I’ve written 10 contemporary romances (I’ve been writing women’s fiction the last few years), and read quite a few. But one thing I’m still fuzzy about, even after all the reading and writing I’ve done, is the level of reality that’s supposed to be in these novels.
For instance, I’m currently reading a mainstream romance series. I started purchasing this particular series because I was intrigued by the idea of continuing stories taking place in the same town about women at different life stages, from very young women barely in their 20s to women past 50. I started a similar project myself three years ago and haven’t had much time to develop it (building and populating a fictional world is a lot of work), but I do believe that multigenerational stories will gain in popularity as longtime readers grow older and find themselves unable to relate to 25-year-olds, while the newer readers can’t relate to 45-year-olds.
But while I’m enjoying these books that are both well-written and contain real character development, as well as enough surprises and mystery to hold my attention (at least I was enjoying them; see the next paragraph), a couple of storylines are striking me as implausible, even downright silly.
Like this scenario: an attractive woman in her late 20s is perfectly content to be dating a man in his 50s, a contemporary of her parents. He’s rich (big surprise!) and buys her the occasional expensive trinket. In case you think it’s the heady combination of gifts and sex that’s keeping this heroine happy, I must bust your bubble by informing you that the sugar daddy is impotent. That’s right, no sex. The “girlfriend†sleeps in her own room when she stays overnight at his place. While it is clarified that the man’s problem cannot be relieved with any of the various medications on the market, it is never explained why a healthy young woman would find a sexless relationship satisfying (oops, bad word choice). Although she did eventually come to her senses in the form of a young and virile man, I found her Before circumstances wholly unconvincing.
A subsequent book in the series has the older-than-dirt theme of the woman who’s been hurt by a bad marriage and has subsequently vowed never to get involved with another man as long as she lives. This tired caricature – I can’t even refer to it as a plot – is giving me serious doubts about continuing on with the series, and actually I haven’t read much beyond a scene where a group of women are having a spirited conversation about men and it’s mentioned at least three times that this character, who has been divorced for years, still feels love and marriage simply aren’t for her. Even though I know that her life is about to change, this character’s drab Before situation is unimaginative and as genuine as a McRib sandwich.
Both of these scenarios involve sex, or, more tellingly, the lack of it. Now, what healthy woman in her early 30s (where women’s libidos are at their strongest, by the way) is going to build her life around her job and forget about sex completely? Why can’t she have had an affair just for the physical release of it, one that is conveniently long over by the time she meets her prince so it doesn’t present complications? Or are readers supposed to believe that these characters have no interest in sex (until meeting their respective heroes) just because it’s a romance novel?
So, romance readers, help me clear up my confusion about romance heroines and either non-existent or passive attitudes toward sex. Do you find it perfectly okay when men are described as making love to women, but women make love with men (not to them, a not-so-subtle difference)? Do you believe it when heroines are presented as having willingly ended all things physical in their 20s or 30s because of a bad relationship? Or do you know it’s so much B.S. but willingly overlook it because it fits the genre?
——-
Bettye Griffin’s newest novel, A New Kind of Bliss, will be published by Kensington on April 28th. Visit her website at www.bettyegriffin.com.
No related posts.
I too find it unlikely that a healthy woman would not want sex, even uncomplicated sex, like you said. She’d have to have some medical or emotional reason to not have any desire, and that should definitely figure in her character development.
Interesting thoughts. And I’m sort of with you, and sort of on the fence about it, not sure I have enough info about the characters to really say what their motivation would be for not choosing sex. The first scenario really doesn’t make me like the heroine very much because it she’s not in it for sex, is it because of the trinkets? Or, what is in her past that makes her want a safe, father figure relationship? Who knows… It would be interesting to read the story to know more. (I know, you’re not going to divulge the series, are you.) LOL
You mentioned 45 year olds and 25 year olds not relating to the same things. Sad, but true, and this is probably why so many parents have a hard time with their teens.
At some point, adults forget what it’s like to be young. They either look back on it bitterly or through rose-colored glasses. This is why so few authors can effectively write Young Adult fiction.
There’s something called *Empathy.* This is the ability to imagine one’s self behind the eyes of someone else, to feel what they feel, and understand what they do.
The fact is each woman is unique and some women will lose sexual interest for periods of time and for a variety of reasons. Just because I never have doesn’t make it unbelievable. I’ve had plenty of women friends who explained such things to me and I only have to look in their eyes (even if I can’t get behind them) to know they’re sincere.
I don’t care for the plot of someone hurt by a former love and vowing to never love again. I find it a very immature unrealistic scenario be it the male or female. I do enjoy the plot of an independent woman who is looking for a satisfying, physical relationship without looking for marriage. Why does it always have to be the woman who wants to settle down, have kids and start a family? I like it when the hero has to convince her to take their relationship to the next level.
Well, people have all sorts of valid reasons for behaving the way they do, for making the choices they make, that might not jibe with our choices. Without knowing the particulars behind those characters’ choices, my only question would be…did the author justify those choices to your satisfaction? Apparently she didn’t.
And yet, another reader might see it differently.
There are people whose lives aren’t controlled or driven by their libidos, who aren’t the least bit interested in having a fling just for the sexual release. Some women — and I imagine, even some men — find little true satisfaction in casual relationships and would rather have NO sex than meaningless sex. Personally, I couldn’t fathom casual “just for the release” sex, either, so I’d find a character who felt the same way far more sympathetic than others might.
And some people really are more cautious about falling in love again after being hurt…just as there are those who throw themselves into relationship after relationship, always convinced THIS will be The One. Usually, though, with the first scenario, there are mitigating circumstances other than the one failed relationship to make the character’s mindset more understandable. But again, without reading the book, I can’t say if that author’s handling of it worked or not.
Over the years, I’ve had readers totally relate to various characters’ decisions, and some not get them at all — an inevitability of the biz. But just as we should perhaps consider in real life that not everyone thinks or acts as we do, so we should approach judging fictional characters, with the caveat that their actions should make sense within the context of the world the author’s created for them.
Karen pretty much said what I was thinking. The author only has to make it believable within the context of that particular storyworld, not the larger, real world. If it’s believable within that story, it works, but it sounds like the author failed on that point.
Some women crave companionship more than sex, not considering it outside of a relationship. Not even really thinking about it much. Maybe that behavior is dictated by their faith, maybe by their libido.
And, depending on how long the relationship was in which the woman was hurt, she might have made a decision to forgo love. Yes, her response might be immature, but it will be if her beliefs about love are immature–he was her first love whom she married and they were married for many years when the relationship failed. Lacking a lot of pre-marriage experience, she may not feel as though she has the capacity/skills to get out into the dating world, which will feell like a very foreign place.
I’m with Karen and Patricia here. I know many women from 25-55 who have decided they don’t want a revolving door on their bedroom while they’re looking for Mr. Right. It doesn’t mean they don’t have a desire for sex. It just means they have learned to put a lid on the desire until they find someone worthy.
Mom Blogs – Blogs for Moms…
…
I think it depends how and why the author chooses to write the character that way, and whether you’re actually talking about this one writer’s series or about the more general trends in the genre.
As others have said, I can buy just about any kind of character, with just about any world view or belief or MO, if the writer presents it properly. (Obviously in this case, the writer didn’t present it in a way that you could buy.) In practice I do find myself eyerolling a lot more often than I’d like because I’ve bought a book where the writer didn’t convince me that a character’s POV was realistic, or maybe I bought that it was realistic but I thought the character was a very realistic idiot, or whatever. But in general, sure, I can believe that a particular, individual thirty-year-old woman might decide she doesn’t need a lover for some extended period if the build-up is done right.
One thing you didn’t mention, maybe because the author you’re talking about didn’t bring it up one way or the other, but was this character not having sex at all, or just not having sex with any men? One can have quite an active sex life by oneself, after all, and if it’s just about “release” then all one needs is some privacy now and then. I’d be much more willing to believe in a woman with no relationship and not even any one-night stands if she has a vibrator in her night table, for example, or just a mention somewhere that yes, she does pleasure herself occasionally for the “release,” even if it’s not an optimal situation. I’ve always found it laughably unrealistic how few romance heroines have any clue about masturbation. Someone over thirty — or twenty, or fifteen even — who’s never had an orgasm at all, ever? In this day and age? Umm, sure. [eyeroll]
As a general trend, though, I agree with you that it’s unrealistic and even annoying. Any individual character can realistically be presented as forgoing sex for some extended period of time while waiting for Mr. Right, although the author is going to have to work to convince me. But when some significant percentage of romance books feature these characters, the cumulative effect gets me pretty cynical.
It seems that the whole Good Girls Don’t trope is still alive and well, despite the sexual revolution forty years ago. The experienced woman who wants and enjoys sex is the villain, the bitch, that slut at the office who’s trying to steal the hero away from the shy, virginal heroine. (Or the heroine who was a virgin when she married, and who hasn’t had sex at all since she was divorced or widowed eleventeen years ago.) Or maybe, if the writer is relatively enlightened, she’s the cousin or neighbor or best friend who’s bopping around enjoying herself with her lover of the week, but who learns by the end of the book that True Love is what it’s all about, and bitterly regrets who loose and slutty ways.
I can buy an individual nunlike heroine, as one of the many different kinds of women who exist in the real world and eventually find love and a stable romantic relationship. But when every other book (or three out of four, or nine out of ten) features this same little nun, who’s patiently waiting with her legs closed and her hands folded on the table until her True Love shows up at her thirty-eighth birthday party or whatever, it starts to feel like the genre is preaching rather than entertaining. To me, anyway.
To say nothing of the way it emphasizes passivity in the woman. The man can go out and get what he wants all his life, so long as he focuses on one woman when he’s met his forever partner. A woman who’s done the same is a slut and a whore and unworthy of being A Heroine. Wow, oppressive much…? :/ I’ve never really thought of myself as a feminist, but this sort of attitude — again, when it’s widespread, not just showing up in individual books here and there — pings even my female oppression alarms. [wry smile]
So yes, I agree that this is an issue. I’m not sure what to do with it, though, since telling authors they shouldn’t write a certain kind of character is definitely a cure worse than the disease. :/
Angie
See, I don’t agree that choosing not to have sex equates with passivity. In fact, considering society’s pressure to “just go get some, fer cryin’ out loud,” it seems to me a woman who bucks the current tide is anything BUT passive. Taking a stand is about as active as it gets, whereas doing something just because “everyone else is” seems pretty darn passive to me.
It’s all about choice, isn’t it?
Look, I’ve written heroines with sexual pasts, who had their first big Os long before they meet the hero (with or without a partner), and I’ve written a few virgins (although no clueless ones). So, believe me, no preaching here. Still, some women with very healthy sex drives actually find abstinence a relief rather than a frustration. I’ve also read stats that indicate that, once past that first flush of sexual exploration in their teens and twenties, many women in their 30’s and older aren’t all that into the casual shag, or even a “sex only” relationship. In this age of rampant STDs, more women are saying fuggedaboutit than one might think.
Not that they all are, of course. But not having sex, or even looking for it, doesn’t make a woman abnormal. It’s quite possible to absolutely adore sexual intimacy, and be very aware of one’s body, and still choose not to be sexually active for reasons as varied as the women who make those decisions.
Sex is a great deal of fun, sure, but it’s simply not a priority for a lot of women. And there’s nothing wrong with that.
Here it is, after 6PM, and I’m just checking the blog, and there I am!
As several of you said, no, the author failed to convince me that either scenario could be authentic. I’ve since learned that this bad marriage was both brief and occurred 15 years previously, when the character was barely out of her teens. That’s a long time to cut oneself off from life with no other information given than because She’s Been Hurt. Perhaps the author will go into more detail further down the line, but I’m frankly doubtful that anything could be so horrible. Right now I’ve put the book aside yet another time because of yet another stereotypical plot element . . . the pregnancy resulting from unprotected sex. No reason was given for not bothering with condoms; it wasn’t even discussed why, for instance, why the man, who’d planned the seduction, hadn’t bothered wtih this little detail, nor why they simply didn’t go down to the local Walgreens (the time was approximately 8PM). Even more incredulous was the fact that the parties didn’t know each other that well. I like my fictional situations to make sense for reasons other than that it would interfere with the plot.
Most authors aren’t even allowed to depict characters having unprotected sex, and with good reason. In the age of HIV, it’s irresponsible. And, of course, in a romance novel, anyone who has unprotected sex will end up, not with a virus, of course, but pregnant. I think my next column will talk about some romance stereotypes that I think should be permanently retired.
Okay, now for some specifics:
Maddie, no, it wouldn’t be right to reveal the series, so my keyboard is zipped on that one! And I must say it’s never revealed why the young lady is in this relationship. She really isn’t painted as a gold digger. I didn’t mean to give that impression.
Kimber An, I was one of those women who said “Never again” myself after my divorce. I’m embarrassed to say how long (or how briefly) that lasted. And it’s been 15 years for this character!
Susan, I understand completely!
Karen, like you, I’ve known women who said “Never again,” and also women who thought that every new man they met was The One. But I don’t believe that the single woman who enjoys sex without commitment on an occasional basis is “ruled by her libido.” I mentioned in my essay that it would have made more sense to me had there been some type of affair over the period of many years . . . that’s singular, not plural. Incidentally, did I mention that this same character who was so down on relationships is the one who’s now pregnant after giving into her libido?
Chicki, again, I said one affair, not a parade of lovers.
Well put, Patricia! And the character in question was married briefly at a young age, which makes her attitude all the more ridiculous to me.
Angie, there’s no mention of self-pleasure in this book. Possibly it’s the Good Girls Don’t syndrome, but to be honest I’ve seen very little of this in romances, but I have seen it. From a writer’s standpoint, it’s very difficult to carry off.
Thanks for all your comments!
romance novels are too often presented
“I’m frankly doubtful that anything could be so horrible.”
Bettye,
It sounds like you’ve had a very lucky, charmed life. I do envy you.
‘Cause you see, I am CERTAIN that something can be so horrible. It can be so horrible that even an eyewitness (like a daughter) would vow never to let a man get that close EVER (but she was lucky too and met a man who took 5 years, yes, 5 years to convince her otherwise).
Don’t envy me, Kimber Chin. I haven’t had a charmed life.
What I am is resilient. I had a very unpleasant first marriage, but as with any other difficult time in my life, I was able to put it behind me and move on with my life. Barricading oneself and/or retreating from bad memories is okay . . . for a few weeks, or even a few months, or a year. But if I was still telling myself 19 years later that I’ll never get involved with another man . . . sounds like a psychological problem to me.
Plenty of us have issues and fears stemming from our past experiences, but most of us learn to deal with them. If we can’t, professional counseling might help.
Karen — I don’t agree that choosing not to have sex equates with passivity.
No, it absolutely doesn’t have to be. And a character written as having a good reason for it and standing her guns in the face of social pressure (say, from her friends) is definitely being shown as strong and not passive. But the way the virginal or nearly so heroine so often is depicted comes across to me as passive.
Oh, I’m just not pretty enough. None of the nice men would want me. I’m not smart enough or funny enough or witty enough so I’m not going to try to find a boyfriend. That guy over there is hot and seems like a nice guy, but he never flirts with me and of course I could never buy him a cup of coffee. Nice girls just sit around and wait to be asked, and no one’s asked me so all I can do is sit here and sigh and smile at my friends and co-workers who are going out or getting married. sigh-whine-dream-sigh Passive.
Even this kind of character can work, if there are believable reasons given for her romantic/sexual passivity and if she’s interesting and three-dimensional in other ways. But too often I’ve seen these characters just sort of hanging around waiting for life to happen in the shape of some Hero who comes and drags them off to love and adventure. I don’t mind a little of that, but after a while I get sick of it.
Still, some women with very healthy sex drives actually find abstinence a relief rather than a frustration.
That’s true. And if there were only “some” abstinent heroines, it wouldn’t be noticeable enough to be an issue worth discussing.
I’m not saying there should be a ban on any sort of character. And I’m definitely not saying writers should be limited in what they’re allowed to write. (I already think the genre conventions are too limiting and I’d never agree to any more limits, even if they favored my own preferences.) What I’m saying is that it’d be nice if there were more of a variety. If there were an experienced heroine who has sex because she wants to with anyone she wants to before she meets her hero (you know, just like most of the heroes do before they meet the heroine?) or even one actively sex-positive heroine for every three or four or six good-girl abstinent ones, I’d be very happy. I don’t want to close anyone off from the types of books and characters they like; I want more variety. [wry smile]
Angie
I know plenty of 30/40 year old virgins.
I don’t think they’re pathetic.
Exactly the opposite.
They have full lives
and are so confident
that they don’t need loveless sex
to make themselves feel better.
(As for sexual urges – Isn’t that what vibrators are for?)
I think it’s liberating.
I choose to love and marry a wonderful man
but I don’t NEED him.
As for needing a break from relationships,
after a truly terrible one,
well, that’s an ‘of course’
for any smart woman.
I’ve never felt the need to date as many guys as I can. I don’t think the decision to not date was immature as it gave me time to do other things like get a degree. I met my future husband last year while just going about my life not expecting to meet “the one”. I’m glad I didn’t waste my single years because I’m shocked at how little free time I have now-and we don’t even have kids.
When a relationship ends, it leaves a void in one’s schedule, if nothing else. A certain amount of time was spent with that person, and now that time is free. Some people concentrate on filling that void with another relationship. Other people will see it as a great opportunity take a class or volunteer or work on that hobby or get a second job if the breakup caused a crippling loss of household income, as opposed to sitting home every night bemoaning the lack of a man, which the serial relationship crowd seems to think is the case.
Once that time is filled, getting involved in a new relationship necessitates DROPPING something else. If a guy blows your doors off from the get-go, it may be worth it to give up some other aspect of your life to make room for him. However, the majority of men a woman comes in contact with aren’t suitable or desirable or necessary for her and so aren’t worth making any sacrifice to accommodate, certainly not just to be able to say, “I have a boyfriend!”, which, to me, is as junior-high immature as it gets.
That being said, if a story doesn’t work for you, it doesn’t work for you, and I’m not going to tell you to give it a chance. Personally, I find Sex and the City and Waiting to Exhale and all those other ensemble stories in which ostensibly smart, sophisticated women do nothing but hunt for men with whom to have sex, have sex, or incessantly whine about their lack of sex pathetic and unrealistic because that level of obsession isn’t consistent with any women I’ve ever known, but they obviously work for plenty of other people.
One person’s realistic is another person’s wallbanger.
I don’t think women (heroines anyway) sit around having one relationship after another just to fill the time. However, after awhile they may want to fill that time with a relationship, even if it’s not The One. There are social needs and companionship needs. Any of these can involve physical pleasuring as well. That doesn’t make her a weakling. That’s a realistic attitude.
However, there are all kinds of heroines. We know romance fiction involves a bountiful diversity.
Love that last sentence, Kerry! And Andrea, you summarized beautifully in your last two sentences.
Thank you all for your comments. Diversity is a beautiful thing, isn’t it?
Great post!
I am late to the party here, but I soooooo agree. I am a 32-year-old woman who is divorced from a man who did some pretty heinous things to me, and I am MORE interested in sex than I was when I married him at age 23. In fact, I have discovered a whole new world I never knew with him. I knew it existed but he was a cold fish.
If I told you my story, you might think I should be one of those heroines that swore off men and sex. However, barring something super traumatic, like a rape, nature takes over. It is only natural for a woman to want sex. And memory fades. I can’t recall the last time i felt that empty, shell shocked feeling of horror I felt fresh after leaving my husband and during the divorce (even though it seemed like it would never, ever go away). I feel fabulous. I want sex! I want to get married again.
Now, I will say that trust issues are a much more plausible scenario. I have come a long way in 2 years from being suspicious of everything to being able to trust. When someone lies and cheats on you to the degree my ex did, it makes it difficult to trust men, for sure. Even now, I feel some fear that it could happen again, but I now take certain subtle precautions that don’t hurt anyone and make me feel comfortable getting involved. I.e. I always verify the information that a man gives me, especially if my gut is telling me something is off. I started doing this after I dated someone for a year and a half only to find that he had lied about a prior marriage, serious money problems, DUIs, and a few other smaller things.