M/M Erotic Romances (Male on Male)
Is this really a turn on for women and a "growing" market? I have been resistant to review them in Romantic Times BOOKreviews because I do not feel we have many readers who want this type of book. I would love your input on this in a poll I have created.
The more people vote, the more objective the result will be, so please make sure to vote. The poll will run for 30 days.
Thanks for your help,
Carol Stacy
Publisher
The more people vote, the more objective the result will be, so please make sure to vote. The poll will run for 30 days.
Thanks for your help,
Carol Stacy
Publisher
posted at 12:11 PM
19 Comments:
M/M romance (read by women, and written by women) is enormous. Just enormous. From fanfic to e-zines to e-books to manga to yaio to novels (Mary Renault, RW Day, O'Neill, EM Forster, Chris Hunt etc etc etc) It's a huge market. (it's also read by men and written by men, of course, but we all know that women buy more books)
I wanted to add myself to Romantic Times authors list but was put off but the lack of m/m.
I am horribly dissapointed that RT has refused to allow a m/m panel at the convention.
Erastes
www.erastes.com
WELL I AM NEW TO THIS GENRE........and quite frankly i was surprised to find a really good story the sex scenes where very well done and YES i would read another one, no probs, usually read M/F, but i was pleasantly suprised and really enjoyrd reading the book..........i must admit i did not think i would like it at all, but the author did a really good job. and now i won't think "NO WAY IS A BOOK LIKE THAT FOR ME", cos quite frankly until i tried , well i didn't know.................each to there own and Yes i believe there is a market for these books and i think no harm comes from "BROADENING YOUR HORIZONS" at least then you would know one way or the other,
trying something new is a good thing, and well if you don't like it 2NO HARM, NO FOUL",
but i think to disregaurd these books is to lose a "NICHE" in this market,
Emma
Love is love. A romance is about two human beings fighting their way to love and a happy ending--nothing in my definition precludes gay or lesbian heroes and heroines. The sexual act might vary, but the emotions don't.
Just because something is reviewed in RT doesn't force someone to read the book. While some readers might be offended by the theme, that doesn't give them the right to keep the books from being reviewed. I, myself, find Inspirationals laughably simplistic with characters who are cardboard cutouts, and the form of spirituality featured tends to make me uncomfortable--but I don't call for THEM not to be reviewed because I don't care for them. It is called tolerance. We need more of it.
Since many women DO enjoy m/m romances, and many of them are also faithful readers of RT, I see no reason why RT shouldn't include the subgenre.
Oh, Heavens to Betsy, no! Do you really want to let yourself in for that kettle of fish? That's a whole other issue and there's no place for it in Romance. Porn, maybe, but not Romance.
m/m is absolutely a growing market. It's not for everyone, but then again, neither is f/f, or het fiction.
Reviewing a particular sub-genre does not necessarily mean everyone is going to love it, or even agree with the review.
If you review erotica, then I personally think it's a disservice to exclude any particular group. After all, there are plenty of people out there that still believe erotica itself is less than qualified to be called true 'writing'. We could argue back and forth all day about the truth of that statement--the numbers can't be denied however, people love it.
I am extremely disappointed in not only the discriminating review practices (which are against your advertising policy) as well as the convention 'no'.
I've posted my own article at my site ~ which is also 'for women' but we realize that there are many forms of romance and love, as well as turn ons.
As editor of several anthologies, I won't advertise here until I see policy changes ~ or rather that you live up to your policies.
Gracie, thank you for linking the article and the interview with Laura, well done! I'll be at the RT convention in Houston in April '07, helping to spread the word that manlove IS romance, that it deserves the same recognition enjoyed by other genres, and that we as m/m authors deserve equal treatment with RT and every other venue. I feel that RT is, at heart, willing to hear us and willing to change, and I think they will in the end. I like to think that their conversations with Laura have opened their eyes to the unfairness of this unwritten policy, and that the policy will ultimately be changed. I like to think the best of people :D
Love is love, and romance is romance. The RWA recognizes that, and I think RT should, too.
Beyond that, I think there's an ethical problem when you accept money for advertising an m/m romance, and then refuse to review the book. Please consider changing your policy to be less discriminatory, and I might consider advertising in your magazine.
As a side note, I'm curious as to why you specified "m/m erotic romances" in your poll and blog. My gay romances have some steamy scenes, but not enough for me to consider them "erotic romances." Does that mean you'd be open to reviewing them? Or lesbian romances of any heat level?
I would never read M/M or F/F romances.
I don't see anything romantic about it and it shouldn't be in the RT Magazine nor should it be at the RT Convention and Book Fair.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion and this is mine.
I'm disappointed this is even being debated. Of course RT should review m/m romance novels. Why shouldn't they? Because some people don't agree with men loving other men? So what? A lot of people are fine with it...some. even enjoy it. It's not *my* thing, but I've edited a few of these books, and the stories were wonderful. The plots are strong and interesting, the characters are three-dimensional and believable, and the love scenes are filled with emotion and heat.
A good book is a good book...Period. And discrimination sucks.
What a person reads has nothing to di with discrimination. If RT really wants to know how their subscribers feel then they should put a poll in the magazine, have the member fill it out and send it in.
That way the magazine readers are the ones who are voicing their opinions as to what they want and don't want to see in the magazine.
I've seen on one of the m/m authors website where she was upset because RT didn't review her book so she told everyone to go to the RT board and leave messages.
That's where all the new people came from. I don't see it as an honest poll.
How does RT know that these people are actually readers of their magazine and not just authors wanting their books reviewed?
I was wondering if it's true that you don't review M/M books. I heard it some where. Personally I like M/M books. I have read them since I learned about them. I have been reading since i was 11 but I just learned of Ebooks and as you can guess m/m books aren't in my local library. Like most genres there are m/m books that i have loved, some that i have liked and some that i have hated. What would it take to get you to review M/M books?
I review m/m erotic romance under two seperate pen names and I am also an unpublished erotic romance author.
I find the sub-genre both arousing and intruguing. In a m/m work I get a hero that embodies the strong dominant male and yet I also get the shy, vulnerable man. M/m works give men a depth and freedom of emotion that is not generally present in a m/f work yet still satifies my needs for a strong hero.
Not reviewing m/m works only does a disservice to the RT subscribers though I am pleased to see that the RT staff is considering broadening their horizons to the possiblity of reviewing m/m works in the future.
I don't really care nonetheless, if you read m/m or f/f books, it doesn't make you weird. It's what you feel is a good book to me, that should me enough for everyone else. It is for me.
I'm 36 years old. Within my lifetime and in my own state it was illegal--ILLEGAL--for an African-American to marry a white person until the Loving case in the late 60's to early 70's. I write interracial romances and I still get comments like "Why would you write about an interracial couple. Races shouldn't mix."
What era are we living in where we're still judging what the hell love is and what good reading is?
It's apparent from the comments and the poll that M/M books are read and are popular.
The name of the magazine is Romantic Times Book Reviews. So do that. Review romances. Period.
BridgeT
www.BridgetMidway.com
I have been reading RT since I first found it in a bookstoe (circa late '89-early '90). I have been to a few RT conventions (Nashville, Savannah) and I am a writer (as yet unpublished) of erotic *romance*. I haven't written any male/male books YET but I plan to in the future. Why? Because they sell like hotcakes!
The romance industry has long tackled 'hot button' issues and RT has evolved with the times. How many here remember when RT was just romance and a sister publication reviewed mysteries, science fiction, etc.? I may be dating myself here.
Anyway, as I was saying, RT has evolved, reviewing paranormal romance (Alien and human sex? Eww? I think NOT!), interracial, erotica, erotic romance, etc. etc. etc.
What would the *reason* be for excluding male/male romance, whatever the steam level? Romantic Times does review *romance* after all.
I've been pushing and writing Male/Male romances for years. Now with Brokeback Mountain, M/M has gone mainstream. It's a sign of the times and if people don't like it they don't have to read them - do they.
Go for it.
Someone above said "Anonymous said...
Oh, Heavens to Betsy, no! Do you really want to let yourself in for that kettle of fish? That's a whole other issue and there's no place for it in Romance. Porn, maybe, but not Romance."
I have to say, there is a HUGE difference in romance and porn. As long as there is no graphicly explicit sex, it isn't porn. I have written m/m romance. There was no pornography involved. You can't judge the level of pornography based on if the piece is m/f or m/m. That is absurd.
I can't see a valid reason for refusing to review same gender romance novels. You review novels with members of the same race, same species, different race, different species, living/living, living/dead, dead/dead. A book deserves to be reviewd honestly and openly based on it's story telling, plot, character development. Gender should not come into the equation when deciding whether to review a book.
I think all forms of romance should be reviewed, not just f/m. Because romance/love/erotica is in every form of couples, and they should all be celebrated. Also, think how your readership/subscribers would rise! I know I would be running to buy your magazine.
And if there's any readers who unsubscribe, then really, they are honestly closed minded people. I'm sure not all of them are, but if they drop something just because it has something they don't like, then that is indeed closed mindedness. But who would you rather have as readers anyway?
Post a Comment
<< Home