The connecting between being non-het and erotic content
This is a little out of context but here are some posts of mine and I would love some input if only to see if I really am sane on this issue: 1) If there is no on page sex rating a gay romance as erotic is just disguised bigotry. Men liking men isn't a kink or rextreme practise. The reader can tell it is gay content form the cover and blurb, the erotic ratings are clearly intended related to sexual act frequency and intensity not sexual orientations. I can tell you from experience that if your gay romance is rated erotic despite not having sex the readers give poor ratings and reviews because they don't get what they were expecting (sexual content). At that point it is better for the gay romance writer to go outside the genre for publishers to literary and genre houses--which is in fact what the majority seem to do based on which shelves I am buying my sweet gay romance boopks from. I assume you don't mean 'does sweet gay romance exist as a genre' as it clearly does--including my first novel and many others at Torquere. Torquere is an excellent publisher of gay and lesbian romance. It is something of a releif to work with a specialist publisher who does not need to worry about uninformed customers throwing a fit when they come across gay content (cue the usual debate about whether gay romance is romance etc etc). 2) Yes it does happen, it has happened to me and it is encoded in the rating systems of several epublishers. It is far less of an issue in print where 'ratings' only exist to the extent that you may end up on the erotic shelf not the romance, gay interest or mainstream shelves. I think it is a bad case of apples and oranges. Some people don't wish to read gay romance content--others don't want to read subordinate women, polyamory or (none of which necessarily include sex scenes). These are content issues that should be made clear on the cover and blurb. The level of sexuality is a seperate issue and making gay orientation a 'rating' level borders on saying gays don't have romance, just sex (can't be in the sweet category) or even 'gay' is a sexual kink not a romantic orientation. The whole system plays into this. I mean why call it homo'sexuality' and hetero'sexuality' as if copulation is the sole feature of orientation? A person can have an orientation and be celebate or asexual. I prefer to say straight/gay/lesbian for these reasons. On a side note I am writing a romance book centred on a asexual woman (a person with no desire to have sex). Would that go under alternative sexualities and get a higher rating? Would that make any sense at all? Yes, she has a minority lifestyle re love and sex but that isn't necessarily a 'sexual' issue, quite the reverse! 3) I don't see why a no-sex story cannot be called menage (threesome etc) in the absence of any specific word for a triad in love but not currently bonking. It's just like every other sweet romance in describing the meeting and forming of the relationship but stopping before the first sexual encounter. As for writing it without sex, why not--I did? I don't see menage as any more intinsically erotic than mf mm ff or whatever--in real life or fiction. I think 'alt' sexualities and erotic-ness are connected by marketing. for the very reasons we are discussing here. Publishers donl't see them as matters of life and love every bit as of sex--just as with straight monogamous couples. Once again, having more than one partner, and describing sex=separate issues. Polyamory is a broader category, polyamorous people can be and in fact often are sexual monogamous just as bisexual people can have never had sex with a same sex partner and swingers can be romatically faithful by only loving one person while having sex with many. But then the terms get tricky here and often orientation and sexual activity become conflated or assumed.

Makes sense to me.

heh. I guess it's something of a non-issue over here ;)

True, doll, your're preaching to the chior

So now what do we do. Want a pop tart?

Pop tart!

Mint chocolate flavor, I also have, um, apple struddle and brown sugar.

... they make mint chocolate flavored pop tarts? I'm so doomed.

Meh, they're not as good as they should be. Toaster strudel is better but I'm all out.

Hmm, I think I have a sneaking suspicion as to how this thread started. I'll look forward to joining into that discussion. Can't say anything about this that the other haven't said. I'll have a cherry Pop Tart, please. To show my innocence.

Ooooh, cherries.... :D Em, this bit rang partiicular bells with me: "I can tell you from experience that if your gay romance is rated erotic despite not having sex the readers give poor ratings and reviews because they don't get what they were expecting (sexual content)." It's an issue I feel I'm having with several of my books and stories - they've been rated as 'erotica' but their sex level is probably not much above many 'romance' books these days and my Fictiionwise ratings are definitely poorer for the books with least sex that are still being marketed as erotiic.... So no, I reckon you're as sane as you ever are. :P What's this all about? I'm intrigued.

This is from some of my posts in the romancedivas forum -- the alternative romance area. I love the Divas but I do feel they perpetuate some stereotypes some of the time. Perhaps the difference is that although many of thjem write the so-called alternative very few of them are living there. Thanks to Dusk for adding her rather more pithy post which cleared up a little of my own fuzzy thinking ...and I am working on that asexual romance novel. I have an outline and everythiong--but life is crazy, I don;t see getting it done for at least 6 months....

"This is from some of my posts in the romancedivas forum -- the alternative romance area." No, it's in the steamy section. I don't have access to the alternative section yet. It started when I made a remark at one of the mainstream sections of the forum that sweet gay romances exist. Apparently that observation was considered to be too steamy for the main sections. :) "...and I am working on that asexual romance novel." Go you! Did you notice, by the way, that I have a new version of "Life Prison" up? I'm waiting for the forums at Asexuality.org to be mended before I post a notice there. I hope it goes over well with the readers there.

I hadn't seen that--I didn't realise you started the whole thing LOL. Talking about gay people not having sex is sexual. oh, well