Romance is Bad for You! So is Pornography! And Sex!

Suitable for the Head Up Our Ass Department, we have a red alert sent to us from Bitchery Reader iffygenia who directs us to this jaw dropping piece of journalism: Is there Harm in Reading Romance Novels?

Sarah: Oh dear Lord. Not this bullshit again. The right-leaning is as dipshitted as the left-leaning, and my greatest regret is that I’m not on site to see Candy’s head explode when she reads this commentary and rebuttal, written by Shaunti Feldhahn and Diane Glass.

Did you read it? Seriously, do NOT have food in your mouth. You might choke. 

Feldhahn argues that romance readers can become “unbalanced” by the distortion inherent in romance, and gets right down to the age-old comparison of romance to pornography, albeit porn for chicks. Pointing her right-leaning finger at erotica, she argues that the pornography is bad enough, but then there’s all these women seeking an unattainable ideal based on reading too much romance with rugged, sensitive heroes. Seems us romance types are not spending enough time “find[ing] the hero in our husbands and not in the pages of a fiction book.”

Thank God she stopped short of mentioning the words “family values,” though the hint was there in broad stroke.

Setting aside the deep faults of the first commentary, the rebuttal has plenty of butt in it, too, starting with the condescending and utterly trite argument that romance, erotica, or not, “at least women are reading.”

Stop patting me on the head. You’ll mess up my hair.

While Feldhahn asserts that erotica novels – which, duh, aren’t the same thing as romance novels, not that these two would care to examine the difference – promote addiction, and create unattainable romantic ideals, Glass responds that erotica has been shown in a recent study titled Pornography: Research Advances and Policy Considerations to have “no adverse social implications.” Thank heaven. I’d hate to think reading about human sexual and emotional relationships might make me antisocial any more than I already am.

Neither writer can tell the difference between erotica and romance any more than they can tell the difference between a sound and completely idiotic argument. Moreover, both come across as women who doth not know whereof they speak, who likely have never read a romance novel nor an erotica novel.

My overwhelming reaction to this condescending bulltripe? Exhaustion. Not only can I not tell if they’re arguing about erotica or the sexuality of romance novels, but again the idea of reading romance and now erotica is called into question as some rubric against which to value the intelligence and relative mental stability of the reader, to say nothing of the old lumping together of romance AS porn for women.

On one hand, so what, if it is? It’s not but even if it were chick porn, so what? God forbid we have orgasms or even sexual knowledge. But more to the point, romance isn’t pornography any more than merely reading it will turn a reader into an imbalanced harpy who finds limitless anger in the fact that her husband isn’t “strong, rugged and breathtakingly handsome, yet sensitive, patient listeners and utterly unselfish.”

If anything, I want to know why “journalism” like this hasn’t caused a decrease in the number of people reading newspapers. Oh, wait….

Candy: First of all, this sentence by Feldhahn was had me rolling:

The male heroes are all strong, rugged and breathtakingly handsome, yet sensitive, patient listeners and utterly unselfish.

Has this woman read a romance novel? Romance novel heroes can be accused of any number of things, but being sensitive, patient and utterly unselfish listeners ain’t one of them. Unless she’s confusing the gay best friend in chick lit with a romance novel hero?

But really, I’m so goddamn sick of the whole “Romance creates unrealistic expectations in women!” argument. Most right-leaning douchebags eventually gave up on the whole “RPGs will make your children Satan-worshipping elf-wannabes who will STAB YOU IN YOUR SLEEP” scenario; why won’t they do the same with romances? Why the insistence on assuming we’re weak-minded fools who are unable to tell fiction from reality? Fiction can have transformative powers, it’s true, but when somebody decides to break up with a wonderful husband because of a romance novel, I think that person has more serious issues than a romance novel addiction to deal with. The DSM-IV would be a good place to start.

The funny thing is, the sorts of people who love to blame romance novels for the breakdown of the family are usually the ones who go on ad nauseam about the importance of personal responsibility, especially when it comes to social issues. Pregnant with an unwanted child? Gay? Brown and po’? SUCK IT UP, BECAUSE IT’S ALL YOUR FAULT TO BEGIN WITH, AND IF YOU TRIED HARD ENOUGH, YOU WOULDN’T BE ANY OF THESE THINGS. But once something like, say, violence in video games or the manly (but sensitive! Don’t forget they’re so sensitive!) heroes in romance novels rear their heads, they’re all for warning people off lest the poor, unsuspecting victims shatter their fragile psyches against the ramparts of oiled man-titty. As soon as blame can be attached to something that directly affects them, you won’t see a group of people so eager to pass on the buck. God forbid that the kids do awful things because they had shitty parents or because they’re being, y’know, kids, or that the woman left her husband because he’s a terrible spouse.

The rebuttal didn’t get my dander up quite as much as it did Sarah, but the derailment into Pornolandia made me raise my brow. I tend to question studies that claim violent porn increases propensities towards sexual violence—my gut feeling is that people who voluntarily seek out violent porn (not kinky BDSM stuff—I’m talking snuff porn and rape porn) on a regular basis probably are inclined in that direction to begin with. Linking causality for this sort of thing is incredibly tricky.

And all this clucking and flapping over female porn always makes me wonder: are female orgasms so terrifying? Seriously, why are people so damn worked up over women getting turned on and rubbin’ one out? Every time a woman masturbates, are TWO kittens killed instead of just one? I want to know, because I’d like to know how many kittens I’ve killed last week.

Categorized:

News, Ranty McRant

Comments are Closed

  1. Bella says:

    *snort* TeddyPig… omg man, you are just wrong. :shakes head:

  2. bookworm says:

    That debate was way too inept to get upset about. Or maybe I’m just in a really good mood from all the chick porn I’ve been reading. Or maybe I’m still laughing about the “Romance novel” short over on YouTube. Sorry – way too computer illiterate to post a link, but I’m trying at least (pats self on head).

    Teddy pig – That was a very vivid picture you painted of Ms Cartland and Fabio in the throes of passion. I see it as a romance cover. Wonder what the blurb would be.

  3. Michele says:

    guh, how unbelievably stupid …

    No wonder women are so confused in society today if these are the two viewpoints with which we need to contend.  I can stay home and tell my husband he is perfect and not even have the satisfaction of whacking off to a romance porno when he fails to satisfy me in bed because it is my fault that I’m not sexually responsive enough because I’m not supposed to read any suggestive porn erotica romance deceptive male dehumanizing emasculating books to help get me in the mood or know what the hell the mood is because if my marriage was working and he was sexually satisfied I wouldn’t need these sexual aids and if I weren’t rotting my brain with something less than inspirational poetry designed to make me conquor the world and throw off all those old female stereotypes perpetuated by Harlequin because I am not literate enough to be entertained by anything more intellectually challenging than man dick suck fuck but hey, at least I can spell.

    Dammit, I need to go kill some kittens.

  4. R. says:

    [shaking head sadly]

    I’d always suspected that—despite all the bravado and the chest-thumping—that a huge chunk of the human populace just can’t handle the suggestion that they may be less than perfect.  For a man to be so insecure that he feels threatened by fictious characters, mere figments of the imaginations of writers, is pathetic.  That isn’t a man,… that’s a spoiled child.

    But the most tragic of it is that any woman would be expected to surrender her dignity and her right to be self-determining in order to preserve the illusion of peace within a relationship that possibly isn’t healthy for her, or worthy of her.

  5. Lynne says:

    And I wondered why my hometown newspaper’s web site was so horribly slow today! Someone turned on the SmartBitch Signal. I should’ve known!

  6. DS says:

    They just repackage that feminine = submissive crap new for each generation. I remember rolling my eyes over the Total[ed] Woman by Marabel Morgan in the 70’s.  I just googled to see if she was still promoting this view point but couldn’t find anything recently. 

    The last mention of her I could find was in 1987 she developed some sort of cancer and went to work for a health aid company that had Magnetic in its title. 

    She was the wrap yourself in plastic wrap and greet your husband at the door advisor—oh, and pray he doesn’t have his co-worker, boss, or best friend with him. 

    my spamkiller word was need87.  Is this somehow significant?

  7. MamaNice says:

    Duh, I know Fabio isn’t coming for me on his white horse.

    It’s a black horse, silly.

    Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

    Come on Fabby, I’m waiting to leave my less than perfect husband, child, & life to go live in a castle with you.

  8. Chris says:

    I’ve been reading porn…err romance since I was a teen. I managed to get married to someone who is not a pirate or a Lord of Something or Other in England. How, oh how did I accomplish this with my unrealistic expectations?!

    Romance= marital aid

  9. desertwillow says:

    When I read things like this I wonder – why doesn’t anybody ever go after novels primarily read by men and discuss how these novels have a negative effect on men – make them think they can live lives free of combovers and beerbellies.

    Seriously, do these women honestly believe that I will read a paranormal vampire romance then walk out into the world (at night) looking for one to fall for?

  10. AnimeJune says:

    Yeah, how is it that romance readers are accused of believing the rugged, sensitive man is out there, whereas fantasy readers are never in danger of believing unicorns exist?

    No one’s raised a hue and cry over mystery readers being too naive about the justice system – or sci-fi readers being confused that aliens exist (oh, wait…)

    My Mum brought up the Romance-Porn connection with me when I started reading romance. The basic idea for her was: “If the sex is part of the story, and contributes to the story – then it’s romance. If it’s just there to arouse the reader, and if the reader is READING the book just to be aroused, then it’s porn.”

    Kindof like if in the French New Wave Film Le Pizzaboy, he has to have a threesome with the lesbian cheerleaders in order to fully explore the surreal depths of his existential angst, then it’s romance – but if he’s just bangin’ the broads so that more sweaty dudes will buy the tapes, than it’s porn.

    Needless to say, it’s not that simple. I read romances for the dialogue, and the build-up, and the obstacles the couples overcome and how they emerge as THE couple at the end. Honestly, Catholic virgin that I am, I find I’m a bit turned off by graphic sex scenes and find I flip through them if they’re present just for the “look how much FUN the heroine’s having nudgenudgewinkwink” factor.

    Heck, even in Jennifer Crusie’s “Anyone But You,” I did that. Yay! ER doc and editor are together – wait, now they’re…*flipflipflip* Yay! Fred and Oreos!

    I don’t think the romance-porn connection is as solid as the naysayers may think, but I also believe it shouldn’t be dismissed out of hand. If you read romances FOR THE SEX (as opposed to the stories which may happen to include sex) – wouldn’t that be using the novel as porn? Not that porn is bad/good – I’m more against porn for the “stop watching TV and get some fresh air and use your IMAGINATION” argument. *lol*

  11. Wry Hag says:

    “Exasperating idiosyncracies” ain’t all that fuckin’ “wonderful”.

  12. Wry Hag says:

    And, by the way, it isn’t “surrendering the way God intended,” it’s surrendering the way St. Paul intended.

  13. Teddy Pig says:

    So if I read a Tom Clancy novel that will somehow make me want to date Sean Connery ? or will I betray the Russians and seek to give the US their most top secret sub?

  14. Nadia says:

    Is it wrong, while doing the deed, and things are taking a long time, to imagine you are in Scotland, with that favorite laird, and the big conclusion is accomplished to everyone’s satisfaction, and he can get on with his end of it, and we can all go to sleep happy?

    I’m just asking, am I going to hell for that?

  15. Marty says:

    Yes, it is dangerous to read romance, BECAUSE …………………………..it makes you a smart bitch/bastard who knows what she/he likes, has their own opinions and does not agree with crap from people like Diane Glass and Shaunti Feldhahn.

    MWAHAHA, I’m burning in hell with all the rest baby! 

    Is that deep enough for you?

    My word is deep16

  16. Robin says:

    So here’s my question after sputtering through that AJC mess (comments were fun, though_:  Who’s more afraid of female sexuality, men or women? 

    I’m so glad I finished my Reader’s Gab piece before I read that.

  17. Wow, I’m late on this one – look what happens when I go to sleep??

    I read the article and it was just laughable – old arguments repackaged for a new day. The rebuttal was particularly weak since she didn’t make any fresh arguments of her own, just reacted to the commentary. As has already been stated in many ways, neither of these people knows anything first hand about romance novels (or probably romance in real life)

    Now I’m off to destroy some more marriages…er…do some writing…

  18. Krysia says:

    I love you guys. Seriously heart you *hard*.

  19. As an erotic romance writer, I hope I’ve somehow contributed to the high kitten mortality rate.

    I like getting turned on.  Sue me.  Orgasms are fun and I like those, too.  I’m going to hell.  If books assist me in feeling good, I’m going to read them.  Simple equation, to me.

    However, for me, in order to get invested enough to be turned on, I have to know something about the characters.  Have to care one way or the other whether or not they get their happies.  This is why I’ve never yet found a porn movie that worked for me—scene 1, hump, come.  Scene change, hump, come.  Scene 3, hump, come.  Whatever, why should I care if Interchangable Blonde #73 gets her jollies with Ugly Yet Well Hung Dude #47?  I don’t give a shit about either if them, and the in-out-in-out closeups don’t do it for me either.  As Robin Williams once said, it’s rather like an industrial film covered in fur.

    So, yeah, books.  At least I’m reading before I snuff those poor little kittens.

  20. Gehayi says:

    “Yeah, how is it that romance readers are accused of believing the rugged, sensitive man is out there, whereas fantasy readers are never in danger of believing unicorns exist?

    No one’s raised a hue and cry over mystery readers being too naive about the justice system – or sci-fi readers being confused that aliens exist (oh, wait…)”

    Trust me. They are accused of just that.

    Fantasy readers are accused of immaturity, naiveté, superstition, dangerous gullibility and being only loosely in touch with reality.

    Mystery novels have been vivisected by critics who think that such novels began and ended with Agatha Christie and Mickey Spillane, and who don’t realise that a) mysteries cover a wide range of genres and b) yes, mysteries CAN say something serious about the world around us.

    Sci-fi—well, it’s practically impossible to get a non-genre-oriented critic to take it seriously. Most reviewers seem to think that science fiction is entirely the province of socially maladjusted, immature Star Trek and Star Wars geeks, and confuse the style of the genre—spaceships, planetary exploration, aliens—with its substance.  Somehow, they manage to miss the fact that science fiction can be used to say things that matter, and that couldn’t be said any other way.

    I don’t know much about romance novels—at least not good ones, though I’ve read more than enough bad tales of romance. But I assume, based on that article, that it is much the same way with the romance genre as well.

  21. Emily says:

    Romance novels have filled in the gaps in my sexual education that grade ten and general lack of experience failed to cover.
    I have sexually-active friends coming to Virginal Moi for advice on how to Do It and Do It well and safely (when in doubt, just suck it up and go to a frickin’ gyno!) and what kind of variations and options there are: because I’ve read a wide range of romance/erotica and am a pretty fair judge of what might work for some couples I know and what might not.
    If that’s not irony, (esp. in the face of this article’s POVs,) I don’t know what is.
    I also watch a lot of nature specials and have no sex drive. At this point, boning is all one and the same. Lord Muchwangst and Lady Ophelia Klitt are on par with those elk humping each other in the marshland with the same deadpan voice-over for everything.
    National Geographic = pr0n?
    David Suzuki = pimp?

  22. Kerry Allen says:

    Oh, come on. I’m sure the skyrocketing divorce rate correlates precisely with the number of romance novels flooding the market, which proves romance ruins marriages.

  23. EGS says:

    Wow, talk about being demeaning towards women and their supposed lack of intelligence.  You mean Fabio isn’t coming for me on his horse anytime soon to ravish me??!!  Those bitches just shattered all of my dreams.

  24. Ann Bruce says:

    sensitive, patient and utterly unselfish listeners

    My SO laughed his head off when I read the above to him.  According to him, I would make mincemeat of such a male paragon in real life so I would never be able to stand writing about one—or reading about one.

    He knows me so bloody well.  Probably too well.

    And why are so many people still uncomfortable with women and sexuality?  Well, just my unsubstantiated, unscientific, wild-assed opinion, but it’s because of the whole Madonna (no, not the singer, the Mother of Christ) figure.  Women are caregivers, nurturers, etc., and it’s difficult to reconcile the two images.  Apparently, you cannot be a mother/caregiver/nuturer and be a sexual creature at the same time.  Which is total BS!

    But there you have it.

    And, I will be honest and admit that I have a difficult time picturing my mother as a sexual creature.  As far as I’m concerned, she had sex four times to conceive my half-siblings and me—and that’s it.  NO MORE.

    Even though I know there was more—and I can’t think about it without cringing.

    On a lighter note, later tonight I’ll be watching Transformers and telling myself every five minutes that I will not rush out after the movie to buy a yellow Camaro because it will not transforms into a sentient robot from outer space.

    It won’t, right?

    Hollywood so confuses me!

    We should ban all Sci/Fi flicks for confusing their viewers and creating unrealistic expectations.

  25. B says:

    Why should we pay attention to news sources these days, anyway? I barely come across any article thats not pure trash or ignorant sophistry. I want stuff that’s well researched. If they’re going to talk about the romance genre, then let them interview romance readers, publishers and romance authors. Let them write a bit more than a few opinionated words, and let them quote more research and statistics. Let them use a writing style that’s actually intelligent and talk to more people who know what they’re on about. Let them actually cover the argument in a well rounded way, talking about well written and badly written romances. Put some actual effort into it, rather than write something that looks like it was reeled off in 20 minutes.

    Their opinion is absolutely useless to me, and ramblings of pure silliness.

    I’m sick and tired of seeing articles that are just regurgutating the same fruitless tripe over and over, instead of actually contributing information and balanced arguments. A lot of journalism is absolute crap these days. If there’s anyone who’s negatively influencing people en masse, it’s the press.

  26. Jackie says:

    “RPGs will make your children Satan-worshipping elf-wannabes who will STAB YOU IN YOUR SLEEP”

    Actually, we don’t wait for you to fall asleep naturally. We drug you first. Then we make with the stabbing and Satan worshiping.

  27. B says:

    I love RPGs, lots of videogames, science fiction AND romance. I must be well effed up in the head, y’all.

    I’m tired of romance being derided. I don’t see how on earth any other genre of literature is more superior. I suggest Smart Bitches compare approaches in romance to the texts in English Lit curriculum in schools. Shakespeare, particularly, had crazy views of relationships sometimes. (e.g. ROMEO AND JULIET?)

    If romance were to be used in schools, what books would YOU put on the syllabus?

    (P.S. Thats frickin scary… I’m typing here about schools and my word is school76. SMARTBITCHES are influencing my subconscious mind with the hot pinkness, mantittyness and suggestive verification words. HALP)

  28. Najida says:

    And why are so many people still uncomfortable with women and sexuality?  …………..Women are caregivers, nurturers, etc., and it’s difficult to reconcile the two images.  Apparently, you cannot be a mother/caregiver/nuturer and be a sexual creature at the same time.  Which is total BS!

    Want to play with someone’s head (expecially a guy who thinks his elderly Nana is a saint?)

    Remind him that everything he’s doing with his wife, Grandpa was doing with Grandma!  And she seemed to like it (Cuz they had 7 kids).  It’s funny how many folks (men especially) are freaked out at the idea that their mothers/grandmothers etc were/are just as wild in the sack as their hot lovers of today.

    Sex and writing about sex isn’t new.

  29. I wonder what those lovely ladies would make of me: published romance author, published erotica author, enjoys porn, happily married for 17 years.

    Obviously, I’m an aberration.  A statistical anomaly.
    A sex-crazed bundle of confused and angry hormones just waiting to Bobbittize her husband while he sleeps for not doing the dishes…

  30. Christine Merrill says:

    Nadia asked:
    “Is it wrong, while doing the deed, and things are taking a long time, to imagine you are in Scotland, with that favorite laird, and the big conclusion is accomplished to everyone’s satisfaction, and he can get on with his end of it, and we can all go to sleep happy?

    I’m just asking, am I going to hell for that?”

    Yes, Nadia.  you are.  But heaven is ankle deep in dead kittens and none of the angels have wings.  Do you really want to go there?

    When it comes to writing, and how much sex, and where to put it? 😉

    The guidelines never tell us that less is more, because women don’t want to have all that sex cluttering up their ertoic novel.  But from the writing standpoint, it’s all supposed to be about writing the best book possible.  And really good books don’t take a detour down a dead end street for a blowjob, just because nothing hot has happened lately and the reader is getting bored.

    However:  if we happen to a story, where a large part of the main conflict occurs on a dead end street, and a lot of hot things are happening there?

    Then it is our job to tell that story to the best of our abilities.  It’s a dirty job, but someone has to do it.  And what the readers are doing, once they get the story is none of our business. We deal in fiction, not on the spot reporting.

    Although I am going to go and check on the health of our cats.

  31. Bella says:

    “Actually, we don’t wait for you to fall asleep naturally. We drug you first. Then we make with the stabbing and Satan worshiping.”

    *snort* love it.

    I wonder when Laura Mallory is going to weigh in on this?

  32. Robin Bayne says:

    Hey I am a right-leaning Christian and totally disagree with the premise that romance reading is harmful, and with the notion women are too gullible to differentiate between fiction and real life. Sheesh.

  33. Kassiana says:

    “Most right-leaning douchebags eventually gave up on the whole “RPGs will make your children Satan-worshipping elf-wannabes who will STAB YOU IN YOUR SLEEP” scenario…”
    —Um, no, they didn’t. They still believe RPGs are evil. They’ve just expanded their definition of evil to everything they don’t like or understand, from romance novels to Goth trends to emerging non-Christian religions (Satanism) and old non-Christian religions (Satanism) to Christian religions like Catholicism (Satanism and the anti-Christ).

  34. Poison Ivy says:

    RE: the Mirabel Morgan greet-your-husband-in-plastic-wrap adjuration idea

    I was the office co-worker who went home with him one evening and his wife (a good friend of mine) greeted him at the door in a flaming orange negligee outfit that I would never in a million years have imagined her wearing—or him enjoying. Needless to say, there were a couple of disappointed people that evening.

  35. iffygenia says:

    Glass’s response is actually an interesting lesson in the value of framing

    Candy, yep, I squawked about that excuse for an article.  And you’re right: absolutely, Glass let Feldhahn frame the debate.  I wish she hadn’t, because “Reading is good” is a better way to state “At least women read.”  I just don’t think failure to re-frame makes her the evil C-word (condescending).  I can see why people take it that way, but I feel like we sound unnecessarily defensive when we jump all over stylistic points when there’s bigger stuff in the article to worry about.  But that’s just my preference.  And that’s why I invoked the Bitchsignal, then yelled “Don’t throw the bathtub out with the baby!”  Silly iffy, that’s what the Bitch does: it Bitches.  And very productively, at that.

    Feldhahn and Glass are longtime sparring partners, and some of their columns sound like they’ve lost sight of the bigger audience (and the possibility of re-framing), because they’re so focused on their ongoing familiar argument.  Of course, that makes for a more obvious “left vs right” piece, which stirs up the readership, which is what passes for “news”.

    (Not that I agree with this approach: the point-counterpoint format is too often lazy journalism and shit-stirring for its own sake, rather than really probing the issues.  It’s even more lazy when it’s couched as right-vs-left and there’s no attempt at synthesis.)

  36. Ann Bruce says:

    Grandpa was doing with Grandma!  And she seemed to like it (Cuz they had 7 kids).

    My grandma apparently liked it a lot.  She has 10 kids (and no multiples)…and there would’ve been more but Grandpa died in his early 40s.

    And, yes, we’re Roman Catholic.

    Funny enough, if Mom and Grandma knew I’m writing trashy books on the side, I think they’d approve.

    My mom’s been making remarks that make me do double takes even before I was old enough to know boys have a penis and girls have a vagina.

  37. Ah, Teddy, I’m so sorry your romance cover fantasy can never happen.
    Babs kicked the bucket a while back.  Hard to get a strap-on around a dead chick.
    Unless this was a paranormal….

    Hmm.

    Okay, so maybe your fantasy cover COULD happen.  Fabio and Zombie Barbara Cartland with a strap-on.  Righteous!

  38. kyra says:

    So THAT’s why I’m single—maybe I’ll get lucky and find a man when I finish my TBR stack.

  39. iffygenia says:

    Sarah and I took this offline, and I think came to a sort of agreement on one reason that we read Glass differently.

    I think statements like “At least X reads!” are predicated on a fear that people no longer read.  I see that all the time, and there are some stats to support it… but also some stats that contradict it. I’ve collected a bunch of stats on reading – anyone here have better sources, or alternate interpretations?

  40. Jen says:

    I think I’d give Diane Glass a pass on this one.  She died of cancer on July 30.  She was diagnosed on July 6th.  I’m guessing she wasn’t up to her usual stuff when she wrote this column.

    http://www.leifwells.com/index.cfm/2007/7/30/My-Best-Friend-Diane-Glass-1964—2007

Comments are closed.

By posting a comment, you consent to have your personally identifiable information collected and used in accordance with our privacy policy.

↑ Back to Top