Colleen Gleason and I were emailing recently, and she asked a question I’ve pondered myself: what’s up with the insta-fuck?
You know, when the hero and heroine fall into bed and start bangin’ the gong almost immediately? When does that work, and when does it not?
We discuss this a bit in The Book, and one book Candy and I mention is Midsummer Moon (subtitle: Salt! Yay!) wherein the hero and heroine end up double moonin’ almost immediately. And certainly I’ve read a few erotic romances and erotic stories wherein the lust is so powerful that it must be addressed first, and then comes the emotional attachment that follows.
With the increase in heat level in romances, and the number of publishers still cultivating hotter, steamier plotlines within their romance offerings, the Wham-Bam-Thank-You-Ma’am Wait-I-Can’t-Stop-Thinking-About-You story has appeared with increasing frequency.
So, being nosy, I ask: does it work for you? Or does it challenge your ability to believe the story and the characters if they fall to humping with so little between them other than hot fiery attraction and a rampant throbbing man ham? What books feature Insta-Sex and really make it work?
I actually detest books that do that then continue the guise that there’s a plot involved somehow. Those stories always strike me as written for the “hot, steamy, make me hot” factor not the “this is a great story that just happens to be all sorts of fever inducing”.
Ultimately, if you want to make erotica then do it. Scream it out loud! But for crying out loud don’t feel compelled to stick an “I love you” stamp on it simply because the main characters had a great time in the sack.
Seeing I fall into this category of sex in the first three chapters (at least with my first book…), I have to say I that it depends upon one’s morals (I have none, heh) and comfort with sexuality (yes, I let it all hang out). Women have been brainwashed since the time of Eve that it’s not okay to be a slut. Of course, everyone’s definition of a slut varies depending on one’s religion, upbringing and so on. Hence, the abhorrance and discomfort with sex in general, especially if we’re referring to wham-bam sex. And it doesn’t help we’re living in a very sexually oppressed Puritanical country. The real question isn’t if wham-bam sex is okay, but whether or not it is realistic and true to the story while also staying within the character’s ability to do so. Otherwise, it’s not about the story or the characters at all that is being questioned. It’s about not agreeing with the sexual choices the characters are making due to your moral understanding of sex. It’s your right, naturally, but that doesn’t make wham bam sex wrong. Bottom line, I’m finding that generally those who read historical romances get most of their history from the historical romances they read. As opposed to history books. Which creates a huge problem for us historical authors. For while many writers do their research, many don’t. And so when someone does put something historically accurate into a book, but is wildly different than what was written about thus far, well, then, it must be wrong. Because a big name went against that as did everyone else. People’s understanding of social classes and sexuality of classes throughout history is warped. Mostly because men are writing the history books. Which doesn’t help. Bottom line, it wasn’t all prim and proper. They drank, they swore, they had sex, and the list goes on and on. And the aristocracy had more freedom to dink with those things than the lower classes. Because a middle class girl stood a chance to actually marry up (or at least try to). If she wasn’t pristine enough, however, or had scandal attached to her, she stood to fall down the ranks into complete nothingness. Aristocrats could only fall so far. They had what we call a safety net. Unless they pissed off the king. That said, this was a most excellent post!!! I apologize for the length of my post, but as you can tell, I LOVE these sort of discussions.
It worked for me in Faking It, but that was probably mostly because Crusie did such a good job capturing just how awkward it can be to have insta-sex. Oddly enough the only other instance I can think of is another Crusie and its one where it didn’t work. I didn’t really like how and why Sophie and Phin fell into the sexooring together.
Word verification: Children37. Ha! And that’s what’ll happen when you have the insta-sex without pausing for the condom first.
Never, at my angriest or craziest or maddest would I call another woman a slut. Not because I am ‘brainwashed to think it’s not okay to be a slut’ but because I believe that a woman’s choices, no matter what they are— relative to her sex life—can’t/won’t/don’t make her a “slut”. I think that word is incredibly demeaning to the type of woman you profess to empower…. and if thinking that makes me oppressed then so be it.
I also don’t think that disliking a certain trope in romantic fiction, in this case the instant sex-scene, shows a leaning toward a
Huh?
No one on this thread yet has said sex should be taken out of romance books. Not hardly. The question asked and being answered is if some, not all, readers prefer the intimacy to come after some type of connection is made between the H/h.
I don’t usually like it either, most like everyone else. One instance where it works for me (I think it’s insta-fuck, but maybe not), is Crusie’s Welcome to Temptation. Also, already mentioned is Exclusive by Sandra Brown. Hot stuff!
I think it all depends on the book. Wicked Burn by Beth Kery is a good example of when it does work. Man, that book was smokin’ hot.
I think it works better in contemporaries. Immediate sex in historicals doesn’t work as well due to the constraints of society, etc.
I’m afraid I have to disagree with those who though the early sex scene in the Slightly Wicked Regency worked. It had to be there for the rest of the plot but I have trouble with this in nearly all of Balogh’s later books: gently bred women who have been taught that even a kiss should immediately lead to a marriage declaration fall into bed right and left! I especially hated it in one book where the heroine already had the stigma of an illegitimate son (due to a Noble Rescue of a mentally disabled girl in her care being stalked by her evil brother), and she *still* slept with a guy with whom she thought she had no future.
As for Insta-Love, I have to admit that it’s the one problem I have with books by Nora Roberts. Meeting and recognizing one’s soul mate doesn’t happen very often. Having it happen in trilogies to absolutely everyone in the family is the one aspect that just doesn’t work for me, although I still love the books and re-read them.
I just polished my first MS and finished a first draft on the second. In the first one, I have two mid-twenties Seattle urbanites who live in a social realm (and share the personal attitude) that sex is part of dating and a very, very important part of getting to know someone to see whether or not there’s a fit. They wouldn’t *not* have sex for very long (though it’s kind of their third date when they do) because it’s part of their thinking that sexual compatibility is as important as liking the same toppings on their pizza.
The second book involved two busy professionals in their late-30s, early 40s. One is working for other other. There’s a lot of sexual tension and it’s stronger than it’s been since puberty. They both love this kick in the gut they’re getting from each other, but they’re busy people and it’s not easy for them to get together. When they finally do, it’s (if I’ve written it right) a culmination of a year-long attraction and low-grade fiery flirtation. But it’s always in context of their larger lives.
I guess I’m just trying to say that I agree that the personalities and plots should define the placement of sex. The thing I’m negotiating uncertainly is how much detailed later sex to include. Once the first hot grind is past, how often should I let them get to it off-page and how often should I put it in the book?
My thinking is that if nothing happens during the sex that furthers the plot, the sex happens off-page. If something happens during the sex (realization of love being the classic, though I’m suspicious of it myself) that drives the plot, then include it. Yeah?
I like writing sex…now I’m thinking about what kinds of plot steps can be taken while the bumpin’ is in progress…
line58 – now that’s some fast sex!
I’m another one who thinks It Depends – sometimes Insta-Sex works for a story but not when it’s a complete substitute for the story.
One example which I thought worked incredibly well was PL Nunn’s Dynasty of Ghosts [m/m]- the prince invites an ranger in his army to his tent, gets him drunk, overwhelms him with charisma and charm, has sex with him. Ranger is thinking that while the sex feels good, he never really had an option to refuse it and also that due t their positions if it gets found out he’s the one who’s going to wear all the blame, so makes himself scarce. Prince can’t understand this AT ALL and has to go through that nice ‘learning how to think of others’ character redemption stuff [which I love] to prove that he deserves a second chance. So really this worked for me as an semi-realistic example of ‘why Insta-Sex may be a bad idea and here are the potential consequences’…
please note that I do not hold myself to the same standards that I require from my narrative fiction and two of the best relationships I have had have resulted from impulsive jumping in the sack straight away. So NOT a role-model…
word: years28- how old I was when I started dating a 20year old [see above anecdote]
i’m like most people here, i’m not bothered in general by the insta-sex in contemporaries, but the insta-love: it bothers the heck outta me. how can 2 people who are together for 3-4 days have deep and abiding love and get married for the rest of their lives…. really? like really??
i do think that insta-sex in historicals bother me more……..
I posted a topic about this over at the Amazon romance boards last week…and Amazon deleted it. (Probably because used the phrase “Insta-f*ck”—including the asterisk, of course.)
The insta-fuck is really getting on my nerves. I notice it most often in paranormal romances, and it’s one of the reasons I just can’t get into that genre. (Although definitely I’ve read some real PNR winners. I’m just saying that a lot of them are losers for this reader.) Last week I read PLEASURE UNBOUND by Larisaa Ione. Had never read her before, but had seen her name around with big smiley faces and enthusiastic thumbs-up. So I buy the book…and there they are…the hero and heroine…having insta-sex on page 28 or so. To make matters worse, the heroine is in the hospital, recovering from near-fatal wounds, and while she’s UNCONSCIOUS the brother of the hero—both of whom are incubus demons—gets into her head and makes her think he’s in her panties as well. He gets her all worked up so that she’s like a cat in heat, and only the hero can give her what she needs and cool her down. I skimmed the rest of the book, but that opening sex-scene was the kiss of death for me. Next I read Jessica Anderson’s NIGHTKEEPERS. At least in that but, the author postponed the insta-fuck to about page 48, but it still happened upon the characters’ very first meeting. And some months ago there was HARMONY’S WAY by Lora Leigh. Same insta-fuck device.
This insta-fuck thing is one of the reasons I gripe about the blurring of the genres. When I posted about this topic at Amazon, I had people tell me that Leigh is erotica…by way of explanation, I guess…or excuse. But see, my problem is that I picked up each and every one of these books thinking it was a ROMANCE novel. You know, with the emphasis on the emotional relationship between the couple. Oh, silly me to think I could walk into the romance section and pick up a book and expect it to be ROMANCE.
When I read these books with the insta-fuck, I don’t feel a connection between the hero and heroine. I don’t feel that this is the beginning of a beautiful relationship. I just feel that the woman has two tits, a hole, and a heartbeat. Her personality doesn’t matter. Her character doesn’t matter.
EXCEPT!!! Have you also noticed that USUALLY when the insta-fuck device is used (in PNR, at least), the author tempers it by also using the “lifemate” device? I guess we readers are supposed to believe/feel that the initial wham-bam is okay because the hero and heroine are destined to be mates. Oh, gag me.
Dena, every scene should further the plot, whether it be a sex scene or two people shopping at the grocery store. And there are a number of things love scenes can accomplish. They can reveal character, not only in when they choose to have sex, but how they have sex—the compatibility thing you mentioned. They can show the evolution in the relationship from fling to something deeper. I’ve had anger and frustration expressed in a love scene, the ultimate surrender of oneself beyond the physical, and, of course, complicating a situation, which is what sex often does in real life.
Those are just a few examples, but yes, I don’t think any scene in a book—sex or otherwise—should be gratuitous. How many to have really depends on what kind of book you’re writing and reader’s expectations. But even in a book where a lot of heat is expected, each love scene should accomplish something.
Congrats on that first manuscript! Good luck in your writing career!
I agree that I’m not a fan of insta-sex, nor insta-love, and yes, the “I’m clean and you’re on the pill so no need for condoms” is worst of all.
I first noticed the moving forward of the action about 10 years ago in Presents when suddenly there wasn’t a book that didn’t have some reason for a kiss by the end of chapter one – usually between strangers and even more often when they despised each other on sight and the kiss was some sort of punishment or challenge. It took me a regrettably long time to take this as a sign that while I love some hot sex and adore erotica, in romance, the faster the sex comes (so to speak) the less satisfying the climax! I’m just not emotionally involved – never mind how unemotionally involved the H & h are!
Maybe this should come under the “everything I need to know I learned from romance” – slow is good! A wham bam thank you m’am can be fun, but for real pleasure? Please eek it out a bit.
It’s why I now don’t read the passionate lines – apart from some modern extra in the UK (the remains of the old Temptation line) and romantic suspense. If I want emotional and sexual tension drawn out and developed and to keep me hooked, I go for the Tender lines every time (Harlequin or Silhouette or M&B;Romance). Yes they mostly keep the bedroom door shut, but the best of the writers give me more of an emotional climax than all the hot sexoring of more explicit lines. Plus, they are mostly great contempory romances – real life dilemmas, relatively few princesses and save the world plots, genuine people, genuine problems and finding love against a real life background – what’s not to like?!
Some of my favourites in recent years have been by Liz Fielding, Jessica Hart & Natasha Oakley. Sure there’s less bang for your buck, but a lot more of a satisfying slow burn and fireworks that stay in my memory far longer than the insta-love/insta-fuck books.
Arriving rather late on this topic, but in general, I *hate* both the insta-fuck and the insta-love. Especially the latter. The thing is, if you actually notice it, to me that means it’s coming too early in the plot to be seen as anything but a device. It seems it’s now part of the romance formula. “Characters must have sex within first 50 pages.” Ugh.
In Judy Cuevas’ Black Silk, by the time the protagonists have sex you’re so primed for it that the scene is incredibly powerful and erotic. You know the characters and what has brought them to this point. It’s so much more meaningful and it both informs and advances the plot.
I also feel that some of the very hottest sex scenes ever written are really not that explicit. If the authors have built the characters well, you don’t have to have reams of words about inserting tab A into slot B to make the scene blister off the page. With insta-sex, you almost have to have all those graphic references because you don’t know these people. They’re strangers to you. So now you have to try to get to know them through explicit description (and FWIW, I’m not at all against explicit sex scenes, I just think that with good writing and character building they aren’t needed as often as they’re used)
Equally irritating to me is the insta-orgasm and the insta-hardon.
I’ll quote Roger Ebert here on insta-love:
That’s from his review of Captain Corelli’s Mandolin – the language is that of film, but I find it applies really well to books, too. Give me the heavy lifting, because that’s what makes me fall in love with the couple, too!
Joanne,
If you knew me (which obviously, you don’t…) you would know that I am a gal who never takes myself too seriously. So sorry I offended you. The word slut is meant to evoke an emotion that had been created by men. Not by women. Which is why I have no trouble using it. My female ancestors didn’t create it to degrade fellow women. So it doesn’t offend me. Men have used this term to degrade women since the year 1350 A.D. They also used the term giglet. Of course, if I had used giglet in my post, you would have simply posted one more “Huh?” I have spent many years studying sexuality and history (you can visit my blog at http://www.DelilahMarvelle.blogspot.com) and have a tendency to make comments about society in general. Not necessarily our postees. I don’t claim to know everything, but I probably know a wee bit more than you are giving me credit for. And bottom line, it’s just an opinion. No need to grab your pitchfork. Grin. Thanks for noticing and responding to my post.
This sounds like a book I would love to read any chance Suze you recalled the title of the book?
It doesn’t work for me, but I can see how it would work well as a way for the characters to grow. Because real people do convince themselves that jumping into bed with a relative stranger is a good idea all the time, and then have to deal with whatever consequences arise. Also, sometimes in a short book, it seems like the author just doesn’t have enough space to ease her characters into the relationship. It seems fast to me, but probably isn’t given the constraints of the book.
Generally though, I just raise my eyebrows and continue reading. A few days ago, however, I did throw a new book at the wall because the 2 main female characters decided, for no good reason, to cheat on their perfectly adequate spouses with neighbors. Ok, the one was in her 40’s and wanted a baby, but even then…not good enough.
Count me with the people who are agnostic about insta-sex and generally hate insta-love. I think either can work in the hands of a skilled writer. However, I find insta love so irritating that my standards are really high and not many people meet them.
I honestly don;t think that the way things work in real life factors all that much into what’s enjoyable in romance novels. I mean how often do Greek Tycoons actually marry their Virgin Mistresses?
I think the “that would never work” reaction isn’t about real life so much as it is a measure of the fact that the story isn’t working. At least that’s how it is for me. I know a book is on the way to being a wall banger when I start to nit pick the logic.
Also, the happy, long lasting couples I know started in a wide variety of ways. I know one couple who refers to their marriage as “the one night stand that lasted 14 years and counting”. I know another who started out as “friends with benefits” and were both really surprised when they fell in love.
I’ve also known people who started talking married on the 3rd date. That doesn’t keep me from finding it irritating in fiction. I think I would mind less if it weren’t so common. As Julianna said, it mostly comes across as a lazy way to avoid doing the work of showing why the h/h fall in love.
I loathed the Instra-sex in PASSION. In fact, the author (Linda Valdez?) went straight onto my Don’t Buy List ( it’s a short list which includes Judith McNaught of WITLESS, MY LOVE, Jude Devereaux of COUNTERFEIT LADY and Cheryl Holt of absolutely anything she’s written). I am sick and tired of porn being marketed as romance. I don’t object to porn when its marketed as such. But ‘romance’ is supposed to be about relationships. I agree with those who say that its ridiulous to give Regency characters 21sr Century morals, particularly the heroines. Well-brought-up girls like Elizabeth Bennet would have expected a proposal of marriage if a man had kissed them! I usually like Mary Balogh, but SLIGHTLY WICKED ought to have been called SLIGHTLY WITLESS: not just the Insta-Sex, but the fact that the supposedly experienced rake ‘hero’ failed to notice that the woman he was having Insta-Sex with was a virgin! Plus the ‘heroine’ was a spineless ninny who allowed herself to be abused by absolutely everyone she met. I would have had a lot more respect for her if she had run away and joined a group of strolling players. At least then she would have been making use of the acting talent she supposedly had. I have all of the SLIGHTLY series on my self except that one. Well, they can’t all be winners. Even Shakespeare had his off days: TWO GENTLEMEN OF VERONA, anyone?
Sure it works . . . if the author is good enough to make it work, and the entire relationship and storyline don’t hinge on boinking. Hell, plenty of real-world relationships begin with irrepressible physical attraction. Most people get it out of their systems (or build it up in their systems) and move on from there.
Or am I just running with the wrong crowd?
ROFL SIWON (snort ice water out nose). You shoulda put a Beverage Alert on that one.
Actually, I suspect that in Harlequin Land, the Any-Ethnicity Millionaire wouldn’t run into that many virgins. Statistically, of course, there’d have to be a few, but the countryside wouldn’t be swarming with ‘em.
I’m about 50% okay with Insta-Luurve. I’ve had it happen to me just once in my lifetime, and that was enough. But it does happen. I’m 0% okay with Insta-Bonk. If strangers are Doing It in the first chapter, I will wallbang the book, ‘cause IMO the author has not earned my attention to these people’s relationship. Or lack of one.
My take and open to discussion only with a few close friends.
Word. And that’s what annoys me the most when I pick up a romance these days. Sex in the first chapter, sex in the 12th, I don’t care if it works, makes sense, aids the plot and works with the characters. But so many books are skipping the romance and relationship side of things to cut right to the sex and get by “explaining” it by telling you they’re mates. Now that I’m getting tired of. Why can’t a romance show me the story of 2 people falling in love anymore? Now it’s Bob, meet Mary. Mary, meet Bob. You’re each other’s soul mates. You may now commence insta-f*ck. Begin.
JT
muñeca, Suze – any chance the historical about
is Gaffney’s To Have and To Hold? The sex starts out with rape. IMO, it’s one of the few rapey books that “works,” which is to say, it’s realistic in the context of the historical period, the plot, and the dynamics of the protagonists.
Wow—I would love to go back and read some of the comments—but right now, I just feel the pressing need for a short answer: Don’t like it. Maybe because I’ve never really known people who do that, or if the idea of letting someone’s ookie into my body when I don’t know his name just gives me the icks—but whenever I run into this plot device, I find myself turned off almost immediately. Go figure…
I just have to throw in here that the one and only time I decided to have myself a one-night-stand with some cute piece of man-meat I’d only met that same day, it somehow ended up becoming the longest and most meaningful relationship I’ve ever had (and still going strong). So the plot device of irresistible physical attraction followed by the gradual development of a strong loving relationship is not at all unbelievable to me. But having been there, you can bet I’ll be rolling my eyes if the author doesn’t capture the inevitable awkwardness and insecurity of the early stages and rushes right into the starry-eyes-and-flowers OMG SOULMATE stuff!
Which probably shows my position on insta-love, as well – I, too, have seen too many people declare instant love only to crash and burn when it turns out it was just lust. Instant proclamations of love bring a gag reflex and a *thump* when the book hits the wall.
know66 – I probably do know 66 people who’ve proclaimed insta-love, only to have their hearts broken. 🙁
I don’t know if someone already said this, because—whoa, 100 comments! But: I usually hate the insta-fuck, mainly because it reads too much like a hook up at a frat party than the beginning of a true romantic attachment. However, I’m in the middle of Nora’s Northern Lights and I think it works well there, because it fits with Meg’s character. She’s normally a no-attachments type of girl, but then is surprised to find herself falling for the hero.
This is a fabulous topic – one that I blogged about a few days ago: http://jcwilder.blogspot.com/2009/01/misplaced-treasures.html – and it started when I found a box of my Keepers in my closet. Not one of them are erotic romance though all of them are sexy romances.
I write erotic and non-erotic romances and I’ve used insta-sex in one, Blood Law. The only reason it worked in my mind (keep in mind it was released in 2003 before everyone was on the insta-sex bandwagon) was the heroine kidnapped the hero to deliberately get pregnant to save her people. Now in my current books if I do use insta-sex the the hero and heroine know each other and its been a long time coming (pardon the pun).
That said – I intensely dislike insta-sex and insta-love. Back in my band days I had sex with a few guys (HEY, it was the 90’s
) I had met less than 24 hours before. With the exception of one time, I couldn’t get away fast enough afterward. The reality is once the hormones are appeased the men lost their appeal.
Insta-love, it happens and it happened to me but it didn’t last. I think its a rarity and in many romances its the norm. Romances are about fantasy, but you can’t duck the reality of the human experience. In the case of insta-love, 98% of us would spend at least two weeks examining the hell out of the relationship, the other person, whether or not we’ve lost our mind…and in most cases we have. 🙂
muneca/Suze –
I think the book you’re looking for is Silver Flame by Susan Johnson.
The insta-fuck works well in a few cases, and done by the right authors, as a lot of people here have said. In general my problem with the insta-fuck is not that it exists, but that it’s normally absolutely amazing, if not the best sex that either party has ever had, and that all other sexual partners that ever have been and ever will be just pale into insignificance beside this one steamy encounter with a stra – OKAY THEY ONLY MET TWO HOURS AGO. Unless one or both of the pair is psychic, it’s unlikely that they’re going to know exactly what needs or wants their partner has in a sexual situation. If one or both parties is an animal in the sack, I don’t dispute that the sex could be good, but doesn’t it normally take time to work up to Best I’ve Ever Had levels?
Insta-love just annoys me. A couple of people mentioned the “soulmate/life partner” thing – URGH. To take a well-known example, it was one of the things that turned me right off the Twilight saga – that you can’t choose who you end up with or ever feel even a twinge of attraction or affection for anybody except your partner, because Destiny (i.e. the author) has foretold your love life in the stars, and – hey, look, a squirrel! No, really, isn’t that squirrel fascinating? *hides plot* Aww, and now they’re married. Wasn’t that a wonderful ending?
drive69 – not advisable, although it would certainly test your reflexes.
I write contemporary and I really try to avoid insta-sex and insta-love. In both ‘Reversing Over Liberace’ and ‘Slightly Foxed’ the heroines fight even the hint that they might be ‘in love’ to the bitter end. What worries me about insta-love is that it always seems to be based on seeing the other person as an ideal, usually coupled with fantastic sex. What’s going to happen in a few years, when she’s just had a baby and is leaking from every orifice? Particularly when their relationship is based on wild, wacky, everywhichway sex? Is she really going to give in to her ‘urges’ and ignore the baby crying for a feed? What about when he puts on a few pounds around the middle and is no longer that heaving hunk of beefcake that she’s shagging so enthusiastically? Contemps are all about real life (OK, brushed up a bit and without the incessant toilet breaks), so let’s have a bit of reality in love!
@jane lovering, you have just hit on one thing that really bothers me too. Too often these characters are falling in “love” based on entirely surface things. “He’s hawt!” “she fucks like a bunny on speed!” You just can’t even imagine them ten years in.
I’ve just been reading Laura Anne Gilman’s Retrievers series. And I *love* the way the romance is handled in this story. She’s ordinary, so ordinary that going unnoticed is one of her strengths. He’s handsome, but he has the start of a bit of middle aged spread and is quite a bit older. They’ve known each other for years, know each other very well indeed, including the bad parts. The romance is real and unflinching and honest and difficult and sweet and sad. And so much more powerful than the insta-trend.
What J.C. said.
Because of all the comments I’ve been thinking more abut this. I think what really bothers me about insta-love isn’t just that it’s treated not just as the norm, but as the ideal. The underlying assumption seems to be that if it’s Real True Love you’ll know immediately, or that there’s something sad or “less than” about taking your time to fall in love. That drives me nuts because getting there really is half the fun. The process of getting there really is half the fun.
Personally this doesn’t work for me. I don’t enjoy watching the characters, unless really well done, fall into bed as soon as they meet. I tend to respect them less and don’t really care for the developed of the relationship afterwards, which then translates to me dropping the book on the floor half way in.
I read a ton of MM romance and the insta-boink is almost de rigeur for that simply because guys are guys and, at least in the MM romance I have read, operate much differently with each other than they do when there’s a woman involved. I have read many a wonderful romance that ended with two guys utterly in love with each other (believably so, not just based on sex) but began with a semi-anonymous hookup in a bar.
But regardless of the genders involved, if I am convinced by the end of the book that the relationship is based on important things (one of which is sex—bedroom compatibilty really does matter in any HEA, real or fiction) and I believe that the couple is a good, loving match, I’m okay with whatever sexual timeline happens, provided it is also true to the characters.
If it’s really just a plot device put in to up the heat level, spare me the insta-sex bandwagon and be original. If it really works for the characters, though, and is reasonable within the context of the story, it’s all good.
Insta-sex bores me. It’s that simple. I barely know you, I don’t give a shit if you are having sex.
One word: ocytocin
Sex leads to bonding, orgasm leads to Luurve.
Personally, I think I read romance novels because they make my oxytocin flow.. I’m an emotion junkie.