Comments on: When Penises Were Taboo… http://www.romancingtheblog.com/blog/2006/12/27/when-penises-were-taboo/ What's hip, what's now, what's tomorrow in the romance genre world. Sat, 09 Jan 2010 20:26:04 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Barbara B. http://www.romancingtheblog.com/blog/2006/12/27/when-penises-were-taboo/comment-page-1/#comment-13870 Barbara B. Fri, 29 Dec 2006 22:47:07 +0000 http://www.romancingtheblog.com/blog/2006/12/27/when-penises-were-taboo/#comment-13870 Grace, you hit it on the head for me. Perfection is incredibly boring. I like reading about all types. I wouldn't balk at reading about overweight, or plain heroines or heroes. When I read romances it's the emotional attachment that draws me, not the beauty of the characters. I would love to see more variety but maybe I'm in the minority on this. I'm not one to fantasize that I'm the heroine so maybe that's why I don't need perfection. Grace, you hit it on the head for me. Perfection is incredibly boring. I like reading about all types. I wouldn’t balk at reading about overweight, or plain heroines or heroes. When I read romances it’s the emotional attachment that draws me, not the beauty of the characters. I would love to see more variety but maybe I’m in the minority on this. I’m not one to fantasize that I’m the heroine so maybe that’s why I don’t need perfection.

]]> By: Grace http://www.romancingtheblog.com/blog/2006/12/27/when-penises-were-taboo/comment-page-1/#comment-13862 Grace Fri, 29 Dec 2006 19:37:28 +0000 http://www.romancingtheblog.com/blog/2006/12/27/when-penises-were-taboo/#comment-13862 I'm told the heroine should be somewhat of an ideal, so that the reader fantasizes about being that woman. I disagree to an extent. I want to read about someone whom I can imagine being--that is, if she's too perfect in any facet of her life, I can't buy it. I wouldn't find myself in her perfect size 6's, when I started wearing size 10 shoes in 7th grade. I want to admire her or empathize, but I don't want her to be perfect! How freaking boring. I’m told the heroine should be somewhat of an ideal, so that the reader fantasizes about being that woman. I disagree to an extent. I want to read about someone whom I can imagine being–that is, if she’s too perfect in any facet of her life, I can’t buy it. I wouldn’t find myself in her perfect size 6’s, when I started wearing size 10 shoes in 7th grade. I want to admire her or empathize, but I don’t want her to be perfect! How freaking boring.

]]> By: Kassia Krozser http://www.romancingtheblog.com/blog/2006/12/27/when-penises-were-taboo/comment-page-1/#comment-13817 Kassia Krozser Thu, 28 Dec 2006 03:32:28 +0000 http://www.romancingtheblog.com/blog/2006/12/27/when-penises-were-taboo/#comment-13817 Tina -- cool! We'll have coffee (you know, when I actually have time to do more than wave at coffee) and share. I'll chide about you the getting a website and not telling me later. I have some semblance of class, you know. Laura -- yes, I do want to try to capture the guidelines throughout history. I think that while they've certainly become less rigid over the years, it's a valuable barometer of where the genre is. If anyone has guidelines to share, contact me -- or add them to the Wiki under the right line. Or both. I'm easy. I have to say that I loved reading these guidelines even as I was laughing. I came from the tradition of female relatives handing over shopping bags filled with old Harlequins -- classic Romance from the 60s forward and Presents -- and even then I thought the women were horribly old-fashioned. Didn't stop me from reading them, of course, but, you know, I was wondering what planet those impossibly perfect women came from (this was not an idle question as I grew up on Venus, one street down from Mercury, with Uranus and Jupiter bracketing my block). I don't know why the feminine ideal of small, delicate, whatever has become enshrined in romance. Part of me wants to blame male publishers because I have a hard time imagining any woman buying into that fantasy, without shaking her head and saying, "Yeah right." Even reading the guidelines, I felt they were some sort of male ideal. But the perfect heroine has become the ultimate romance cliche, so it would be hard for me to say that it came from the male perception of what a romance should be. But yeah, as I read them, I could also see how so many current day perceptions of the genre developed. I mean, the guidelines out-and-out state that secondary characters should be stock. It goes against every writing rule in the world, but there you have it. It's also interesting to me that these particular guidelines were issued at a point when the genre was changing so dramatically -- in a way, they were old-fashioned even then. Tina — cool! We’ll have coffee (you know, when I actually have time to do more than wave at coffee) and share. I’ll chide about you the getting a website and not telling me later. I have some semblance of class, you know.

Laura — yes, I do want to try to capture the guidelines throughout history. I think that while they’ve certainly become less rigid over the years, it’s a valuable barometer of where the genre is. If anyone has guidelines to share, contact me — or add them to the Wiki under the right line. Or both. I’m easy.

I have to say that I loved reading these guidelines even as I was laughing. I came from the tradition of female relatives handing over shopping bags filled with old Harlequins — classic Romance from the 60s forward and Presents — and even then I thought the women were horribly old-fashioned. Didn’t stop me from reading them, of course, but, you know, I was wondering what planet those impossibly perfect women came from (this was not an idle question as I grew up on Venus, one street down from Mercury, with Uranus and Jupiter bracketing my block).

I don’t know why the feminine ideal of small, delicate, whatever has become enshrined in romance. Part of me wants to blame male publishers because I have a hard time imagining any woman buying into that fantasy, without shaking her head and saying, “Yeah right.” Even reading the guidelines, I felt they were some sort of male ideal. But the perfect heroine has become the ultimate romance cliche, so it would be hard for me to say that it came from the male perception of what a romance should be.

But yeah, as I read them, I could also see how so many current day perceptions of the genre developed. I mean, the guidelines out-and-out state that secondary characters should be stock. It goes against every writing rule in the world, but there you have it. It’s also interesting to me that these particular guidelines were issued at a point when the genre was changing so dramatically — in a way, they were old-fashioned even then.

]]> By: Tina Ferraro http://www.romancingtheblog.com/blog/2006/12/27/when-penises-were-taboo/comment-page-1/#comment-13814 Tina Ferraro Thu, 28 Dec 2006 00:25:18 +0000 http://www.romancingtheblog.com/blog/2006/12/27/when-penises-were-taboo/#comment-13814 Kassia, long time, no see! :grin: I very much enjoyed the title and the topic of your blog post, and am madly searching for the Harlequin guidelines I filed away in the '80s, which I recall including gems about stock secondary characters and slim, attractive heroines. If I find it, I'll zap you a copy... Kassia, long time, no see! :grin: I very much enjoyed the title and the topic of your blog post, and am madly searching for the Harlequin guidelines I filed away in the ’80s, which I recall including gems about stock secondary characters and slim, attractive heroines. If I find it, I’ll zap you a copy…

]]> By: Karen Templeton http://www.romancingtheblog.com/blog/2006/12/27/when-penises-were-taboo/comment-page-1/#comment-13801 Karen Templeton Wed, 27 Dec 2006 20:31:06 +0000 http://www.romancingtheblog.com/blog/2006/12/27/when-penises-were-taboo/#comment-13801 Welll. . .I've written short and slender, tall and slender, short and zaftig, and tall and zaftig heroines. Oh, and a few totally average gals, too. :wink: When the voices speak, I don't ask them what size they wear. And, thank goodness, neither does my editor! :lol: Welll. . .I’ve written short and slender, tall and slender, short and zaftig, and tall and zaftig heroines. Oh, and a few totally average gals, too. :wink:

When the voices speak, I don’t ask them what size they wear.

And, thank goodness, neither does my editor! :lol:

]]> By: Kalen Hughes http://www.romancingtheblog.com/blog/2006/12/27/when-penises-were-taboo/comment-page-1/#comment-13800 Kalen Hughes Wed, 27 Dec 2006 19:33:00 +0000 http://www.romancingtheblog.com/blog/2006/12/27/when-penises-were-taboo/#comment-13800 Is it weird that one of my "problems" with romance has always been these tiny, delicate heroines? I just can't identify (not when I'm nearly six feet tall and not delicate unless compared to a professional football player). Give me a tall, strong, athletic girl who can “bring home the bacon and fry it up in the pan” any day! I’m so glad we’re seeming more of these types in Romancelandia. Is it weird that one of my “problems” with romance has always been these tiny, delicate heroines? I just can’t identify (not when I’m nearly six feet tall and not delicate unless compared to a professional football player). Give me a tall, strong, athletic girl who can “bring home the bacon and fry it up in the pan” any day! I’m so glad we’re seeming more of these types in Romancelandia.

]]> By: Sharon http://www.romancingtheblog.com/blog/2006/12/27/when-penises-were-taboo/comment-page-1/#comment-13799 Sharon Wed, 27 Dec 2006 18:45:29 +0000 http://www.romancingtheblog.com/blog/2006/12/27/when-penises-were-taboo/#comment-13799 <i>Her figure is always perfectly in proportion, usually petite, and slight of build.</i> Has this really changed? Because goodness knows we can't have a heroine with a zaftig figure otherwise the hero will be emasculated by all that flesh. Her figure is always perfectly in proportion, usually petite, and slight of build.

Has this really changed? Because goodness knows we can’t have a heroine with a zaftig figure otherwise the hero will be emasculated by all that flesh.

]]> By: Kalen Hughes http://www.romancingtheblog.com/blog/2006/12/27/when-penises-were-taboo/comment-page-1/#comment-13798 Kalen Hughes Wed, 27 Dec 2006 16:12:57 +0000 http://www.romancingtheblog.com/blog/2006/12/27/when-penises-were-taboo/#comment-13798 ROFLOL! I so want to read your husband's book. *GRIN* ROFLOL! I so want to read your husband’s book. *GRIN*

]]> By: Kimber An http://www.romancingtheblog.com/blog/2006/12/27/when-penises-were-taboo/comment-page-1/#comment-13797 Kimber An Wed, 27 Dec 2006 15:50:53 +0000 http://www.romancingtheblog.com/blog/2006/12/27/when-penises-were-taboo/#comment-13797 :smile: No kidding, Barbara B? Maybe it's good that I never read any of the earlier romance novels. I'm playing against stereotype and I don't even know it!:lol: :smile: No kidding, Barbara B? Maybe it’s good that I never read any of the earlier romance novels. I’m playing against stereotype and I don’t even know it!:lol:

]]> By: Barbara B. http://www.romancingtheblog.com/blog/2006/12/27/when-penises-were-taboo/comment-page-1/#comment-13795 Barbara B. Wed, 27 Dec 2006 14:48:38 +0000 http://www.romancingtheblog.com/blog/2006/12/27/when-penises-were-taboo/#comment-13795 The physical standards for women haven't changed very much. The heroine can be average height or tall but she's still usually slim or delicately built. The word delicate is used frequently when describing romance heroines. There's almost always got to be a great physical contrast between the heroine and the hero. That even applies to skin tone. The heroine is generally paler than the hero. I rarely find stories with tall, strongly built heroines, for instance. I guess they're not feminine enough. I'm not saying that there are no romance heroines that don't fit those old physical guidelines but they're still in the minority in my opinion. The romance definitions of femininity and masculinity are very limited and somewhat old-fashioned. The physical standards for women haven’t changed very much. The heroine can be average height or tall but she’s still usually slim or delicately built. The word delicate is used frequently when describing romance heroines. There’s almost always got to be a great physical contrast between the heroine and the hero. That even applies to skin tone. The heroine is generally paler than the hero. I rarely find stories with tall, strongly built heroines, for instance. I guess they’re not feminine enough. I’m not saying that there are no romance heroines that don’t fit those old physical guidelines but they’re still in the minority in my opinion. The romance definitions of femininity and masculinity are very limited and somewhat old-fashioned.

]]>