Introducing Women's Erotica: a new subgenre of Erotica, and a necessary one

[THBGato]

This might just be me, but I'm not entirely comfortable going into this level of criticism of a story without the author being involved, or at least aware. AG31 already tagged them in a few posts above, so perhaps we can refrain from further comment until they have a chance to give their views? This line of discussion seems to have slipped quite far from the thread's topic anyway.

Agreed! My whole point in referring to the story was simply to give an example to support somebody else's point (PSG's?) that scoring was the be all and end all. It wasn't to unpick it.

I doubt you'll hear from the author though. They don't follow any other writers, nor do they reply to comments. I don't think they are big on engagement with the wider community. Though they may surprise me!

 

[Jackie.Hikaru]

This might just be me, but I'm not entirely comfortable going into this level of criticism of a story without the author being involved, or at least aware. AG31 already tagged them in a few posts above, so perhaps we can refrain from further comment until they have a chance to give their views? This line of discussion seems to have slipped quite far from the thread's topic anyway.

I concur with this, and offer instead that we all travel together on an emotional journey:

 

[THBGato]

Yep, let's get back to Kate Beckinsale pics. I always quite liked her as Hero:

 

[Sappho_CGN]

What about coming back to the subject of the thread, trolls?

 

[Jackie.Hikaru]

What about coming back to the subject of the thread, trolls?

Feel free

 

[StillStunned]

What about coming back to the subject of the thread, trolls?

No-one's trolling here, at least not by what I think is the commonly accepted definition of trolling: deliberately sending a discussion of its tracks by posting statements intended purely to provoke a reaction from other posters.

 

[SimonDoom]

This might just be me, but I'm not entirely comfortable going into this level of criticism of a story without the author being involved, or at least aware. AG31 already tagged them in a few posts above, so perhaps we can refrain from further comment until they have a chance to give their views? This line of discussion seems to have slipped quite far from the thread's topic anyway.

Fair point. But I think the issues brought up in the initial post that mentioned this story illustrate some difficulties with the way the OP initially framed the subject: "Erotic stories in which the plot is driven by the main character’s emotional journey."

As I see it, this is a universal theme that has nothing to do with men or women. As a kid I read stories from a female point of view like The Secret Garden, or, later, Pride and Prejudice or Middlemarch, and I never thought of them as women's fiction. It's just fiction. People are people. I have the same attitude about erotica. I read stories equally from the point of view of male and female characters and I don't think of it as very different. So, from my own personal point of view as a reader (who may or may not be representative of other readers), further balkanizing the site into more categories based on gender would do no good for my personal reader experience. It would detract from it, not add to it. I suspect the Site owners understand this, and it's one reason that they choose not to go down this path.

My reaction to the story cited by THBGato had nothing to do with gender or gender preference. I reacted the same way I would to any story.

On a completely separate note, I'm all in favor of Kate Beckinsale appreciation. It hadn't occurred to me that she would be the object of lesbian interest (I always learn interesting things here). My appreciation goes back well before Underworld, to The Last Days of Disco and Cold Comfort Farm.

 

[Sappho_CGN]

No-one's trolling here, at least not by what I think is the commonly accepted definition of trolling: deliberately sending a discussion of its tracks by posting statements intended purely to provoke a reaction from other posters.

Do you have any doubts that this is exactly what happens in this thread?

Men occupied the thread with the only intention to derail it because they feel pissed-on by women daringt looking for something else and discussing it

 

[AwkwardlySet]

Do you have any doubts that this is exactly what happens in this thread?

Men occupied the thread with the only intention to derail it because they feel pissed-on by women

Hey, there are those among us with a completely legit fetish!

 

[StillStunned]

Do you have any doubts that this is exactly what happens in this thread?

Men occupied the thread with the only intention to derail it because they feel pissed-on by women daringt looking for something else and discussing it

I not only doubt it, I'm pretty sure that hasn't happened. And I've followed the entire discussion from the beginning.

No-one has tried to derail the thread. People have argued for and against the concept or name of "women's erotica", with more coming down on the "against" than on the "for" side. All side tracks have flowed naturally from the existing discussion, including this latest about Kate Beckinsale (by way of a story that was given as an example in the discussion).

And in what way is this a "men v women" thing anyway? The OP's definition of "women's erotica" makes it clear that it's not written exclusively women, it's not intended exclusively for female readers, and it doesn't necessarily feature female characters. I myself have mentioned "male chick lit" author Mike Gayle in relation to the concept of "emotional-journey literature".

Then again, I've also mentioned twice before that the name "women's erotica" seems to be used purely to attract women who will defend the concept just because it says "women's" on the tin, regardless of the contents.

 

[Sappho_CGN]

Obviously, you feel offended by the fact that women think that there is something like "womens erotics". Your last posting more or less gives full evidence for my assumption.

 

[StillStunned]

Obviously, you feel offended by the fact that women think that there is something like "womens erotics". Your last posting more or less gives full evidence for my assumption.

No I don't. Have you read my posts in this thread? I've been arguing against the use of the term "women's erotica" for something that doesn't match that term. Even the OP agrees that it's problematic, that "women's fiction" is a misnomer and that attempts were made to change it.

The fact that you're defending the idea, simply because of the word "women's" in the name, underscores how it's being used to trigger an emotional response. *That* is what offends me, not the idea of women wanting something for themselves.

If the definition of "women's erotica" was supposed to be "erotica that places women first, as writers, readers and characters", I'd be perfectly fine with that. I'd be perfectly fine with a category of erotica (or other writing) that wanted to achieve that under whatever label. But that's not what the OP is advocating, hence my criticism of the name.

 

[yowser]

Methinks the troll hath been revealed.

 

[HordHolm]

Do you have any doubts that this is exactly what happens in this thread?

Men occupied the thread with the only intention to derail it because they feel pissed-on by women daringt looking for something else and discussing it

What I saw was a group of authors, of differing identities, discussing the topic and having differing points of view, both practical and conceptual. I then saw a smaller group of authors, mostly ones who identify as women, sharing Kate Beckinsale pics.

But if you want to characterise authors (who this discussion is aimed at) who have views different to yours as 'trolls' then we aren't going to have much of a debate, are we?

And if you are going to characterise those authors who disagree with the original premise as 'men whose intention is to derail the thread because they feel pissed-on by women daring to look for something else and discussing it' when some of those dissenting voices actually come from women (or at least, posters who identify as such), then I would suggest you aren't looking for any discussion at all, but only blind agreement or just a reason to feel justified in your own ideological position, because objection can then be characterised as prejudice.

By and large, most of the contributors to this debate are posters who have submitted work to this site, and as such they have a clear and present interest in the subject under consideration. Do I agree with all of their opinions? No, but I do believe their voice should be heard in this discussion (after all, it may affect their work). And if they disagree with me, are they trolls? Of course not.

 

[THBGato]

Do you have any doubts that this is exactly what happens in this thread?

Men occupied the thread with the only intention to derail it because they feel pissed-on by women daringt looking for something else and discussing it

I'll add my voice to disagree with categorisation of responses as trolling. What happened is:

- Nancy started the thread. Lots of people replied. She replied to them. She paid me a nice compliment, this lead to:
- A relevant side discussion about how to judge stories arose.
- I offered a story by an another author as an example of what I felt fit Nancy's definition of Women's Erotica BUT was not scoring highly. I felt this was relevant to both the OP and the direction the conversation had taken.
- We got into a critique of the story in the light of the OP (emotional journeys, etc)
- In response to a question, Kate Beckinsale was mentioned
- Thirsting occurred. Admittedly, this was not relevant to the OP, BUT was simply a natural turn in the conversation, rather than a deliberate attempt to derail the thread
- You labelled this trolling (it wasn't) but that at least, thanks to @StillStunned and @HordHolm has brought us back to the OP's topic

 

[AG31]

Do you have any doubts that this is exactly what happens in this thread?

Men occupied the thread with the only intention to derail it because they feel pissed-on by women daringt looking for something else and discussing it

Speaking as a woman, I think this is a ridiculous take on the male comments in this thread.

 

[MelissaBaby]

Underworld. Kate Beckinsale running around with those pistols, and that hair, and those eyes.

Mary Elizabeth Winstead in Scott Pilgrim Vs The World, at this exact moment.

 

[AwkwardMD]

Mary Elizabeth Winstead in Scott Pilgrim Vs The World, at this exact moment.

View attachment 2399427

Yeeeeeah. Yeah.


Yeah.

 

[Kelliezgirl]

Speaking as a woman, I think this is a ridiculous take on the male comments in this thread.

Seconded.

 

[MelissaBaby]

Yeeeeeah. Yeah.


Yeah.

I didn't name one of my main characters Mary Winslow just by chance.

 

[SimonDoom]

Mary Elizabeth Winstead in Scott Pilgrim Vs The World, at this exact moment.

View attachment 2399427

Mary Elizabeth Winstead was the ONLY good thing about Fargo 3.

 

[Erozetta]

Mary Elizabeth Winstead in Scott Pilgrim Vs The World, at this exact moment.

View attachment 2399427

That's the inspiration I used for my current hairstyle, lol. Same cut, but red.

 

[Erozetta]

Also:

I think my intro to the idea of being attracted to other women was a result of Barbara Crampton. Whether it was Re-animator, From Beyond, or Body Double, I'm not sure.

Could've been Linnea Quigley, too. I became aware of both around the same time/age. If it was Linnea, then it was most definitely Night of the Demons related. She's the only reason I own a pink frilly dress.

And Barbara is the reason I'm into leather corsets.

 

[NoTalentHack]

Also:

I think my intro to the idea of being attracted to other women was a result of Barbara Crampton. Whether it was Re-animator, From Beyond, or Body Double, I'm not sure.

Could've been Linnea Quigley, too. I became aware of both around the same time/age. If it was Linnea, then it was most definitely Night of the Demons related. She's the only reason I own a pink frilly dress.

And Barbara is the reason I'm into leather corsets.

Man, Linnea Quigley in Night of the Demons was great, but Amelia Kincaid as Angela showed me that I definitely had A Type.

 

[Bramblethorn]

Do you have any doubts that this is exactly what happens in this thread?

Men occupied the thread with the only intention to derail it because they feel pissed-on by women daringt looking for something else and discussing it

Most of the Kate Beckinsale discussion was coming from women; specifically, women who are known for writing complex "emotional journey" stories with female protagonists, often sapphic. Rather than leaping to accusations of sabotage, you might consider that conversations sometimes just drift, especially when the original purpose of that conversation has been exhausted.

I don't think anybody here objects to the kind of stories under discussion. Indeed, the supposed "trolls" in this thread have written many more such stories than you have.

AFAICT, what people are mostly objecting to is:

• Unnecessarily gendering something that doesn't need to be gendered
• The implication that "stories with an emotional journey" are something we haven't already been writing for years
• The suggestion (which I don't think came from OP?) that adding a category would be helpful in encouraging such stories.