This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
deleted
I'm not sure if Sir Walter Scott's novels count as romance novels (I imagine that some of them do) and they're usually from a very straight male perspective, though it's true that many women enjoy them, e.g. Waverley, The Bride of Lamermoor, Ivanhoe, The Heart of Mid-Lothian, The Talisman, and Rob Roy. These have non-romantic historical stories in them, but (sexual) romance is ultimately the point, I think.
My main objections to his writing occur in the passages where Scott is writing a romantic ode to Latin, Scots, or legalese, rather than telling the story. See also Catriona by Robert Louis Stevenson.
More options
Context Copy link
What's the difference between a romance novel for men and a romance novel for women? Is it something like this:
regular novel for men: man wants X, gets X (or Y), gets woman as a bonus;
romance novel for women: woman wants man, ends up doing X to get him;
romance novel for men: man wants woman, ends up doing X to get her?
Another thought. Male-oriented romances do exist in droves, but they tend to be chameleons. One, it's easy to mischaracterize a male-oriented romance ("Man believes he cannot do X, woman sees man's potential and falls in love with him despite not doing X. Inspired, man does X.") as a novel about X. Second, the flipside of the open secret that females are hypergamous is that males want to sleep around, or at least be the sort of man who is able to sleep around but virtuously declines. In male-oriented romances, the protagonist will have one madonna they want to prove themselves to, and a gaggle of discreet admirers.
To give an example, Name of the Wind is secretly male Twilight.
I think male romance novels were Westerns. That's the romantic image of the male heroic lead, and the villains he has to overcome, and the woman he wins along the way.
Look at Louis L'Amour's books - some of them are what in other terms would be called family sagas. To take a snippet from a sniffy critic quoted in the Wikipedia article:
Let's test Cormac McCarthy
All the Pretty Horses? Check
The Crossing? Nope
Cities of the Plain? Check
Blood Meridian? Nopenopenope
Two out of four ain't bad, but I wouldn't say that his books are entirely full of internal monologues, undercurrents of neuroticism, and sweeping character emotions at all.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Whether the male or female lead gets more attention from the author.
Well. Male Gaze alone isn’t enough to make a romance novel; it still has to have the pursuit/conflict of the relationship front and center. But given that a book is about a couple, the character that’s more fully realized is probably the intended interest. In (female-oriented) romance this is usually the man.
This intersects with viewpoint characters in the form of self-inserting. Romance novels are often 1st or close 3rd person, putting the reader in the head of one character. Obviously, that’s a big clue as to the intended sex of the audience!
It’s not foolproof, especially for slash. Consider MDZS, a famous cultivation web novel. The gay main pairing is front and center despite very definitely being marketed to women. Likewise, romance genres like yaoi which use the more distant 3rd person of manga can’t rely on self-inserting. All bets are off when it comes to lesbian romance.
Maybe men are less likely to self-insert, or maybe there’s an author bias against writing accordingly. I can’t say. But there is definitely a style which tells me a book is intended as romance.
More options
Context Copy link
This doesn't feel quite right to me. Women tend to be the objects more than the actors in romance novels geared towards women. I think it's more like:
Woman is irresistible to man for some reason. Man, despite being rich and handsome has awful flaw. Man approaches woman. Woman rejects man. Woman is worried man is gone. But man is still irresistibly attracted. Man pushes through objections (could be kinda rapey at this point). Woman is overcome.
More options
Context Copy link
Well, I've heard it said that The Dresden Files are harlequin romance novels for lonely 20something men. But, women who encounter the books also tend to really really like them.
Similar to The Witcher, which is really just a bodice-ripping sex romp with some fantasy monster-hunting thrown in, and also has a sizable female fan base. Maybe this is more a case of dudes getting tricked into reading romance novels.
Both series are also very Detective Noir, so maybe that's the secret gender fandom crossover element.
I do like the Dresden Files, but Harry's track record with romance? 🤦♀️ Also, the sure-fire way to lure him into a trap is to dangle a damsel in distress before him. By this stage, he should have copped on but no, he keeps rushing to the rescue no questions asked. It is a very sympathetic flaw, but one of these days it will get him into serious, serious trouble.
Only if Butcher writes more, which seems unlikely. And he's already one of the most powerful beings in creation (that we know about), so how much worse can it get? (LOL, don't ask THAT, Harry)
Yeah he doesn't seem in any hurry to start the next novel, does he? I think he wrote himself into a corner with the cliffhanger he left us all dangling on, and now doesn't want to tackle the next book and I can't blame him. Plus, there are a lot of hints about Harry and his ultimate meaning that he now has to start paying out on, because he's dropped too many hints and built Harry up to this peak of power, so the next step will turn Harry from "all these Big Powers push the little people around but I stand up for the plain folks" to being a Big Power himself, and I don't think Butcher is ready to shift gears like that.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Man believes he cannot do X, woman sees man's potential and falls in love with him despite not doing X. Inspired, man does X.
Man courts woman with low self esteem. Man has severe character flaw or skeletons in closet. Man fixes woman's self esteem, woman fixes man.
Don't forget the: Woman is presented as ugly or non-atractive at the begining but with a plucking of eyebrows and a wardrobe change everyone else finds out she is beautiful. And first sexual encounter between the love interests being nonRape.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link