a new romance novel line that categorizes its stories in a different way: Slightly Squicky Romances. Looking for a story about stony-hearted guardian and the feisty ward who finally melts his defences away? What about a stepbrother falling in love with his stepsister? Hey, how ‘bout that footman falling in love with his mistress—or his master, for that matter? Or do you desire to read about the whirlwind romance between the math professor and the brilliant college student for whom he was the senior thesis advisor? Then look no further than Slightly Squicky Romances, where the relationships are always kinda wrong, but also oh so right.
Shapeshifters freak me the hell out. Bestiality at it’s “approved” level. Bleah.
Names don’t bother me very much, unless they’re super crappy like Rod Steele or something like that.
For me it’s the humiliation that I can’t handle, particularly in a public setting. Whatever gets your butter melting is fine, as long as you aren’t forcing the rest of the world into your little fantasy. (Within limits. I mean, kids, dogs, and werecods are NOT allowed ever ever ever.)
I read Master/Slave and it had some pretty damn kick ass stories that were certainly added to the rolodex o’ rubbin’, but there were some that I was reading and thinking, “Huh? How the mother hell is this supposed to be hot?” I still can’t bring myself to read the short story titled “Fisting”.
Wry Hag,
BDSM isn’t about politics. If you’re into it, it’s got nothing to do with what is politically correct. It’s all about what turns you on and that’s why so many people ignore that part of their sexuality: they’re ashamed of what turns them on because their politics tells them that SHOULDN’T turn them on and yet it does.
Trust me. I know. But I’m on the femdom end of the scale.
I don’t know how this translates to readers who read BDSM but don’t practice.
But it still comes down to the fact that what turns you on has nothing to do with politics. And I know you were expressing a personal opinion. I just wanted to put this out there anyway.
If you’re looking for a great—and I mean brilliant—femdom book, Joey Hill’s “Natural Law” is absolutely stunning. Stephanie Vaughan’s “Cruel to be Kind” is also pretty good. Both of them are e-books, but are also real-paper published.
Rosemary,
Fisting, with the right person, is incredibly hot.
-Roseread
I published a short story about two step siblings falling in love—but they never lived in the same house. The parents married when he was already in college. (There were five years between them—and the story takes place later.) The story was romantic and sweet and dealt with the issues involved—but they weren’t blood related, so I didn’t see a problem.
But the editors gave it a squicky title.
I grew up on all those Harlequin Presents novels that had the older man/younger woman, guardian/ward, stepbrother/stepsister. They were wonderfully, melodramatically romantic to the young girl I was and sometimes, I’ll admit to taking a trip down memory lane.
Now, having said all that—the blood related siblings thing icks me all out.
I remember a Jayne Anne Krentz that squicked me out big time. Don’t recall the name, but the hero’s father married the hero’s ex-wife, his daughter-in-law.
But the cousins marrying thing doesn’t bother me. ‘Course, that could be ‘cause I live in North Florida where that kind of marriage used to be pretty darn common. And marriage between first cousins is still legal in this state.
What are these Charlaine Harris books you are all talking about? The vampire books? Honestly, the covers of those have kept me from picking them up. They look like the Harry Potter covers only vampires instead of wizards. Which makes the fact that there might be squick in them even more squicky. Eee.
Does setting make the difference in age gaps between hero and heroine for anybody else? I can’t imagine thinking a romance between an eighteen y/o heroine and a thirty-eight y/o hero would be a good idea in a modern setting, but it’s perfectly acceptable in Jane Eyre.
For most of history, women have first married at a younger age than men. It wouldn’t even occur to me to be squicked by a fifteen or twenty year age difference in a Romance set in a time when that was the standard.
Funny you should mention the squick factor. I read _On Fire’s Wings_ a few weeks ago and it was squicky, squicky, squicky. Half (not step) brother and sister just turns me off, throws me out of the story, and makes me want to forget the book was published.
Also, today I started reading _Nauti Buoy_ and it’s about step-brother and sister who lived together at one point and were encouraged to see each other as siblings…way too V.C. Andrews for me. V.C. scarred me as a child, I swear.
There were two books recently that squicked me out and I had to put them down. Lady of Conquest by Teresa Medeiros—it was a ward/guardian thing, plus there was all this betrayal and lying, and I just didn’t feel the relationship. The other was The Fatal Crown by Ellen Jones, about a supposed relationship between Princess Maud and Stephen of Blois. Cousin as lovers? No thanks.
Did I see Tonda’s book for pre-sale on Borders? Looks like a challenging plot…
My book (Lord Sin)is up for presale. But it looks like WHAT? Please tell me you’re joking?
Wow, I’m a total freak. None of these relationships squick me in the least (and, depending on the background/storyline, I can totally see incest), I’ve never had a problem separating a hero with my dad’s/brother’s name from them (My husband has the same name as my oldest brother, so just imagine THAT one, why don’t you), and I write slash fanfiction from a popular children’s series… and one of my favourite characters there shares the same name as my dad.
I enjoy reading well-written dark themed stories (non-con, torture, violent character death, etc) and quite a few of those in my chosen fandom include the relationships mentioned above.
Yep, I’m a sicko. *g*
Pie…it’s in Charlaine’s recent “Grave” release, and hasn’t yet developed beyond awareness. Her vampire books are better than the covers.
1/2 siblings is squicky, squicky, squicky.
Large age differences are a turn off for me. Really, what do they have in common? Visualize their relationship in 10 or 20 years, when he is ancient and she a generation younger. In some historical times and settings this was ok because married couples were not necessarily close anyway. Otherwise, I have a difficult time mentally connecting these two people, much less happily ever after.
And there ya go, squicky for one is a total turn on for another!!
Eey, if you are a sicko, then I’m joining the club!
I have the Black Jewels Trilogy, but I’ve never gotten around to reading it.
Any other tv or mvie fanfic fans out there? I keep hearing about this show “Supernatural”…
KTG
KTG,
I haven’t seen “Supernatural” (because of the horror – scary monsters), but from what I’ve seen on various blogs, apparently shipping the two brothers is not uncommon.
I didn’t think Logan/Rogue was all that surprising. I thought it was rather evident on screen 😉 .
That wasn’t what she was saying. Wryhag was saying that if you’re beaten/abused/degraded in a non-consensual fashion by a mate/spouse/interested party, sado-masochism isn’t a turn on for you ever after. She was talking *personal experience*, not politics. (sorry, don’t know how to do italics on this g’khested board!) Personally, I don’t find it a turn on either, but that’s because I am constantly aware of the power dynamics of the office, of my family life, of society in general, and I find it (dominance/submission and themes of power) rather tiresome. If you want to get my engines humming, damn, try some *respect* and treating me like an equal. I’ll lap that up like ice cream.
On the other hand, I’m not bothered at all by shape shifters (which always seemed a metaphor for the mutability of personality) or step siblings. Blood relatives would gross me out. Age differences don’t bother me, either.
I am bothered by asshole heroes, though. I always wonder what’s wrong with the heroine that she puts up with such bad treatment. He may be good in bed, but puhleease! You can buy vibrators and other assorted sex toys legally in all 50 states!
For me, it’s about context. I read erotic stories on a site called Literotica.com and there I can tolerate (and even enjoy) a much darker story line. In romance, however, where everything needs to end up happy-ever-after, I have some squick buttons. Though not that many.
My problem with Stockholm Syndrome, whether it’s the male or female in power, is that it’s another version of the bodice-ripper, i.e., the prisoner has no responsibility for their lust because they have no freedom. Therefore, they can’t feel guilty or ‘dirty,’ because they had no choice.
It’s just a slightly more palatable form of rape, and, IMO, inherently conservative and anti-sex. Same goes for the forced marriage stories, too.
Without freedom, there can be no love.
When I was doing research for a paper in one of my classes, I came across a book about twin studies, in particular, twins that were separated at birth.
There was this one instance of (fraternal) twin boys separated at birth who were also gay. They happened to meet and fell in love & became partners.
Talk about a freakin’ squick factor.
Roseread- I’m just gonna have to take your word on that.
“What about a stepbrother falling in love with his stepsister?”
That one works for me, ala “Clueless.” So much so that I have a half-finished novel written on the premise. Please start your Squicky Publishing Company soon so I have a place to send it!
A stepbrother falling in love with a stepsister gets me thinking of Greg & Marcia engaged in a torrid clinch with “If Loving You Is Wrong, I Don’t Wanna Be Right” playing on the soundtrack. Damned if “The Brady Bunch” wasn’t trading majorly on a very titillating squick factor during prime time. I mean, why else would there be an exact, age-appropriate match for each child in the family?
For me, as long as the writer’s good enough, my squick-o-meter settings are pretty broad, although I can occasionally surprise myself. I’ve also noticed that the further removed from my own reality, the greater my squick tolerance. The Greek Tycoon’s Blackmailed Stenographer Bride makes me wince, but Taming Her Savage Alien Love Slave would at least get a glance at the back cover. Although probably not if it involved salmon. And there was that one about aprodisiac bees and giants that blazed me right through squickiness and into fits of very undignified hysterical laughter.
Having cut my teeth on second-hand M&Bs, I don’t give married relations a second thought unless a parent-child relationship is involved. But blood kin relationships are a road I travel warily. Really need a good writer to persuade me on this one, since I’m another one traumatised by early exposure to VC Andrews.
Same goes for big age gaps and guardian/ward situations. Guess it’s the trust/choice factor. But I’m a sucker for a good loving from afar story, and these scenarios can provide (to my mind) pretty believable reasons for all that tormented longing and give hope for a believable HEA. But again, with reservations…
One of Christine Feehan’s books (Dark Destiny?) has the Mysterious Brooding
wampyre, sorry,
Carpathian do his magic woowoo to make the heroine his destined lifemate while she’s still in the womb. Talk about foetal attraction. Or frankendesign-a-girlfriend. Anyhow, I couldn’t get past the heebie-jeebies this gave me to believe the explanations, and it soured me on the whole “lifemates” concept entirely.
I can’t do the shape shifter stories… That is a major squick for me. It just seems wrong on so many levels, however, I have always had some trouble reading most SF. I have issues suspending belief that far maybe? Not sure.
I agree that Pamela Morisi’s Simple Jess was a great read. I didn’t have any trouble with that one. The first in that series was The Marrying Stone and the character of Jess was a main character and after reading about him, I really wanted him to have his own story. I even wrote to the author and told her how laugh out loud funny The Marrying Stone was. She wrote me back. Those are two of my favorite all time keepers.
It might also help that I have a “slow” neice. She functions at a teenage level although she is 26. She has had many “normal” IQ boyfriends over the years and I have hopes that she will marry and live a “normal” as possible life. So that may have helped with my great love of the story.
My verification word was never86?!
Actually, Kaite, some states do have legal restrictions on sex toys… Hard to believe in this day and age, no?
Uh-oh. Perhaps we need a list, so I don’t inadvertently move to one and break all sorts of common decency laws.
Ha! As if my moving there wouldn’t just break them before my ‘friends’ arrived in the U-Haul…. 😆
Don’t worry, Kaite—I think the restrictions are on sales of sex toys, not the usage thereof.
Oh, awesome, my word is “church24.”
Last I heard, the use of toys was illegal in Massachusetts. People were raising money for the defense fund for a case in the Boston area a few years ago.
I haven’t seen “Supernatural†(because of the horror – scary monsters), but from what I’ve seen on various blogs, apparently shipping the two brothers is not uncommon.
Ah, yes. Shipping the Brothers Winchester, otherwise known in the fandom as “Wincest.”
Supernatural rocks—Pretty Boys, good writing, decent f/x, and did I mention The Pretty?—whether you dig the Wincest vibe or not. But what I find interesting is how the creators seem to play to the fangirls’ fantasies in this area by occasionally having secondary characters assume the boys are lovers rather than brothers. Hilarity then ensues. And much squeeing from the Wincest contingent.
Of which I’m not one. Much.
Ahem.
*shrug* It’s fiction, folks. The boys don’t REALLY kill demons and vampires, either.
Hey! Anybody remember The Love Talker, by Elizabeth Peters? The heroine thinks, right up to the end, that the hero is her brother, only to find out—with a certain amount of relief—that he was adopted!
Squicky, maybe, but fooled me: when there are only two guys in the story and one is the heroine’s brother, the other HAS to be the love interest, right?
I was just reminded – not a book – but “High School Musical” – I keep asking the teens I work with and they’ve all fanwanked it away. In the movie, the two characters who keep getting cast as the leads in the school play are brother and sister. I can’t believe that no one noticed that potential squick in a Disney movie.
Oh, man, sherryfair! Now I’ve got Brady Bunch plot bunnies hopping gaily through my head!
Gives “Marsha, Marsha, Marsha” a whole new vision…
How about doctor-patient? In most if not all states, the doctor can lose his license over something like that. And if you really want to up the squick factor, make him an ob-gyn. Or a pediatrician.
(But she swore she was fourteen!—From Tender Awakenings, Ozark Books.)
Oops. Sorry. I just italicized everything with my sloppy HTML—all for a crappy, tasteless joke.
So I guess Flowers in the Attic is up there on the squickometer?
Heh.
KTG (the above icons made by luarel_tx on Live Journal..)
I love Supernatural. I’m watching the new one tonight. Yay! However, the “Wincest” factor had never occurred to me, not even once. I’m astonished but not revolted, though, and here’s why:
(nice segue to my thoughts on the squick factor)
The only thing that squicks me out is imbalance of power, which usually comes from a big age gap, occasionally the captor/captive thing. It’s possible for me to get into a story where the heroine has been kidnapped by the hero, but it turns out he’s saving her some threat she didn’t know existed. Elizabeth Lowell has managed to sell me a few scenarios like that, if memory serves.
Beyond that, I don’t mind anything, even incest, unless there’s an imbalance of power. For that reason, parent / child stuff is out of bounds for me, even once the kid has grown up because you never outgrew the desire to please the person who raised you. It’s sort of hard to tie that into a sexual relationship. But cousins don’t bother me so much. The only risk there is genetic (and that for reproduction).
For siblings, well, it’s not something that gets my motor running, but it doesn’t bother me either, unless it comes from an abusive situation a la Flowers in the Attic. But if an adult brother and sister fall in love, who does it hurt? Most likely, it would be unwise for them to reproduce, but otherwise…
Bottom line, I can deal with anything that doesn’t result from coercion, force or inappropriate influence. As long as both parties came by their feelings honestly and are mature enough to make the decision, then I’m okay with it.
KTG: Holy crap, those icons are brilliant. I especially like the one involving The Prestige. Hee!
As for Supernatural: I liked that show so much when I first caught it, I posted about it on this blog. It is tremendous fun, and I can’t wait to get my mitts on the Season 1 DVD set (helloooo, Christmas present!). The fact that there’s a burgeoning Wincest slashfic community does not surprise me, since the vast majority of Boondock Saints fic I looked up involved *sobs quietly* twincest.
Jackie: OH FUCK YEAH Flowers in the Attic set off my squick-o-meter. I still read it, but I didn’t find the relationship sexy, just incredibly disturbing and compelling in a trainwrecky way.
Doug: Doctor-patient’s a good ‘un, and I’m willing to bet Harlequin has already published some pediatrician-MILF romance.
Bonnie: Oooh, good point about Clueless. I love that movie, and I love the romance in that movie. Sigh.
Theresa: As far as I know, there’s no romance novel I know of about a math thesis advisor gettin’ it on with his student. But I’d read it if there was one, because it trips one of my “OMG SO SEXY BUT SO WRONG” triggers.
Ostrea: Use of sex toys is illegal in Massachusetts? Seriously? I tried looking that up, but couldn’t find anything. I did find out that owning more than six dildos qualifies you for a felony in Texas. Eeep! I’m 2/3 of a felon according to Texan law, I guess.
I love Supernatural. I’m watching the new one tonight. Yay!
Yay, indeed. Best ep of the season so far. I’m betting you’ll love it.
However, the “Wincest†factor had never occurred to me, not even once. I’m astonished but not revolted, though, and here’s why…The only thing that squicks me out is imbalance of power…Beyond that, I don’t mind anything, even incest, unless there’s an imbalance of power. (please pardon my snippage of your comments)
Exactly. This is why Wincest of the brother-on-brother variety doesn’t bother me, but the stuff about John and the boys? Squicks me to the core. It’s all about the power differential.
Plus, it’s not like Dean and Sam are getting up to any baby-making in the near future. (Although if you look, you’ll find plenty of MPREG/Wincest fanfic. Which I ignore. Because I have my standards, dammit.)
And as I said before: FICTIONAL. CHARACTERS.
As for Supernatural: I liked that show so much when I first caught it, I posted about it on this blog. It is tremendous fun, and I can’t wait to get my mitts on the Season 1 DVD set (helloooo, Christmas present!).
You won’t regret it, Candy. Nothing like Jensen Ackles’ lips and eyes in DVD-quality close-up.
What? You say you watch it for the PLOT? :p
See if you can’t get your hands on the DVD set that includes the Paley Institute round-table discussion with Kripke (the creator), Ackles, Padalecki and Kim Manners, among other writers and directors. Fascinating and funny as hell. But the “Day in the Life of Jared and Jensen” and the gag reel together are worth the price.
And The Pretty. I did mention The Pretty, yes?
*paddles back to the shallow end of the pool*
I totally agree with what most of y’all are saying, but I have to say that the visual enactment of the taboo in movies and even in graphic novels/manga doesn’t seem to wig me out as much as the printed one. Maybe because I know that at the end of the day the characters are actors and not actually related.
What really gets my grey matter twirling are the romances where the ancient and oh-for-the-love-of-all-that-is-wrong-and-yet-so-right, HOT vampire who comes to claim for his own the woman who would actually be his great-great-greeeaat granddaughter?!! It should squick me out more than it does, but somehow I always work through it—much as I do for the guardian/ward romances that I, too, have a special place for in my…uh …heart
Selah, I blogrolled you on the strength of our mutual love of Supernatural. The episode I’m watching tonight is only the second one of the new season, though. I’m in Mexico and our TV “seasons” run a little bit behind those in the states.
Selah, I blogrolled you on the strength of our mutual love of Supernatural. The episode I’m watching tonight is only the second one of the new season, though. I’m in Mexico and our TV “seasons†run a little bit behind those in the states.
Thanks! 🙂 Someone else set up my blogroll for me and I’ve yet to figure out how to edit it. If I ever do, you’re SO THERE.
ANd the second ep: That one’s not bad, either. Especially the last scene.
Topic? Firefly fanfiction based on an incestuous relationship between Simon and River squicks me. I believe it’s the age difference/power differential thing again—which only seems slight in this case, because although she’s young, she’s spooky-brilliant and can kill you with her brain—or it might be the whole “their babies would be mutant freaks” thing.
I’m aware this makes me a hypocrite on the subject of fan-fictional incest. I will endeavor to live with the shame.