In Which Lauren Gets Out the Soapbox and Then Has to Be Circumspect

I hate it when I want to talk smack and I come here to do it and then I remember that I’m not supposed to. Sigh. So in the interests of trying to remember that I’m somewhat of a public figure and I’m supposed to be all circumspect and shit, I’ll be somewhat veiled and try to say it without saying it. Sigh.

I see stuff happen and I’m incredulous. I mean, fer cripes’ sake, people, get that stick out of your butt and deal! If you don’t like sex in books, don’t read books with sex in them. But why does that seem like such an impossible thing for folks to learn?

But instead, it seems like they read it two extra times, just to be good and sure they’re offended and then they cry and rail about THE CHILDREN and THE FUTURE OF ROMANCE because the pornographers are all out to drag it down into their disgusting smutty little world. (by the way, we have candy and Jude Law down here so there)

And people, lemme tell you a few things – first, ain’t no one gonna take romance where romance readers don’t want to go. Romance readers seem to like some spice with their sweet. And those that don’t still have fourteen shelves full of stuff that closes the bedroom door. This is not a threat. This is the market.

Second – sex is not disgusting and immoral and contrary to romance. I don’t know what kind of sex these folks are having but even when my characters are having really naughty sex, they’re still having romance. Sex is wonderful and beautiful and FUN. Yes, that’s right, FUN. Jeebus, it’s more fun than a bike ride on a Sunday afternoon. More fun that shopping for shoes. And a great way to connect with your romantic partner.

However if you have a problem with the description of graphic sex scenes in your romances, please refer to the “don’t read them” portion above.

Third – sharing the market with something does not make that thing your enemy. Get over it.

Fourth – stop it. Just let there be an erotic/sensual category in the Ritas for goodness’ sake. And stop reading steamy romances if you are one who hates the books and thinks they aren’t romance. That’s not fair and you aren’t doing your job as a judge. (oh, did I say that out loud?)

Different strokes people. That’s what makes the world go round. Things that ring my bell won’t necessarily be your cuppa. And that’s fine. Because there are readers who like what I write and readers who like what you write. But don’t you dare start speaking in sweeping generalizations that minimize what I do and by extrapolation, who my readers are. My readers are wonderful people who love romance. It’s too easy for some to forget that the reader is what fuels romance as a genre. Stop insulting them and be happy with yourselves.

7 comments to “In Which Lauren Gets Out the Soapbox and Then Has to Be Circumspect”

  1. Lili
    May 1st, 2006 at 5:35 pm · Link

    Are you talking just readers, or writers too? I think some writers just can’t tolerate any other kind of writer, especially one that writes well. It’s always a competition, and competition is good, but one writer’s success is not another writer’s failure. Some people don’t get that.

    I don’t know what constitutes ‘romance’ because I only read you, so I have nothing to judge. But I wouldn’t say you’re over any smut line.

    I’m going now. People are blinking my messenger.

  2. Lauren Dane
    May 1st, 2006 at 5:38 pm · Link

    This is about other writers. Readers just don’t buy what they don’t like, shrug. They seem to get that pretty well.

    The people who judge the RITAs are authors. If they can’t deal with books with sex in them, they shouldn’t be judging them.

  3. Candice Gilmer
    May 1st, 2006 at 9:58 pm · Link

    I agree with you Lauren. The world changes every day, we evolve as a race. I mean, look at the controversy Madonna’s Sex book had back in ’92, yet now, it’s almost fashionable to have a “sex tape” out there.

    Are we driving down a horrific moral road? I don’t think so. I think we’re becoming, as a new generation, more open about things that our mothers wouldn’t have dared talk about in public.

    And like you said, if the populace wasn’t buying the books, then the books wouldn’t sell… so what’s the problem?

  4. Meljprincess
    May 2nd, 2006 at 7:50 am · Link

    Well said, Lauren!

    I can’t understand why in the US we’re so uptight about sex. That’s it..I’m moving to Europe where sex is accepted, loved and appreciated. *g*

  5. Jo Owen
    May 3rd, 2006 at 5:31 am · Link

    Have you read Lynn Viehl’s blog for 30th April (I think). You seem to be talking about the same article – it might make you smile

  6. Lauren Dane
    May 3rd, 2006 at 10:00 pm · Link

    Candace and Mel – yes, I do think a big part of it is sexphobic to a certain extent. And I wish them well with that, I just want them to stop trying to block everyone else from reading/writing if if they want to.

    Jo – I haven’t, I’ll need to hop on over to see! Thanks for the heads up.

  7. Crystal Jordan
    May 5th, 2006 at 2:33 pm · Link

    Yeah! YEAH! What she said. And add a bit more for me, too.

    And hey, if you’re down in a disgusting, smutty little world, will you save me a seat by the fire?