I got my most recent RWR in the mail the other day, and since my entire job as a giant pregnant lady is to relax, gain weight, and sit around waiting, I read it cover to cover. Usually I skim it, check out the contest winners, look at the articles and who wrote them, and read a piece here or there. But hey, I sit down now, and I don’t move voluntarily for at least an hour, so bring on the reading material.
And hello, page 4’s Letters to the Editor! I laughed out loud. Did anyone else notice this one?
Madeline Baker, she doesn’t like the cussing:
I continue to be shocked by the language in some romance novels I’m reading. It’s unfortunate that more and more authors feel the need to use the “F word” in their books, but even worse, the word “Motherf…” has cropped up in two of my recent reads. It’s bad enough when language like this is uttered by the villain, but when it comes out of the mouth of the heroine… well, I’m just plain stunned. Surely it’s possible to write a gutsy heroine without having her talk like a gang member.
Here are a few choices of response that pop to mind:
1. Bitch, please.
2. Racist and classist undertones aside, I’m as offended by books titled Cheyenne Surrender as you are by the word “fuck.”
3. Fuck that!
4. Gang members? Only gang members say “fuck?” Seriously?
Perhaps the problem is the reading material she’s choosing, which she addresses in her letter:
Lately I’ve read several books that have ‘paranormal romance’ on the spine. In my opinion, a good number of them haven’t been romances at all, and that includes the one I threw across the room just last night….
Demons and vampires and werewolves, especially the ones that want to kill you, will totally stop if you speak nicely and say, “Please.”
I doubt if it will ever happen, but I’d like to see some kind of rating on books so that I’ll know what I’m getting before it’s too late.
Now that there, THAT is an IDEA. Why did we think of that?! We here at the Smart Bitch HQ, we got us some Photoshop. There need to be warnings on books!
Our advisories, let us show you them:
You can Has more!
I can’t help but feel that ladypeyton has absolutely no idea of the enormity of this issue. Her “what’s a little warning label going to hurt†argument astounds me. She is right about one thing. Labeling does not equal censorship, but it is the first step. It is a necessary step. You also can’t crack an egg into a bowl and say it equals an omlet, but you can’t make an omlet without cracking a few eggs (How’s that for a new twist on an old cliché?) The purpose of the warning labels (to inform rather than single out) is completely irrelevant. If they exist, they WILL be used for evil.
“Oh, goodness!” she said, her eyes rolling back in delight. “Oh, goodness me. That feels so goshdarn good!”
And she wasn’t killing demons either… But if said demons heard her, they might die laughing.
Omigod – I haven’t laughed so hard in a long time – especially at that last one with the page numbers!
Okay, let me think.
I was reading it backwards – it’s the ‘Any offense felt is purely on the part of the reader/listener’ part I found problematic.
I read that as an argument that if I call you a cunt and you take offense – you’re in the wrong. You’re imagining the insult, because the writer is arguing that I (the speaker/writer) am only producing value-neutral strings of letters which are inherently inoffensive.
So looking at it that way round – I wouldn’t try and argue that every usage of any word is unacceptable, but I would argue some words are unacceptable in some contexts.
So, for me, if I looked up ‘cunt’ in the dictionary, I’d expect to find it there – acceptable usage. If my teenager called me ‘cunt’ when I asked her to tidy her room that would be (for me) an unacceptable usage.
Who defines the acceptability? Really hard to say. But would you argue for the reverse? If in your classroom a student makes a sectarian, sexist or racist remark to another student, wouldn’t you want to be able to say ‘That’s unacceptable’?
ladypeyton ~ “Movies in the US start out with “Warning: this movie contains adult language, M/M, monkey feces, ghod knows because by now I’ve tuned out,†all the time and does anyone in mainstream America even LISTEN to that warning anymore?
I know I don’t”
Okay, I’m coming out of lurkdom for this.
Please explain to me, if you don’t LISTEN to the warnings of those who are labeling movies, why you would listen to the warnings of those who are labeling books? What is the difference?
Morality and censorship (in this case, censorship of language used) are like art…subjective. You can’t in good conscience make a subjective statement and hold it out as a standard. It doesn’t work, nor should it.
Does anyone remember the childhood chant, “Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me”? Fuck is a word. It can’t hurt you. It can’t hurt your children. You can deplore the use for your own wants/needs and those of your children, but don’t assume to do the same for me and mine. That means, don’t label my book. If I can’t make an educated choice in my reading material based on reviews and recommendations by like-minded readers, then I’m going to end up with the possibility of not liking a book, either the actual story line, or the words used in it. But that’s MY problem. Not yours, not my neighbor’s and not my mother’s. MINE.
Verification word ~ subject21…Does that mean you have to be 21 or older to discuss this???
I’m wondering if Ladypeyton isn’t trolling the wank a bit? “Just a little Peyton Place….”
Oh, but what would we do with the word “bloody” that just leaves people from the US scratching their heads while it seemed to be considered as the height of rude language in England (and other members of the commonwealth?) for generations without being connected to anything except a lower class origin as a swear word.
And I have to admit I ended up being bemused by the frequency of the use of the word “cunt” in Denise Mina’s Glasglow mysteries. Apparently it’s tossed off like Americans say damn. I figured that out and read on without offense.
I just thought of another one I MUST have: Warning: this book uses the euphemism, “manroot.”
….on the fuck thread, not the censorship sux thread…
Best t.v. episode EVAH, season 1, episode 4 of HBO’s The Wire. Two detectives investigate the scene of a “cold case” murder and the ENTIRE dialog consists of fuck and motherfuck and motherfucker and fuckedy fuck fuck fuck. Scene lasts for, I dunno, at least 5 minutes. Leaves you wondering if the dialog was actually scripted or ad-libbed. Unfuckingbelievable.
(can’t believe this is what lured me out of lurkdom…)
Marianne McA said: I was reading it backwards – it’s the ‘Any offense felt is purely on the part of the reader/listener’ part I found problematic.
I read that as an argument that if I call you a cunt and you take offense – you’re in the wrong. You’re imagining the insult, because the writer is arguing that I (the speaker/writer) am only producing value-neutral strings of letters which are inherently inoffensive.
—>It’s not the word that’s the offense. It’s that someone chose to call someone a word that they know is potentially inflammatory. Word alone doesn’t do it; context is required.
Take, for example, the word “nigger.” Call a person that, and it is almost certainly offensive. Oh, wait, some people don’t take offense if they’re being called it by a good friend. And if we outlaw the word entirely, then we completely destroy the brilliance that is Blazing Saddles, possibly the most anti-racist film ever made.
Conversely, a person can offer deadly insult without ever using a curse word or even a bad name. Again, it’s the context and the intent that’s the insult, not a particular word.
An individual’s gut reaction to a specific word is all in that individual’s head. I am unoffended by, for example, the word “cunt,” because I have looked beyond the word to the intent behind it, and concluded that anyone who can’t come up with a more imaginative epithet isn’t insulting me at all. Someone’s gotta be smarter than that to get my respect, and I can hardly feel diminished by the poor opinion of people I don’t respect, yah?
Can I add my two cents?
It seems to me that this discussion is quite restricted in the geographical aspect. For example, I had never found and advisory thing until one day I bought an american singer cd with it. I was surprised. I do not want to lie, but I think that I’ve never seen an Spanish singer cd with that kind of warning.
What’s more, if you go to the cinema, I do not remember much warning either. I mean, it’s warned when needed, a simple +18 or whatever in a corner, but for the major part, it’s left to the consumer opinion.
May this need for labeling be an american thing?
I may say that I’ve always found amusing the contrasts within the american society.
IMO, you should have the information but it’s not the same to find a film in the tv and see the +18 in the corner (they won’t wait for you and make you a resume, will they?), that the back blurb on a book. There is always information for you. But sometimes you find sth that you do not like: I can swear that I skipped at least 10 to 20 pages of fishes description while reading Jules Verne Twenty-Thousand Leagues Under the Sea!
I would like to second the motion to include the word “manroot”.
Only because I feel personally it is not used enough and should be a part of everyday speech.
BTW, I want an advisory : laughable euphemisms! pff love hole is the recent one
Back to ladypeyton again:
Is it that damn hard to read the cover of a book?
Are we speaking different languages here? Labeling IS the stuff on the cover of a book no matter what it looks like.
—>So why do you object to using it?
In my book, that makes your opinion a crock of shit.
I don’t have a hell of a lot of respect for yours either. See? Still equal.
—>Sorry, sweetie, but not all opinions are created equal. Opinions based on “what is practical and does the least harm” trump opinions based on “I want the world to revolve around me.”
read the first few sentences, and say, “Crap, this isn’t what I signed on for!†and then put the book down?
By then I’ve already spent money on something I don’t want which I think it would be better to avoid.
—>If you walk on the street, you may see someone get pasted by a bus. Now, I’m sure you don’t want to see that (I know I don’t), but your alternative is to never go outside.
You pays your money, you takes your chances. If you can’t figure out from the current system which books are likely to offend you, I can’t imagine that a labelling system will help you.
Where does the labelling stop?
Warning: contains graphic m/m action.
Warning: contains implied m/m action.
Warning: implies that some of the men may be getting with each other, but we’re not really sure.
Some people will not want graphic m/m sex, but won’t mind implied m/m sex. Even if we do develop a bajillion different forms of warning label, who gets to decide what is “graphic” and what is merely “implied”?
And that’s without even going into all the other forms of warning label that one could request, or have you missed the litany in the previous 100+ posts?
If this is really all about not wanting to waste your money (which, frankly, I think is a flat lie), there’s this thing called a “refund.” I’ve never known a bookstore that won’t give one. That’s one of the advantages of the returns system.
:Orders a dozen of each sticker then dies laughing:
ladypeyton,
I understand not wanting to waste your money. I understand that you have preferences. I understand you wanting some kind of warning that one of the two above could be a problem if you pick up ‘x’ book.
But, I think the other ladies are right that you could find out more about a book by reading reviews, reading the back cover blurb or asking friends than you could from a ‘adult language’ sticker on the front of a book.
My problem with the labels is the arbitrariness of who decides what is too much (of the f-bomb, or m-f-bomb, or dude sex, or anything that may squick someone out).
I, personally, don’t like to swear (o.k., f-bomb or m-f-bomb). I wouldn’t stop reading a book because of a salty tongued heroine though. I figure I”m reading a story about someone else, and SHE (or someone she deals with) may curse.
I’m more likely to get ticked at a book with a stupid/unbelievable/rambling plot that a few curse words.
Think they could just have a smart bitch advisory…Caution, this book fails on many levels…or Caution: Grade F book…
Sam
And I don’t feel okay with calling Ms. Hunter names, but aside from that, she sent the letter to the RWR.
Crap. I meant Ms. Baker. All apologies to Ms. Hunter.
And in case no one’s brought this up, the movie ratings system is controversial. I suggest a viewing of This Film Is Not Yet Rated!
Thank you so much for the laugh. I needed it and as always in the best Smart Bitch way you delivered.
Just this morning I was filling out a form to judge an upcoming contest and was asked if there was any material I wouldn’t want to judge.
I write erotic, language doesn’t bother me, so I was rather hard pressed to come up with an answer.
Finally I did. I don’t like books that torture kittens or kiddies. Oddly enough these events rarely happen in romance so I’m pretty much okay.
To be honest, those mystery books where some kid has been molested, I find those a lot more troubling than sex and language.
I’m pretty close to being an absolutist on First Amendment issues. And I’m not in favor of labels as they are being discussed here (as big orange advisory banners). BUT, I DO understand the discomfort some readers have with a genre that has been rapidly hybridizing and expanding.
I know, for example, some readers who are sensitive to violence, and IMO the genre has, through Romantic Suspense and Paranormal Romance, but in other ways, as well, become more graphically violent. When the subject of violence ratings came up a while ago on AAR (in regard to reviews, not on books), I was completely frustrated with the way readers sensitive to violence were characterized and treated as babies who didn’t want any responsibility for their reading choices. YET, AAR offers sensuality ratings. So okay, they don’t want to do violence ratings—why does that makes readers sensitive to violence big babies? Does that follow that readers who want the sensuality readings are moralizing prudes?
Isn’t it sort of a logical fallacy to make this whole issue about reader responsibility (and under the surface, maturity), when in fact almost EVERYTHING about book appearance is geared toward providing us with information to guide our decision to buy or not?
IMO this is not about readers needing to be more “mature” or whatever, since I think the publisher and the reader share in the task of “marking” a book (and really, if you want to bring it down to that level, we’re basically being manipulated by marketing to be cued by certain images and appearances). Sure this issue is easy to argue at the extremes (censorsing harpy v. immature prude?), but not IMO where the real meat is: in a genre known to provide “comfort” reads, how much of the genre has become identified in certain ways and how is that changing? We see this all the time when we start arguing about the HEA, and readers say that without the HEA a book can’t be a Romance.
Like I said, I dislike explicit labeling, but OTOH, I think there are many, many cues readers get from publishers, authors, readers, bloggers, review sites, etc. that help us decide what books to choose. And while it ultimately IS the responsibility of the reader who dislikes a book for buying that book, OTOH, I don’t think we should be so quick to dismiss the concerns readers have about certain content in a genre that has traditionally been one way and is now rapidly shifting and expanding.
I’m not sure there will ever be a universally acceptable solution to this issue, although my own proposal would be more detailed (or coded) cover blurbs (yes I know this is problematic, as well—like I said, this may be a dilemma without a real solution). And at the end of the day, my vote is against labeling, for many of the reasons already discussed. But it does disturb me a bit that readers who are put off by certain elements in Romance—whether that be graphic violence, rape, torture, explicit language, whatever—are simply told to grow up. As much as I love Romance to keep pushing the envelope and challenging boundaries, I understand how and why readers turn to the genre looking for a certain emotional comfort and sense of justice being served, etc. That more conservative, traditional element of the genre hasn’t disappeared, even in some of the most provocative books. So ultimately, I think this is a discussion worth having and worth having respectfully, because it seems to me that it’s a very real consequence of the genre’s incredible hybridization. And, of course, because even though I consider myself an adventurous reader, just as I want to be able to talk honestly about certain stereotypes in the genre that bother me, I think others should be able to talk about things in the genre that disturb them, too, even if I don’t share the aversion.
“the word “Motherf…†has cropped up in two of my recent reads. It’s bad enough when language like this is uttered by the villain, but when it comes out of the mouth of the heroine…”
LOL, this woman better never read my book 😉
And HILARIOUS advisories! You should incorporate them into your reviews from now on…
I wanted to say something profound here, but all I can add is I want the “Delayed Gratification” sticker to show up on the appropriate books.
R said … When books get slapped with big, orange warning stickers, the reader’s likely to get labelled as well. And stigmatized.
Yep. You get those labels and you’ll be hiding it under a copy of Pride and Prejudice and hoping the clerk doesn’t say anything. Because only those kind of people read that stuff. Reminds me of a woman years back who used to hide the covers while she rode the subway because she liked romance and you know what they say about women who read romance novels.
I dunno. I’ve read an awful lot of books over the years. A few I didn’t finish because the content bothered me. But I never felt betrayed. I just figured it was a life lesson.
Robin, I don’t think it’s immature for her not to want to read books with strong language. But I do think it’s childish of her to associate bad language with “gang members”. For god’s sake, grow up.
It’s completely understandable that some folks don’t like books with the word “fuck” in them. But there’s a disconnect there. Reading about fucking is okay? Just not using the right term? It’s not all making love. So what is it? Doing it? Sexoring? Getting it on?
Look, I don’t like dark paranormals, the kind that feature vampires who will live their life in eternal, empty darkness if they aren’t with their One True Mate. I just don’t. So what do I do? I read the back cover, then I flip through the book. Even a plot point is pretty easy to identify via skimming. Sensuality level should be pretty easy to gauge. And language is the simplest thing to check for. I don’t need a rating to help me avoid books that aren’t for me. I don’t understand why anyone would. If you’re that sensitive to it, check review sites before going to the store.
Oh! You should read the warnings in Samhain’s books, they are sooooo funny! I do not know who writes them, but hope he/she keeps his/her job!
The authors write them, and you’re right, some authors are too, too funny! Kate Johnson comes to mind. Wish I’d done that with mine.
And I can say that the labels do give bookstores a reason to censor. How do I know? One of the indie bookstores in my hometown refused to carry my Samhain books in their local author section because of the warning on the back—explicit language, sex, and violence. (Well, it’s a VAMPIRE book, people!) They felt their readership might be offended and politely, but firmly told me they wouldn’t carry my work.
So yes, it does happen. This isn’t hypothetical.
I’m hoping to get the warnings off any future Guardians’ League books. I’m sure it’ll be up to my new editor, whoever s/he turns out to be. (Losing your editor’s like losing an arm! Waah!)
Robin,
I hate to point this out but…
graphic violence, rape, torture, explicit language
certain content in a genre that has
traditionally been one way
I would bet several Woodiwiss “rape” comments here on the board recently that those exact elements have been a part of the Romance genre for a very long time now, sort of like death has been prevalent in Murder Mysteries.
So the whole rapidly expanding argument seems not to wash too well.
—E, I agree with most of that, except the last part.
“An individual’s gut reaction to a specific word is all in that individual’s head.”
Seems counter-intuitive to me. After all, language only works because we understand what others mean by specific words. (You may be right, but I’d need convincing.)
Back to the hard question – what do you think about hate speech? Is there any word you’d ban in any circumstance? Same question as I put to Sarah – if a child you were teaching used a racist term to another child, would you say anything?
Just OMG! Too funny (and too tired) to think of something more coherent to add. Love the warning labels!
TSTL is my favorite… Really. How often DO we run into that one??
I haven’t finished the thread, yet, so if someone else answered this, sorry for the repeat.
I think LadyP said that the warning labels on movies don’t make a bit of difference… but that is not so. An R rating SINKS a movie. F’ing sinks it. Directors will do anything to keep a movie PG rated, because the movie probably won’t make back its outlays with an R rating.
I don’t watch a lot of movies, nor am I educated in la cinema, but I would be interested to find out what someone who is a movie person thinks about what labels did to the quality of movies and the depth of subject matter handling.
Personally, I am sick of everything being defanged because of sensibilities or children. I’m fucking sick of it.
Personally, I am sick of everything being defanged because of sensibilities or children.
Yes, I thought this was what parents were for? Or am I the only really anal retentive parent out there who prescreens all the movies her kids watch—yes, even in the theatre—and doesn’t have TV because it’s all crap?
But they do read. Oh, do they ever read.
Also, people think there are no consequences to adding new rules and regulations beyond the cost of printing ‘em up but that’s not so.
SOmeone has to police this shit, someone has to define this shit, somoene has to make sure the policing is done and the defining is done right and the information gets desiminated and people get input and everyone understands and is on the same page and on and on and on and on and on.
…and all this shit COSTS MONEY. Putting warning labels on books will COST MONEY that you will pay at the check out counter.
It will also confer power to those that decide to people who don’t write the books, who don’t sell the books, who don’t promote the books, who don’t really have anything to do with the books, other than skimming through the books for fucking and butt fucking. That’s a power addition and shift no one wants, for gosh sakes.
LOL! Love your take.
But to be perfectly honest, werewolves, vampires and demons on a rampage aren’t going to be stopped by a “Desist, Motherfucker!” either. I think the weapon of choice is silver bullets spiked with holy water.
Still giggling, though. I would LOVE to see a sweet (probably Southern) lady take on the forces of darkness with a, “Now, Azmiel Rae Andanda, you stop that right now. Honestly, what *would* your father say if he saw you acting like a cheap impling like that.”
I’d give her the power of the lightening bolt for the times when a scolding is simply not enough—but you’d only see that once a book. Yes, it would be a series (-:.
Robin:
I disagree with you that romance is typically a “comfort” read and all this is a consequence of the hybridization of romance.
I think there are comfort reads and authors readers can rely on to provide comfort reads.
But romance has NEVER been in it dispensing tea and pats on the head. It has ALWAYS had some aspect that is pushing the envelope. Always. And this hybrization may feel new, but it’s not, it’s just a new avenue.
To address another point movie ratings do affect not only box office intake but whether the movie will even get a distributor. Nevermind the fact that they are patently unreliable in any case, unless you subscribe to the notion that violence is fun but titties will harm you for the rest of your life.
Marianne, I would and do “censor” my students’ speech in class. I won’t let anyone use the word “gay” or “queer” in a derogatory way (“Oh, that’s so gay!” when discussing something stupid, rather than a Barbra Streisand impersonator in full drag). And I certainly wouldn’t let them call other each other by derogatory words. So I guess some words are inappropriate in some contexts, I’ll grant you that.
And taking this back to advisory stickers on books: who gets to decide what’s “appropriate” or “inappropriate”? If one doesn’t like reading m/m sex, what about Suz Brockmann’s latest (and two before that), where Jules and Robin and Robin and Adam get it on, but not explicitly and not “on-screen”? Does that jump past Lady Peyton’s squick barrier? What about Ted Haggard’s? It certainly doesn’t jump past mine—I just wanted more. But it’s not full-frontal m/m penetrative sex like can be found in gay erotica. So does it deserve a label?
What about Joey Hill’s Natural Law where there’s some m/m cock-sucking going on, but strictly in the context of a m/f BDSM relationship? Should that get labeled? As what? Who decides?
I guess it comes down to the question, again, of who decides what goes on the cover, if indeed something needs to go on the cover? THAT’S the question that bugs me and brings the whole thing tumbling down.
I thought the basic impetus behind rating movies and music was protecting children. I don’t want my books rated because I don’t need or want someone else to choose to protect me from certain words. I am an adult. If there is some subject matter I don’t care to read about, it is my responsibility to avoid it, because I am an adult and capable of judging for myself.
Robin, I get your point, but I think you miss the whole assumption underlying labeling/rating: that someone needs to protect us from things. Children need protection. Adults protect themselves. It is not immature to want to avoid descriptions of extreme violence. It is immature to expect someone else to wrap the world in cotton wool for you so you’ll never need to put a book down or skim over a scene.
Sarah Frantz:
You wanted more Teg Haggard? Like more stories about him and meth and a male prostitute? Like for reading fun?
I guess it comes down to the question, again, of who decides what goes on
the cover, if indeed something needs to go on the cover? THAT’S the
question that bugs me and brings the whole thing tumbling down.
Hopefully the author and the editor together hoping you will like this book and buy the next one.
It’s their baby.
You wanted more Teg Haggard? Like more stories about him and meth and a male prostitute? Like for reading fun?
Now that would be a rockin book I would buy!
For review purposes only of course.
Not because I have done at least two of those things and know what fun can be had.
Nuh Huh I am sweet and innocent. I swear.
Ann: Ew. Ew! Now I need a bath! No! You’ve mistaken me. Notice the possessive there: Ted Haggard’s [implied possession= squick barrier]. Would a book like that cross his squick barrier? Not what about a book/scene about him.
The thought of “erotica” based on him….ew. ::shudder::