This is a very relevant topic because readers have different tolerence for both sex and violence in their reading. It is important to be able to buy what you want to keep from being disappointed in either the lack of ‘heat’ or being exposed to too much.
I guess what bothers me is the fact that violence is being mixed with sex – the ‘bodice ripper’ is returning at the hands of women who don ‘t remember the horrendous fight to MAKE rape a crime of violence, instead of a ‘she made me do it because of the way she was dressed’ social gaff.
I can understand – the women who have benefitted the most from the ‘battle of the sexes’ of the 1960’s and 1970’s were never subjected to the humiliation of being told ‘go home and have babies’ when they tried to get jobs ‘above their station’ instead of cashier and waitress.
The danger is forgetting that once women were raped and their attackers went free because ‘she was a slut’ defences. Along with the right to choose your job, being able to choose birth-control methods and even to terminate a pregnancy if that method failed. These aren’t inalienable rights – these were hard and long fought by the women of my mother and sisters’ generations.
So I’ve made my case – and ranted my little rant.
All About Romance just posted about revising their heat ratings, and the pursuant discussion on The Passive Voice blog (which was where I saw the link to the post) got me thinking about the way I view sex in romance novels.
So let me get a few caveats out of the way first. One, despite the title above, I don’t actually consider myself a prude. I am generally broadminded and have had a lot of friends over the years who were involved in one counterculture or another. I don’t find myself shocked or offended by what people do, or need, in order to achieve sexual satisfaction, even though most of it is not something I need to do. It’s like how I feel about drugs: legalize them all. Alcohol will still do me just fine when that happens, but if you need something else, go for it.
Two, I have a deeply…
View original post 646 more words