Comments: 25
Grimlock ♥ Inhumans 3 years ago
Y'know, I want to say this to a bunch of people about my sexuality. Not the polyamory bit - although I wonder since I do like the idea of polyamory and a lot of my fantasies involve this. Although I realize that this sounds trivial: what I mean is I'm not sure. I'm equally attached to one-on-one relationships, or group relationships. I can see it working for me - and the right partners. (Of course, it becomes moot when one takes into consideration that no right partner exist - so the question of if I'm polyamory may also be a be pointless due to that?)

But I'm getting sidetracked. Regardless of I'm imagining cuddling up with Bee one-on-one or the whole crew of the Lost Light - other than Rodimus - at the same time, so much of this (it's not your kink, it's not wrong, etc) apply to me.

I was near tears at some point reading this, going, yes, yes, someone got it down.

So a gazillion points to all of this.
The Fangirl 3 years ago
Polyamory is a lot more than just like/sexing more than one person. You don't have to be in relationships or love with every person you sleep with. You don't have to have sex at all to be poly. This is what makes it more than a relationships distinction, it's an aspect of emotional and sexual behavior. An asexual person can be poly too, they can be in love with several people whom they do not have sex with. It's a rainbow of possibilities. I don't think your choices ever cancel out your person identity. No matter what. You say your poly you are. Simple as that.

Dude, we could expand this to your sexuality in a lot of ways. But that's a discussion for another time. I have to run. Thanks for reading and commenting.
Grimlock ♥ Inhumans 3 years ago
Ah, fair enough! But, yes, I understand - with a lot of the relationships I wish I could have, it's more about the emotional relationship than the sexing. (Or I should say, the cuddling/spending time with them/in their heads. It's... complicated.)

And run, run. I may post about this and expand a little if you don't mind me linking to this. I'll wait for your say so, though. (I'd like to this post and say it was my springboard and add my own thoughts.)
The Fangirl 3 years ago
Post away. Don't ever wait for my permission. It's your blog and you have a right to post about whatever you want on it.
Linda Hilton 3 years ago
I don't like beer, but that doesn't mean other people can't like it and enjoy it, so long as they don't force me to, and they do it responsibly and don't hurt innocent people as a result of their drinking beer.

I don't like sex with multiple partners, but that doesn't mean other people can't like it and enjoy it, so long as they don't force me to, and they do it responsibly and don't hurt innocent people as a result of their having sex with multiple partners.

Makes sense to me.
The Fangirl 3 years ago
It really is that simple. Yet so many people assume or feel entitled to be an authority on other peoples sexuality often because they don't realized that real living people outside of their porn have this sexuality.

I appreciate that you're able to give people room to be who they are without needing to define it for them. Thanks for reading and commenting.
The Fangirl 3 years ago
If my statement was for you I would have addressed you directly.

This post is about how readers assuming they have a right to demand notification if a book isn't cis/hetero/monogamous is a form of microaggression that feeds into the marginalization and harm of other people. It's also about the problem with creating subgenres for sexuality to cater to this expectation. Where labeling anything that isn't cis/hetero/monogamy creates the expectation that anything that deviates from them should have to warn away readers who they're not written for in the first place. It is much larger an issue, than that one review, and it's part of an on going conversation about reading diverse books and microaggressions in book reviews and literature in general.

I get you think that this is just about you wanting to know about the content of a book so you can make an informed decision when you buy it. If that is true why not ask for books with monogamous relationships be clearly labeled instead? That way you can be assured that there is no hint of multiple partner sex anywhere in the books you buy. Why put the responsibility on authors and books that are not written for you to label themselves in order to ensure you don't accidentally give them your money? Especially when the content you're demanding be labeled isn't harmful or damaging to anyone.

What about if a straight man who buys lesbian porn only to discover it's porn made with by real lesbians for real lesbians. Does he have a right to demand that all real lesbian porn be properly labeled so he doesn't accidentally buy again? No. In my opinion this situation is no different.

Even in a genre like Romance and Erotica that are dominated by books that celebrate and perpetuated monogamy it is still not the responsible of a marginalized group to announce their differences for the sake of people who do not even want to read about them. Not to mention it's unfair and insulting to demand they do.

nospin 3 years ago
The issue is really about labelling a book so the proper audience can find it. This book failed to do that.I really do not care about anyone's sexuality but if publishers don't adequately market their books, I appreciate a heads up as to the nature of the book.

A couple years ago Christian fiction kept getting promoted without noting that it was Christian fiction. Only other reviewers remarks allowed me to steer away from it. Christian fiction pubs have wised up and the same will probably happen in the new genres.
The Fangirl 3 years ago
I get that you think you're being equitable, but I again I don't see why an author should have to shoulder the responsibility of warning away readers who don't want their perfectly acceptable none harmful erotica. Trigger and content warnings weren't created to help people create laundry lists of likes and dislikes. They are to highly traumatizing content or things that could trigger traumatized people.

Polyamory isn't a trigger, and characterizing it as triggering if offensive. Authors of books about black characters are not obligated to announce their content to readers who don't want to read about black people. This is exactly the same. Don't want to read about poly, find books that clearly announce they're about monogamy.

I don't understand why it's that hard.

I'm not a fan of Christian books, but I don't demand that authors of those books clearly inform me of their content because I'm not their customer base. Please not that's only in certain genres. No one is labeling the work of C.S. Lewis as Christian even though they absolutely are.
nospin 3 years ago
The story did not make it clear they were in that type of relationship when the first sexual encounter occurred. - it could easily be seen as cheating.
Not marketing or labelling adequately does not help those readers find the books.
My goddaughter is in a poly relationship and I have no problem with it.

Oh and btw, the labelling for Christian book s is there now because we fought for it. Honesty and transparency in the marketplace.
The Fangirl 3 years ago
Just because you don't understand polyamory and insist on viewing their relationship as monogamous (even though it was never state to be monogamous at any point in the book) you are the one choosing to view it as cheating. It is only easily seen as cheating to someone who assumes everyone who doesn't say they're not monogamous is monogamous. You're the one making that assumption and it's not the authors responsibility to tell you that world is different than you expect it to be.

Neither Akira or Jacob identify as heterosexual either. So if you were to assume they are straight and get mad that Akira kissed another woman that would also be on you, not the author.

Not everyone is straight or monogamous, if you assume they are unless they tell you differently your imposing your own expectations on the world around you and that's on you. It is not responsibility of the rest of us to inform you that we're different.

"Honesty and transparency in the marketplace." Wow, so if someone doesn't explicitly tell you their story isn't what you expect they're being dishonest. How are they supposed to read your mind while not knowing you? While they're accommodating you, what should the rest of us do? Be happy that you let us get books about us written at all?
Linda Hilton 3 years ago
I'm stepping into territory I probably shouldn't, but. . . .

I think sometimes the "proper audience" excuse(sic) is a way of saying "I/we don't want to read about that kind of people and demand that I/we be protected from it." (A kind of "separate but equal" excuse, which is wrong, just wrong. IMHO.)

I think -- and again this is all just my woefully uninformed opinion -- the difference between a "warning" that there's gay sex or interracial sex or polyamorous sex and a "warning" about, say, child abuse or animal cruelty, is that the latter are acts that are not confined to a particular group or lifestyle or sexual orientation. There's also the issue of a demand for that warning, any warning. I don't like demands of that nature. I think they're lazy and cop-outs.

There's a point at which we readers have to take responsibility for our own choices, good or bad. Sometimes shit happens. Oh well. It's just a book. You don't like it? Quit reading it.

For the most part, I think reasonably well-read people have a decent idea what kind of book they're getting when they acquire it. And if they don't know and are surprised, well, they roll with it. "Oh, I didn't know this was going to be science fiction! I hate science fiction!" and then they put it back, quit reading, whatever. Maybe they'll never read anything by that author again, but that's as far as it goes. (The snotty ones leave 1-star reviews on Amazon, and it's usually obvious that they aren't very well read at all and should have known what the book was before they picked it up.)

Going back to my beer analogy, if it comes in a tall brown bottle, has words like "brew" or "hops" or "malt" or "lager" or "pilsner" on the label, I'm going to have a good idea it's beer, and I'm not going to drink it no matter how strongly my friends urge me to try it. It's beer, and I don't like beer. If a friend pours it into a glass and hands it to me saying it's ginger ale, I'm going to know by the smell of it that it's not, or the most a single sip. ***But then I'm going to hate that friend for trying to trick me into doing something she/he knows I do not want to do.***

I've downloaded books that turned out to be not what I thought they were, but I didn't really think there was anything intentionally misleading about them. Some, in fact, were Christian fiction, and I'm with you, nospin. I have no interest in Christian fiction. But I'm not going to demand a warning label. I can do the research -- if it's published by Zondervan or Bethany House, it's probably Christian. Etc.

On the other hand, there's a book by one of my all-time favorite authors (now deceased, and the book was published in the 1950s) that has one of the most horrific scenes in it that I've ever read. No warning, and yet that scene gave me literal nightmares for years. I could never reread the book. (Ditto with the movie Dances with Wolves. Even hearing the music makes me sick to my stomach.) Should that book have had a trigger warning? Just for me? I don't think that's reasonable. (Voluntary labeling is another thing altogether.)

Another book that is beloved by historical romance readers, one of the quintessential "desert island keepers," is in my never humble opinion one of the most disgusting examples of the genre, NOT because of the overwhelming historical inaccuracies but because of the heroine's willful and remorseless animal cruelty. Should that book have had a warning? For me the tiny minority? when just about everyone else loves it to pieces?

I just don't think that's practical, and I don't think it's fair.

If I were to demand any warnings at all, it would a huge one warning of crappy writing. ;-)

And now I'm quitting while I'm ahead. Even if I'm not ahead any more.
Linda Hilton 3 years ago
"...it wasn't the story I was looking forward to based on the promise of the synopsis."

And that's what happens sometimes. An ending sucks. A favorite character dies. The mystery is too easily solved. The research is crap. The MC is TSTL.

It's easy to say someone should have posted a warning -- the author, the publisher, the other reviewers, even your trusted someone -- but they didn't. I just don't think their failure to warn you as an individual is sufficient justification for anyone to DEMAND that books come with a shopping list of warnings. If you were unpleasantly surprised, okay. I think most people would be all right with your saying that. But demanding across the board warnings? Hmm, I'm not so okay with that.

Do I want to know if there's graphic animal cruelty in a book? Yes, I do. Do I want to know if there's graphic child abuse? Yes. Do I want to know if there's brutal rape? Explicit violence? Yes. Political agendas I don't agree with? Yes. (That last is sort of tongue in cheek.)

But wanting something isn't a demand, and it's not an abnegation of reader responsibility.


nospin 3 years ago
So you do not think reviewers should have the option of sharing what was pro somatic for since readers coming after won't have that kind owledge
Linda Hilton 3 years ago
No, no, no, no, no! Not at all! If reviewers or readers want to share that info, absolutely they have the right to do so. (It's, like, kinda their job, so to speak.) You should know me well enough by now that I'll be on the side of the readers 99.55% of the time. And this definitely falls into that 99.55%.

But that's totally different, imho, from DEMANDING that authors/publishers warn about what some might consider offensive.

The someone Barb trusted didn't share that information with her, however. Did that person have an obligation to do so? No. Did that person have a right to do so? Yes.

Two different things. ;-)
The Fangirl 3 years ago
@Linda I wish there was a way to like a comment more than one time. I think you outlines some fantastic points.

To expand on what you've said, Trigger/Content Warnings were never intended to be used to sort out readers likes/dislikes. They're about notifying readers of triggering content, i.e. things like rape, blood, graphic violence, pedophilia. These things are intense/disturbing subjects and it is very understandable that they could illicit an intense response in certain readers/viewers, like your response to that horrific scene and Dances with Wolves. In those cases it is absolutely reasonable to require a trigger/content warning. That's why many rating systems have added notices about graphic and sexual violence, even animal abuse, to their list of content warnings for movies and tv shows.

However treating real sexuality and sexual orientations like traumatizing situations like rape isn't just lazy, it's incredibly offensive and hurtful. I expand on this in a quick post I just put up here http://thefangirl.booklikes.com/post/1062700/a-quick-note-about-trigger-content-warnings

Thanks for sharing your insight, despite your hesitance. I'm glad you commented.
The Fangirl 3 years ago
@Barbara Most of what you're explain is your own expectations of the book, that to be fair were based on your impression of your friend's tastes.

It doesn't really matter what you've read and enjoyed. I'm not accusing you of being homophobic, but I will say that your comments continue to contribute to bigotry against marginalized people, whether you realize it or not. I'm talking about your assumption and insistence that readers should be notified about certain kinds of sexuality or sexual scenarios that aren't linked to anything harmful.

Do you demand "notices" for blow jobs and anal sex? Why is this different? Probably not.
nospin 3 years ago
That is not at all what I meant bowing the book to find d it's proper Udjen e. Correct t marketing g should minimize wrong book sold to wrong reader.
nospin 3 years ago
No way do those comments contribute to bigotry against marginalized people.

You want all reviews to go through you for vetting. Reviews are for other readers - if you find d a review that is not helpful just move on. Being the net nanny for reviews is unattractive.

The Fangirl 3 years ago
I'm deeply amused that you are not accusing me of doing to book reviewers exactly what you're doing to authors of polyamory books. Or is policing polyamory in fiction less of an issue as my calling out casual bigotry? I guess it is.

I get you don't like being forced to acknowledge that your experiences and POV are not only not like other peoples, but that others have a right to not agree with you, but you're going to have to get use to it if you intend to continue to comment on my posts.

Insisting that poly stories wear a giant sign to warn you away, is demanding special treatment you have not right to have. If you don't want to read about us demand authors who only write about monogamy label their books clearly. Don't make demands of authors who aren't even writing books for you.

And claim "intended market" all you want, but it's not about helping poly people find books about us. It's about everyone else accommodating your needs.
nospin 3 years ago
You are totally off-base and making a great deal of Asus.options. I read mysteries and classics.
The point remains you think your interpretation is the only one allowed and reviewers are not allowed to share their experience in a review without your app to all.
DUDE, I FRIGGING LOVE YOU FOR THIS. ARE YOU GOING TO POST THIS ON TUMBLR? THIS NEEDS TO GO OUT EVERYWHERE. Sorry, I just really like what you said. xD (Also, I'm reading both of those books, or at least have them. I need to start them.)
The Fangirl 3 years ago
I posted it on Tumblr here: http://fangirljeanne.tumblr.com/post/104978531587/fixing-the-problematic-legacy-of-romance-erotica

Thanks. I'm glad you liked the post. You NEED to read these books so we can talk about them.