Exactly. When he or his finger starts stroking her or enters her I KNOW WHAT HE'S TOUCHING. You don't need to ruin the scene with some idiotic term.

Found another: "puckered opening" or "rosette" for the anus. Not as offensive as "bowels" but these are a close second!!

omg I've seen "rosebud" for that specific opening. I mean, seriously?
(makes me think of when I was a kid and asked mom what "phabet" was. She said—of course— "Whaaaaa?" whereupon I answered, "I know what anal is, I'm just wondering what the phabet is."
I present to you, Anna, at age 6. I collected words already then).
Words. So many of them, and so little time. Please, let's use the sexy ones.

Reply to post #18 (show post):
"Rosette" is still one of my favorites as the worst for anus. Can't even.

Reply to post #19 (show post):
What IS a "phabet"???

Reply to post #21 (show post):
analphabet - I grew up surrounded by people did not know how to read and write. my mom taught analphabetic people. I wanted to know what the two parts of the word were - I just cut the word in the wrong place.

here's a new one, read it on Litchick's status update: http://bit.ly/1dHnZfW

nubbin
for all that is holy
nubbin

Reply to post #23 (show post):
Ick, yeah, I HATE nubbin, too. I've read it for both clit and nipple. Blech.

GAWD!! Nubbin....GEEZUZ!! I saw Litchick's status update last night and almost screamed. Every time I read that my teeth clench. Authors...must do better, please!

This is why I wish they would stop calling things stuff. Haha. Seriously, I wish I could float a memo thought Romancelandia that romance should go back to being less explicit. Save that for erotica. Romance love scenes are so much more romantic and sensual operating under less is more. Focusing more on emotions and feeling than tab a into slot b. And it would save everyone from reading words they can't stand, thereby ruining the scenes. Either it's jarringly explicit or overly flowery and ridiculous. Hell, maybe it would remind some authors that there IS a difference between romance and erotic romance. Sometimes it's really hard to tell the difference nowadays. You want people to like your books, which isn't happening if we're ripped out of the scenes cringing and shuddering then posting status updates screeching about terrible word usage in sex scenes!

Reply to post #26 (show post):
"Hell, maybe it would remind some authors that there IS a difference between romance and erotic romance." I seriously can't tell anymore. When you wrote that Victorial Dahl's book had a 19 page love/sex scene, I was surprised. And there are other authors that were never as explicit hopping on that train too. Meanwhile readers were probably reading those authors BECAUSE they kept things less graphic. That's just not everyone's cuppa! I love erotic, smutty novels but sometimes I want a break from that and now my go to authors for that are forcing the graphic stuff down my throat anyway. I'm with you; let's go back to a time when readers used their imagination...I don't need a play by play every time.

Reply to post #27 (show post):
Exactly. If you want to write erotica, write erotica. But they've turned them into the same thing when they're not. I much more enjoy a less explicit story. And then if I want something else I can make the choice. You're right, they're forcing it down our throats and I don't appreciate that. And I've noticed authors moving that way, too.

And, yeah, I don't understand why Harlequin keeps publishing Victoria Dahl as romance, every book I've read of hers so far have been very, very explicit and the characters are all about sex, sex, sex. That's what their relationships are based on, that's almost all they do, then they're in love and supposed to call that a satisfying story. In my book that's erotica. (The last sex scene in the same book I'm reading was 16 pages, BTW.)

Could it simply be, that Erotica is the new Romance? just throwing that out there.
I very much enjoy both kinds, but I like to know which one I'm reading :-)

I've not read VD's latest stuff but some of her earlier book were contemporary romance...I think that's why she has that label still. 16 pages...geez! Erotica or not, I don't need that much for one sex scene. The longest sex scene I've read to date was 35 pages. But there were like 5-6 ppl involved. It departed from anything resembling sexy after the first 5 pages, IMO. Emotion, sensuality....what are those?

Anna, all I can say to that is no me gusta. There's a difference! There's more to life and relationships and especially romantic relationships than sex. Many authors have forgotten that. Sex scenes in books are really only satisfying to me when the characters have established a relationship, gotten to know each other, are good together. Not just immediately ripping off their clothes before any chance of emotion or feeling is involved.

INPO, The series I'm reading now is the earliest of her stuff I read. Actually the only other book of hers I read is the first of the Jackson series. It was like this to with too much sex and not enough relationship. I have two of her Donovan books (one and three, I'm waiting for the second to show up on sale so I can start reading them), I'm wondering if its too much to hope they'll be better about that. Oh and better about not using *that* heinous euphemism.

I can't remember what the longest sex scene I've read is. But I bet it'll be in one of the many menages I've read like you.