# Romance genre reader expectations



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

I've been wondering this for awhile -- why are there so many and such specific reader expectations in this genre?

I get the basic things that make the genre what it is, like the HEA/HFN, but stuff like the heroine can't have a past of sleeping around (but it's okay for the guys) I don't really understand.


----------



## Anna Lace (Jul 16, 2017)

They expect a fairy tale and not a horror novel


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

Anna Lace said:


> They expect a fairy tale and not a horror novel


Yeah, but a woman who owns her own sexuality certainly doesn't make it a horror novel.


----------



## Monique (Jul 31, 2010)

I feel like a lot of this was covered in your other thread, but I have a follow-up question. The MMCs who have a past/sleep around, is that trait seen as empowering/desirable or as something he needs to fix in order to be with the FMC? Is it a positive trait, as you're painting your FMC's past/promiscuity, or is it seen as a fault that he must overcome when he finds Miss Right?


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

Monique said:


> I feel like a lot of this was covered in your other thread, but I have a follow-up question. The MMCs who have a past/sleep around, is that trait seen as empowering/desirable or as something he needs to fix in order to be with the FMC? Is it a positive trait, as you're painting your FMC's past/promiscuity, or is it seen as a fault that he must overcome when he finds Miss Right?


I'm more wanting to know the reasons _why_ the expectations exist...not just this one, but why there are so many strict expectations in this genre whereas others are less so. Another one that was discussed recently was the swear words thing.

I'm not painting promiscuity as good or bad in my own work, personally. It's just part of who the character is. There are things that result from it - good, bad and neutral. She has an embarrassing moment, for example, when she gets arrested by a former conquest. As for the good, she realizes that she's in love because she feels differently than all one night stands where she was just having fun.


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

I had to dig back into another thread to find these posts, but I was thinking of this too when I made this thread:



writerlygal said:


> I don't know what genre this is but if it's romance or erotica, I had hispanic male & female main characters in a book & that book didn't do as well as most of my books have but it's hard to say if it's due to ethnicity. I think the market wants white men unless it's interracial romance but even then that is usually a white man with a black woman in romance. With erotica, yes, there is a demand for black men with white women. And then the urban romance categories which are black couples & very culture-specific.





dianapersaud said:


> I have two books where the hero is white and the heroines are both Mexican-American and I would consider them a flop sales wise.


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

boba1823 said:


> My impression is that in Romance, perhaps more than in most other genres, readers want to really identify with the main character and imagine themselves in her shoes. I think it is more aspirational, in a sense, for Romance readers than it is for many other genre readers.
> 
> So in effect, readers maybe need to feel that they can basically endorse the kind of person the heroine is and what she does - at least in the ways that they find particularly important.
> 
> A heroine who is promiscuous (as they see it) or who has a promiscuous history, then, is not the kind of character they want to imagine themselves being in this aspirational way. Because they want to read the story as their _own_ fairy tale, more than just seeing it as the story of the main character. The heroine doesn't have to match them perfectly, of course - but some things are just going to be too much to ignore.


I guess I just can't identify here. I mean...they couldn't imagine themselves as someone who was just doing her thing and having fun, but then she falls in love when she least expects it?

I'm pretty sure I found my niche with UF, but my research into the romance genre just left me scratching my head for a lot of reasons.


----------



## Monique (Jul 31, 2010)

paranormal_kitty said:


> I guess I just can't identify here. I mean...they couldn't imagine themselves as someone who was just doing her thing and having fun, but then she falls in love when she least expects it?


They could, but I'm not sure they want to.

Maybe those readers just don't identify with the promiscuous heroine and see it as a negative and that ruins the aspirational fantasy of it. Whereas the promiscuous MC can be changed for the better by their love.


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

boba1823 said:


> For readers of this sort, being (what they see as) promiscuous is a pretty huge character flaw. For them, it's nasty, gross - definitely not how they want to imagine themselves being in the context of a fairy tale romance.


What is about the demographics of the readers that makes it that way though? I know not every female feels that way (especially in the younger generations).

It's kind of frustrating to me because I do like to write a good love story, but apparently I don't write what sells in romance.


----------



## Usedtoposthere (Nov 19, 2013)

I write interracial/multicultural romance all the time with men of color. Those have been some of my most successful books. I've got about a half dozen. 

Also several with women of color. 

As far as promiscuity--the reason it's seen as something to overcome by hero or heroine is romance is that the point of romance is a BELIEVABLE, EXCLUSIVE, preferably LIFETIME relationship. Somebody who sleeps around, of either gender, and isn't having any problem continuing to live that way--where's our belief in her/his happily ever after with ONE person? Why would he or she give that up?

I write heroines with active sexual pasts. No issues. I don't write any seriously "sleeping around" right now, though they may sleep with somebody en route to the hero. They aren't looking for casual sex, because--see above. (Although I'm aware that some genres of romance, esp the bad boy variety, feature the hero who uses and disposes of women until he meets the heroine. Not what I write so I can't really speak to it, except that it's a pretty classic female "taming" fantasy.)


----------



## ShayneRutherford (Mar 24, 2014)

paranormal_kitty said:


> What is about the demographics of the readers that makes it that way though? I know not every female feels that way (especially in the younger generations).
> 
> It's kind of frustrating to me because I do like to write a good love story, but apparently I don't write what sells in romance.


Think of it less as demographics, and more as that the genre has become a reflection of what the largest part of its audience wants. Does that make sense?


----------



## Word Fan (Apr 15, 2015)

paranormal_kitty said:


> It's kind of frustrating to me because I do like to write a good love story, but apparently I don't write what sells in romance.


Have you written successful books in other genres? Sometimes it's not the tropes that you use but the quality of the writing that doesn't sell well, and that's something that we all have to face up to.


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

ShayneRutherford said:


> Think of it less as demographics, and more as that the genre has become a reflection of what the largest part of its audience wants. Does that make sense?


Not really. I mean, there must be something about the audience creating these preferences?



Word Fan said:


> Have you written successful books in other genres? Sometimes it's not the tropes that you use but the quality of the writing that doesn't sell well, and that's something that we all have to face up to.


No, I'm doing the publishing thing for the first time, so we'll see what happens. I'm going with UF though as I said. Hopefully the very prominent love story is okay there.


----------



## Usedtoposthere (Nov 19, 2013)

It's easier to write a genre you really like. You're more likely to have a fundamental understanding of it, because, you know ... that's why you like it.

Chick lit has sleeping-around heroines, but it's very much out of style now, I believe, at least in the U.S. And I think every one of Emily Giffen's books is about cheating heroes and heroines. At least all of them I've seen. I read one, and just about threw it across the room, but she sure sells. 

Her books appear to be categorized as Women's Fiction. That's an option for you.


----------



## Atunah (Nov 20, 2008)

Simple. Read romance from 30 years ago, 25 years ago, 20 years, 15 years, 10 years, 5 years and today. Don't go by what is shown on amazon's ebook list only, many books are not even romance on there. Go to the library and look at the shelves. Go to the bookstore, check out goodreads, RWA, RT book reviews, etc. 

To know romance and its readers, one has to read romance. Once you do that, all will be clear. There is no one kind or romance reader, there is no one kind of romance. There are many sub genres within romance. Show respect to the readers by getting to know the genres. Read. And then read some more. 

People have tried to box us in for ages. We can't be boxed in. We have also heard it all. 

In my experience, if one has to ask some of the questions the OP and other have asked, it tells me they do not know the genre and often don't show any interest in knowing the genre. What romance did you read, old and new and in between. What subgenres did you read. The genres is big and varied. As varied as its reader base. We romance readers are not some different species. We are all of us. All walks of life. Our expectations are not any different than any other genre fiction readers. All have expectations. Its what makes them genres.


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

Usedtoposthere said:


> It's easier to write a genre you really like. You're more likely to have a fundamental understanding of it, because, you know ... that's why you like it.
> 
> Chick lit has sleeping-around heroines, but it's very much out of style now, I believe, at least in the U.S. And I think every one of Emily Giffen's books is about cheating heroes and heroines. At least all of them I've seen. I read one, and just about threw it across the room, but she sure sells.
> 
> Her books appear to be categorized as Women's Fiction. That's an option for you.


This is true. I am going with UF for this series because there's probably too much blood and guts in it for anything else. When I first started it, I was thinking paranormal romance, but I ended up with way more action and killing than I anticipated. My MCs don't cheat though. I wouldn't make her be that mean because his only other serious girlfriend cheated on him while he was home taking care of his mom. Cheating would probably ruin her for the readers I'm sure.


----------



## Word Fan (Apr 15, 2015)

Atunah said:


> The genre is big and varied. As varied as its reader base. We romance readers are not some different species. We are all of us. All walks of life. Our expectations are not any different [from those of] any other genre fiction readers. All have expectations. Its what makes them genres.


Absolutely this.

And if you read a genre with intelligence and an open mind, you will learn what those expectations are, and you can then decide if those expectations are what you can write to.

But you can't learn without doing a good bit of reading. Not really.

And if, while doing that, you're not enjoying what you're reading, then that genre is not for you.

You cannot be consistently successful within a genre for which you have no liking nor respect.


----------



## EC Sheedy (Feb 24, 2011)

Lorri Moulton said:


> Very true, Atunah.


I think Atunah should write a book about romance reading and writing.  The history of the romance novel is quite interesting. (Harlequin began its life in 1949 in Winnipeg, Manitoba.) It would be great to have a _What is a Romance, and Why I love it_, type of book written by someone who obviously knows and cares about the genre. As a writer, I'd love to read it!


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

LilyBLily said:


> Of course you can find exceptions, but think of romance heroes and heroines as more discriminating and as acting up to a higher moral standard than most people and you'll have a basis for them being the main characters of a romance. A heroic character isn't just anybody.


I see that as kind of boring though. It's more interesting when they get it wrong a lot of the time, but then get it really right sometimes. I like the fighting and the jealous rages along with the romance. It's more fun to write and more fun to read. And really...that high moral standard often doesn't apply so much to the man, let's be realistic.

I also don't get why having casual sex outside of a relationship is equated with cheating? A person can enjoy themselves while single and still mange to be faithful if they do enter a relationship.


----------



## Usedtoposthere (Nov 19, 2013)

I wasn't equating cheating. Just using it as an example of something in other genres but not normally in romance. 

As Atunah says, lots of different types of romance. I don't like reading things like jealous rages, because that type of attitude and behavior isn't realistically conducive to happily ever after. However that sort of higher drama thing is much more popular in new adult romance, as one would expect. That's more of a younger version of romantic love. Enjoyed by many older readers however. It's what Atunah said. Knowing the genre and where your preferences fit. 

I mostly write heroes in their early to mid thirties who are in professions that make you more mature. Usually their sleeping around days are behind them, sometimes not. I write heroes and heroines who are divorced, widowed, often have been cheated on, possibly have cheated in marriage themselves. Many lessons in life are learned the hard way. I'm writing for a different reader though. At a different stage of life experience, often. 

Writing what you enjoy reading is easier and probably turns out better. If a genre puzzles and bores
you, as others have said, it probably won't be profitable for you. You won't hit the subtle notes right.


----------



## Nic (Nov 17, 2013)

Boba, Monique, Usedtoposthere and LilyBLily nail it extremely well in their posts.



paranormal_kitty said:


> I also don't get why having casual sex outside of a relationship is equated with cheating? A person can enjoy themselves while single and still mange to be faithful if they do enter a relationship.


You inadvertently made a Freudian typo here.

A lot of readers will have no problem knowing that the heroine had a past sexual life, outside of the group who wants to read about virgins. As Usedtoposthere pointed out, she does well with mature, experienced heroines with an active past life and she is so successful with her books, that most people can only dream of it. Readers can easily identify which such heroines, because they are clearly healthy, wholesome women with a past a lot of readers will have experienced themselves or wish they had experienced themselves.

However, downright promiscuity is something else than just having had two or three serial relationships or a couple of sexual encounters while a teenager or at the uni. Mangy or skanky is - as I wrote in the other thread - the connection a lot of people make with "sleeping around a lot", quite apart from the moral aspect shared by most religions. This is especially so since HIV and AIDS. Many people will instinctively shy away from seeing a lot of sexual partners as being anything healthy and wholesome. This isn't particularly helped by the prevalence of STDs in promiscuous people in reality. That's a negative value and not a theoretical one. It weighs much more in the considerations of people than any ideas of sexual freedom.

It isn't as if such romances as the one you want to write don't exist, though. There are a couple of authors who manage to pull it off successfully, especially among those writing BDSM romance or horror/SF romance. These are very small niches, however, and if you plan on earning a lot of money off writing romance, then you will have to adjust your sights - for the moment. Either gritty, promiscuous heroines or a lot of money.


----------



## EllieDee (May 28, 2017)

> I don't know about you, but I think what bothers me is what that fantasy sometimes says about our society and how it judges people. That, and someone like Boba comparing a character who's had casual sex with someone who picks their nose and eats it or with someone who kicks dogs. I mean... wow.


Yeah, that surprised me, too. There are ethical and promiscuous people in the world. Those aren't mutually exclusive qualities. Some people are honest and upfront about what they want (exploring new sexual horizons like BDSM, finding a steady FWB, whatever) and what they don't want (a committed relationship) and they use condoms every time to protect everyone's health. But somehow this is as awful as animal abuse?

I'm *not* picking on anyone specifically in this thread, I just don't understand the mindset. At all. I know that I could accept a partner's highly promiscuous past, as long as they're tested for STDs and willing to be monogamous with me. But if they abuse animals? Dealbreaker. Period.


----------



## Usedtoposthere (Nov 19, 2013)

I think the idea that romance readers demand some kind of female chastity is hugely overblown. I don't see it except in the virgin stuff. Or inspirational romance. 

Write your stuff the way you think is right. Personally my big thing is consent and respect, so that's the hill I die on. I want the guy to actually make a realistically great life partner. All sorts of audiences out there even in romance, but it IS a genre focused on successful relationships and monogamy. Read by people who want to believe in lifelong love and monogamy. My best friend thinks my books are unrealistic, and she's been happily married 40 years. I believe in my people. But I love romance and she doesn't. The books and movies she enjoys, I'd pay NOT to see. I know what the bad side of real life looks like. I don't want it in my entertainment. 

But I'm one reader. One author. That's all.


----------



## Anastasja (Sep 3, 2017)

EllieDee said:


> Yeah, that surprised me, too. There are ethical and promiscuous people in the world. Those aren't mutually exclusive qualities.


I believe that such people exist, but in my thirty-something years of life I am yet to meet at least one. The promiscuous people I did meet usually had an unhealthy lifestyle (heavy drinking and/or drugs addiction). Most of them had some psychological problems as well. Sorry, but as a romance reader I don't want such people in the books I read.


----------



## EllieDee (May 28, 2017)

> I believe that such people exist, but in my thirty-something years of life I am yet to meet at least one.


And in my thirty-something years of life I have met quite a few like that. Maybe it's a regional difference? I tend to socialize in liberal and queer-friendly spaces.

This thread has hit a nerve for me because I love reading romance. It's just so hard to find romance novels that I can connect with. I go through phases where I try, I check out recommendations, I trawl through Goodreads. And then I get burnt out. There are so, so many books I paid for but have to put down partway through. And I'm on a very tight budget, so I hate wasting money like that. But I have to walk away because I run into tropes I don't want in my stories. An uber-alpha for a hero. A virginal heroine who has never explored her body, not even once. Or an exclusively white and heterosexual cast, sometimes jazzed up by stereotypes like the Sassy Gay Hairdresser and Token 'Ethnic' Co-worker.

So I think there IS indeed an audience for formerly promiscuous FMCs, or ones that are sexually experimental. Maybe quite a large one. But the audience can't find the books they like in most romance subgenres, so they give up and go off to UF, PNR, etc. And I love my queer UF stories or PNR triads with vampires. Especially the vampires. But if I want a contemporary romance, or I'd like to read the book equivalent of Black Sails? Yeah, good luck with that.

What can be done? As a reader, the romance genre hasn't served me that well. I wish there was a well-recognized subgenre or publishing house that I could just reach for to find stories that hit the right spot for me.


----------



## Anastasja (Sep 3, 2017)

EllieDee said:


> And in my thirty-something years of life I have met quite a few like that. Maybe it's a regional difference? I tend to socialize in liberal and queer-friendly spaces.
> 
> This thread has hit a nerve for me because I love reading romance. It's just so hard to find romance novels that I can connect with. I go through phases where I try, I check out recommendations, I trawl through Goodreads. And then I get burnt out. There are so, so many books I paid for but have to put down partway through. And I'm on a very tight budget, so I hate wasting money like that. But I have to walk away because I run into tropes I don't want in my stories. An uber-alpha for a hero. A virginal heroine who has never explored her body, not even once. Or an exclusively white and heterosexual cast, sometimes jazzed up by stereotypes like the Sassy Gay Hairdresser and Token 'Ethnic' Co-worker.
> 
> ...


I think the answer to that should be development of some new romance subgenre, kind like "sexually experimental heroins," because I'll be sure to give such a book 1 star if I buy it disguised as an usual romance.


----------



## Nic (Nov 17, 2013)

EllieDee said:


> And in my thirty-something years of life I have met quite a few like that. Maybe it's a regional difference? I tend to socialize in liberal and queer-friendly spaces.
> 
> This thread has hit a nerve for me because I love reading romance. It's just so hard to find romance novels that I can connect with. I go through phases where I try, I check out recommendations, I trawl through Goodreads. And then I get burnt out. There are so, so many books I paid for but have to put down partway through. And I'm on a very tight budget, so I hate wasting money like that. But I have to walk away because I run into tropes I don't want in my stories. An uber-alpha for a hero. A virginal heroine who has never explored her body, not even once. Or an exclusively white and heterosexual cast, sometimes jazzed up by stereotypes like the Sassy Gay Hairdresser and Token 'Ethnic' Co-worker.
> 
> ...


Read gay romance and erotica written by gay authors, as opposed to m/m. You'll find it there. Because m/m romance is written for a female and mainly straight audience you'll have more of a time finding promiscuous characters as heroes there.


----------



## Usedtoposthere (Nov 19, 2013)

We all have our desires and our pet peeves around romance. That's why it can be good, whatever else you write (and I write in a bunch of subgenres) to be known for some things, some qualities about the people, something different about your books.

Whatever it is for you--that's your brand, beyond handsome heroes or virgins or billionaires or the other surface stuff. If you want to write it, maybe find other people writing the things you're interested in if you want to sell, and check out what they're doing, how they're covering their books, etc. Then go for it. Write a book like that for yourself. Maybe it'll strike a chord with others looking for the same thing. Maybe not. But you'll have written it. That's what I did. I thought, at least I wrote a story I loved. It was awesome, the best feeling I've ever had in writing since. (My first book, well before I imagined it would get published, and certainly before I imagined it could sell, or that anybody would read it beyond a couple friends. Possibly. If I dared to show it to them.) There's something to be said for at least TRYING your passion project. Otherwise, how will you know?


----------



## Forgettable (Oct 16, 2015)

.


----------



## Laran Mithras (Nov 22, 2016)

It is safest to assume that Fiction/Romance is a very tight sub-niche. At least, that's how I view it. So write to that very tight sub-niche. If your romance doesn't cater directly into those very tight expectations, list it in a different category, such as Fiction/Contemporary Women or one of the sub-niches of the Romance category.


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

Nic said:


> You inadvertently made a Freudian typo here.


I doubt it, considering I've never heard "mange" used in that manner before. Where I live it only has one meaning: a skin disease that animals get.


----------



## Nic (Nov 17, 2013)

paranormal_kitty said:


> I doubt it, considering I've never heard "mange" used in that manner before. Where I live it only has one meaning: a skin disease that animals get.


That's the exact meaning I was talking about.


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

Nic said:


> That's the exact meaning I was talking about.


I have never heard it applied to a human though. It's not a disease that humans can get. No one where I live would use it as a synonym for skanky or slutty.


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

So, the whole idea of a Freudian slip/typo is that you misuse/misspell a word without consciousness that you've done so. Further, the reader/listener can tell pretty clearly what word you meant to use, but the word you've inadvertently substituted may have connotations that not only distort the meaning of what you said, but may tend to indicate that your point is exactly the opposite. Or, rather, that you are making a point that your subconscious doesn't actually believe.

In this case, however, I think it was a garden variety typo and not indicative of anything other than typing too fast. So let's move on from there, shall we?


----------



## Nic (Nov 17, 2013)

paranormal_kitty said:


> I have never heard it applied to a human though. It's not a disease that humans can get. No one where I live would use it as a synonym for skanky or slutty.


Ever heard of metaphors?

It has been applied to me where I live, and I am LGBT and happen to be promiscuous. If you can't wrap your head around such quips, I'm not astonished you have a problem with imagining how people at large react to promiscuous characters in romance. Or that they really do react. I suggest you listen to the good people in this thread who've tried to help you understand that and why this is a "thing" in romance.


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

Nic -- kitty -- enough.

End of discussion. further posts on the topic by either of you will be deleted. Move on.


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

Markus Croft said:


> I don't know about you, but I think what bothers me is what that fantasy sometimes says about our society and how it judges people. That, and someone like Boba comparing a character who's had casual sex with someone who picks their nose and eats it or with someone who kicks dogs. I mean... wow.


Yeah, I think that was just an offensive and unnecessary comparison.



EllieDee said:


> This thread has hit a nerve for me because I love reading romance. It's just so hard to find romance novels that I can connect with. I go through phases where I try, I check out recommendations, I trawl through Goodreads. And then I get burnt out. There are so, so many books I paid for but have to put down partway through. And I'm on a very tight budget, so I hate wasting money like that. But I have to walk away because I run into tropes I don't want in my stories. An uber-alpha for a hero. A virginal heroine who has never explored her body, not even once. Or an exclusively white and heterosexual cast, sometimes jazzed up by stereotypes like the Sassy Gay Hairdresser and Token 'Ethnic' Co-worker.


These are all the same complaints I have too. I think there is an audience for something different, but the challenge is finding the audience and letting them know you have something they might want to read.



boba1823 said:


> An important part of being a writer, or so I believe, is learning to imagine yourself in another person's shoes. The shoes of various readers - that can be helpful - but also those of various characters. And a big part of that is imagining what it would be like to have very different beliefs, values, and motivations. If all of my characters share the same values I personally endorse.. well, chances are that my book is not very good. If I'm not very skilled at imagining what it would be like to have different beliefs, then my characters who are supposed to hold different beliefs are probably going to end up being psychologically shallow and their motivations are not going to seem really believable.


Isn't it the readers who are not being able to imagine themselves in another person's shoes though...since that's the stated reason they don't like women who have casual sex in the first place: they can't identify? My characters don't all share the same values or the same values that I have either - the MMC is much more reserved and cautious about sex than the FMC, and the funny thing is that if you reversed that you'd have something that's common and accepted in the romance genre. They both have valid reasons for the choices they make and neither is presented as right or wrong.


----------



## Word Fan (Apr 15, 2015)

RBN said:


> Flawed people can be good, bad, or mediocre, and none of us is free of flaws. [...] Pollyanna makes me barf.


I love _Pollyanna_, the Disney movie. It's one of my all-time favorite "repeats." 

And, as "good" a person as she was, she had flaws, too. In fact, as some here will rememmber, the acting out of one of them almost killed her.


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

Lorri Moulton said:


> I'm seeing two different heroines in this discussion. One, who has had a past and decides to move on and finds true love...hitting all the tropes necessary in romance. And another, who continues to have relationships on the side during a romance.
> 
> I believe Kitty's FMC is the former. She's had a past, she meets a guy (turns out he's THE guy) and they build a relationship as they're searching for the man who raised her, probably fighting bad guys, etc.


Yes, exactly. But then I was told that readers would tear me apart for the heroine's past. Their dynamic is an inverse of that old soap thing where the womanizer falls in love, often with someone who annoys him at first.



Lorri Moulton said:


> ETA: I love Disney movies and fairytale romances. I don't need the hero to be a billionaire, an alpha male or have a waxed chest, but that's me. I want him sweet, kind, sexy and considerate...and able to have a conversation with some witty banter. Everyone has their preferences (thank goodness) which creates a myriad of possibilities for all of us as writers.


Gosh, I'm so tired of billionaires. These should be filed in fantasy because twenty-something super hot billionaires don't even exist IRL lol.



RBN said:


> You answered your own question. When nearly everyone is obsessed with what "sells," the market is saturated with more of what has sold in the past. There isn't a sufficient sample of books that deviate from the norm to draw useful conclusions. _A_ book with an unapologetically sexual heroine may sell poorly, but it may also have plot holes you can fly a jet through and lousy marketing, but because "promiscuous heroine" is what you're looking for, you confirm your bias and don't write/publish what you've determined, based on a vanishingly small sample, won't sell.
> 
> Contrary to popular belief, not all romance readers self-insert. I was in my mid 30s before I even knew that was a thing, and I'd been active in the romance community for 15 years before that, so I'd go so far as to say _most_ romance readers, at least where I hang out, are perfectly capable of empathizing with characters that are not replicas of them, _provided those characters and everything else in the story are well written_.


I'm glad to hear that not everyone does that. Some people act like it's a given. I even read advice to not describe the heroine in detail because that makes it easier for the reader to imagine she is the heroine.



RBN said:


> A writer who is judgmental of a character will telegraph that to readers and then use the readers' judgment to support the conviction such characters are doomed to fail. If you hate them, _please_ don't write them and further pollute the tiny pool. Some of us do just fine with various flavors of "unlikable" protagonists by conventional/conservative standards because there _is_ a market for romance that's not samey-same. Sure, the appeal is less widespread, but you're also not in direct competition with the hundreds of insert-self-here Pollyannas published every week. If you don't limit yourself in an attempt to achieve universal appeal (which doesn't exist -- Pollyanna makes me barf), you can create characters _your_ readers will remember.


This is good advice. I hate the Pollyanna types too. I like characters that are a challenge for each other. It's hard to find equally matched pairings in romance though. I actually like the alpha male thing when paired with an equally strong female and that never seems to happen. I just don't see the appeal in watching someone walk all over someone else.



RBN said:


> Self-publishing took off largely because trad pub is so unimaginative and reluctant to deviate from last year's formula. Cutting out the middle man allowed authors to give readers stories publishers wouldn't touch because they were too far off the beaten path. Now the focus has shifted from making the market to following it, exactly like trad pubs, and it's getting stagnant. If you want to build an audience hungry to read what you want to write, write what you want to write instead of what everyone else is writing. Be courageous, and stop asking for permission to make a splash in the pond because it will always be discouraged by those certain not blending into the environment means certain death.


You should write a how-to book. It seems like most of the advice out there is saying to do whatever everyone else is doing.


----------



## EC Sheedy (Feb 24, 2011)

Seriously, I think many romance readers are absolutely fine with heroines who have a sexual/romantic past. It's not a problem as far as I can see. Sure there are readers who expect/want virgin or virginish heroines, but I'd wager a guess there are not that many of them. Write empathetic characters a reader can relate to and love, and you've done your romance writer job. If writing a promiscuous heroine is what you want to do, do it. See how it goes. Maybe the hero can come along and be the one she *changes* for. That'd be a flip. 

The really, really big trope in romance that needs to go is the requirement that a hero be over six feet tall.


----------



## Justawriter (Jul 24, 2012)

It doesn't really matter why the expectations exist, only that they do. So you can say it shouldn't be that way, but it won't change the fact that reader expectations are very real---you can choose to ignore them, or give them what they want and sell better and have better reviews. You can do whatever you like!


----------



## Monique (Jul 31, 2010)

paranormal_kitty said:


> I hate the Pollyanna types too.


So optimist shaming is okay? 

One of the reasons the flip of "taming the womanizer" might not be as popular is that the fantasy is to tame the man, to change him for the better (which also implies the previous state was less desirable). I'm not sure how common the flip-side fantasy is of being the promiscuous woman and being "tamed" by the good man. I'm sure it's a thing for some.

Ultimately though, write the change you want to see in the genre. It might sink or it might find an underserved audience. Just go into it with eyes wide open.


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

EC Sheedy said:


> Seriously, I think many romance readers are absolutely fine with heroines who have a sexual/romantic past. It's not a problem as far as I can see. Sure there are readers who expect/want virgin or virginish heroines, but I'd wager a guess there are not that many of them. Write empathetic characters a reader can relate to and love, and you've done your romance writer job. If writing a promiscuous heroine is what you want to do, do it. See how it goes. Maybe the hero can come along and be the one she *changes* for. That'd be a flip.


Haha, that's pretty much what I wrote. She doesn't change just to suit him though...more like she realizes she doesn't want anyone else anymore.



EC Sheedy said:


> The really, really big trope in romance that needs to go is the requirement that a hero be over six feet tall.


I didn't even know about this one...and yet I _still_ failed to meet the expectation lol.


----------



## Atunah (Nov 20, 2008)

RBN said:


> Contrary to popular belief, not all romance readers self-insert. I was in my mid 30s before I even knew that was a thing, and I'd been active in the romance community for 15 years before that, so I'd go so far as to say _most_ romance readers, at least where I hang out, are perfectly capable of empathizing with characters that are not replicas of them, _provided those characters and everything else in the story are well written_.


This, right there. In all my years of reading romance I have never once inserted myself into a the heroine, or any other character for that matter. Never. I also don't see this around romance reading circles much. Only time I see a wee bit of it is newer romance readers that read NA and such things. Its just another one of those stereo types about romance readers that just will not die.

Just like we can't separate fiction from reality just because a character in a book wouldn't be in real life probably, like good looking billionaires. I am sure there are some, its a bit world after all. Nobody ever questions those things in other genres, just romance. 
Same with the all romance readers want virginal heroine. Huh? Inspy probably has that and it also depends on the subgenre. HR is going to have a lot more of that type than other subgenres for obvious reasons. I don't care either way. What matters is that the story and the relationship is believable. Can you make it work with those characters. Do you have the skill to do that.

The only romance genre conventions are, HEA or HFN, that is a given. And it has to have a journey all the way through that leads to that HEA. There can be anything in between as long as it leads to that positive ending. It can be as dark as can be, sweet as can be and everything in between. And as any romance knows, there is a lot of in between. Which is why you can't just tack a HEA on the end of a book and call it a romance. Because there is more to it than that.

As far as trade publishers not doing risky stuff or different? Not seeing that at all. It has always been the trade publishers that pushed the boundaries. When indies came along, one hoped for even more of that. But I just see a lot of sameness among many indies. Thankfully there are a select group of those that are hitting it out of the park. 
And I am again seeing trade going all in with different subgenres, different type of stories.

Read the genre, respect the genre. Do not keep spreading stereotypes about the genre and its readers.

Don't obsess with on aspect of a character like having a past. Pretty much 99 percent of romance I read has characters with a past. Flawed but deep inside decent. There is a huge scale to play with in romance. Its not just one thing.

I can't even point out any romances right now where the heroine specifically had lots of partners before the hero came along. Why? Because I don't dissect a book like that. I don't put characters into just one box, its the full story. Just one part of it. Is it overall believable, that's it. I don't mark books by teeny character things. We are all the sum of many parts. So are the characters in books.

Its your job to make me feel like they are real people. Of course there is a certain fantasy about reading romance. Duh. Its fiction after all. I want to feel good by the time I am done reading one. Doesn't mean I want rainbows and puppies. I always hate when the genre and us readers are separated into the "we rock because we like edgy stuff" and pearl clutching puritans. I wish that would stop also. There is a lot more in between that that. And most readers do not just read one type of story either. You guys are welcome to take a peek at my goodreads "read" shelf. Its not complete as I only started logging when I got a kindle and I haven't logged everything yet. I am not unique in that at all.

Think of the whole journey for romance. Not just one teeny fork. And stop trying to put romance readers into boxes over one thing. So the heroine has had partners before. Duh. Big deal. But can you make it believable and make the journey believable. That is the question.

eta: sorry if some letters are missing, I seem to have seaweed pieces stuck under some of my keys


----------



## Athena Grayson (Apr 4, 2011)

Monique said:


> So optimist shaming is okay?
> 
> One of the reasons the flip of "taming the womanizer" might not be as popular is that the fantasy is to tame the man, to change him for the better (which also implies the previous state was less desirable). I'm not sure how common the flip-side fantasy is of being the promiscuous woman and being "tamed" by the good man. I'm sure it's a thing for some.


Taming the Duke of Slut is hugely popular because it reinforces the idea that the heroine is the Chosen One. In a romantic character arc/hero(ine)'s journey, the magic elixir that the Chosen One brings back to save the people is her--and only her--ability to tame the manimal of the alpha male, in the face of all others' failed attempts and bring peace and HEA sparkles. Make no mistake--even when it's written abominably, It. Is. Like. Crack. And catnip. Cracknip. 

Paranormal_kitty, check out Sarah Wendell and Candy Tan's (aka the "Smart B!tches") "Beyond Heaving Bosoms" to see a well thought-out survey of romance's tropes that still mostly holds up after a few years.





Monique said:


> Ultimately though, write the change you want to see in the genre. It might sink or it might find an underserved audience. Just go into it with eyes wide open.


This. This so hard I broke something mashing a "like" button that isn't even there.
Paranormal_kitty, I spent 17 years in RWA watching other people--and myself--fighting against the reader expectations in varying degrees. They are there, and they are what they are. The more you try to fight against those expectations and change the *readers,* the more unnecessary pain you will cause yourself by doing the different thing, but expecting the same results. Romance expectations is what they is. Your choices are to jump inside the fence, go all the way outside of it, or put a saddle on it and name it Seabiscuit. But you absolutely cannot expect to have the same reception from three different positions.

This goes for other genres, too. Not just romance. Don't try to tell the *reader* that they're wrong for liking what they like and expecting what they expect in their favorite genre. There will always be more of them than there are of you. If you can't understand or bring yourself to write what they like, then you have to let that reader go, because they are not your reader. And it's OKAY. In the future, if you decide you do want to try to hit genre more tightly on the nose, you absolutely can, and that reader will be waiting! If you find, instead, that you'd rather find the readers who like what you love to write, they will come to you, rather than genre expectations. For those readers, your obligation to them is to give them the best "you" book you can, and to understand what a "you" book entails.

Much of romance success depends on underscoring what you have that meets expectations. That's your 80 of the 80/20 rule. The other part of romance success is underscoring how you're different--that's the 20, in that 20% of the time, you'll be blazing new trails that other people also wish to go down. Also that you'll get about a 20% good reception, or that your reading fans will be about 20% of the spectrum. Just understand that while you're meeting an underserved niche, you'll have to also go about building that underserved niche and/or providing a place for it to assemble. It can be immensely satisfying, but it won't make you an overnight zillionaire.

Ultimately, be true to your writing, be clear and sober in your expectations, and let everything else be what it is. That little vein in your forehead will thank you.


----------



## Jena H (Oct 2, 2011)

Monique said:


> Ultimately though, write the change you want to see in the genre. It might sink or it might find an underserved audience. Just go into it with eyes wide open.


Been there, tried that. Mine sunk.  I haven't totally given up on the "romances" I've already written, but I likely won't write any more going forward.



Athena Grayson said:


> This. This so hard I broke something mashing a "like" button that isn't even there.
> Paranormal_kitty, I spent 17 years in RWA watching other people--and myself--fighting against the reader expectations in varying degrees. They are there, and they are what they are. The more you try to fight against those expectations and change the *readers,* the more unnecessary pain you will cause yourself by doing the different thing, but expecting the same results. Romance expectations is what they is. Your choices are to jump inside the fence, go all the way outside of it, or put a saddle on it and name it Seabiscuit. But you absolutely cannot expect to have the same reception from three different positions.


I know this is all true. Unfair, possibly, but true. I've never been a bandwagon-jumper, so again, I probably won't be writing_ any_ version (mine, or the readers') of romance anytime soon.


----------



## Rose Andrews (Jun 1, 2017)

@Athena: well said! Your post was brilliant and thank you for sharing that book (getting it asap).

All I wanted to add is that it's so important to find a genre you can fall in love with. It'll be there right in your heart. It's so much tougher to change other people (reader expectations) and in a way, it's unrealistic and a real struggle. Ever had that boyfriend or friend in the past who you really wanted to connect with but something was missing? You didn't click somehow? So you eventually moved on because no matter how hard you tried, you didn't click, and that was just...that. It's like that with our romance subgenre/readers. 

The solution is to read...a lot. Explore books that don't feel like your normal fit and ones that do. I read enough books I didn't like and decided that particular audience wasn't for me. What's interesting is that I've read historical romance since I was a kid...and never noticed the subtle difference in various time periods/settings. It's only reading it through the eyes of an adult writer--as a woman--that I understand where my interests fit in with a particular audience. 

Romance genre is amazing. I love it so, so much. It has the power to transform the lives of readers, inspire them emotionally, make them FEEL and seduce them with a good story and larger-than-life characters. Literature in general has this power, but maybe I'm biased when I say that romance has a specific task in this world. There are lonely people out there who have never experienced love, people who've had love taken from them, lost love somehow, are in boring marriages and need hope, whatever their situation is it doesn't matter. There is a reason why readers have expectations: because they are looking for something specific you rob from them whenever you put in your own changes. It's like going to get eggs at the store but inside the carton there are upgraded Easter eggs with chocolate instead of yolk or whatever. When you try to change things, you take from readers the very promise you promise to deliver when they pay for your work.

So read read read and find an audience that strikes your fancy. I've recently decided to only write in the 20th century, even though that time period has a tiny audience and I wager more of those readers are going there for the women's fiction, which I tried to write and couldn't do it. Why? Because I love uplifting stories of love, of romance where they live happily-ever-after. As a kid, I enjoyed watching black and white movies with moving emotions. I want to write God at the center of these relationships; so Inspirational fiction. These are the types of books I want to write, even if they won't make me a ton of money. Because it's where I fit in. Where do you fit in? If you don't know yet, that's okay. Take the time to find out. Maybe it's romance. Maybe it's not. But I think it is romance for you...you just still need to figure out where you fit in.


----------



## Anastasja (Sep 3, 2017)

RBN said:


> Some of the best people I know have substance abuse and mental health issues. Being in pain doesn't make one a bad person or unworthy or incapable of love. It's just not as easy as when everything is sunshine and rainbows.
> 
> Flawed people can be good, bad, or mediocre, and none of us is free of flaws.


When I mentioned psychological problems I meant to say: I don't believe that people who sleep around are healthy in all senses because my life experience tells me otherwise. I never implied that people with psychological problems are unworthy or incapable of love.


----------



## amdonehere (May 1, 2015)

To OP: I'm really not understanding why you're trying so hard to force your book into the Romance category if that's not what you want to write.  It sounds like you have a great story, and it's not something that will meet the Romance audience' expectations. As a result, you're having a lot of frustrations with the Romance audience and the genre. But that's like butting your head against the wall. There are other readers out there, you know. Why not target your book to the readers who would want to read your story, with your kind of heroine?  It'll be a lot less frustrating for everyone.

If you target your book to the right audience instead, then you'll have a chance to maximize sales to those audience, instead of worrying that your sales won't be as stellar among the Romance readers.

Maybe you're thinking you want to sell to Romance because it's the most popular genre, but that doesn't mean it's easy to succeed there. Lot more competition. And many authors who follow the tropes might not do well as it is. I don't write Romances but I'm sure our fellow Romance authors here can tell you it's no cake walk.

I sense your frustrations but I guess I'm just not understanding why you must try to fit a square peg into a hole. Sell to the right target audience. There are a lot of readers out there.


----------



## Word Fan (Apr 15, 2015)

EC Sheedy said:


> The really, really big trope in romance that needs to go is the requirement that a hero be over six feet tall.


That may be a bit of social- and cultural anthropology from which there is no escape, like it or not.


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

AlexaKang said:


> To OP: I'm really not understanding why you're trying so hard to force your book into the Romance category if that's not what you want to write.


I'm not. I've already decided to go with urban fantasy, although I do have some concerns that the love story maybe a little too heavy for the genre...but it's definitely a better fit there. I just never really understood why certain things are expected in the romance genre. Like the guy has to be tall, really?? I didn't write to fit any genre; I just wrote the story I wanted to tell.


----------



## Crystal_ (Aug 13, 2014)

ShayneRutherford said:


> Think of it less as demographics, and more as that the genre has become a reflection of what the largest part of its audience wants. Does that make sense?


Most people write what they see selling. Over time, that makes genres more derivative, then readers get bored of the same old, flock to new themes/authors, and the cycle repeats itself. Romance is no more or less tropey than any other genre.

Paranormal, why do you care so much about writing a promiscuous heroine in a romance? If that is really what you want to do, do it and own it. Some readers won't like it. So what? No matter what you do, some readers won't like it. Romance readers are not one monolithic group. There are so, so many different types of romance out there. A lot of times review complaints are the reasons why other readers love books. My books get a lot of "too much sex" reviews, but my readers always tell me the heat factor is one of the reasons why they pick up my books.

If you don't want to be boxed in by expectations, then don't let them box you in. It's tricky finding a balance between writing what you love and writing what is marketable, but a lot of the skill in writing is finding a way to write the story you want in a way that is marketable.


----------



## EllieDee (May 28, 2017)

> I'm not. I've already decided to go with urban fantasy, although I do have some concerns that the love story maybe a little too heavy for the genre...but it's definitely a better fit there.


Aaaaand there there it is. Urban Fantasy will continue to scoop up readers like me, people who have been overwhelmed by the size of the Romance category, annoyed by the offerings in the top 100 lists, and failed by the subcat and tagging systems.

You know what? That's cool. Gimme those against-all-odds, passionate and sex-positive romances between a demon hunter and a vampire. My kindle 3g can hold over 3000 ebooks. Bring it on. 

Funny enough, despite all the complaining in I did _just now_, this thread has pointed me at some Romance subgenres I want to take another look at. I've browsed through M/M romances in the past and found some pretty infuriating tropes going on, but I'm feeling energized and ready for another round of disappointment! Oh, and it looks like New Adult Romance authors may be more willing to explore nontraditional love stories. Look out, bank account!


----------



## Rose Andrews (Jun 1, 2017)

EllieDee said:


> Aaaaand there there it is. Urban Fantasy will continue to scoop up readers like me, people who have been overwhelmed by the size of the Romance category, annoyed by the offerings in the top 100 lists, and failed by the subcat and tagging systems.
> 
> You know what? That's cool. Gimme those against-all-odds, passionate and sex-positive romances between a demon hunter and a vampire. My kindle 3g can hold over 3000 ebooks. Bring it on.
> 
> Funny enough, despite all the complaining in I did _just now_, this thread has pointed me at some Romance subgenres I want to take another look at. I've browsed through M/M romances in the past and found some pretty infuriating tropes going on, but I'm feeling energized and ready for another round of disappointment! Oh, and it looks like New Adult Romance authors may be more willing to explore nontraditional love stories. Look out, bank account!


Traditional romance can be sex positive and against all odds...I don't see why it can't be? Isn't that what romance is?


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

Okay, so all (most) of the posts gave me a better understanding of the why, even if I still don't agree or want to write to those restrictions. Challenging the expectations is a nice idea, but personally I don't really want to take the risk after putting all the effort into a book and cover.

The only question I have left is ... *why the height thing?* My MMC can't be sexy because he's under six feet tall? Is this only a romance thing or it across genres? I mean, it would be an easy change to go back and make, but he doesn't really have the genetics to be 6'5" or anything. Plus the FMC is short, so that might create a logistics challenge for some things (haha).



EllieDee said:


> You know what? That's cool. Gimme those against-all-odds, passionate and sex-positive romances between a demon hunter and a vampire. My kindle 3g can hold over 3000 ebooks. Bring it on.


Yay


----------



## Usedtoposthere (Nov 19, 2013)

Romance can absolutely be sex positive and sex experimental. Both characters can have pasts. If the heroine has been sleeping around in present day a lot at the start you just probably want to look at new adult or younger demographic audiences. 

Part of the deal of romance at least steamy romance is that the sex is amazing for both of them. So that's a big thing. Partly the emotional component and partly that he is good at it and willing to take his time. I wrote a really popular book where she hadn't been orgasmic with a man and he's always willing to work and see what gets her there and do that. In real life a lot of men aren't that willing to be as experimental or as generous so part of it is setting an expectation, for me. 

I have a super popular hero who's just at six feet and super stocky. Mashed nose and cauliflower ears. Heroine is taller than him when she wears heels as she is 5 10, and that bothers him not a bit. He is also younger than she is and not as good a rock climber. He tells her he doesn't have to be taller, older, or better at climbing. That when his masculinity is threatened he'll let her know. He joins her in her celibacy pact because he's been very promiscuous and cheated on his wife and is an alcoholic, and he has major regrets. They have sex once in the story, towards the end. He deals with his sexual frustrations by taking her shoe shopping. Extremely popular hero.

In my experience readers like confident heroes. My readers also like kind heroes, but there are plenty of alpha holes out there selling books. Listen to Atunah. Atunah is wise. Romance is a HUGE and diverse genre with far fewer constraints than people think. Write an emotionally compelling story about fully fleshed out people and make the reader care what happens to them.


----------



## Usedtoposthere (Nov 19, 2013)

And by the way I've written exactly one virginal heroine. I've also written books where the woman is richer and more famous than the guy. I've written two books where the heroine is in a committed relationship when she meets the guy, and a book where she goes out with the guy, he behaves badly (says something she overheard), and she sleeps with somebody else who turns out to be a jerk before she gets with the hero. That's my Pride and Prejudice homage. You don't have to write romance in ANY x formula way unless you write for Harlequin. Montlake Romance gave me zero guidelines or rules. Hero and heroine need a strong emotional and physical attraction. The one thing I've found Where I went wrong is if hero isn't absolutely crazy about the heroine (he can be denying that to himself but the reader needs to be in no doubt). THAT is what it's about. A guy who would die for you. Which isn't really a fantasy. That's just a good man.


----------



## PatriciaDreas (Mar 30, 2017)

paranormal_kitty said:


> What is about the demographics of the readers that makes it that way though?


Emotional immaturity? It's definitely a mystery.


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

Usedtoposthere said:


> I have a super popular hero who's just at six feet and super stocky. Mashed nose and cauliflower ears.


Well, if you managed to sell a hero with that description, I would guess that being vertically challenged only won't hurt my MMC that much.



Usedtoposthere said:


> THAT is what it's about. A guy who would die for you. Which isn't really a fantasy. That's just a good man.


The guy in my book is literally willing to die for her (accompanies her on a suicide mission and says he'd rather die with her than live without her).



PatriciaDreas said:


> Emotional immaturity? It's definitely a mystery.


Haha.


----------



## Usedtoposthere (Nov 19, 2013)

PatriciaDreas said:


> Emotional immaturity? It's definitely a mystery.


Geez. What a thing to say. If you think the genre is stupid and you can't find romances you like,
don't write it. It's the most competitive genre esp contemp romance so if you don't get it or like it you are unlikely to do well. But plenty of authors and readers simply find it boring.

The guy can't seem whipped. He has to be strong and confident and have a good body. He doesn't have to be handsome.


----------



## Laran Mithras (Nov 22, 2016)

Whenever these romance threads come up, the fur starts flying.

Sigh


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

Usedtoposthere said:


> The guy can't seem whipped. He has to be strong and confident and have a good body. He doesn't have to be handsome.


I'm sorry...I didn't mean to offend. The cauliflower description just kind of made me laugh...like it's pretty un-sexy, so if that works...you know. Like I said, I'm not marketing as romance, but I was afraid the height discrimination carried over to other genres.


----------



## Usedtoposthere (Nov 19, 2013)

We're a little tired of having our genre belittled. We try to be helpful and to explain that romance is diverse, but it seems like we always hear these really negative things that don't get said about other genres. I could say cozy mystery seems so unrealistic with the cookies and the cats and the amateur detectives, or why do guys read thrillers, do they really want to solve problems with violence. But as it happens I like mystery and thrillers and get the appeal. That's why I write romantic suspense. But I really and absolutely hate horror. It feels to me like people must have sadistic tendencies to like it. EXCEPT I KNOW THAT ISNT TRUE. Excuse caps. I know that I just don't have whatever human tendency enjoys reading awful things. I, personal-I, take them too much to heart and can't separate fantasy from reality. I take care not to read thrillers that dwell on people's pain, especially around sexual violence. But unless somebody actually reveals to me in conversation that, say, reading descriptions of rape and murder excites them in a way that I think is dicey, I try to remember that we read for different reasons.


----------



## Monique (Jul 31, 2010)

PatriciaDreas said:


> Emotional immaturity? It's definitely a mystery.


Because their standards differ from yours they're immature? Where's the eyerolly emoji?


----------



## Laran Mithras (Nov 22, 2016)

Each genre has their niche. Straight (un-niched) romance has certain expectations from the readers. Best to view it as a very tight sub-niche. Complaining about it is pointless.

It's the customer that matters. Trying to force other niches into romance will likely be dealt with by suffering scathing reviews.

Write your heart, and don't listen to people who disagree with your story. But make sure you stick it in the right category. Forcing your idea of romance onto readers won't work.


----------



## PatriciaDreas (Mar 30, 2017)

Usedtoposthere said:


> Geez. What a thing to say. If you think the genre is stupid and you can't find romances you like,
> don't write it.


Knowing a market requires an understanding of the mindset of its average reader, including their basic emotional maturity - what can they handle? How much of the real world are they willing to permit in a work of fiction?

I don't think the romance genre or any other genre is stupid or not stupid. For pleasure, I don't read any of them avidly, but I appreciate some more than others. As for writing in any of the genres, for some of us, it's just a job, like writing copy for annual reports or marketing brochures. In every case, knowing the market is key to writing effective copy.

To question the emotional maturity of the average romance reader isn't making a statement. The OP asked a question. I offered a clue to the answer in the form of another question.


----------



## Jena H (Oct 2, 2011)

boba1823 said:


> Personally, I absolutely _love_ clear reader expectations, whatever they may be.
> 
> I find that by ruling out many possibilities for a character or plot, I'm better able to focus on the interesting stuff that really matters to me. No "Oh golly, how should I end this story?" - I write Romance, so it ends happily ever after. Boom. Don't have to think about that one, good, I can focus on the journey there. What's the fellow look like? Well duh: tall, handsome, strong. What's he do for a living? Oye, there are some choices there, but fortunately I can stick to some common ones: he's a billionaire (great job, sign me up), and/or a rock star, or sports star, or... sometimes a pirate? I'm doing Contemporary, so I can rule out the pirates. I'll just spin the wheel on that one. He's a billionaire, there we go. Personality? Duh again, alpha.
> 
> ...


This is one of the reasons I rarely read romance anymore. Especially contemporary.


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

PatriciaDreas said:


> As for writing in any of the genres, for some of us, it's just a job, like writing copy for annual reports or marketing brochures.


Man, I don't think I'd want to read something written by an author who felt that way about the story. Seems like it would have no soul to it.


----------



## PatriciaDreas (Mar 30, 2017)

paranormal_kitty said:


> Man, I don't think I'd want to read something written by an author who felt that way about the story. Seems like it would have no soul to it.


Many popular, established romance authors haven't lifted a pen in years, yet they're still publishing. How do they do that? They hire professional ghostwriters.


----------



## Simply_Me (Mar 31, 2016)

Paranormal_kitty, there is a sub-genre very popular in romance and most of the heroines are similar to yours. And within this sub-genre there are books with paranormal too, here is a list of the most popular books in it https://www.goodreads.com/shelf/show/motorcycle-club-romance

Just reading the reviews you can learn a lot of what readers like and dislike.

The great thing is that we don't need permission to publish anymore, and there's an audience/readership for everything.

I prefer the most traditional romance, and the happy ending. I like action, but not violence.


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

Simply_J said:


> Paranormal_kitty, there is a sub-genre very popular in romance and most of the heroines are similar to yours. And within this sub-genre there are books with paranormal too, here is a list of the most popular books in it https://www.goodreads.com/shelf/show/motorcycle-club-romance


Hmm, interesting.



Simply_J said:


> I prefer the most traditional romance, and the happy ending. I like action, but not violence.


I didn't know I liked violence so much until I started writing it lol. It's not too bad though...mostly shooting and stuffing people into car trunks (followed by the car exploding in one instance). The ending is a bit of a werewolf bloodbath.


----------



## tvnopenope (Sep 14, 2015)

Different readers have different expectations and like different things. I think you can write whatever you want, and as long as you don't market it to the wrong audience, it should be fine. Sometimes it's difficult to figure out who you audience is, though. I often have that problem.


----------



## loonlover (Jul 4, 2009)

PatriciaDreas said:


> Emotional immaturity? It's definitely a mystery.


Do you realize how many readers on this board as well as across the demographic you just insulted?


----------



## crebel (Jan 15, 2009)

loonlover said:


> Do you realize how many readers on this board as well as across the demographic you just insulted?


You would think we would be inured to it by now, wouldn't you? Yet the sentiment still always surprises and disappoints me.


----------



## Simply_Me (Mar 31, 2016)

paranormal_kitty said:


> Hmm, interesting.
> 
> I didn't know I liked violence so much until I started writing it lol. It's not too bad though...mostly shooting and stuffing people into car trunks (followed by the car exploding in one instance). The ending is a bit of a werewolf bloodbath.


That's all right, write what you enjoy writing, and eventually you'll find your own voice and sub-genre. It's a matter of time, just continue writing even if the first book doesn't go far. This craft is learned by doing your own thing, and paying attention to what others do.

Maybe I should have said torture instead of violence. Because some of my favorite series include violence in the action scenes, and I've written some in my own books.

There are series from successful authors, whose heroines often had lovers in their past, but like you said in this thread, once they meet the heroes, that's it. They are forever in love, even if they are fated enemies.

Speaking of forever, a good example of a paranormal heroine that isn't a saint, is Myst from Kresley Cole's 
The Warlord Wants Forever, from the Immortals After Dark series https://www.goodreads.com/series/40483-immortals-after-dark

I didn't like Myst in the prologue, but later I understood her reasons to be the way she was. Some reviewer still hate her. There are werewolves in some of the books in IAD.

I also suggest that you check these other two series:

https://www.goodreads.com/series/152990-scorpius-syndrome

https://www.goodreads.com/series/181728-bad-things


----------



## Atunah (Nov 20, 2008)

crebel said:


> You would think we would be inured to it by now, wouldn't you? Yet the sentiment still always surprises and disappoints me.


Yeah. We have heard it all right? Its still hard to just brush off the insults after all this time.

I had another whole post written. I was trying to be helpful. But I realized its not wanted. There doesn't seem to be any listening going on and like any other romance thread it devolves into wrong stereotypes about its readers and insults. And its always from those that have absolutely no clue about the genre. None. There have been successful romance writers posting here, they aren't listened to. There are those of us readers that keep trying, but we aren't listened to.

I am starting to not care anymore. Have at it. Keep insulting and stereotyping and belittling us romance readers. I guess its one way to turn me off indies. I don't see this stuff from trade publishers. Because most of them know the genre, respect the readers and I "see" them out and about talking about romance.

I am just tired at this point.


----------



## Guest (Sep 20, 2017)

Atunah said:


> I had another whole post written. I was trying to be helpful. But I realized its not wanted. There doesn't seem to be any listening going on and like any other romance thread it devolves into wrong stereotypes about its readers and insults. And its always from those that have absolutely no clue about the genre.


Yeah I don't understand starting a thread to trash a genre you don't understand, don't read, and have no intention of writing in. Personally I read romance for the escapism/fantasy element and seek out the sub-genres that are my catnip. I have a few auto-buy authors who really get their sub genres and deliver the experience I am looking for every time


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

Tilly said:


> Yeah I don't understand starting a thread to trash a genre you don't understand, don't read, and have no intention of writing in. Personally I read romance for the escapism/fantasy element and seek out the sub-genres that are my catnip. I have a few auto-buy authors who really get their sub genres and deliver the experience I am looking for every time


I didn't start the thread to trash the genre. I just wanted to understand more of why it's career suicide to publish in romance if you don't meet - what seemed to me at first - arbitrary requirements. With one notable exception, I learned something from everyone who posted whether I ultimately agree or not. I'm not really sure why the sensitivity can be so high from readers and writers of romance though. I mean, I'm a life-long soap fan and that gets made fun of all the time. I don't think it's offensive just because I happen to enjoy watching them myself. I know the stories can be silly and outrageous, so why be offended? It just kind of seems like taking yourself a little too seriously, maybe?


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

boba1823 said:


> In fairness, certain discussion participants were also getting a bit, erm, sensitive when the topic at hand was how some people see promiscuity as unethical and disgusting.


Yeah, but you have to realize in saying that you might be offending someone's actual lifestyle.

There's a big difference in criticizing someone's entertainment choices and calling someone a dirty whore who is as disgusting as a person who picks their nose all the time.


----------



## Atunah (Nov 20, 2008)

Usedtoposthere said:


> Yep.
> 
> Emotional immaturity is one I've never been accused of before. Being or writing. Fortunately I have enough lovely emotionally mature readers who like my realistic romance, so I'll just keep going along doing my thing and focus on entertaining myself and them rather than trying to explain my beloved genre to people who don't like or understand it.


Yep, we hear it often. Emotional, sensitive, narrow, lonely house wives, sad, bon bon eating cat collectors, pearl clutching, etc. We hear it all. Lets see, a genre most written by women, most read by women. Yeah, we hear it all, all our lives.

You keep going kicking butt with your romances.



paranormal_kitty said:


> Yeah, but you have to realize in saying that you might be offending someone's actual lifestyle.


I don't think of reading romances of being a lifestyle. I think of it reading fiction. Not any different then when I pick up a historical mystery, a paranormal mystery, urban fantasy, etc. We are not the characters in the books. I have never met a character that was just like me, never. I am not them, I am me. They are people to me, they help me through tough times and they brighten my days even more when I am just fishing fine. They take me on a journey to who knows where. Pirates, lordlings, billionaires, ladies, tattoo artists, geeks, musicians, highlanders, barristers, soccer players, tennis players. Strike that, there are no fishing tennis players I can find darn it.

Go check out SBTB. I can't spell it out on KB. You'll find it googling. Check out romance readers sites, watch the documentary love between the covers. Its on Netflix. Read the genre. Just darn read it. Or just leave us be.


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

Atunah said:


> I don't think of reading romances of being a lifestyle. I think of it reading fiction.


That was exactly the point I was making. Criticizing reading romances is not criticizing who a person is. When people were saying that promiscuity/casual sex is gross/immoral/whatever, people who actually do those things may have been reading it...so would you really wonder why they might find that offensive or take it personally?


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

boba1823 said:


> Maybe I misunderstood, but I had thought that the original question for the thread was something along the lines of "Why won't Romance readers accept a heroine with a history of sleeping around?"


That's the thing that ended up being discussed most, but the original question was about romance reader expectations in general. The height thing was a new one to me though.


----------



## Nope (Jun 25, 2012)

.


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

P.J. Post said:


> Writing tip:
> If your character is promiscuous, then we need a reason(s) why, and it should matter. It can't just be a checkbox on a character profile, like +7 dexterity. When did this behavior start? How did it start? What does it say about her self esteem? Is it empowering or shameful? How does she feel the next morning? Does she own it? How does it affect the rest of her personality - because it's probably a pretty big driver for her emotional being and relationships, from co-workers to friends. Does she drink a lot? Which came first? What was her childhood like? And finally, we need that history of promiscuity to matter later on in the story - Chekhov's gun.


So I guess you were assuming I can't answer any of this about my own promiscuous heroine? She lost her father (her only parent) at 16 and went to live with a strange vampire at a vampire hotel, where she discovered that she has a fang fetish. In the prologue, she kisses her first vampire and discovers that it does something for her that none of the regular boys she had kissed did. She's promiscuous because she wants to be. She begins as someone who just does what she wants and has little direction in life, but her feelings for the MMC along with the huge mission she's entrusted with because of her father cause her to find a purpose and grow up.

She owns her behavior and choices, and her friends often playfully tease her about her fang fetish and her high number of conquests. When she and the MMC discuss their sexual pasts, she's actually a lot more shocked about him only being with two women. Her past promiscuity helps her to realize she's in love because she feels different about the MMC than anyone else she's been with. She is really reluctant to admit her feelings throughout the relationship because she's always been so independent and unemotional. Whereas the MMC is the complete opposite.


----------



## Forgettable (Oct 16, 2015)

.


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

LMareeApps said:


> I might be wrong, but I was under the impression it was a writing tip (the underlined heading gives it away!)- not an accusation, and that the 'we' was actually referring to your readers.


It just kind of seemed like not giving enough credit to people who write this kind of character. I think anyone who does would likely be able to answer all of those questions. It seems like some people think that just because you write that type of character it's only for shock value or something. So hopefully I provided an example of how it works.

And also...what about questioning the virgin trope? Do these contemporary twenty-something women ever have plausible reasons for why they're not only virgins but also often completely ignorant of how their bodies and sex even works?


----------



## Forgettable (Oct 16, 2015)

.


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

LMareeApps said:


> I think maybe you're looking for insults where there are none.


I may have. It's late and I've been sorting through Stock Photo Hell all day.


----------



## Becca Mills (Apr 27, 2012)

Reviewing this thread, there's lots here that's good and of value -- a lot of great information, a number of interesting ideas offered in good faith, much civil discussion. But one strand of the thread, the one that resulted in the comment about romance readers as emotionally immature, is troubling. I think I've pieced the strand together. Apologies if I neglected or misattributed an element:

It probably begins with paranormal_kitty's OP, which asked a question about restrictions within the romance genre, with particular focus on female casual sex. I can see she made an effort to keep her phrasing neutral, but it's not hard (especially for those of us who've read her other recent threads) to see a certain level of frustration prompted by believing FMCs like hers aren't acceptable in romance. That unstated frustration gives the OP a "what's wrong with this genre?" shadow life, despite the admirable effort at neutral phrasing.

Later, boba1823 characterized romance readers -- or at least some of them -- as thinking female casual sex is "nasty, gross," akin to someone "who compulsively picks her nose. And.. then eats it."

paranormal_kitty asked what could account for romance readers' thinking this way.

PatriciaDreas suggested that emotional immaturity might account for it.

Usedtoposthere and Monique challenged that explanation.

Reacting to Usedtoposthere, PatriciaDreas neither retracted the explanation nor claimed she was only trying to account for the extreme reaction to casual sex boba1823 described; instead, she clarified that she truly was questioning "the emotional maturity of the average romance reader."

Understandably, a number of readers and writers of romance were hurt and offended.

This strand of the thread ... we don't want that to happen. All genres are equal here, and all authors, all readers. We don't want to end up denigrating our colleagues who write romance or our members who read it. Exploring genre differences and boundaries is important. As writers, we need to be able to do that. But the exploration needs to stop short of "_____ genre is the way it is because there's something wrong with the people who read/write it." In our minds, we need to make sure we go through *both* stages Usedtoposthere described in talking about her own reaction to the horror genre: "It feels to me like people must have sadistic tendencies to like it. EXCEPT I KNOW THAT ISNT TRUE. Excuse caps. I know that I just don't have whatever human tendency enjoys reading awful things." If we're all going to get along on in a multi-genre environment, it's essential to live the truth that the genres that don't appeal to you, don't appeal to you _because of you_, not _because of them_.

So, not locking the thread, since there's much excellent discussion here. But I do think we need to watch out for this dynamic or process, try to keep from going down that road.


----------



## PearlEarringLady (Feb 28, 2014)

Atunah said:


> I had another whole post written. I was trying to be helpful. But I realized its not wanted. There doesn't seem to be any listening going on and like any other romance thread it devolves into wrong stereotypes about its readers and insults. And its always from those that have absolutely no clue about the genre. None. There have been successful romance writers posting here, they aren't listened to. There are those of us readers that keep trying, but we aren't listened to.





boba1823 said:


> There's at least one aspiring romance writer listening


And another one here. I love these threads, even when they get a bit contentious, because I learn so much from them. I write traditional Regency romances, but I struggle with it because I really don't understand the wider romance genre at all, and these discussions are incredibly educational for me. Please, please don't stop.


----------



## Crystal_ (Aug 13, 2014)

Usedtoposthere said:


> And by the way I've written exactly one virginal heroine. I've also written books where the woman is richer and more famous than the guy. I've written two books where the heroine is in a committed relationship when she meets the guy, and a book where she goes out with the guy, he behaves badly (says something she overheard), and she sleeps with somebody else who turns out to be a jerk before she gets with the hero. That's my Pride and Prejudice homage. You don't have to write romance in ANY x formula way unless you write for Harlequin. Montlake Romance gave me zero guidelines or rules. Hero and heroine need a strong emotional and physical attraction. The one thing I've found Where I went wrong is if hero isn't absolutely crazy about the heroine (he can be denying that to himself but the reader needs to be in no doubt). THAT is what it's about. A guy who would die for you. Which isn't really a fantasy. That's just a good man.


My books that have done the best are the ones where the hero's feelings and motives are more of a mystery. Is he into her or is it just sex? She doesn't know and neither does the reader. Different readers like different things. I love writing the hero's POV, but I miss making him a mystery, so I'll probably be returning to single POV sometine soon.



paranormal_kitty said:


> I didn't start the thread to trash the genre. I just wanted to understand more of why it's career suicide to publish in romance if you don't meet - what seemed to me at first - arbitrary requirements. With one notable exception, I learned something from everyone who posted whether I ultimately agree or not. I'm not really sure why the sensitivity can be so high from readers and writers of romance though. I mean, I'm a life-long soap fan and that gets made fun of all the time. I don't think it's offensive just because I happen to enjoy watching them myself. I know the stories can be silly and outrageous, so why be offended? It just kind of seems like taking yourself a little too seriously, maybe?


This isn't just true about romance. It's true about every genre. You're cherry picking examples from romance, but urban fantasy is just as trope heavy.



Usedtoposthere said:


> There's also a huge subgenre of instalove stories about rock stars and such where it starts with a hookup and the hero is madly in love. I don't write that because in real life that isn't how male celebrities tend to work. But certainly that subgenre is full of heroines who are meeting the guy and going right to bed with him.


Uh, no there isn't. As described, this is not a thing. There are certainly instalove stories out there, and occasionally they involve a famous hero, but this is not a niche or a popular trope.


----------



## Simply_Me (Mar 31, 2016)

paranormal_kitty said:


> So I guess you were assuming I can't answer any of this about my own promiscuous heroine? She lost her father (her only parent) at 16 and went to live with a strange vampire at a vampire hotel, where she discovered that she has a fang fetish. In the prologue, she kisses her first vampire and discovers that it does something for her that none of the regular boys she had kissed did. She's promiscuous because she wants to be. She begins as someone who just does what she wants and has little direction in life, but her feelings for the MMC along with the huge mission she's entrusted with because of her father cause her to find a purpose and grow up.
> 
> She owns her behavior and choices, and her friends often playfully tease her about her fang fetish and her high number of conquests. When she and the MMC discuss their sexual pasts, she's actually a lot more shocked about him only being with two women. Her past promiscuity helps her to realize she's in love because she feels different about the MMC than anyone else she's been with. She is really reluctant to admit her feelings throughout the relationship because she's always been so independent and unemotional. Whereas the MMC is the complete opposite.


I think that she is within the paranormal romance ways, and it's all right. Indeed, Cynthia Eden's Forbidden Bite has a heroine with a similar past, and nobody has said anything. Apparently, in their world, when vampires feed they often feel the urge to have sex.

The series I linked before was for you to see that there are countless heroines with an active dating past and it's just part of who they are, or were before meeting the hero.

Now, that fang fetish, I've never heard of, that is very original.


----------



## Simply_Me (Mar 31, 2016)

Usedtoposthere said:


> Here's the intro to my heroine in the abovementioned book. You can decide if it sounds like she has no sexual experience or like I'm slut-shaming. It's not my bestselling book, but it's sold tens of thousands of copies and like I said--zero bad reviews for her sexuality or her out-there personality.
> 
> I write grown-up books (meaning, yep, emotionally mature heroes and heroines) for mostly a 35-65-year-old audience. Both hero and heroine in this book are divorced, both over 30, both have been cheated on. They meet in a bar and she goes back to his hotel room with him.
> 
> ...


I couldn't sleep after watching the news, and seeing all the catastrophic events that are happening. I'm glad that I checked the board and read this, it made me smile. I like her a lot, and I don't find anything unusual in her. She'd had lived a normal life, including some relationships that were not the best. She deserves a HEA and it's exciting to see how she gets it and with who.

Thanks for sharing it.


----------



## Evenstar (Jan 26, 2013)

paranormal_kitty said:


> The cauliflower description just kind of made me laugh...like it's pretty un-sexy, so if that works...you know. Like I said, I'm not marketing as romance, but I was afraid the height discrimination carried over to other genres.


If you like men that play that particular sport then the mashed up noses and the cauliflower ears are a must have. A badge of honour. And pretty darn sexy. I like those men so I like those romances. And the height thing? Well, yeah it matters, because it's about genetics, it's how we're built, we seek out strong and powerful in order to maximise chances of survival and produce the strongest heirs. Maybe it matters way less in some areas of romance. For example I see smart brainy men is a trend that is working just as well as strong he-men. Clever and tall? Even better. And yes, I know how dumb it sounds as I write it out, but it's a trope for a reason. Does it carry over to other genres? Seems to me that it does, but I don't read every genre. I'm not a fan of horror or .... Hmmm, that's about it.


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

Evenstar said:


> If you like men that play that particular sport then the mashed up noses and the cauliflower ears are a must have. A badge of honour. And pretty darn sexy. I like those men so I like those romances.


It was the comparison to cauliflower more than the way he would actually look. Just not a sexy way to describe someone.



Evenstar said:


> And the height thing? Well, yeah it matters, because it's about genetics, it's how we're built, we seek out strong and powerful in order to maximise chances of survival and produce the strongest heirs. Maybe it matters way less in some areas of romance. For example I see smart brainy men is a trend that is working just as well as strong he-men. Clever and tall? Even better. And yes, I know how dumb it sounds as I write it out, but it's a trope for a reason. Does it carry over to other genres? Seems to me that it does, but I don't read every genre. I'm not a fan of horror or .... Hmmm, that's about it.


Do you think the height thing leads to racial/ethnic bias since some people tend to be less tall than others?


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

boba1823 said:


> I recall that there was a thread on here a little while back regarding what I guess you might call 'racial preferences' in mainstream Romance.
> 
> I think the general consensus was that outside of the Multicultural Romance sub-genre, and in Contemporary at least, books feature white protagonists and love interests typically sold the best. Or at least the ones with white people on the covers.
> 
> Glancing at today's Amazon (kindle) top 20 Romance list, it looks like all the people on the covers are white. (There's one with multiple shirtless men on the front, and from the thumbnail it looked like some of them may have been people of color, but zooming in... I think they're just in shadows or tan. Actually maybe it is the same one or two models cloned, lol.)


Do you remember the thread? I'm kind of interested in the reasons for this. Is this another one of those things that's accepted as just part of the genre? Is it the writers or the readers or both? Or just that anything non-white gets put into the multicultural sub-category?

I clicked on the one with the multiple shirtless men btw...it's basically Snow White does the seven dwarves, which I have to give the author props. I'm wondering how the HEA promised in the blurb works out with all eight of them.


----------



## LinaG (Jun 18, 2012)

Sounding in kind of late here and many good things have been said, so sorry if I repeat.

The heroine can, I suppose sleep around, but that is generally in the past, or perhaps a relationship that has, just or is about to end.

The reasons as I see them:

The romance genre is about ROMANCE not the sex part. Sure there might be sex in the novel, but if you're heroine is sleeping with random guys during the action of the novel just because she's "in the mood" she is not ready to be "in love." Therefore she is not a good candidate for a female lead in a romance novel. The moment she meets the hero, there is something about him that makes other potential encounters seem pale. This happens in real life too.

A character who is ready to be "in love" wants more. Many novels and films begin this way.

"You didn't go up to her place after?" The friend and confidant will ask the MC. "But she's totally hot and puts out, man. I mean, I'd never slut shame such an attractive, mentally well balanced and independent woman, but she did George and you are _taller_ than he is!"

The hero will stare through the window at the night cityscape below and wonder what the heck is wrong with him... And so it begins.

The character might not be able to articulate 'why' her sleeping around has become less satisfying, but the feeling will hang over any encounter with a potential sex partner. Remember, romance isn't about 'sex partners' romance is about ROMANCE. Romance is two people finding each other and deicing to build a future together. If we accept that, then it makes sense that any sleeping around, should have occurred in the heroine's past. This time, with this guy, she's not going for 'now' she's going for the future, even if she doesn't realize it. Hormones will only take you so far in life. Romances are about that moment when the heroine wants more.

It's important to restate: she may not be conscious of this as she moves through the book. That's why we get all those great scenes with the hero and heroine fighting and throwing junk at each other --they don't realize what's happening, but the reader does --and ho-ho! Our two proud characters are headed for a fall --into each other's arms and into a future they share.

Plus there is the practical, real life thing where when you are attracted to a person as a potential partner, you don't really want to sleep around anyway.



> Rochelle Marks was sleeping--or trying to--with all the windows open and the fan blowing semicool air across her restless form, which was covered only by a pair of blue bikini underwear and a white sheet. Being hot at night would have been just fine if she'd had anybody to be hot with. As it was, there wasn't anyone around to appreciate that those underwear were a size six now instead of a seven. Well, there were people who'd appreciate it. Just nobody she wanted to invite over to appreciate up close.
> 
> She'd just drifted off to sleep with the help of a nice fantasy about a rodeo rider who didn't actually have chlamydia, thirty-second staying power, or a wife in Wyoming, because that was the point of a fantasy. And then the phone rang. She groped for her cell, knocked her water glass right smack onto the mattress, and said something very unladylike.
> 
> The phone was still ringing, though, so she sat up, edged out of the way of the rapidly spreading pool of water--at least it was cool--shoved the hair out of her face, and said, "If you're a telemarketer or my drunk-dialing ex, I will kick your ass."


This is amazing and exactly what I'm talking about. Heroine has a past. It's clearly gone down in flames. She wants no part of that past. The book will be about her future. I love this opening. Love, love, love it! Bravo!

As to the book about romance novels. Ancient, but well worth reading and already done. Edited by Jane Ann Krentz it's called 
_Dangerous Men and Adventurous Women_.

My 2 cents. PS-- Sorry about the quoted film above. I try to be serious, I just can't do it.

Li

All that being said, one of *my favorite Netflix series is Lovesick*. OMG. You have to watch it. It has the sleeping around and the longing all in one. But the premise cleverly allows it.


----------



## Crystal_ (Aug 13, 2014)

Usedtoposthere said:


> Sorry--I stand corrected. I've seen some blurbs and look insides like this, but it's not my subgenre, so clearly those have been the exception.
> 
> I thought those Alexa Riley things were super instalove/insta sex, though. Haven't read them however.


Yes, instalove novellas are big but they rarely involve celebrities. I've never actually read one, so I can't speak to much more about them, but they tend to be more classic tropes like boss/secretary.


----------



## Rose Andrews (Jun 1, 2017)

LinaG said:


> The romance genre is about ROMANCE not the sex part. Sure there might be sex in the novel, but if you're heroine is sleeping with random guys during the action of the novel just because she's "in the mood" she is not ready to be "in love." Therefore she is not a good candidate for a female lead in a romance novel. The moment she meets the hero, there is something about him that makes other potential encounters seem pale. This happens in real life too.
> 
> A character who is ready to be "in love" wants more. Many novels and films begin this way.


This is a great explanation. Personally, I find the romance genre to be an uplifting one. It's about hope, faith, selflessness, and bettering as a person. I don't care who sleeps around with who, I just don't want that in my romance novels. I'm in my 30s and have seen the effects of promiscuity enough to build my own opinion about it. That's my prerogative. Others have their prerogatives. Who cares? I read for escapism and prefer books that provide the emotional journey I'm looking for. I do believe there is something for everyone in this genre. If you believe in true love, that is.


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

Lynna said:


> Cool! I learned something. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cauliflower_ear


Me too! I thought she was using it like how you might describe someone as having buttercream skin or honey eyes. I was like...cauliflower, that is _so_ not sexy. Didn't know that's what it's actually called.

And I feel like I'm carrying the literary banner for shorter guys now. I decided I'm not giving in to society's unattainable standards lol. He's still slightly above average height for his country.


----------



## Jena H (Oct 2, 2011)

paranormal_kitty said:


> And I feel like I'm carrying the literary banner for shorter guys now. I decided I'm not giving in to society's unattainable standards lol. He's still slightly above average height for his country.


I once went out with a guy who was _*very*_ good-looking. And so was his twin.  Thing is he was only about 5'4" or 5'5" at most. (I'm even shorter, so it wasn't awkward.) He was a great guy, too bad we kind of drifted apart. (Not my doing, btw!)


----------



## Word Fan (Apr 15, 2015)

boba1823 said:


> There were two books for Romance writers recommended in the thread:
> 
> Wendall & Tan: _Beyond Heaving Bosoms_
> Krentz (Ed.): _Dangerous Men and Adventurous Women_
> ...


Not a book but a video: _Love Between the Covers_, which USA Today called _"...a riveting and celebratory look at the romance genre and industry."_

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01M1HWUXP/


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

Usedtoposthere said:


> I've seen you say that you need this to work out, that you need the money. Really--think about what you take a risk on. I'm not sure this is the hill to die on. Like--in a thriller for men, the guy's going to sleep with a woman with a good figure. (Meaning: waist/hip ratio and nice breasts.)
> 
> There's a field called evolutionary psychology. It's really fascinating and drills down to a lot of these pretty fundamental human preferences. Useful information for romance authors, especially. (Or authors in any character-driven genre.) Here's an academic study about the preference for height across cultures, for example.
> 
> https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4342156/


Do you really think it matters that much in Urban Fantasy though? I mean the guy's already a vampire, and they would quibble about him being 5'9" lol? I could go 5'10", but the average guy in his country is like 5'8" plus he was sick as a child and survived a heart transplant...not exactly a recipe for reaching your full height. I didn't even think this was short until I read this thread.


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

Usedtoposthere said:


> I imagine that's OK, as long as he's confident, strong, and super capable. And sorry, but I'd make him taller than the heroine.
> 
> It's like book covers. Authors often assert with great confidence that "I don't choose a book based on the cover. Or the reviews." Etc. Why did they even SEE the book? Because they clicked on it! Because of a combination of the cover and title! Because you saw the stars and got a subconscious impression.
> 
> Many of our impressions and decisions are subconscious. We aren't thinking, "Oh, he's short, I don't think he's sexy." He either feels sexy to a reader or he doesn't. She's not analyzing why.


Oh, the heroine is very petite (5'3" and she has an aversion to heels). Personally I think this guy is the sexiest thing ever, but as I've seen my tastes may not align with the general public.


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

Usedtoposthere said:


> Heck, Tom Cruise played 6'5" Jack Reacher. But in the books, where all you have to go on is the words on the page? The man is 6'5".


He's really 6'5" in the books? That's bordering on absurd. And I'm guessing him being ridiculously tall had nothing to do with the story since Tom Cruise could play him in the movie.


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

paranormal_kitty said:


> He's really 6'5" in the books? That's bordering on absurd. And I'm guessing him being ridiculously tall had nothing to do with the story since Tom Cruise could play him in the movie.


I'd say you guess wrong. He was a military brat who joined the forces and became a bad*ss special forces type -- his imposing size is how he deals with a lot of what he comes up against in addition to being the source of suspicion against him at times: this guy is huge and dangerous and no fixed address so he must be the kidnapper/thief/etc.

Tom Cruise was a poor casting choice, in my opinion. But then I'm sort of an anti-fan of him anyway -- and it has nothing to do with his size.  They made him seem imposing with lighting, camera work, and other tricks of the trade. Basically, they just wanted a big name to sell the film.


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

Usedtoposthere said:


> In one book his pectorals literally stop a bullet.


I can't stop laughing.


----------



## Jena H (Oct 2, 2011)

Ann in Arlington said:


> Tom Cruise was a poor casting choice, in my opinion. But then I'm sort of an anti-fan of him anyway -- and it has nothing to do with his size.  They made him seem imposing with lighting, camera work, and other tricks of the trade. Basically, they just wanted a big name to sell the film.


I'm an "anti-fan" of Cruise too.  And when you say "THEY wanted a big name to sell the film".... Cruise himself produced the movie, so it's a safe bet that nobody else was even considered for the role. *cough*vanityproject*cough*


----------



## Athena Grayson (Apr 4, 2011)

paranormal_kitty said:


> He's really 6'5" in the books? That's bordering on absurd. And I'm guessing him being ridiculously tall had nothing to do with the story since Tom Cruise could play him in the movie.


My kid is 6'3" and he's only fifteen (that is a lot of hollow leg I have to fill when he comes home from school). Mr. Athena's brother is 6'5" and so is his college student son. Not so absurd. It's all in the way you carry yourself. If your romance hinges on exact details of your characters' appearances, you're more likely to fall flat, because if you're being that specific--and if you're relying on a pretty face rather than a strong character--you're putting off more readers than you're turning on, so to speak.



boba1823 said:


> There were two books for Romance writers recommended in the thread:
> 
> Wendall & Tan: _Beyond Heaving Bosoms_
> Krentz (Ed.): _Dangerous Men and Adventurous Women_
> ...


There's also the academic blog Teach Me Tonight, run by a number of PhD's focused on the popular genre, that organizes academic studies on the romance genre. http://teachmetonight.blogspot.com/ The contributors have also written a few books on the subject and a number of articles that will dig into the genre's expectations not just right now, but perennially. Paranormal Kitty (and anyone else interested), if you truly want to understand romance as a popular genre, this is the place where you can have it dissected and displayed so you can truly understand what makes it tick from the inside, and why the genre is the way that it is. And you'll get a pretty good insight as to why the genre is not only a literary and commercial powerhouse, but a driver of societal values in and of itself. No one should ever mistake this genre for "fluffy and lightweight" because it is fluffy and lightweight the way Saturn is made of light gases.


----------



## Laran Mithras (Nov 22, 2016)

Usedtoposthere said:


> An "alpha male" does NOT have to be a jerk in any way. He can be soft-spoken, he can listen more than he talks. A truly powerful man often does.


I roll my eyes whenever I see the cliche. What woman really does want to be spanked until she bleeds? Treated like a slave? Obeying some alpha's every whim? Maybe some, but...

Seems like every book I click into with an ab-cover, the guy is a billionaire, tall, crushingly handsome, a total jerk, tatted all to heck and back, with a foot-long soda can d---.

GAWD, where are the real alphas?

But, we read to escape reality. I always paint my men as normal, on the handsome side, and attaining extraordinary exploits. Same for the heroine.

I don't blame authors for the cliche, but I try to avoid them.


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

Jena H said:


> I'm an "anti-fan" of Cruise too.  And when you say "THEY wanted a big name to sell the film".... Cruise himself produced the movie, so it's a safe bet that nobody else was even considered for the role. *cough*vanityproject*cough*


Ah! I didn't realize that.

kinda proves my point though . . . . 



Spoiler



(resisting jokes about size envy)


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

Athena Grayson said:


> My kid is 6'3" and he's only fifteen (that is a lot of hollow leg I have to fill when he comes home from school). Mr. Athena's brother is 6'5" and so is his college student son. Not so absurd. It's all in the way you carry yourself. If your romance hinges on exact details of your characters' appearances, you're more likely to fall flat, because if you're being that specific--and if you're relying on a pretty face rather than a strong character--you're putting off more readers than you're turning on, so to speak.


I meant absurd as in uncommon or exaggerated. Reacher being 6'5" AND stopping a bullet with his pecs...I mean seriously, that's truly absurd. I would put the book down at the bullet-stopping point because it's so completely ridiculous. All my characters are described in detail over the course of the narrative; that's just how I write. His height is only mentioned a couple of times, only once specifically. Like I said, I'm not marketing in the romance genre anyway. It doesn't even fit due to the action, blood and guts.


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

paranormal_kitty said:


> I meant absurd as in uncommon or exaggerated. Reacher being 6'5" AND stopping a bullet with his pecs...I mean seriously, that's truly absurd. I would put the book down at the bullet-stopping point because it's so completely ridiculous. All my characters are described in detail over the course of the narrative; that's just how I write. His height is only mentioned a couple of times, only once specifically. Like I said, I'm not marketing in the romance genre anyway. It doesn't even fit due to the action, blood and guts.


Well, Reacher isn't romance either. It's escapist thriller literature. Women want him, men want to be him.  It's a completely different animal. And HUGELY popular, so there are a lot of people who don't seem to mind. 

No, it's not hugely realistic -- but readers of that sort of book want something where they can say 'wow, that's almost unbelievable'. Emphasis on the 'almost' -- suspension of disbelief is not violated.  Rational humans reading it do recognize that it's fiction and he's a highly idealized person. And that's o.k.


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

Ann in Arlington said:


> Well, Reacher isn't romance either. It's escapist thriller literature. Women want him, men want to be him.  It's a completely different animal. And HUGELY popular, so there are a lot of people who don't seem to mind.
> 
> No, it's not hugely realistic -- but readers of that sort of book want something where they can say 'wow, that's almost unbelievable'. Emphasis on the 'almost' -- suspension of disbelief is not violated.  Rational humans reading it do recognize that it's fiction and he's a highly idealized person. And that's o.k.


I think I'm just not a fan of highly idealized characters. They usually come off as silly to me. I find the flawed, anti-hero type far more interesting.


----------



## LinaG (Jun 18, 2012)

Just a quick thought here: Size doesn't matter.

As writers, we often feel we work alone, but we don't. The experience of the story we create is communal, right? In other words, the reader takes what we've created and uses their own imagination to fill it all in. 

An example from my own writing (a 'mystery caper type thing with overtones of the eventual romance, but it still applies)

My heroine meets my hero, a has-been pop star, to deliver some legal papers to him. I clearly wrote, that although he still sported the semi-shaven beard from his hey-day, she was glad he had a current haircut.  I described his eye color. I mentioned that he is handsome and has not gone to pot.

When I gave this to a trusted beta reader, she was very enthusiastic about the hero, Mickey Nix. "I could just see him," she said, "with his long pony-tail and..."

I'd written nothing about ponytails. Her imagination filled it in.  I don't generally specifically say how tall someone is if I can help it. I don't need to. Our wonderful, creative readers will do all that heavy lifting for us.  I try to walk the line between enough information without being too specific so the reader can work her own magic there.

Also--  Describing less will help 'future proof' your work.  Someday that coffee shop hipster is going look as ridiculous as a skinny, fluffy haired Bee Gee in satin pants.  It's just the way it is.  But your character will still be current, because you resisted describing him in red leather pants and wearing one glove.

If you think about it, you've probably read a romance where the hero, heroine, or some element was described in a way not to your preference, and you changed it in your mind. If you don't like tall men, you probably re-imagined that "tall" hero to be your ideal height, hair color and eye color. You probably dressed him to suit as well.

It's interesting to note that Dashiell Hammett never describes his character "The Continental Op." Sue Grafton, taking a cue from this doesn't describe Kinsey Milhone at all in the first book, and maybe more.

Readers have awesome imaginations! Use them to your advantage!

PS, So much for a "quick thought!"

Li


----------



## Atunah (Nov 20, 2008)

paranormal_kitty said:


> I think I'm just not a fan of highly idealized characters. They usually come off as silly to me. I find the flawed, anti-hero type far more interesting.


Which is one of the reasons I read and love romance. I can find all of that and action, blood and gore. If I am so inclined. Or anything else and in between. But of course I have said that before, repeatedly . And so have others. Probably a good thing you aren't going for the romance market anymore since you still have misconceptions, stereotypes about it that are not what the whole of the genre represents.



Laran Mithras said:


> I roll my eyes whenever I see the cliche. What woman really does want to be spanked until she bleeds? Treated like a slave? Obeying some alpha's every whim? Maybe some, but...
> 
> Seems like every book I click into with an ab-cover, the guy is a billionaire, tall, crushingly handsome, a total jerk, tatted all to heck and back, with a foot-long soda can d---.
> 
> ...


Its pretty much why I don't look at the top 100 on amazon anymore. There is nothing much there for me. But I don't have to. Either stick with know names or find readers like on goodreads that like stuff you like. Go to big name blogs, some are even by subgenre. Also lots of stuff in the top 100 isn't even romance, its thinly veiled erotica.

One of my big no is insta-love. And many of these newer type romance that keep popping up, have that. So mostly I stick with the "brands" and then some selected new authors that have been talked about by readers I trust.


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

Atunah said:


> Which is one of the reasons I read and love romance. I can find all of that and action, blood and gore. If I am so inclined. Or anything else and in between. But of course I have said that before, repeatedly . And so have others. Probably a good thing you aren't going for the romance market anymore since you still have misconceptions, stereotypes about it that are not what the whole of the genre represents.


I guess you didn't notice I was talking about Reacher here, not anything in the romance genre?



Lorri Moulton said:


> I cannot believe I posted a photo of Cary Grant (who was 6'2" by the way) and the conversation shifts to Tom Cruise. SMH


Haha. I'm not a Tom Cruise fan (too weird), but my favorite actor is 5'10". I always thought somewhere around there was a good height for a man.


----------



## Fel Beasley (Apr 1, 2014)

paranormal_kitty said:


> Do you really think it matters that much in Urban Fantasy though? I mean the guy's already a vampire, and they would quibble about him being 5'9" lol? I could go 5'10", but the average guy in his country is like 5'8" plus he was sick as a child and survived a heart transplant...not exactly a recipe for reaching your full height. I didn't even think this was short until I read this thread.


Does his actual height matter in the story? If not, you don't have to mention it in specifics. Especially if your FMC is shorter than him. This thread is about romance expectations, but you are writing urban fantasy. Even in urban fantasy, readers want the love interest to be extremely attractive. What one person finds attractive, another might not. Many people find taller men more attractive, probably because of the sense that big(tall) equals protection. Does that mean you have to make your love interest tall? No, of course not. But if it isn't important to the story, why would you want to risk turning off readers? Even in non-romance, with a romance sub-plot, readers are looking for something more specific.

I write and read urban fantasy. A large segment of readers read for the sexual and romantic tension between the FMC and MMC/multiple love interests. You can tell this from the reviews and also from talking to fans. Not everyone cares, I'm sure, but many do. I write very light romantic sub-plots and I prefer a slow burn romance where the FMC and the MMC develop a strong friendship before a relationship. Mostly this is because I love the trope enemies to lovers and including a genuine friendship in between makes it far more believable. My FMC also has multiple relationships, though once she commits to the "one", she is committed.

In urban fantasy, many of the love interests will be the same type of alpha-hole that's popular in certain sub-genres of romance. A jerk with a soft spot for the FMC. Even though I don't focus on romantic relationships, my fans have a preference for the type of the love interests they fall in love. And most prefer the bad-boy demon and the slutty best friend with commitment issues who uses women like tissues. (Neither of which who are good for her.) You are already writing against type (which I find good and refreshing), but urban fantasy still has a lot of the same expectations that you are seeing in romance when it comes to the romantic and sexual relationships in a book/series.

Will making your MMC 5'9 or 5'10 make or break your book? No. But it wouldn't make or break your book if it was romance either. The primary expectation in romance and urban fantasy (and other sub-genres) is that the love interest is attractive to the reader. There's lots of ways of accomplishing this and you can't please everyone.


----------



## Becca Mills (Apr 27, 2012)

Lilly_Frost said:


> Coke, Pepsi, or store-brand?


Not sure, but I think it's diet.


----------



## Jena H (Oct 2, 2011)

LinaG said:


> Just a quick thought here: Size doesn't matter.
> 
> As writers, we often feel we work alone, but we don't. The experience of the story we create is communal, right? In other words, the reader takes what we've created and uses their own imagination to fill it all in.
> 
> ...


Good point. I'm sure many readers like to imagine what the MCs look like rather than having it spelled out for them. 
Like you I haven't described some of my characters in detail--not to the point of including height. One of my series does have a 'character' who is only referenced but not really seen on-page. I did mention his impressive height, but that was mainly because he's sort of based on a hunky TV character, whose actor is also hunky and tall.  In the same series, my main female character is described as "average in every way"--height, build, hair color, hair length, etc. This feature helps her "blend in" and be more or less invisible in a crowd.


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

HopelessFanatic said:


> Does his actual height matter in the story? If not, you don't have to mention it in specifics. Especially if your FMC is shorter than him. This thread is about romance expectations, but you are writing urban fantasy. Even in urban fantasy, readers want the love interest to be extremely attractive. What one person finds attractive, another might not. Many people find taller men more attractive, probably because of the sense that big(tall) equals protection. Does that mean you have to make your love interest tall? No, of course not. But if it isn't important to the story, why would you want to risk turning off readers? Even in non-romance, with a romance sub-plot, readers are looking for something more specific.


It might matter somewhat. The two MCs are little rough with each other at times. It might not be believable that she could shove him around as she does if he was thought to be a larger person. I also have a feeling that many people would assume him to be short regardless, perhaps even shorter than how he's described. There is plenty of the protective aspect in the story though. I don't think he has to be big and tall to convey that when he does things like shielding her from gunfire.



HopelessFanatic said:


> I write and read urban fantasy. A large segment of readers read for the sexual and romantic tension between the FMC and MMC/multiple love interests. You can tell this from the reviews and also from talking to fans. Not everyone cares, I'm sure, but many do. I write very light romantic sub-plots and I prefer a slow burn romance where the FMC and the MMC develop a strong friendship before a relationship. Mostly this is because I love the trope enemies to lovers and including a genuine friendship in between makes it far more believable. My FMC also has multiple relationships, though once she commits to the "one", she is committed.


This is really good to know because I was worried the romantic plot might be too heavy for the genre.



HopelessFanatic said:


> In urban fantasy, many of the love interests will be the same type of alpha-hole that's popular in certain sub-genres of romance. A jerk with a soft spot for the FMC. Even though I don't focus on romantic relationships, my fans have a preference for the type of the love interests they fall in love. And most prefer the bad-boy demon and the slutty best friend with commitment issues who uses women like tissues. (Neither of which who are good for her.) You are already writing against type (which I find good and refreshing), but urban fantasy still has a lot of the same expectations that you are seeing in romance when it comes to the romantic and sexual relationships in a book/series.


Yeah, that is definitely not my MMC, whether that's good or bad. How do the fiery, passionate artist types go over?



HopelessFanatic said:


> Will making your MMC 5'9 or 5'10 make or break your book? No. But it wouldn't make or break your book if it was romance either. The primary expectation in romance and urban fantasy (and other sub-genres) is that the love interest is attractive to the reader. There's lots of ways of accomplishing this and *you can't please everyone*.


I think that's the main takeaway, haha.


----------



## Evenstar (Jan 26, 2013)

Usedtoposthere said:


> Cauliflower ear is the description. It's not my phrase.
> 
> Actually only forwards fit the rugby player stereotype, especially front rowers. Backs in particular can be incredibly pretty. I always say these guys really owe me some cover shoots. I write both forwards and backs, but the tougher, bigger, less glamorous forwards are my favorites. But many women like the backs, who I should note are still muscular, but can be tall or not. High level international rugby players range from 5-7 to 6-7, but I tend to write them not much less than 6 ft because, yes, general female preference.
> 
> ...


As someone who has dated way more than her share of international rugby players, I'm going to make myself unpopular and repeat that height matters to a lot of women, especially within the realm of romance. Now, I know that my taste isn't everyone's taste (the human population would be tiny if it was), but I would like to post exhibit A as an example (no name, but those that love the sport will know). Please note the "cauliflower ears" and the "mashed nose", but I think still utterly irresistible. And yeah, one of things I liked most about him: he was 6ft 9.


----------



## Laran Mithras (Nov 22, 2016)

In both my romances and erotica, I almost never mention actual sizes. But I always have the heroine look up to the hero. I think female readers like that. Had some women tell me they hated looking down at their man.


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

Holy hell, what do you do with 6'9" of man Wait...maybe don't answer that (lol). This is like culture shock or something. I had no idea this preference existed or that it was so common. The roughed up rugby players really do nothing for me...likewise American football players.



Laran Mithras said:


> In both my romances and erotica, I almost never mention actual sizes. But I always have the heroine look up to the hero. I think female readers like that. Had some women tell me they hated looking down at their man.


I have some instances of that, so I guess I did something right at least?


----------



## Laran Mithras (Nov 22, 2016)

I don't know if I'm doing it right or wrong, but no reviewers have complained that I have cliche characters. Never had that complaint.

I think the disposition to explain exacting details of height and weight might just be the authors obsessively describing the description they planned out beforehand. In my case, I use a notepad and rarely even mention hair color. To me, their personality is much more important than whether or not they are 6'1".


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

Laran Mithras said:


> I don't know if I'm doing it right or wrong, but no reviewers have complained that I have cliche characters. Never had that complaint.
> 
> I think the disposition to explain exacting details of height and weight might just be the authors obsessively describing the description they planned out beforehand. In my case, I use a notepad and rarely even mention hair color. To me, their personality is much more important than whether or not they are 6'1".


I don't describe it exposition-wise. It comes up in the scene where he's passed out in his car and the FMC is trying to figure out how to help him. She notes that he's half a foot taller than her, and we already know she's 5'3" from a description of her told by a cop to a bystander in chapter one. I like working in good, detailed descriptions. That's just my style. My pet peeve is reading something and the characters are hardly described at all. Plus, given this character's genetics (Spanish/Italian and his great-grandmother was Quechua), he's obviously not super tall whether I explicitly say so or not.


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

Lynna said:


> Here's my tip:
> 
> For fictional men in romance--they just need to be a little taller than the heroine and STRONG. The vast majority of women like strong men as romance heroes. Period. Make him strong (physically and mentally) and the height is a non-issue unless you bring it up and make a huge deal out of it.
> 
> I mean, don't go saying things like "he was the shortest man in the room but still the sexiest" because that isn't going to save you.


Yeah, of course not because I was under the impression he was average height when I wrote it lol. 6'9"...good lord, you'd need mountain climbing gear. He does pick her up pretty often, does that help?


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

Usedtoposthere said:


> You can absolutely, positively make your books realistic in terms of "how would a real woman feel about that?" That's basically the story of my career.


Yeah, but not realistic in terms of how tall men actually are in the real world...


----------



## Monique (Jul 31, 2010)

paranormal_kitty said:


> Yeah, but not realistic in terms of how tall men actually are in the real world...


Not sure what you mean. I know plenty of men well over six feet.


----------



## Crystal_ (Aug 13, 2014)

I always write height as it's relevant to the particular character. I don't know about you, but my standards for tall and short are all relative to my height. Shorter than me = short, taller than me = tall. I'm 5'10'', so it's unusual when people are significantly taller than I am. I wouldn't call a guy tall unless he was over 6', and maybe not even then. My dad is 6'2'', so he's my model of male height. I rarely think a guy is tall, but a 5'1'' woman is likely to think a 5'7'' is tall, because he's so much taller than her. Or maybe she wears 6'' heels everywhere and thinks he's average. It all comes down to character.

I rarely mention a guy's exact height. I think I have once, and only because he was a particularly tall/big guy. In my mind, one of my heroes is on the shorter side (I never mention his height). When I told an author friend this, she said, "nah, I'm still going to see him as 6'2''." She had a similar reaction when I reminded her that her celebrity crush is 5'5''. "He's six feet tall in my mind."

Make your guys shorter. Just don't mention it/call attention to it. Or do. Make it work. I've read a few romances with shorter guys. Readers didn't mind.


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

Monique said:


> Not sure what you mean. I know plenty of men well over six feet.


Well, of course, but that doesn't mean they have to be the _only_ ones featured in books. It's hardly realistic when everyone's that tall, unless maybe it's about Vikings or the Masai or something.


----------



## Monique (Jul 31, 2010)

paranormal_kitty said:


> Well, of course, but that doesn't mean they have to be the _only_ ones featured in books. It's hardly realistic when everyone's that tall, unless maybe it's about Vikings or the Masai or something.


No one is saying every man has to be tall just that's the convention and part of the fantasy.


----------



## tvnopenope (Sep 14, 2015)

I don't mention height in my books, although I might say "he was tall," and since I'm short, a lot of people are tall to me. I wouldn't date anyone over six feet, but in books, it doesn't matter, because the characters aren't standing next to me and I don't have to look up and crane my neck to see them.


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

Usedtoposthere said:


> Seriously. Anybody can push back. They can try "their way" and see if there's an audience. Who knows, perhaps there is. But if you ask what sells, people will probably tell you what sells.


I know there are people asking for certain types of books and characters, but then people who've written them will say it didn't sell. So who knows? Maybe it's just they aren't connecting with the right audience, or maybe people say one thing and practice another.


----------



## TellNotShow (Sep 15, 2014)

boba1823 said:


> [Notebook out]
> 
> What sells?


Well written stories, as long as people can find them, and they don't alienate almost everybody.


----------



## Crystal_ (Aug 13, 2014)

Usedtoposthere said:


> We haven't even mentioned that most romance readers prefer men to be at least somewhat dominant in bed. OH dear ...
> 
> Seriously. Anybody can push back. They can try "their way" and see if there's an audience. Who knows, perhaps there is. But if you ask what sells, people will probably tell you what sells.


I have two books where the heroine ties up the hero. They sold as well as the other books in the series, but they weren't focused on BDSM. It was more one thing he or she wanted to try. I do think a submissive hero will be a hard sell, but I don't foresee any problems with a couple who shares control.


----------



## Shimmergirl69 (Sep 25, 2016)

paranormal_kitty said:


> I've been wondering this for awhile -- why are there so many and such specific reader expectations in this genre?
> 
> I get the basic things that make the genre what it is, like the HEA/HFN, but stuff like the heroine can't have a past of sleeping around (but it's okay for the guys) I don't really understand.


Well there is a double standard when it comes to males and females. That said, I'm on the opposite end of the spectrum and that is, I prefer to write virginal or at the least celibate characters (and of course there is that one man they will come out of celibacy for)

My particular dilemma is, I don't believe that there is a Black readership for virginal Black heroines. I say that to say, I still write my characters how they come to me. And I would say the same for you-you can write your characters how you want-BUT if you are writing for the masses, you might have to buckle and give the readers what they want. Which is a one man, woman heroine, or at least one man that she will ultimately sleep with, but her other suitors may chase her, but she never gives into them physically. Honestly I prefer those type of stories as a reader.

I think the stories you want to do would be more of the 'modern' woman (Sex in the City types) but I believe the vast majority of women/readers would prefer to live vicariously through more chaste/pure women. Or, women with not a lot of experience.


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

So, I'd like to ask if there's anything else I should know about reader preferences and expectations (romance or otherwise). Hair color? Eye color? Vaccination schedule? Political affiliation?


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

Usedtoposthere said:


> I don't understand why you are asking if you resent the answers. Wouldn't it just be better to write your stories your way and see what happens?


I'm just curious. Just because I disagree with what's popular, doesn't mean it isn't still good to know. Like the height thing was a complete surprise to me, so I'm wondering if there are other weird things like that.


----------



## Forgettable (Oct 16, 2015)

.


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

LMareeApps said:


> Perhaps if you dropped the sarcasm in your posts, they wouldn't come across quite so offensive.


I wasn't trying to be offensive. It was just a laugh at how many little things I had no idea about. Not meant to insult you or anyone else.


----------



## tvnopenope (Sep 14, 2015)

Crystal_ said:


> I have two books where the heroine ties up the hero. They sold as well as the other books in the series, but they weren't focused on BDSM. It was more one thing he or she wanted to try. I do think a submissive hero will be a hard sell, but I don't foresee any problems with a couple who shares control.


Just curious, did you promote those two books differently or to a different audience? I write slightly dominant heroines, but BDSM isn't the main focus, and sometimes I wonder if I should promote that aspect of the story more.


----------



## Crystal_ (Aug 13, 2014)

taliwrites said:


> Just curious, did you promote those two books differently or to a different audience? I write slightly dominant heroines, but BDSM isn't the main focus, and sometimes I wonder if I should promote that aspect of the story more.


I promoted them about the same. But they weren't *really* about dominant heroines, so I'm not sure it made a difference. AFAIK, femdom is more of an erotica kink, and it can be a hard sell in romance (though there are certainly BDSM books with Dommes). With one, it was a sequel, so readers were already invested in the couple. The hero had never been particularly dominant, but he was leading the action bc the heroine had been abstinent for a long, long time following a sexual assault. People floved that scene, but I don't know how it would have played if it was earlier in their story. The hero was super high strung, always in control type, so it fit him well.

With the other, the hero was more game for anything, and he helped the heroine bring out her inner freak/bad girl. They were more the sharing control type. They got married in Vegas during a ONS, so I focused on that. She was still less experienced than he was (my guys tend to be quite slutty), but her sexual history wasn't in focus except that her past sex life had been lackluster.

I wrote myself into a bit of a corner with my WIP bc it starts with a ONS where the heroine tells the reader she doesn't like being ordered around, but it's been fun to play with them trading who's in control. I haven't included anything remotely BDSM in it as I'm sorta BDSM-ed out at the moment. I think IRL most people are into a bit of playing with control and can be dominant sometimes and submissive sometimes depending on their mood and partner, so I like to write some of my couples that way.


----------



## tvnopenope (Sep 14, 2015)

Crystal_ said:


> I promoted them about the same. But they weren't *really* about dominant heroines, so I'm not sure it made a difference. AFAIK, femdom is more of an erotica kink, and it can be a hard sell in romance (though there are certainly BDSM books with Dommes).


I suppose it's different when the whole book isn't just about the BDSM aspect. I like my stories with a little kink, and I'm still figuring out how people react to that kind of thing. My heroines are usually always in control when it comes to sex, even when it doesn't seem like it. One of my heroines liked to be tied up, but she told the hero exactly what she wanted him to do to her. I wish it were easier to find books that incorporate a bit of kink but aren't completely focused on it. If I search for femdom, I get only erotica, usually aimed at men, and that type of femdom is far from what I enjoy.


----------



## tvnopenope (Sep 14, 2015)

Usedtoposthere said:


> I often write kinky sex in books centered around relationships and not sex. Definitely possible. I just don't think many romance readers enjoy dominant women though. I'm not saying none do. But I don't think it's equal numbers.


Probably, but I also think some readers end up disliking or avoiding reading about dominant women because of the way they tend to be portrayed. When I'm looking for femdom books, I sometimes see reviews saying things like: "I was glad the domme wasn't crazy/cold/nasty," or, "I don't usually care for femdom, but this was nice."


----------



## Laran Mithras (Nov 22, 2016)

paranormal_kitty said:


> I wasn't trying to be offensive. It was just a laugh at how many little things I had no idea about. Not meant to insult you or anyone else.


I've been all over the political spectrum. I find that politics is the surest way to lose some of your customers. If I do write any politics in my stories, my MC is apathetic. Seems to work.


----------



## LinaG (Jun 18, 2012)

HoplessF--



> same type of alpha-hole


Hilarious


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

I was just thinking -- could it be that the height issue comes more from author bias than the readers? If the author thinks of the character's height as unappealing, that's going to end up in the story with him having confidence issues or other things due to it. I didn't even think of my character as short when I wrote it...so wouldn't that make a difference?


----------



## Jena H (Oct 2, 2011)

paranormal_kitty said:


> I was just thinking -- could it be that the height issue comes more from author bias than the readers? If the author thinks of the character's height as unappealing, that's going to end up in the story with him having confidence issues or other things due to it. I didn't even think of my character as short when I wrote it...so wouldn't that make a difference?


This could be true to some degree. I mention things about my character that *I* think are important. Other people might not care about _her_ hair color, or _his_ eyes. For many writers who have said they don't mention character height in their books, maybe subconsciously height isn't that important to them in real life. (I'm not talking about _every case,_ obviously, it's just a generalization.)


----------



## Evenstar (Jan 26, 2013)

paranormal_kitty said:


> I was just thinking -- could it be that the height issue comes more from author bias than the readers? If the author thinks of the character's height as unappealing, that's going to end up in the story with him having confidence issues or other things due to it. I didn't even think of my character as short when I wrote it...so wouldn't that make a difference?


Yes, you really do need to take author bias out of it. You need to write for your readers.

The big secret is out that I personally like tall men , but just because I chose to date a man who is 6'9 does not mean I would _ever_ write my heroes to be that height, it's too extreme for most women. To be honest I don't think I've ever really made a point about their height, they are just taller than my heroine, which is only shown by the fact that she looks UP into his eyes, or raises her mouth for his kiss, etc.


----------



## Laran Mithras (Nov 22, 2016)

I haven't had a single reader complain about my lack of very specific detail. In many of my novellas, I might say: Doug ran his hand back through his long hair.

I don't mention color or height or if the hair is thinning. Instead, I delve more into their thought processes. Most often, I get praise for my character development, even in 40-page stories.

By concentrating on personality, I've let the reader develop their own image of that personality. Maybe they have a favorite actor they think fits. I might ruin that with a detailed description. I let the reader decide.


----------



## Usedtoposthere (Nov 19, 2013)

You've asked about expectations in a certain genre in a number of threads. People who sell well in that genre have told you about expectations in it, and have gone to some trouble to explain why. You don't want to hear it, or you want to deny it or suggest those expectations are author prejudice. I gave you a link to one of many academic studies on the subject. I'm pretty confident there are psychological/biological/social reasons for those preferences.

I don't write to market. I AM the market. If you aren't, you will need to make some choices. I would either (a) read books that sell well and are in the general vein of what you're doing, or (b) listen to authors who sell well (which isn't everybody, which sounds blunt but is a fact of author life). If having the book sell well is important to you, of course.

If you don't want to write romance because readers' expectations are stupid to you, that's fine. But you may not want to broadcast that online. It may not make successful writers and knowledgeable readers (normally an amazingly generous group) eager to help you with your other questions.


----------



## Rose Andrews (Jun 1, 2017)

Usedtoposthere said:


> You've asked about expectations in a certain genre in a number of threads. People who sell well in that genre have told you about expectations in it, and have gone to some trouble to explain why. You don't want to hear it, or you want to deny it or suggest those expectations are author prejudice. For heaven's sake, I gave you a link to one of many academic studies on the subject.
> 
> I don't write to market.* I AM the market.* If you aren't, you will need to make some choices. I would either (a) read books that sell well and are in the general vein of what you're doing, or (b) listen to authors who sell well (which isn't everybody, which sounds blunt but is a fact of author life). If having the book sell well is important to you, of course.
> 
> If you don't want to write romance because readers' expectations are stupid to you, that's fine. But you may not want to broadcast that all over the internet. It may not make successful writers and knowledgeable readers (normally an amazingly generous group) eager to help you with your other questions.


I love what you've said here, especially the bold part. I'm not suggesting that the OP wants a quick buck, but I do know (from ghostwriting gigs and via Facebook groups) that there's a prevailing view that writing romance is easy. So, so easy to make a few dollars writing some hot sex and happily ever after. It goes beyond HEA. Romance is about an emotional journey, a path to accepting that the person in front of you IS THE ONE no ifs ands or buts! A lot of people in this world never find 'the one' for a multitude of reasons. So yeah, it isn't easy.

What I'm trying to suggest is that it's very important to love what you write. Once upon a time, I read a crap ton of fantasy. I fell out of love with it this past summer when I wrote a book that bombed big time...because I no longer wanted to read/write fantasy. I want to stay in my little historical romance bubble because it's what I'm passionate about. Writing is such an effort. I will never understand why some want to write in genres they don't enjoy reading or understand. The take away from this thread for me is to write what I love because I like reading it.


----------



## Kal241 (Jan 11, 2017)

Usedtoposthere said:


> You've asked about expectations in a certain genre in a number of threads. People who sell well in that genre have told you about expectations in it, and have gone to some trouble to explain why. You don't want to hear it, or you want to deny it or suggest those expectations are author prejudice. I gave you a link to one of many academic studies on the subject. I'm pretty confident there are psychological/biological/social reasons for those preferences.
> 
> I don't write to market. I AM the market. If you aren't, you will need to make some choices. I would either (a) read books that sell well and are in the general vein of what you're doing, or (b) listen to authors who sell well (which isn't everybody, which sounds blunt but is a fact of author life). If having the book sell well is important to you, of course.
> 
> If you don't want to write romance because readers' expectations are stupid to you, that's fine. But you may not want to broadcast that online. It may not make successful writers and knowledgeable readers (normally an amazingly generous group) eager to help you with your other questions.


*Standing ovation* I love everything about this! ^ Encore!


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

Usedtoposthere said:


> You've asked about expectations in a certain genre in a number of threads. People who sell well in that genre have told you about expectations in it, and have gone to some trouble to explain why. You don't want to hear it, or you want to deny it or *suggest those expectations are author prejudice*. I gave you a link to one of many academic studies on the subject. I'm pretty confident there are psychological/biological/social reasons for those preferences.


I'm not sure why you think that wasn't a valid question? It wasn't even a genre-specific one, since I was told that the height thing carries over to other genres. Obviously, if an author is writing a character that she perceives as short, that will come off in the narrative and characterization. I was just asking if the readers will have a different impression of a character of the same height when written by an author who perceived the character as short vs. an author who didn't think of the character that way. And perhaps the reason that shorter heroes don't sell is because of how the authors wrote them and not strictly the reader's preference.

I am not denying or not wanting to hear anything. I just disagree. I think these expectations probably turn off readers and writers who feel like they're unwelcome in the genre.


----------



## Forgettable (Oct 16, 2015)

.


----------



## ShayneRutherford (Mar 24, 2014)

paranormal_kitty said:


> I'm not sure why you think that wasn't a valid question? It wasn't even a genre-specific one, since I was told that the height thing carries over to other genres. Obviously, if an author is writing a character that she perceives as short, that will come off in the narrative and characterization. I was just asking if the readers will have a different impression of a character of the same height when written by an author who perceived the character as short vs. an author who didn't think of the character that way. And perhaps the reason that shorter heroes don't sell is because of how the authors wrote them and not strictly the reader's preference.
> 
> I am not denying or not wanting to hear anything. I just disagree. I think these expectations probably turn off readers and writers who feel like they're unwelcome in the genre.


Attraction is a huge part of romance, so I can't imagine why anyone would write a romance hero (or a heroine, for that matter) that they found unattractive. I can't imagine trying to write a hero that one finds unattractive would be very much fun. Not to mention, it would be that much harder to be convincing.

The trope in romance seems to be heroes who are taller rather than shorter, so if a romance author is writing a short hero, I can only imagine it's because she finds shorter guys attractive, and that attraction would probably come out in the writing.


----------



## Usedtoposthere (Nov 19, 2013)

There are many, many, MANY academic studies on this subject (and many others about people's overall physical preferences). If you truly want an answer and you believe that bestselling romance novelists are looking at the subject too narrowly (which could be true, I suppose), Google it and read them. I read a fair number of studies about these subjects (physical attributes, fantasies, sexual preferences, changing attitudes, etc.) They're very helpful.


----------



## Jena H (Oct 2, 2011)

ShayneRutherford said:


> The trope in romance seems to be heroes who are taller rather than shorter, so if a romance author is writing a short hero, I can only imagine it's because she finds shorter guys attractive, and that attraction would probably come out in the writing.


Which sort of confirms the theory of author bias.


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

ShayneRutherford said:


> Attraction is a huge part of romance, so I can't imagine why anyone would write a romance hero (or a heroine, for that matter) that they found unattractive. I can't imagine trying to write a hero that one finds unattractive would be very much fun. Not to mention, it would be that much harder to be convincing.
> 
> The trope in romance seems to be heroes who are taller rather than shorter, so if a romance author is writing a short hero, I can only imagine it's because she finds shorter guys attractive, and that attraction would probably come out in the writing.


Thank you for answering. Yeah, I would guess if I can't manage to write a hero I find unattractive probably most others wouldn't do it either. It's kind of funny because I didn't even think of this character as short until I saw that apparently everyone else's definition starts at 6 feet. My MMC is actually taller than the other two guys that the FMC shows interest in during the course of the story. So I guess everyone in this book is short (lol)?



Jena H said:


> Which sort of confirms the theory of author bias.


Haha


----------



## ShayneRutherford (Mar 24, 2014)

Jena H said:


> Which sort of confirms the theory of author bias.


True. But romance authors are, presumably, also romance readers. And even if they're not, I doubt the bias is limited only to romance authors. As UsedToPostHere pointed out, there are studies done on the subject that confirm tall heroes are a trope for a reason.


----------



## Guest (Sep 24, 2017)

Usedtoposthere said:


> You've asked about expectations in a certain genre in a number of threads. People who sell well in that genre have told you about expectations in it, and have gone to some trouble to explain why. You don't want to hear it, or you want to deny it or suggest those expectations are author prejudice. I gave you a link to one of many academic studies on the subject. I'm pretty confident there are psychological/biological/social reasons for those preferences.
> 
> I don't write to market. I AM the market. If you aren't, you will need to make some choices. I would either (a) read books that sell well and are in the general vein of what you're doing, or (b) listen to authors who sell well (which isn't everybody, which sounds blunt but is a fact of author life). If having the book sell well is important to you, of course.
> 
> If you don't want to write romance because readers' expectations are stupid to you, that's fine. But you may not want to broadcast that online. It may not make successful writers and knowledgeable readers (normally an amazingly generous group) eager to help you with your other questions.


I love this post  Personally I've learned a lot about romance readers and picked up some invaluable tips by listening to this discussion.

The OP obviously wants to write the book her way (which is fanfic, right?) and believes the audience is there for short heroes/promiscuous heroines etc. I say do it how you want since you know best. Who knows, you could start a new trend and in a couple of months time you'll be back here talking about your break out hit.


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

Tilly said:


> I love this post  Personally I've learned a lot about romance readers and picked up some invaluable tips by listening to this discussion.
> 
> The OP obviously wants to write the book her way (which is fanfic, right?) and believes the audience is there for short heroes/promiscuous heroines etc. I say do it how you want since you know best. Who knows, you could start a new trend and in a couple of months time you'll be back here talking about your break out hit.


I think I've told you about a dozen times it is not fanfic...it seems like you are just levying a sarcastic putdown here. It was inspired by a short, unpublished fanfic. It's not like many other people haven't done that and been successful with it. I doubt anyone could identify what it came from if they watched the movie and read this book back-to-back. I already stated the reasons why my MMC is the height that he is (which to me is not even short).


----------



## CoraBuhlert (Aug 7, 2011)

Content removed. I don't consent to the new TOS of 2018.


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

I came across this post if anyone wants to discuss another type of reader expectation: https://www.goodreads.com/author_blog_posts/3393632-does-size-matter---romance-heroes

I have no comment on this one because I didn't get _that_ detailed.


----------



## Jena H (Oct 2, 2011)

paranormal_kitty said:


> I came across this post if anyone wants to discuss another type of reader expectation: https://www.goodreads.com/author_blog_posts/3393632-does-size-matter---romance-heroes
> 
> I have no comment on this one because I didn't get _that_ detailed.


If certain, er,_ things_ are in proportion to a man's height, then no wonder all the romance writers insist that their MMCs are tall. The heroes have to do their job and "fill," don't they.


----------



## CynthiaClay (Mar 17, 2017)

paranormal_kitty said:


> Yeah, but a woman who owns her own sexuality certainly doesn't make it a horror novel.


Touchee!


----------



## CynthiaClay (Mar 17, 2017)

> I guess if you wanted to have fun with it, you could speculate... maybe most of the people who think 'promiscuity' is great are too busy going out and being promiscuous to have time to read a book, while the more chaste types have a lot of free time to fill since they aren't... you know.


This is a really hilarious post.


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

Jena H said:


> If certain, er,_ things_ are in proportion to a man's height, then no wonder all the romance writers insist that their MMCs are tall. The heroes have to do their job and "fill," don't they.


I can tell you from experience it's not often in proportion.


----------



## Ava Glass (Feb 28, 2011)

It's not good to vaguely cite evolutionary psychology. It's full of pseudoscience.

https://gizmodo.com/men-have-always-used-science-to-explain-why-theyre-bett-1797608461


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

Puddleduck said:


> LOL. Please write an abominable snowman romance. Not a spoof/satire. One that plays it entirely straight.


That sounds like a job for Chuck Tingle.


----------



## Atunah (Nov 20, 2008)

Puddleduck said:


> I suspect some of these "reader expectations" may be based around a relatively small pool of readers. Romance isn't my primary genre, but I do read it, and I do like romantic elements in other stories, and I would not agree that the above is a "requirement" in the slightest. (I like neither of them to have a past of sleeping around, though I'd rather both did than the perpetuation of the double standard.)
> 
> I do think HEA with the main couple ending up an a committed romantic relationship is a requirement. Beyond that (and for a lot of individual readers, even including that--see anyone who's okay with a HFN), I think any "requirements" you see are going to be based on skewed samples of the romance readership. A lot of people think alpha males are requirements. I wish not so many authors thought that, because as a reader, I'm just so sick of them. But when authors buy into thinking things like that are requirements, it's a self-perpetuating cycle, and romance readers who'd prefer (or even just be open to) other things get stuck reading books that don't really fit their preferences because those are all that's being written.
> 
> I plan to write some romances, and I plan to completely ignore anything anyone thinks is a requirement (except for the committed-relationship-HEA one that I mentioned). Then I'll let readers decide if there's a market for it. But I'm writing books to please me, not what I think the "market" wants, so I guess YMMV if you're a stalwart believer in writing to market.


Some good points made. I think maybe part of the issue is that a lot of newer type romance authors only look at the top 100 and think that is a representation of romance as a whole. Its not. And many never read much romance before writing it. I can tell that by some of the questions that keep coming up here. Its why I always say, read some of the established authors. Many of them will be trade published as they were around long before any indies appeared in a kindle store. Many of them are still writing new stuff today that does not follow just one niche of romance. Heck, even just withing one subgenre of romance, contemporary, there are huge lanes to go in. And that is just one subgenre. Some authors seem to also think its the only subgenre there is. Its not.

Its fine to find your niche to make money in. But its also better to get a understanding of the full genre as a whole and some of the history of it. Most romance readers don't just read one niche either.


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

So no one else has an opinion on the donger (thanks, Australia!) article?


----------



## Atunah (Nov 20, 2008)

paranormal_kitty said:


> So no one else has an opinion on the donger (thanks, Australia!) article?


Its a blog post by one author. One opinion. There aren't even any comments on it and it was written in 2012. This author at the time at least wrote for an erotica and erotica publisher. Not sure what that has to do with romance in general.


----------



## Jena H (Oct 2, 2011)

paranormal_kitty said:


> So no one else has an opinion on the donger (thanks, Australia!) article?


I don't read too much romance anymore (except for my old favorite "keepers"), but even when I do I skip the sex scenes, so... the topic really isn't that interesting to me.


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

Jena H said:


> I don't read too much romance anymore (except for my old favorite "keepers"), but even when I do I skip the sex scenes, so... the topic really isn't that interesting to me.


I was wondering how much of a thing it was. I can't remember reading anything where that was really described...well, weird stuff excluded.


----------



## Jena H (Oct 2, 2011)

Lynna said:


> I don't skip the sex scenes. If I lose interest to that degree, I dump the book.


To clarify: The reason I skip sex scenes is that I already know what happens during sex. What I _don't _know is what happens in the rest of the story. A little thing called the plot. That's what I read books for, romances or otherwise.


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

Jena H said:


> To clarify: The reason I skip sex scenes is that I already know what happens during sex. What I _don't _know is what happens in the rest of the story. A little thing called the plot. That's what I read books for, romances or otherwise.


Aw, I hope most people don't do this because I put some somewhat important plot and character stuff in the sex scenes. Plus it's vampire sex so they do some different things than what you can in real life (lol).


----------



## Jena H (Oct 2, 2011)

Lynna said:


> Jean H.
> 
> Okay. I read for all the sorry, you don't. So what? I too know what happens during sex. I'd better. Two kids!


I was clarifying regarding your comment about "dumping the book." You had said that if you "lost interest to that degree (to skip sex scenes)" you'd toss the book. But _my_ point was that sex scenes are usually independent of the larger storyline, and skipping them does NOT necessarily mean any loss of interest in the book as a whole.


----------



## Rose Andrews (Jun 1, 2017)

Atunah said:


> Some good points made. I think maybe part of the issue is that a lot of newer type romance authors only look at the top 100 and think that is a representation of romance as a whole. Its not. And many never read much romance before writing it. I can tell that by some of the questions that keep coming up here. Its why I always say, read some of the established authors. Many of them will be trade published as they were around long before any indies appeared in a kindle store. Many of them are still writing new stuff today that does not follow just one niche of romance. Heck, even just withing one subgenre of romance, contemporary, there are huge lanes to go in. And that is just one subgenre. Some authors seem to also think its the only subgenre there is. Its not.
> 
> Its fine to find your niche to make money in. But its also better to get a understanding of the full genre as a whole and some of the history of it. Most romance readers don't just read one niche either.


I find your statement invaluable. It's true...not all of us stay reading the same niche or even genre for that matter.

And every niche is different. I really love sweet romance. Sweet romance can be clean and wholesome. It can be sweet and sexy. There is an audience for either or. Sweet historical romance can be western, it can be Highlander, it can be 20th century, it can be anything. But some of the sweetest romance books I've read have been contemporary. It's all still sweet romance with similar covers, a similar feel, and similar themes across the board.

This is just a tiny portion of romance, historical or contemporary. There's fantasy romance, sci-fi romance, etc. Looking at the top 100 is a mistake. It doesn't represent the entirety of the genre or the different audiences for the books that are as diverse as the authors/readers.


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

So, I have another question. Is the male tease ever a thing in romance? Like, he keeps turning her on and leaving her hanging?


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

paranormal_kitty said:


> So, I have another question. Is the male tease ever a thing in romance? Like, he keeps turning her on and leaving her hanging?


May I ask, how much Romance have you read?

Honestly, you can have pretty much anything you want -- as long as the story is about the relationship, the characters are both likable or become likable, and at the end they are together. Many people have told you this and yet you keep asking about specific plot details. And when you do, people say, "you can use that; some people might not much like it, but others will; it may depend on how well it's done." I am not a regular romance reader or writer, but I'm betting the answer is the same here.

And, FWIW, Atunah is a voracious romance reader . . . . listen to her!


----------



## Forgettable (Oct 16, 2015)

.


----------



## Athena Grayson (Apr 4, 2011)

Also going to point out here that none of these points--hero height, hung-ness, heroine history--will be the reason a book flops in romance. The fastest way to flop your book--even if you have all these traits checked off, is to not have the confidence to write the story and commit to it and the genre. If you resent what the readers love, they can smell it from a mile away. Especially in romance. Write a story YOU fall in love with and they will sense that and give it a go with you. Even if you make your hero two feet tall and your heroine a supermodel. If you believe they are romantic and worthy of a happily ever after, then readers will, too. But if you make him two feet tall just to beat them over the head for being wrong about liking six foot guys, they will throw your book at the wall and then tell all their friends, too.

Is anyone here old enough to remember a book called "Simple Jess?" The hero is mentally challenged. And a virgin. And yet he still has a place of affection in my memory a zillion years after reading that book. And if I'm not mistaken, thousands of other romance readers have it on their "DIK" (desert isle keeper) list. 

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk


----------



## readingril (Oct 29, 2010)

Athena Grayson said:


> Is anyone here old enough to remember a book called "Simple Jess?" The hero is mentally challenged. And a virgin. And yet he still has a place of affection in my memory a zillion years after reading that book. And if I'm not mistaken, thousands of other romance readers have it on their "DIK" (desert isle keeper) list.


I'll attest to that DIK status!

I don't always read sex scenes, especially if there's too much of the 'insert A into B" type sex, and for most authors I FF through it if it's an audiobook or a TTS read. Just this reader's opnion.


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

Vicky said:


> I understand that. But it's the OP of the thread who is still asking what Romance readers want. I'm not sure what the OP is hoping to find out if Romance has no relation to his/her chosen genre. It's reminiscent of some previous threads on KBoards re:Romance requirements. Apologies if I've misunderstood.


Because I have a pretty strong love story in my book, and this:



HopelessFanatic said:


> I write and read urban fantasy. A large segment of readers read for the sexual and romantic tension between the FMC and MMC/multiple love interests. You can tell this from the reviews and also from talking to fans. Not everyone cares, I'm sure, but many do. I write very light romantic sub-plots and I prefer a slow burn romance where the FMC and the MMC develop a strong friendship before a relationship. Mostly this is because I love the trope enemies to lovers and including a genuine friendship in between makes it far more believable. My FMC also has multiple relationships, though once she commits to the "one", she is committed.
> 
> In urban fantasy, many of the love interests will be the same type of alpha-hole that's popular in certain sub-genres of romance. A jerk with a soft spot for the FMC. Even though I don't focus on romantic relationships, my fans have a preference for the type of the love interests they fall in love. And most prefer the bad-boy demon and the slutty best friend with commitment issues who uses women like tissues. (Neither of which who are good for her.) You are already writing against type (which I find good and refreshing), *but urban fantasy still has a lot of the same expectations that you are seeing in romance when it comes to the romantic and sexual relationships in a book/series.*


----------



## anikad (Sep 19, 2017)

Athena Grayson said:


> Is anyone here old enough to remember a book called "Simple Jess?" The hero is mentally challenged. And a virgin. And yet he still has a place of affection in my memory a zillion years after reading that book. And if I'm not mistaken, thousands of other romance readers have it on their "DIK" (desert isle keeper) list.


It was recommended to me recently and I really love it but I think it's a polarising book. I heard that it adversely affected the author's career. In a similar vein did you ever see the film Tim (The Mel Gibson, Piper Laurie version)? The hero is mentally challenged and falls in love with an older woman. The film is on my keepers list, only recently read the book. It was interesting to see what they had changed for cinema.


----------



## 77071 (May 15, 2014)

This is always such an intense topic!  I'm glad I didn't know more about reader expectations when I started because I might have been frightened out of writing what I really wanted to write.  I'm in a smaller subset of romance (gay romance), and I often skim or skip sex scenes as a reader, and I've always tended to like heroes who aren't tall!  (There are exceptions and obviously it's more about personality than looks.)  What works for me is that I wrote what I liked, and experimented, and tried new things, and overall I've enjoyed it enough that I've been able to keep doing it.  If I'd thought there was only one way to write a gay romance, I'd have noped out of it long ago.  To hit the market right out of the gate...even when you love the genre and read it all the time...yikes, I don't know how anyone would do that, even hitting every single "correct" thing.  I've had some less than positive feedback for when I don't include sex scenes...and other people who've loved those stories and disliked the ones where I had more "show don't tell" in the bedroom.  I think there's probably a market for any sort of story, but ultimately Usedtoposthere is right, you want to find and cultivate the readers who like your works, over the long haul.  There's no one perfect trope or idea that will do that.  It'll take years and lots of stories, and probably making mistakes along the way.

But not many people want to hear "just write what you like and eventually you'll figure out whether you're finding an audience or need to change some stuff."  It's not helpful for getting going out the gate, is it?  Still, I think writing what you enjoy will definitely help.  Personally I'm rarely if ever going to tell people exactly how tall my characters are, but I'll mention their height in relation to each other, if they feel self-conscious about it, etc.  I agree that most readers will picture the character how they like, if you don't describe too much.  I must admit I get rather tired of reading about the exact height of characters in certain books...still like them, but I'd rather imagine they're not towering near the seven foot line personally.  Again that's very much my personal preference, like some people do prefer tall characters.  But I think it's always best not to be too exact when possible, as others have said.


----------



## Allyson J. (Nov 26, 2014)

Athena Grayson said:


> Is anyone here old enough to remember a book called "Simple Jess?" The hero is mentally challenged. And a virgin. And yet he still has a place of affection in my memory a zillion years after reading that book. And if I'm not mistaken, thousands of other romance readers have it on their "DIK" (desert isle keeper) list.


Oh man! Loved that book. It is certainly a top 5 favorite of mine.

I think if any story is told well, no matter the concept (Simple Jess being a perfect example), it can be successful. But I don't think it will be a success right out of the gate. A book that turns genre expectations on its head takes time and word of mouth to spread. Not until a hundred people told me and I saw it on almost all of the Greatest Romances Ever lists that I searched out a copy of Simple Jess. Or The Madness of Lord Ian MacKenzie now that I'm thinking of it. Both were good stories that readers passed around their book clubs, facebook groups, libraries like crack.


----------



## 77071 (May 15, 2014)

I should add that one author who always describes the characters' _exact_ height sells about a hundred times better than me...so make of that what you will.  

But the author has also been in the game for far longer than me and has fans who will read literally anything they write!


----------



## Becca Mills (Apr 27, 2012)

paranormal_kitty said:


> Because I have a pretty strong love story in my book, and this:


Despite what HopelessFanatic said, I think it would be more useful to be asking about urban fantasy norms. UF is a newer genre, and yeah, it's been cooked up partially from romance tropes, but other genres have also been added to the soup. If you focus on romance, you'll get an incomplete picture. Like, if you really want to work with mules, you should spend most of your time learning about mules. Learning about horses isn't going to be nearly as useful, even though mules get half their DNA from them.


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

Becca Mills said:


> Despite what HopelessFanatic said, I think it would be more useful to be asking about urban fantasy norms. UF is a newer genre, and yeah, it's been cooked up partially from romance tropes, but other genres have also been added to the soup. If you focus on romance, you'll get an incomplete picture. Like, if you really want to work with mules, you should spend most of your time learning about mules. Learning about horses isn't going to be nearly as useful, even though mules get half their DNA from them.


I guess I feel less need to do that since I actually read (sorry) that genre. And as I told Usedtoposthere privately, I did have sort of a chip on my shoulder about the romance genre because of things I was told (not necessarily on here) back when I was considering writing in that genre.


----------



## Rose Andrews (Jun 1, 2017)

It's still a good idea to learn how to write a strong romance sub plot though, I agree. 

I do feel bad for you, kitty. Maybe it's because I love cats or maybe because I think  your heart/intentions are in the right place. Honestly, the only way to learn about the genre is to read it. I'd read more on the fantasy romance side since you write UF, or paranormal romance.


----------



## 77071 (May 15, 2014)

Thanks for the folks who recommended _Love Between the Covers_! I'm watching it on Netflix now. Really interesting insights!


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

Rosie A. said:


> It's still a good idea to learn how to write a strong romance sub plot though, I agree.
> 
> I do feel bad for you, kitty. Maybe it's because I love cats or maybe because I think your heart/intentions are in the right place. Honestly, the only way to learn about the genre is to read it. I'd read more on the fantasy romance side since you write UF, or paranormal romance.


Thanks  And sorry to whoever was offended if I came off as being antagonistic.


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

Puddleduck said:


> So, is your book a true urban fantasy, or is it really a paranormal romance?


Well, this is the question I've been asking myself the whole time lol. I'm pretty sure that it's technically UF, because the plot _could_ still exist if they were just friends or business partners and not lovers, but would just be a lot more boring. The love story does steal the show to a significant degree. My MMC is pretty different from what's popular with male love interests in the genre. Oh, and they do get a sort-of happy ending, but I haven't decided as for the whole series yet (but I'm thinking probably).


----------



## Word Fan (Apr 15, 2015)

HSh said:


> Thanks for the folks who recommended _Love Between the Covers_! I'm watching it on Netflix now. Really interesting insights!


I personally think that, if you're truly serious about writing romance---of any kind---you _have_ to find out what readers expect. _Love Between the Covers_ should be part of that research. You have to have an understanding of what the "rules" (read: reader expectations) are before you can knowledgeably decide to break them, bend them, or adhere closely to them.

Anyone who says, _"I don't think that there are any hard-and-fast rules about blah, blah, blah, and I'm just going to write what I feel..."_ is fooling themselves.


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

Puddleduck said:


> Sounds like it's a paranormal romance to me. In the same way that I'd call the Mercy Thompson series paranormal romance. Sure, the story *could* exist without the romance, but I think the romance is really the crux of that story.
> 
> Your love interest does not at all need to fit anyone's expectations of what a love interest looks like in order for it to qualify as a romance. (Although I would decide about whether or not there's a HEA for them before you decide on classification. I would expect any PR series to have a HEA, and I think most readers would.)


I'm not sure I'd say it's the crux of the story though. The basic plot is that the FMC's father was forced by the villain to develop a weapon disease and she's the only one that can stop it. The MMC ends up going along for the ride because he initially needs her help and later because he's fallen in love with her. They end up with a pretty solid partnership after working through their problems with each other, and that will carry over to the sequels.

It's not so much looks that he's different, but he's not that alpha type and when he does act arrogant and jealous in the beginning (it's more hysterical than alpha), she shuts him down pretty fast. He's truly in love with her and he treats her very well. The only time he even comes close to controlling her is when he tells her to stop stealing (after she was kidnapped because she was stealing).


----------



## Becca Mills (Apr 27, 2012)

I know several of the major traditionally published UF series also get categorized in PNR, but indie authors are not allowed to choose both, and as a new indie author, I wouldn't put something in any romance category unless it was really and truly romance. If the story's driven by something other than achieving HFN/HEA as a couple, I'd put it in UF. If people could plausibly disagree about whether a story is UF or PNR, I'd put it in UF.


----------



## Monique (Jul 31, 2010)

Sounds like Rogue One. Did I win?


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

Monique said:


> Sounds like Rogue One. Did I win?


No comment.


----------



## Becca Mills (Apr 27, 2012)

Vicky said:


> Slight derail, and I remember reading the thread about this earlier this year, but there are still indie books being categorised in both Romance sub-genres (usually paranormal, fantasy or sci fi) and in the main SF/F section as well. So I'm not sure Amazon is actually enforcing this one (yet, at least).
> 
> Completely agree with the rest of your post.


Huh. Interesting. Their subcat keyword guide for romance has this at the bottom: "Warning: Do not add books from any Romance category to these categories: Science Fiction & Fantasy, Children's." But if they're not enforcing it, I guess it depends on how much of a stickler one is for following their rules.


----------



## Decon (Feb 16, 2011)

I wouldn't know where to start writing a romance, and therefore never would because I don't read the genre. All I have to go by is from threads and posts like on here and a few films I've been forced to watch, which I admit to pulling out the tissues at the end of as few of them with happiness at the outcome and I'm male.

Saying that, we all have ideals, whatever your gender, of how we expect our relationships to pan out from an early age, which include fidelity and loyalty at the top of the list, with attraction already established is a given. I'm more interested in what happens in a realtionship after love conquers all. Over compensate and you end up a jealous control freak. Under compensate through naivity and you run the risk of losing out. Find someone who kicks the cat or the dog, and they'll likely kick you at some stage.

Not sure if I'm right, but romance, I imagine, is pure escapism and on the whole not reflective of the reality of modern western society other than in fits and starts of relationships, with an ideal in mind of happy ever after to give you a warm fuzzy feeling. A sort of idealism of that's how things should pan out for yourself in a given situation of say a love triange to spice up the story, but for you, maybe it hasn't, or maybe it has, and the reader is maybe hanging on to those expectations of a moral outcome to reinforce their own situation and relationship at whatever stage it is at. 

Are there any series stories that say follow one such MC from a romance story, and on through a plot arc that reflects say her break up, and then having to start out on the, let's say the promoscuous dating scene? Now I could read such a story series, because I would have invested myself in the character in the romance episode and then go on to what would reflect modern society and all it's warts and tribulations.


----------



## Rose Andrews (Jun 1, 2017)

Vicky said:


> I'm sure Amazon will one day decide they are going to enforce it. And, in true Amazon fashion, they won't tell anyone before they do. Naturally.
> 
> I wonder how many Romance and SF/F writers are even aware of the new warning.


Yeah it's pretty bad. In order to find high fantasy romance I first need to go to Goodreads and then look up the book on Amazon. Otherwise I get a lot of books I'm not interested in in my search. When I think of fantasy romance, I think of Grace Draven, or even our own Jaclyn Dolamore, or S.A. Hutchon. Authors who write actual fantasy with a romance plot line. Instead, whenever I search Amazon, I get a ton of shirtless covers with pretty purple or pink paint, animal heads on the cover and something related to shifters. NO. That's not what fantasy romance is! And it irritates me to no end. I don't really read fantasy romance anymore because I've somewhat grown disenchanted with fantasy in general. Anyway, no one follows the rules.


----------



## Laran Mithras (Nov 22, 2016)

Rosie A. said:


> Yeah it's pretty bad. In order to find high fantasy romance I first need to go to Goodreads and then look up the book on Amazon. Otherwise I get a lot of books I'm not interested in in my search. When I think of fantasy romance, I think of Grace Draven, or even our own Jaclyn Dolamore, or S.A. Hutchon. Authors who write actual fantasy with a romance plot line. Instead, whenever I search Amazon, I get a ton of shirtless covers with pretty purple or pink paint, animal heads on the cover and something related to shifters. NO. That's not what fantasy romance is! And it irritates me to no end. I don't really read fantasy romance anymore because I've somewhat grown disenchanted with fantasy in general. Anyway, no one follows the rules.


I wrote both sci-fi romance and fantasy romance. All four books are some of my worst sellers. Maybe the covers could be better.


----------



## Rose Andrews (Jun 1, 2017)

Laran Mithras said:


> I wrote both sci-fi romance and fantasy romance. All four books are some of my worst sellers. Maybe the covers could be better.


The covers are hard to figure out for that niche. At least for me. I tried once, failed miserably, and decided I'm better at writing historical romance.


----------



## Laran Mithras (Nov 22, 2016)

Rosie A. said:


> The covers are hard to figure out for that niche.


I used freebie covers back then. Sci-fi, yes. Sci-Romance? Nah. Fantasy? Yep. Fantasy romance? Nah. Like I said, maybe bad covers. It was way back in the very beginning.


----------



## Atunah (Nov 20, 2008)

SFR and FR are like the unicorns to me. So so hard to find the good stuff. I agree with Rosie on not being able to find fantasy romance much in the store, its all full of shifters. SFR is pretty similar, full of shifters and porn. Often not even having any SF in it at all. I have read very little FR for that reason, Grace Draven I liked also. 

SFR at least has some blogs out there, but I can't often trust if something is actually SFR or just SF with some romantic elements in it, which is not the same. There are also a lot off shorts/novellas out in the genre and I don't read shorts or novellas. Then when I finally do find something it tends to lean to erotic romance. Nothing wrong with that, I read them fine. Just not every single darn time. 

I think there is a hungry audience for SFR and FR out there, we just have a hard time finding them in the sea of mis-categorized. I have pretty much completely stopped browsing the kindle store for reads, for any subgenre of romance.


----------



## Laran Mithras (Nov 22, 2016)

Atunah said:


> There are also a lot off shorts/novellas out in the genre and I don't read shorts or novellas.
> 
> I have pretty much completely stopped browsing the kindle store for reads, for any subgenre of romance.


Mine were novellas ~200 pages each. Wrote 3. I wouldn't recommend them because they are my pre-erotica and (ahem) actually quite tame. Even my latest eroticas have been mentioned as somewhat tame.

But the sci-fis and the one fantasy romance were very romance-oriented with plenty of plot to move the MCs along. The sales results were so lackluster (covers probably) to move me into erotica. I haven't looked back, except for today.

M/M fantasy. What a concept.


----------



## Fel Beasley (Apr 1, 2014)

Puddleduck said:


> Sounds like it's a paranormal romance to me. In the same way that I'd call the Mercy Thompson series paranormal romance. Sure, the story *could* exist without the romance, but I think the romance is really the crux of that story.
> 
> Your love interest does not at all need to fit anyone's expectations of what a love interest looks like in order for it to qualify as a romance. (Although I would decide about whether or not there's a HEA for them before you decide on classification. I would expect any PR series to have a HEA, and I think most readers would.)


I don't consider the Mercy Thompson series paranormal romance. Most of the books in the series have nothing to do with a romantic relationship at all. Patricia Briggs other series is definitely more paranormal romance, especially book 1. It's funny how two people view the same thing very differently. It's a good demonstration not to lump all readers of specific genres together.

I want to clarify my post that is being quoted because I think it's being misunderstood. I wasn't saying that UF has certain expectations that need to be filled.

I was speaking specifically to the romantic sub-plot. The romantic sub-plot is a mini-romance and the same things a reader looks for in a romance is what they would look for in a romantic sub-plot. Depending on the emphasis of the sub-plot, and the individual readers reasons for reading the book, would change how "important" it is to fit those expectations or preferences.

But the only expectation I was talking about is reader's attraction to the love interest which is actually a preference and varies from one reader to the next.

The only expectation in Romance is a focus on a romantic relationship and a happy ending. That's it. Everything else is individual reader preference and you'll never find a consensus. Urban fantasy does not have those expectations, though I would think most readers would want a happy resolution to a strong romantic sub-plot at some point in a series.

Everything in this thread is about reader preference. Iusedtoposthere, Atunah, and others have talked about reader preference in general, or what a majority would prefer/expect. But it is sub-genre specific, with some sub-genres like New Adult and Bad Boy Romance have different preferences.

In my opinion, if you're writing a heavy romantic sub-plot in urban fantasy, you should be aware of reader preference/expectations, not what they are but why. It's the why that is important, not the specifics. Many of the posters have answered the why. The answer doesn't really change with the specific. Romantic urban fantasy would have the same why's.

Why for all genres come down to why the reader is reading a particular story. If you know the why, you can figure out the what that is actually important. 

My original comment was a reaction to the attitude that romance is more restrictive than urban fantasy. It's not true. But it's also not true that romance (or urban fantasy) is restrictive. At least not in my opinion.


----------



## Jena H (Oct 2, 2011)

Athena Grayson said:


> Is anyone here old enough to remember a book called "Simple Jess?" The hero is mentally challenged. And a virgin. And yet he still has a place of affection in my memory a zillion years after reading that book. And if I'm not mistaken, thousands of other romance readers have it on their "DIK" (desert isle keeper) list.
> 
> Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk


Point of clarification: Why would someone have to be "old enough" to remember this book? According to Amazon, it was published in 2011. Hardly the Dark Ages of bookdom.


----------



## Atunah (Nov 20, 2008)

Jena H said:


> Point of clarification: Why would someone have to be "old enough" to remember this book? According to Amazon, it was published in 2011. Hardly the Dark Ages of bookdom.


Simple Jess was first published 1996 by Jove.

Amazon doesn't have the date of the earliest publications most times if it was re-released. The 90's and early 2000 were haydays of great HR. I am glad I can have access to pretty much anything now with ebooks.


----------



## Jena H (Oct 2, 2011)

Atunah said:


> Simple Jess was first published 1996 by Jove.
> 
> Amazon doesn't have the date of the earliest publications most times if it was re-released. The 90's and early 2000 were haydays of great HR. I am glad I can have access to pretty much anything now with ebooks.


Ah, I see. Another nice thing about physical books-- original print year is included on the copyright page.


----------



## Atunah (Nov 20, 2008)

Yeah, that is why I don't go to amazon if I need publishing info on books. I go to goodreads and fantasticfiction. 

I don't mind paper books, I just can't read the font anymore in paperbacks and they are often yellow and have tight spines where the text waves in. And my hands clamp up having to hold them open. 

I still have some selected ones. Especially some pretty embossed ones with stepback covers. I like to pet them.


----------



## Nope (Jun 25, 2012)

.


----------



## meh (Apr 18, 2013)

TOS.


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

judygoodwin said:


> I write pure fantasy under one name, and M/M paranormal romance under another. I get complaints sometimes that there's too much action/suspense in my PR, so I'm trying to work more on the romance part of it and I appreciate this thread.


What do you think is the limit on how much action you can have in PNR before people don't like it? I'm pretty sure I well crossed that line this time (which is why I think UF is a pretty good fit), but for future reference.


----------



## Tulonsae (Apr 12, 2015)

Content removed due to TOS Change of 2018. I do not agree to the terms.


----------



## Rose Andrews (Jun 1, 2017)

Tulonsae said:


> I find this interesting. I would assume (corrections welcome) that FR is basically romance in a fantasy setting/plot. Fantasy is pretty broad. So, would an example of a FR unicorn be a well written romance set in a medieval magical environment? Or, is there something else involved?


Yes and yes. It's romance in a fantasy setting. I have no idea why some authors think it's okay to put their shifter romances under fantasy romance. Because, as a reader, what I envision as fantasy romance is a medieval style setting (it's what I love, I do not like UF, it has to be historical somehow) with a main romance plot, magic, monsters, and a HEA. Instead, when I look on Amazon, I see modern day settings with wolf clans or bear clans, no magic, no monsters just shifters (which I do not care about unless they are actual werewolves but I digress). It's an entirely different type of story.


----------



## Kat_Merikan (Dec 31, 2016)

Rosie A. said:


> Yes and yes. It's romance in a fantasy setting. I have no idea why some authors think it's okay to put their shifter romances under fantasy romance. Because, as a reader, what I envision as fantasy romance is a medieval style setting (it's what I love, I do not like UF, it has to be historical somehow) with a main romance plot, magic, monsters, and a HEA. Instead, when I look on Amazon, I see modern day settings with wolf clans or bear clans, no magic, no monsters just shifters (which I do not care about unless they are actual werewolves but I digress). It's an entirely different type of story.


I asked for fantasy romance recommendations yesterday (specifically said 'no paranormal') and 90% of what I got was shifter books...


----------



## Laran Mithras (Nov 22, 2016)

Kat_Merikan said:


> I asked for fantasy romance recommendations yesterday (specifically said 'no paranormal') and 90% of what I got was shifter books...


Looking at the top 20 Fantasy romances, only 2 were medieval-type swords and sorcery. The rest were contemporary works. I think authors are confusing fantastical with fantasy. Maybe they should be putting them in Myths/Legends, instead.


----------



## C. Gold (Jun 12, 2017)

I don't mind shifter romance when I'm in the mood, but it seems like there is nothing but shifter romance or vampire romance or dragon romance. That's why I wish Grace Draven would hurry up and write more books! (Watch, it will be a shifter dragon romance, LOL.) 

My first book was going to be fantasy romance but that became difficult with a main character who is spelled to forget everything each morning. To top that off, he did bad things back in the day... It was so much fun to write and is as romance-y as it can be while still dealing with end of the world fantasy stuff. But that means I deemed it to not have enough of that 50% split so it's going into epic fantasy instead of fantasy romance. Sorry guys/gals, maybe I'll have better luck with a future story, since I'm with y'all who want to see more fantasy romance. Now I just have to push that thing out the door this weekend!


----------



## JsFan (Dec 22, 2014)

RBN said:


> Some of the best people I know have substance abuse and mental health issues. Being in pain doesn't make one a bad person or unworthy or incapable of love. It's just not as easy as when everything is sunshine and rainbows.
> 
> Flawed people can be good, bad, or mediocre, and none of us is free of flaws.


Yes!



RBN said:


> Self-publishing took off largely because trad pub is so unimaginative and reluctant to deviate from last year's formula. Cutting out the middle man allowed authors to give readers stories publishers wouldn't touch because they were too far off the beaten path. Now the focus has shifted from making the market to following it, exactly like trad pubs, and it's getting stagnant. If you want to build an audience hungry to read what you want to write, write what you want to write instead of what everyone else is writing. Be courageous, and stop asking for permission to make a splash in the pond because it will always be discouraged by those certain not blending into the environment means certain death.


Yes yes yes!

Like you, Kitty, and others here, I like love stories but dislike the romance genre because I dislike the tropes I hear it must have. I know that if and when I'll write a romance, it will be the one I want to read. I'm not discounting the tropes --- it may well have them. What I'm saying is I will not be a slave to tropes. I will write the story I wish to write the best way I know how and do my best to sell and market it. If I'm one in a million, then there are 7000 people like me in the world. Therefore, it's not impossible to find true fans who like what I like. That's my story and I'm sticking to it!

People will make up standards because THEY want things the way they want them. In fact, I read about the old "industry standard" of 6x9 in the page trim thread and was shocked. The writers I read must've missed that memo.


----------



## Kat_Merikan (Dec 31, 2016)

I love how broad that is and how broad a 'HEA' is. It doesn't have to be a white picket fence. It can be two assassins killing together  As long as it's a happy ending for the people involved. It allows for such a variety of exploration of anything from power dynamics in a relationship, juggling different kinds of needs and then you can do it including any other genre from thriller, to steampunk, which then changes the tone of the book, while you still get to write romance.


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

Does anyone have any good definitions of the alpha/beta/etc.? I always thought alpha was the a-hole type, but it seems like that's only one subset. I can't really figure out how to classify my MMC. He doesn't really fit into the beta male role, but he's not the a-hole type that's trendy in UF either. I'm thinking maybe alpha who just happened to meet his match in the FMC (they get along like cats and dogs until they figure each other out). 

Do definitions like this really matter in marketing UF? It seems like they don't, whereas romance readers have certain preferences they look for (like Lynna said a couple posts up) so in that case you'd want to try to market to the audience who wants what you're selling.


----------



## Laran Mithras (Nov 22, 2016)

Alphas are confident and know what they're doing, what they're saying, and where they're going. Doesn't mean they aren't vulnerable.

Also doesn't mean they control everything like the typical alpha-hole.


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

Laran Mithras said:


> Alphas are confident and know what they're doing, what they're saying, and where they're going. Doesn't mean they aren't vulnerable.
> 
> Also doesn't mean they control everything like the typical alpha-hole.


Yeah, this is what I've been reading -- like the non a-hole alpha is pretty much the kind of guy you would want, and pretty much what I've written, so maybe I did something right after all. Confident and take-charge, but not controlling or abusive, and not without flaws either. I can't understand the appeal of the a-hole types, but it's popular so it must appeal to someone.


----------



## Atunah (Nov 20, 2008)

Some reader discussion about alpha, beta, gamma heroes.

http://dearauthor.com/features/letters-of-opinion/alpha-beta-gamma-or-the-abgs-of-romance-heroes/

Few other things come up in google, but that is the one remembering reading at the time.

I don't think I have ever seen a romance book where any of those terms where use in the blurb, on cover or anywhere. Never. It readers afterwards that talk about the books and the themes and the tones. I haven't seen or read any UF either where those terms were used in the description. The books just are. They stand on their own.


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

Atunah said:


> Some reader discussion about alpha, beta, gamma heroes.
> 
> http://dearauthor.com/features/letters-of-opinion/alpha-beta-gamma-or-the-abgs-of-romance-heroes/
> 
> Few other things come up in google, but that is the one remembering reading at the time.


Good article, thanks.



Lorri Moulton said:


> Stargate SG-1
> 
> Jack O'Neill is an Alpha
> Daniel Jackson is a Beta.
> ...


Wishing I had ever seen this show now...lol.


----------



## meh (Apr 18, 2013)

TOS.


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

judygoodwin said:


> I think that varies by reader--the nice thing about paranormal romance is that you can pull in readers from both the paranormal/fantasy genres and romance readers as well, but that also means they may not get enough of what they crave, whether that's the action and world building, or the relationship building.


This is true. The only romance I've read is PNR. Although now that I know Sci-fi romance is a thing, I may look into that.



judygoodwin said:


> I agree with others here who say if you're going to label it as a romance of any kind, (including PNR), then you'd better devote a lot of time to the developing relationship between your couple, and there should be a romance plot--something that is keeping them from being together, or some internal barrier preventing the couple from committing to each other for that HEA.
> 
> If most of your book is focused on the paranormal or fantasy plotline and there's no real barriers to the relationship, then it's not a romance. It's then an urban fantasy that happens to have a pairing.


Although I'm still going with UF, they do have obstacles galore.


----------



## Jena H (Oct 2, 2011)

Lorri Moulton said:


> Stargate SG-1
> 
> Jack O'Neill is an Alpha
> Daniel Jackson is a Beta.
> ...


Ummm, not sure about Daniel. Many people have the impression (even Wikipedia) that Beta males are "weak and emasculated." That's not Daniel.


----------



## Jena H (Oct 2, 2011)

Lorri Moulton said:


> I thought Beta men were more apt to ask other people's opinions before making a decision. More diplomatic about things, less likely to shoot first and ask questions later. I think that's very Daniel, especially in the first few seasons.
> 
> In the movie, he didn't feel comfortable using a weapon, he was a bit of a mess compared to the army guys...but he did figure out the way to get them home. He's smart and he got the girl.


Personally I like your description of Beta males (and yes, it definitely fits Daniel  ), but others-- including some romance readers-- will assume that Beta is the _opposite_ of Alpha. Apparently Wikipedia thinks so.


----------



## Nope (Jun 25, 2012)

.


----------



## Cherise (May 13, 2012)

Alpha-holes are popular because - as someone said up thread - of the taming trope. 

Many readers like to imagine their love can tame the savage beast, er, alpha-hole.


----------



## Word Fan (Apr 15, 2015)

paranormal_kitty said:


> Although now that I know Sci-fi romance is a thing, I may look into that.


I have not been following every post here but I have to jump in and say (and maybe someone else already has) that Sci-Fi Romance has been around for at least 30 years, if not more.


----------



## Melisse (Jun 3, 2012)

For SFR, I admin a thriving group with a variety of authors and readers, limited promos, and freebie day. https://www.facebook.com/groups/the.scifi.romance.group/

I also started a FR group but it is slower and I find it harder to be engaged there. https://www.facebook.com/groups/the.scifi.romance.group/

I have a fantasy rom coming out at Thanksgiving.


----------



## kcmorgan (Jan 9, 2013)

Jena H said:


> Ummm, not sure about Daniel. Many people have the impression (even Wikipedia) that Beta males are "weak and emasculated." That's not Daniel.


Beta males are meant to be normal everyday guys. So yeah, Daniel would definitely be a beta. Alphas are meant to be the leaders of the pack. Your CEOs, Commanders, Kings, Chiefs, Mob Bosses, Pirate Captains, etc. Weaker males are usually called omegas, they've been getting feminized to the point that a lot of them can give birth now.


----------



## Jena H (Oct 2, 2011)

kcmorgan said:


> Beta males are meant to be normal everyday guys. So yeah, Daniel would definitely be a beta. Alphas are meant to be the leaders of the pack. Your CEOs, Commanders, Kings, Chiefs, Mob Bosses, Pirate Captains, etc. Weaker males are usually called omegas, they've been getting feminized to the point that a lot of them can give birth now.


And that's one reason I have a problem with the "alpha male" romance stories--the notion that every guy who doesn't plow and shove everyone else out of his path to get what he wants is "weak." I don't know why people even have to classify the "types" of men they deal with or encounter. Do they do the same to groups of women?


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

Lorri Moulton said:


> I thought Beta men were more apt to ask other people's opinions before making a decision. More diplomatic about things, less likely to shoot first and ask questions later. I think that's very Daniel, especially in the first few seasons.
> 
> In the movie, he didn't feel comfortable using a weapon, he was a bit of a mess compared to the army guys...but he did figure out the way to get them home. He's smart and he got the girl.


Just figured out why I'm lukewarm toward most Romance novels . . . . I liked Daniel better than Jack and, thinking about it, I am generally drawn more, not to the one who is 'in charge' (however enlightened he might be), but to the one who is more cerebral. Not that he can't handle himself when needed.

My grade school/high school/college crushes were band geeks and honor roll guys: the ones who preferred Penny Robinson to Judy and Mary Ann to Ginger. 

And I married an Engineer . . . . so it all worked out. 

So: got any Romances where the geek gets the girl?


----------



## Kat_Merikan (Dec 31, 2016)

Ann in Arlington said:


> Just figured out why I'm lukewarm toward most Romance novels . . . . I liked Daniel better than Jack and, thinking about it, I am generally drawn more, not to the one who is 'in charge' (however enlightened he might be), but to the one who is more cerebral. Not that he can't handle himself when needed.
> 
> My grade school/high school/college crushes were band geeks and honor roll guys: the ones who preferred Penny Robinson to Judy and Mary Ann to Ginger.
> 
> ...


Here you go: https://www.amazon.com/All-Strings-Attached-Adult-romance-ebook/dp/B00TVO57FE 
Disabled goth guy makeup artist tries to get a geeky heroine who collects Japanese dolls. He's vulnerable and anxious.

Sales are dismal


----------



## Jena H (Oct 2, 2011)

Ann in Arlington said:


> Just figured out why I'm lukewarm toward most Romance novels . . . . I liked Daniel better than Jack and, thinking about it, I am generally drawn more, not to the one who is 'in charge' (however enlightened he might be), but to the one who is more cerebral. Not that he can't handle himself when needed.
> 
> My grade school/high school/college crushes were band geeks and honor roll guys: the ones who preferred Penny Robinson to Judy and Mary Ann to Ginger.
> 
> ...


QFT!!! The Jack O'Neill's of the world may be able to blast or fight their way out of a bad situation, but it falls to the Daniel Jacksons of the world to use their knowledge & skill to come up with the larger plan.  

(And the Sam Carters, too. She helped 'MacGyver' their way out of a lot of tight spots.)


----------



## readingril (Oct 29, 2010)

Ann in Arlington said:


> So: got any Romances where the geek gets the girl?


One of my favorite beta heroes is Jack in Nora Roberts' Vision in White.

Vicki Lewis Thompson has an entire series about nerds.


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

Jena H said:


> QFT!!! The Jack O'Neill's of the world may be able to blast or fight their way out of a bad situation, but it falls to the Daniel Jacksons of the world to use their knowledge & skill to come up with the larger plan.
> 
> (And the Sam Carters, too. She helped 'MacGyver' their way out of a lot of tight spots.)


Well played!

And, agreed . . . they'd never have made it without Sam . . . . who's only flaw was that SHE preferred Jack to Daniel.


----------



## Jena H (Oct 2, 2011)

Ann in Arlington said:


> Well played!
> 
> And, agreed . . . they'd never have made it without Sam . . . . who's only flaw was that SHE preferred Jack to Daniel.


Yeah, Sam was a great character. The writers did a great job creating her. A bit of a thread derail, but here's one of my favorite exchanges, from the very first episode when O'Neill meets then-Captain Carter for the first time, and of course he's not impressed.

*Capt. Carter:* I'm an Air Force officer just like you are, Colonel. And just because my reproductive organs are on the inside instead of the outside, doesn't mean I can't handle whatever you can handle.
*Col. Jack O'Neill:* Oh, this has nothing to do with you being a woman. I like women. I've just got a little problem with scientists.
*Capt. Carter:* Colonel, I logged over 100 hours in enemy airspace during the Gulf War. Is that tough enough for you? Or are we going to have to arm wrestle?

 

(I'm just glad he didn't say "I cherish women."  )


----------



## JaclynDolamore (Nov 5, 2015)

Kat_Merikan said:


> Here you go: https://www.amazon.com/All-Strings-Attached-Adult-romance-ebook/dp/B00TVO57FE
> Disabled goth guy makeup artist tries to get a geeky heroine who collects Japanese dolls. He's vulnerable and anxious.
> 
> Sales are dismal


Shoot, you sold me on this. I booted a half-finished book out of KU to put this in there instead. This sounds like everything I love.

But, yeah, such books are hard to sell.

Like Ann in Arlington, I like more cerebral heroes too and most of my first crushes were from JRPGs, anime, and manga. Even the badasses often have traits that are considered feminine in the west. Even when I write a guy who is in charge, he never fits the alpha male tropes.

With my pen name the guys get a little more alpha because I'm writing them to market as best I can, but...still...the best I can usually do is a broody Rochester type who might boss the girl around in the bedroom but only when she's into it.


----------



## Rose Andrews (Jun 1, 2017)

Puddleduck said:


> IMO, the whole alpha male, beta male thing is a bunch of made-up nonsense. It's a way of putting down men who aren't raging a-holes and has led to way too many books about men who I wouldn't want to touch with a ten-foot-pole, let alone be in a relationship with. Gentleness and respect are not anti-masculine, but the whole alpha/beta male thing makes it sound like they are. It doesn't even make sense, since alpha wolves aren't alpha because they dominated all the other wolves; they're alpha because they're the patriarchs and most of the other wolves in the pack are their children.


Thank you! I don't think of men like this in real life or write them this way either.

Alpha beta seems more UF, paranormal to me. Unless I miss it in the books I read. I don't understand this fantasy of male assholes because it's not sexy to me.

Bad boys are nothing but trouble. Do women read these types of dudes then go out into the real world and get hurt by them? Idk. But taming the bad boy trope irritates me to no end. Before my husband came along, I dated bad boys who were total jerks so yeah...no thanks on including those in my stories.

Men can be strong and sexy by treating a lady right. Making her laugh is a good thing.


----------



## Dpock (Oct 31, 2016)

Rosie A. said:


> Bad boys are nothing but trouble. Do women read these types of dudes then go out into the real world and get hurt by them? Idk. But taming the bad boy trope irritates me to no end. Before my husband came along, I dated bad boys who were total jerks so yeah...no thanks on including those in my stories.
> 
> Men can be strong and sexy by treating a lady right. Making her laugh is a good thing.


Just coincidentally, a free-promo newsletter yesterday released the results of a recent promotion. By far, bad boy romance/erotica was the biggest seller.


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

Rosie A. said:


> Thank you! I don't think of men like this in real life or write them this way either.
> 
> Alpha beta seems more UF, paranormal to me. Unless I miss it in the books I read. I don't understand this fantasy of male [expletive]s because it's not sexy to me.
> 
> ...


I think the paranormal aspect probably makes the behavior seem less outrageous. Like there is a series where the MMC literally pees on things to mark his territory. If he was just a regular human, I doubt that would go over. I know women IRL do think they can tame those guys, but whether it came from books or not I don't know.


----------



## Rose Andrews (Jun 1, 2017)

Dpock said:


> Just coincidentally, a free-promo newsletter yesterday released the results of a recent promotion. By far, bad boy romance/erotica was the biggest seller.


This does not surprise me. I wonder if age demographics has anything to do with it. Do younger readers prefer the bad boys because they haven't had a chance to be hurt by them? I've noticed readers of sweet and historical romances tend to be more mature in their years. Just an observation.


----------



## Laran Mithras (Nov 22, 2016)

The desire for the alpha-hole probably more speaks to the desire in some women for a man who will take control. Someone they can look up to for the kind of guidance that makes them complete.

As we often read to escape reality, our heroes need to be larger than life. I think many authors write their MMCs to be much larger than life. When I write mine, I like my MMCs to be realistic but their exploits to be larger than life. So my alphas are just normal men and not holes.

It is the fantasy and escape, I think, that brings the alpha-hole into being and preference.


----------



## Atunah (Nov 20, 2008)

Can we not go down that tired rabbit hole again where us poor widdle romance readers can't separate reality from fiction? Or that we want in real life what we read? No other genre readers get put through that constantly and psychoanalyzed like that. It gets really old. Its fiction.


----------



## Rose Andrews (Jun 1, 2017)

Atunah said:


> Can we not go down that tired rabbit hole again where us poor widdle romance readers can't separate reality from fiction? Or that we want in real life what we read? No other genre readers get put through that constantly and psychoanalyzed like that. It gets really old. Its fiction.


Um...it's just my opinion no harm no foul.

Laran, I agree with you there. But bad boys are irresponsible. I realize it's just a fantasy but count me in as someone who sees this trend in romance to not be a positive thing for the genre/womanhood. A man worth his weight in gold will already be a leader. Jut my 2 cents.


----------



## Becca Mills (Apr 27, 2012)

I think the romance readership has a lot of variety. Some readers want stories that feel very true and possible. Okay, maybe the couple are a little better looking than most people, but the characters and events still feel utterly plausible. Others prefer something totally other than real life, something fantastical. I'd put myself in the second camp. I love the "taming the bad boy" trope (so long as it's not too too extreme), even though I think RL bad boys are best handled with a ten-foot pole. With something pointy on the end. IRL, I'm married to a 5-foot-7 literature professor who's always losing his hat and would never consider throwing a punch at someone. No danger of "bad boys" being taken seriously around here. Still enjoy reading about them, though.


----------



## Guest (Sep 30, 2017)

Ann in Arlington said:


> So: got any Romances where the geek gets the girl?


One of my favorites is Trust Me by Jayne Ann Krentz. Very much the geek guy with a theater girl...they learn from each other nicely


----------



## Kat_Merikan (Dec 31, 2016)

Atunah said:


> Can we not go down that tired rabbit hole again where us poor widdle romance readers can't separate reality from fiction? Or that we want in real life what we read? No other genre readers get put through that constantly and psychoanalyzed like that. It gets really old. Its fiction.


Thank you for this. My thoughts exactly. Just because I write about mafiosos and bikers, doesn't mean I want one.


----------



## Laran Mithras (Nov 22, 2016)

Atunah, all heroes are larger than life in most genres of fiction. It is our desire for escape that demands larger than life heroes. Not just romance.

Someone said PNR is leaning more towards realistic heroes with the exploits being larger than life. Maybe the genre was UF. In any event, I think the focus should be on exploits.

Being that alpha-holes have such a dominating presence in many niches of romance is due to the genre, not necessarily the reader. In Action Adventure, the alphas are super bad-a.. being deadly, but can often be normal, non-hole guys. It's the genre, not the reader. I think romance authors are responsible for the overkill on making their stories larger than life. Likewise, AA authors make their MMCs out to be one-man wrecking machines no human soldier could ever hope to emulate.


----------



## kcmorgan (Jan 9, 2013)

Jena H said:


> And that's one reason I have a problem with the "alpha male" romance stories--the notion that every guy who doesn't plow and shove everyone else out of his path to get what he wants is "weak." I don't know why people even have to classify the "types" of men they deal with or encounter. Do they do the same to groups of women?


First I'd like to clarify, not all alphas are alpha-holes. You can be dominant and be a perfectly nice guy. Alpha-holes are usually used to rev up the drama. It's just a package of flaws the hero needs to set aside to get the girl. So as we examine the romance reader's psyche, it's important to remember, the traits that make an alpha-hole an alpha-hole aren't usually helping him achieve his goal of getting the girl, they are usually hindering him and he has to give up his a-hole ways for his HEA.

And I'd like to also point out that not all romance readers are only interested in alphas. There is a lady that post here, Rosalind(sp?) that makes money hand over fist writing about normal guys. So obviously the fan base for romance is pretty diverse in their taste.

And yes, those designations are sometimes assigned to women too. Often in stories where omegas have no rights, alphas covet them and betas are the normal people that make up everyday life. The omega is like "Oh, my society is so oppressive, I'll hide in this hole so no one will mate with me." And the alpha is like, "Even though all other alphas are alpha-holes I'm the one exception, I'll show you what it means to be loved!" And the beta is like, "Did someone call about a problem with the pipes?"


----------



## Kat_Merikan (Dec 31, 2016)

Another element of the 'bad boy' in romance is that he is not the real bad boy/a$$hole (lol, didn't know there was censorship here) who walks all over you. In fiction he does no more and no less what you want. He is a controlled force for the writer, and the reader can always close the book. It's a safe fantasy.


----------



## Evenstar (Jan 26, 2013)

I discovered something about caricaturisation very early on that I'd like to share.

In my first book I wrote a self centred heartbreaker who is not a nice guy but gets completely flawed by my heroine, who is a sparky confident girl.
I was working on the basis that girls liked the idea of challenging the boy and him falling in love with her and wanting to be a better guy to get her. I was right but the book was only liked rather than loved.

During one of my many many re-writes of the book I changed him from being a dumb jock to being smart, witty and educated. Reviews went through the roof.

One of the only things I did to demonstrate it was to have him quote Pride and Prejudice, and teenage girls globally suddenly fell in love with him instead of commenting that he was a d-bag.  His quotation is mentioned repeatedly on Googleplay reviews as the moment they wanted him to be theirs.

It taught me a valuable lesson, and I hope I've written this clearly enough that you can see it too. (It's late here and I'm tired, so a little bit incoherent).


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

Evenstar said:


> I discovered something about caricaturisation very early on that I'd like to share.
> 
> In my first book I wrote a self centred heartbreaker who is not a nice guy but gets completely flawed by my heroine, who is a sparky confident girl.
> I was working on the basis that girls liked the idea of challenging the boy and him falling in love with her and wanting to be a better guy to get her. I was right but the book was only liked rather than loved.
> ...


Oh, you gave me a lot of hope here. My MMC happens to be smart, educated and quotes literature as well. He has a master's in English despite it not being his native language. He's confident, bordering on arrogant, but the FMC can put him in his place. He doesn't really need "tamed" though (he does tame her down quite a bit), and he'll do pretty much anything for her even in the beginning when she still hates him. I'm thinking people may actually like this after reading more of you guys' posts. And thanks a ton to everyone who's been posting -- really interesting and helpful conversations going on.


----------



## JaclynDolamore (Nov 5, 2015)

Also, I mean, I have not STUDIED this, but to me, there's stuff I read for the romance/relationship and stuff I read for the smut. In the former, the guy has to be a good person. He might have troubles or make mistakes or be a jerk at times, but he has to grow and face consequences for negative actions, and there are lines he can't cross. If it's more erotic, though, I think it's more like bedroom role playing and dirty talk. Besides that we have a society where women are supposed to be good girls but "boys will be boys" and the bad boy in a book gives a girl permission to wrangle with that aspect of society in different ways--either to succumb to him, or to match him. When I started reading these books I realized what fascinating psychology there is to popular steamy romance novels. And no, I don't think it has anything to do with the type of men readers would choose in real life.


----------



## LinaG (Jun 18, 2012)

> It's just a package of flaws the hero needs to set aside to get the girl. So as we examine the romance reader's psyche, it's important to remember, the traits that make an alpha-hole an alpha-hole aren't usually helping him achieve his goal of getting the girl, they are usually hindering him and he has to give up his a-hole ways for his HEA.


This.

As I see it in Romance:

*Alpha* (at the beginning of the book) Corporate d-bag who wants to pave the farm like he has so many times before. He's got money. He's got the power money brings. He doesn't think about how his actions effect others. The heroine probably doesn't have much money or power. She most certainly does not want the farm paved and dotted with vinyl wrapped houses since it's the last unpaved farm in the county. Their relationship will broaden his outlook in the process of their romance. (Pretty Woman anyone?)

The heroine will "land" the hero by sticking to her guns and not being swayed by his wealth or power into betraying her ideals. He will find her annoying, but irrisistable.

Many, many women find themselves in situations in which they are powerless. Their job sucks, but they can't leave because they need the money or the insurance. Their parents aren't well and they have to be on call. They in the middle of a divorce, or the aftermath of a hurricane. They don't have money, social status or any kind of special influence over circumstances.

Romance readers don't read this kind of story because they like/daydream/hope to be bullied or abused or 'ruled' by a man. (In my opinion)

The "Alpha male" romance tells them a story about a powerless woman who *sticks to her guns and wins*. In the romance genre the victory is a HEA. But the 'lesson' if you will, for the reader is, "Hang in there. Stick to your guns. Don't give up. You can win." This is the power of a story about an "Alpha male"

*Beta hero:* The fireman who takes care of his dead sister's baby, and has a beef with the heroine social worker who has come to check up on whether or not his care is adequate. Maybe she assumes such a good looking, fit man can't be a great single dad and still have an essentially dangerous job. Maybe snooty, know it all women annoy him due to something in his past. He's still a great hero, good looking etc., but his ego is not involved in his 'flaw.' I mean, heck, all he wants is to be left alone to take care of that baby and fight fires! She will give a little and he will give a little during the development of the romance.

Two men, equally awesome at the end.

My 2 cents


----------



## Usedtoposthere (Nov 19, 2013)

I can name sooo many romance authors who make mid six to seven figures a year writing decent grown emotionally mature men. They are dominant in bed and you can have plenty of kink and role playing, but it's fully consensual, and they respect a woman's choices in and out of bed. They do not have to be larger than life and they sure as h e double toothpicks don't have to be jerks. They don't have to be handsome. They should be strong, confident, and have great bodies, however you define that. 

It's a big genre. You don't "have" to write anything to succeed but an appealing hero, a heroine not too many readers dislike, and a story readers can escape into and enjoy.


----------



## Nope (Jun 25, 2012)

.


----------



## Rose Andrews (Jun 1, 2017)

P.J. Post said:


> This.
> 
> I can read the strong-willed, foul-tempered bad-boy/girl with a heart of gold-ish trope all day long, but I don't think these qualify as alpha-holes.
> 
> I associate alpha-holes with restraining orders and abuse. And yes, as adults, we can separate fantasy from reality, but I believe it to be disingenuous to think that young adults, of both genders, are not also reading these books as they try to figure out who they are, who they want to be, and even more importantly, who they think they are supposed to be. Edward and Bella taught a whole generation that love is keeping tabs on one another 24/7, and that stalking is romantic. Due to the success of Twilight and then 50 Shades, these abusive tropes have been repeated over and over in other books and genres. I won't quote the statistics we should all be familiar with - I guess writers should feel free to write whatever they want, but, just as we talk about inclusivity, diversity and equality, I think we also need to take responsibility for how our books might contribute to the normalization of abuse - and, you know - don't do it.


This eloquently states the point I was trying to make. Thank you, P.J.

That being said, of course I'm on the freedom of the press side: authors can write what they want and readers can read what they want. There's something for everybody in romance. This is kind of an extreme example but I recall not too long ago how upset some folks were on here about the author who wrote the Stepdaddy book with the young girl. When is it too much too far? I'm the least qualified person to answer that question and I don't believe that's what this thread is about either. It's just something I keep in the back of my mind when I write. My prerogative. Others are free to feel/write what they want and I'm not going to think they are any less artistic or intelligent because of it. Felt like I should clarify. Maybe I'm a prude. lol.


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

boba1823 said:


> Are these tropes something that the average (or many, or whatever) Romance reader likes? Or is it something that a lot of Romance authors just like, or like to write about, or think (incorrectly) that readers like?
> 
> Or.. is there even any way to tell? I mean, some books including such tropes sell a lot of copies. But buying a book isn't the same as liking a book, since you generally don't know exactly what's in there prior to reading. And some readers might dislike certain tropes/content but ignore it because they like other aspects of a book - or even just because it seems to be so pervasive that it is difficult to get away from it.
> 
> It's not the kind of thing I would think would be appealing, but what do I know.


Just personally, I will read it in PNR/UF if the story is otherwise good. It's not my favorite type of couple, but I don't mind it so much if the FMC is strong enough to not be a door mat. If he's being abusive and walking all over her, it's a DNF for me. I think due to the paranormal aspects and the strong FMC, a little more alpha-ness can be gotten away with in these genres. A true beta male in UF with a strong female lead will end up being a purse holder, but I really don't like the super overbearing alpha-hole either. It can be hard to strike a balance with a strong female lead because no one likes to see the emasculated male, so I think the trend was to overcompensate and make him an a-hole.


----------



## JaclynDolamore (Nov 5, 2015)

boba1823 said:


> Are these tropes something that the average (or many, or whatever) Romance reader likes? Or is it something that a lot of Romance authors just like, or like to write about, or think (incorrectly) that readers like?


Oh, I think there is no question that readers love this trope. I mean, both Twilight and 50 Shades were shockingly successful; that doesn't happen if readers aren't into it. There was a PNR YA novel I threw across the room once that has a love interest who makes Edward look like the sweetest guy ever born.

In fact, I'm a little romance writer group where all the writers gripe about having to write so many alpha males all the time. Although how many writers are just pretending we'd rather write something else, who knows. I've noticed readers are certainly quick to complain about tropes they find unfeminist but then those books sell like CRAZY.


----------



## LinaG (Jun 18, 2012)

From RoasieA:

This:


> I think we also need to take responsibility for how our books might contribute to the normalization of abuse - and, you know - don't do it.


Years ago a writer named Lawerence Block wrote a procedural titled Fuzz. It was made into a movie. A side crime in the book was someone who was lighting bums on fire as they slept out in the street. The book took place in NYC I think. Days after the movie came out, someone started setting bums on fire as they slept, burning them alive.

I was pretty young but I knew I wanted to be a writer. I have always remembered this. The power fiction can have over the actions of the audience.

Romance can teach young women, who may not have great role models at home, to value themselves and their bodies, to stick up for what they believe is right, to be resilient and strong. It is a great and honorable genre that I feel is smeared by people who don't understand it and who buy into the pontificating of patriarchal rattletraps who know nothing (and are perhaps jealous of the earning potential of "those little books.")

Li


----------



## NotMyRealName (Aug 18, 2014)

I do not accept nor do I consent to KBoards/VerticalScope's Terms of Service which have been updated without notice or the opportunity to opt out.


----------



## kcmorgan (Jan 9, 2013)

boba1823 said:


> Are these tropes something that the average (or many, or whatever) Romance reader likes? Or is it something that a lot of Romance authors just like, or like to write about, or think (incorrectly) that readers like?
> 
> Or.. is there even any way to tell? I mean, some books including such tropes sell a lot of copies. But buying a book isn't the same as liking a book, since you generally don't know exactly what's in there prior to reading. And some readers might dislike certain tropes/content but ignore it because they like other aspects of a book - or even just because it seems to be so pervasive that it is difficult to get away from it.
> 
> It's not the kind of thing I would think would be appealing, but what do I know.


Yes, it's a very popular trope. But the assumptions about people who like it are laughably off. I like those kinds of romances because I enjoy high amounts of drama in my fiction. And when your love interest is a villain the stakes get super high.

That doesn't mean I long to be abused, or accept abuse in real life. I also like reading about alien worlds, but in real life I don't even like leaving the house. The idea that what people only enjoy reading about is stuff they want to happen is just silly. Do thriller fans secretly hope for terrorist attacks? No. That's dumb. People just like exciting situations. Why is Romance the one genre where everyone needs to be in a perfectly healthy situation or their fan base is cray?


----------



## Nope (Jun 25, 2012)

.


----------



## Kal241 (Jan 11, 2017)

P.J. Post said:


> Gamergate shows us that it's not just the typical Alphas, whatever the [expletive] that is, that's perpetuating this [crap].


Gamergate, contrary to popular belief, wasn't originally about misogyny. It was an argument about male editors giving a female game dev triple-A ratings because she'd had past relationships with them. ALL of them. That's a huge conflict of interests, but that argument got buried when the audience went off the rails, and then it turned into a gender argument.

Otherwise, I fully agree with the rest of your statement.

_Edited to remove political content in quoted post. PM me if you have any questions. Evenstar, Moderator_


----------



## kcmorgan (Jan 9, 2013)

P.J. Post said:


> Read what you want, you'll find no argument here, but as for what we write...
> 
> Yeah, no. Romance doesn't get a pass any more than any other genre, and it doesn't have anything to do with assumptions being laughably off.
> 
> ...


But they do repent. There is a plot point literally called "The Grovel" where the guy finally realizes he's been a jerk and swears off his evil ways. Even 50 Shades ends with Christian Grey being all, "Oh, I'll give up my interest in BDSM and just be the man you want."

_Edited to remove political content in quoted post and the response to it. PM me if you have any questions. Evenstar, Moderator_


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

kcmorgan said:


> But they do repent. There is a plot point literally called "The Grovel" where the guy finally realizes he's been a jerk and swears off his evil ways. Even 50 Shades ends with Christian Grey being all, "Oh, I'll give up my interest in BDSM and just be the man you want."


If that one sentence was all I knew about 50 Shades, I might feel sorry for Christian Grey. Like, why can't he have his hobbies?


----------



## kcmorgan (Jan 9, 2013)

paranormal_kitty said:


> If that one sentence was all I knew about 50 Shades, I might feel sorry for Christian Grey. Like, why can't he have his hobbies?


Ana's entire arc is her growing a spine. And while people like to compare Christian to a classic abuser, he warns her from day one that he's a vampire hot mess that's incapable of giving her what she wants and she's like that's okay, the power of my lady bits love will change you. And it did. So if we are criticizing stories like these for anything, it should be the idea that you can bring dangerous men to heel with the power of your "love".

But even being a fan of that sub-genre, I want to seduce a dangerous psychopath about as much as a thriller reader wants to navigate a tomb full of deadly traps. Just because you enjoy reading about something doesn't mean you want to do it for real.


----------



## Cherise (May 13, 2012)

Puddleduck said:


> IMO, the whole alpha male, beta male thing is a bunch of made-up nonsense. ... It doesn't even make sense, since alpha wolves aren't alpha because they dominated all the other wolves; they're alpha because they're the patriarchs and most of the other wolves in the pack are their children.


Yep. I uncovered this fact when researching my one wolf book. Here is a good summary of how this misnomer came to be:
https://io9.gizmodo.com/why-everything-you-know-about-wolf-packs-is-wrong-502754629

"A key problem with Schenkel's wolf studies is that, while they represented the first close study of wolves, they didn't involve any study of wolves in the wild. Schenkel studied two packs of wolves living in captivity, but his studies remained the primary resource on wolf behavior for decades."


----------

