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

[Erozetta]

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

Amelia as Angela is absolutely a favorite character of mine. But, she wasn't part of my "Oh, shit, I think I like women," moment, lol. But after that realization, she's definitely a part of the "Yeah, I definitely like women" group.

 

[Britva415]

Methinks the troll hath been revealed.

Compliments on your Iambic!

 

[Cagivagurl]

Threads here in the AH, always get derailed. Not always intentionally. It's the nature of many sided conversations.
I for one will never complain at somebody sharing Kate Beckinsale images... Never ever.... My dreams have often lingered there.

When many people join debates. There is always the chance it will head off on a tangent at some point. Regardless of the topic.

In this instance, I would dearly love to see it come back to the topic. Selfishly, I am interested in seeing where it goes.

Cagivagurl

 

[NancyVeeners]

Threads here in the AH, always get derailed. Not always intentionally. It's the nature of many sided conversations.
I for one will never complain at somebody sharing Kate Beckinsale images... Never ever.... My dreams have often lingered there.

When many people join debates. There is always the chance it will head off on a tangent at some point. Regardless of the topic.

In this instance, I would dearly love to see it come back to the topic. Selfishly, I am interested in seeing where it goes.

Cagivagurl

Dear fellow readers and writers

thank you all for your amazingly rich response to my Women’s Erotica proposal, both those on-topic and those off-topic. Indeed, I love some of the digressions and I look forward to answering all the contributions to the discussion. But it will take time.

So, I join @Cagivagurl in being interested in seeing where it goes. Here are a few simple proposals for continuing the exploration of the new-old genre of Women’s Erotica.

• Definition: we adopt the definition of Women’s Erotica (in short: WE) given by the Women’s Fiction Writers Association. Our adaptation would be: “Erotic stories in which the plot is driven by the main character’s emotional journey.” You can find more about this definition in Wikipedia (read the second part of the Wikipedia article) and on the WFWA website.
• Examples: we select a few examples from our stories that comply with the definition. For example, we could create a shortlist (hopefully long) of writers and readers, and each could propose two stories of WE, one written by herself or himself, the second by another writer in the shortlist (so we can discuss the story with the author). Or any other idea: the aim is to generate a 'corpus' of WE works and evaluate the potential of the proposed (cross)genre.
• Name: the genre’s name is problematic and potentially misleading, because Women’s Erotica is genre-based, not gender-based, so it is inclusive. Women, Men, and LGBTQIA+ readers, writers, and characters are welcome. We could find better names, but in this first exploration, I’d suggest keeping it as a provisional term using the acronym WE until anything better emerges. By the way, WE sounds much better than WF, in that we can begin our statement with "WE, readers and writers of Women’s Erotica…" It echoes well, doesn't it?

These suggestions emerged from the discussion. I could have overlooked interesting ideas, so I apologize to the proponents and welcome other proposals.

Readers and writers of WE, cheers from the Mediterranean!

NV

 

[Erozetta]

Dear fellow readers and writers

thank you all for your amazingly rich response to my Women’s Erotica proposal, both those on-topic and those off-topic. Indeed, I love some of the digressions and I look forward to answering all the contributions to the discussion. But it will take time.

So, I join @Cagivagurl in being interested in seeing where it goes. Here are a few simple proposals for continuing the exploration of the new-old genre of Women’s Erotica.

• Definition: we adopt the definition of Women’s Erotica (in short: WE) given by the Women’s Fiction Writers Association. Our adaptation would be: “Erotic stories in which the plot is driven by the main character’s emotional journey.” You can find more about this definition in Wikipedia (read the second part of the Wikipedia article) and on the WFWA website.
• Examples: we select a few examples from our stories that comply with the definition. For example, we could create a shortlist (hopefully long) of writers and readers, and each could propose two stories of WE, one written by herself or himself, the second by another writer in the shortlist (so we can discuss the story with the author). Or any other idea: the aim is to generate a 'corpus' of WE works and evaluate the potential of the proposed (cross)genre.
• Name: the genre’s name is problematic and potentially misleading, because Women’s Erotica is genre-based, not gender-based, so it is inclusive. Women, Men, and LGBTQIA+ readers, writers, and characters are welcome. We could find better names, but in this first exploration, I’d suggest keeping it as a provisional term using the acronym WE until anything better emerges. By the way, WE sounds much better than WF, in that we can begin our statement with "WE, readers and writers of Women’s Erotica…" It echoes well, doesn't it?

These suggestions emerged from the discussion. I could have overlooked interesting ideas, so I apologize to the proponents and welcome other proposals.

Readers and writers of WE, cheers from the Mediterranean!

NV

Nah, Imma keep calling it erotica because I'd rather destigmatize what it is than try to soften it to be more palatable to people harboring self shame over their enjoyment of it.

 

[NancyVeeners]

WE call it Erotica. Women's Erotica. WE.
Best
NV

 

[Erozetta]

WE call it Erotica. Women's Erotica. WE.
Best
NV

It's not strictly about women, strictly written by women, or strictly featuring elements enjoyed only by women.

What purpose does the "Women's" in front of "erotica" serve other than to make it seem less like the porn that it is?

 

[NancyVeeners]

Dear @Erozetta
Like Women's Fiction, Women's Erotica is genre-based, and it comes with the advantages and problems of an inclusive term. The advantage is that Women's Fiction exists and is here to stay, and it has a clear and accepted definition. Admittedly, it is a problematic genre, and as you say potentially misleading. But WE need to 'buy' the whole package, or leave it. And I think it is worth the attempt. Finally, there is no reason why Women's Erotica should be 'less' erotic than 'general' Erotica. On the contrary, Women's Erotica is usually MORE Erotic. But it is not just Porn...
Thank you for your opinion!
Best
NV

 

[StillStunned]

Like Women's Fiction, Women's Erotica is genre-based, and it comes with the advantages and problems of an inclusive term.

But that's just the point: it's *not* an inclusive term, is it? You might envisage the genre itself as being inclusive, but by using a name that's exclusive by definition sooner or later you risk the genre becoming exclusive as well.

The advantage is that Women's Fiction exists and is here to stay, and it has a clear and accepted definition. Admittedly, it is a problematic genre, and as you say potentially misleading. But WE need to 'buy' the whole package, or leave it. And I think it is worth the attempt.

Why do we need to buy the whole package? Most of us write erotica as a hobby, and even the mainstream writers among us keep their identities separate, I suspect. You might have better luck championing this cause from the mainstream side of women's fiction; here, I suspect by now most of us have reached the point where we shrug and carry on what we've been doing - which, for plenty of writers here, includes writing "emotional journeys" in their erotic works.

Finally, there is no reason why Women's Erotica should be 'less' erotic than 'general' Erotica. On the contrary, Women's Erotica is usually MORE Erotic. But it is not just Porn...

There are plenty of stories here that are more than "just porn" without being "women's erotica". Emotion is far from the only factor that can elevate a story above the level of "just porn". And I think most of us, at least here in the Hangout, try to achieve that in dozens of different ways, without feeling the need to confine ourselves to such an exclusive label as "women's erotica". We're proud writers of erotica, smut, porn, whatever you want to call it, but above all we're writers.

 

[Cagivagurl]

Dear fellow readers and writers

thank you all for your amazingly rich response to my Women’s Erotica proposal, both those on-topic and those off-topic. Indeed, I love some of the digressions and I look forward to answering all the contributions to the discussion. But it will take time.

So, I join @Cagivagurl in being interested in seeing where it goes. Here are a few simple proposals for continuing the exploration of the new-old genre of Women’s Erotica.

• Definition: we adopt the definition of Women’s Erotica (in short: WE) given by the Women’s Fiction Writers Association. Our adaptation would be: “Erotic stories in which the plot is driven by the main character’s emotional journey.” You can find more about this definition in Wikipedia (read the second part of the Wikipedia article) and on the WFWA website.
• Examples: we select a few examples from our stories that comply with the definition. For example, we could create a shortlist (hopefully long) of writers and readers, and each could propose two stories of WE, one written by herself or himself, the second by another writer in the shortlist (so we can discuss the story with the author). Or any other idea: the aim is to generate a 'corpus' of WE works and evaluate the potential of the proposed (cross)genre.
• Name: the genre’s name is problematic and potentially misleading, because Women’s Erotica is genre-based, not gender-based, so it is inclusive. Women, Men, and LGBTQIA+ readers, writers, and characters are welcome. We could find better names, but in this first exploration, I’d suggest keeping it as a provisional term using the acronym WE until anything better emerges. By the way, WE sounds much better than WF, in that we can begin our statement with "WE, readers and writers of Women’s Erotica…" It echoes well, doesn't it?

These suggestions emerged from the discussion. I could have overlooked interesting ideas, so I apologize to the proponents and welcome other proposals.

Readers and writers of WE, cheers from the Mediterranean!

NV

Personally, I am deeply interested in the concept, where it goes and what it has to offer.

Are you suggesting a new category (WE)

Or are you suggestion a forum based discussion board?

Getting the owners to move on adapting a new category might be problematic. It seems there have been members fighting for new categories for a very long time. All to no avail.
Cagivagurl

 

[Bramblethorn]

Dear @Erozetta
Like Women's Fiction, Women's Erotica is genre-based, and it comes with the advantages and problems of an inclusive term.

I don't see it as "inclusive" to use a name that excludes half the potential writers and readers of this genre, while not accurately describing what the genre is about.

The advantage is that Women's Fiction exists and is here to stay, and it has a clear and accepted definition. Admittedly, it is a problematic genre, and as you say potentially misleading.

If it's "potentially misleading" then it is not "clear".

If you want to call it "Women's Erotica", then that's your choice. If you're suggesting that the rest of us should adopt the term for our emotional-journey stories, I'm afraid my answer (speaking only for myself) is no.

 

[Omenainen]

• Examples: we select a few examples from our stories that comply with the definition. For example, we could create a shortlist (hopefully long) of writers and readers, and each could propose two stories of WE, one written by herself or himself, the second by another writer in the shortlist (so we can discuss the story with the author). Or any other idea: the aim is to generate a 'corpus' of WE works and evaluate the potential of the proposed (cross)genre.

What is this potential you keep referring to? Are you saying there’s some vast readership that is too timid to google for their preferred kink and would come screaming if we just labeled what we already do differently? Pun intended.

• Name: the genre’s name is problematic and potentially misleading, because Women’s Erotica is genre-based, not gender-based, so it is inclusive. Women, Men, and LGBTQIA+ readers, writers, and characters are welcome. We could find better names, but in this first exploration, I’d suggest keeping it as a provisional term using the acronym WE until anything better emerges.

Better alternatives have been proposed in this thread already. If you really are trying to come up with an inclusive term, I hereby propose “people’s erotica”, in short, erotica.

Temporary solutions tend to stick. I’m not interested in attaching my work to anything that is as exclusive and vague as “women’s erotica” sounds.

Dear @Erozetta
Like Women's Fiction, Women's Erotica is genre-based, and it comes with the advantages and problems of an inclusive term. The advantage is that Women's Fiction exists and is here to stay, and it has a clear and accepted definition. Admittedly, it is a problematic genre, and as you say potentially misleading. But WE need to 'buy' the whole package, or leave it. And I think it is worth the attempt.

Inclusive, clear and accepted, yet problematic and misleading? Yeah, nah.

 

[Lifestyle66]

....... For example, we could create a shortlist (hopefully long) of writers and readers, and each could propose two stories of WE, one written by herself or himself, the second by another writer in the shortlist (so we can discuss the story with the author). Or any other idea: the aim is to generate a 'corpus' of WE works and evaluate the potential of the proposed (cross)genre.
.......

When it comes to categories and tags, every author selects where they want to put their story and what tags they choose. That's beyond your control.

And a call to authors to write your kind of stories doesn't work as imagined. Look at O's "Pink Orchid" annual competition for an example of how that worked out. Each year the definition of what the competition was looking for was refined (no offense, O, but to me it wasn't clear three years ago with female "empowerment", as you saw in my MFC, powerfully offensive.)

So, with the example above, as I said previously "You'll know it when you see it."

It sounds like your "proposal", idea, or goal with this discussion thread is to create a focus group or discussion panel to award selected stories with that group's "Women's Erotica" award for having an emotionally growing MC. Then you would need to find a way of socializing or posting that growing list of stories for new readers to find the list (like ... a curated list... but more easily discoverable.)


EDIT: To put it in more concrete terms, the ideal would be for a new "category" on the LitE page, but which is a pointer to the group's curated list, with only that group having the ability to add to that list.

 

[Erozetta]

Dear @Erozetta
Like Women's Fiction, Women's Erotica is genre-based, and it comes with the advantages and problems of an inclusive term. The advantage is that Women's Fiction exists and is here to stay, and it has a clear and accepted definition. Admittedly, it is a problematic genre, and as you say potentially misleading. But WE need to 'buy' the whole package, or leave it. And I think it is worth the attempt. Finally, there is no reason why Women's Erotica should be 'less' erotic than 'general' Erotica. On the contrary, Women's Erotica is usually MORE Erotic. But it is not just Porn...
Thank you for your opinion!
Best
NV

The problem I have with this is the fact that you put "just" in front of porn as if it's lesser if it doesn't fall under your definition of "women's erotica" (which, speaking as a woman, isn't inclusive, it's decidedly exclusive by invoking a specific gender. Erotica is as inclusive a title/genre as it gets.) It's not.

I write emotional journeys with a psychological edge to them (I enjoy building a relationship around a character's fears, desires, and ideals, particularly when those things are at odds), and I write stories that are about carnal desires being met and nothing more. Both are erotica. Both are porn. Neither is more or less porn than the other just because one has an additional element to the story. Both serve their purpose and are enjoyable in different ways but are ultimately still porn regardless of what bows and ribbons I try to stick on them to make it seem less "icky" to the people who need it to have a less offensive seeming genre label.

What I'm saying is this idea is unnecessary and just serves to further stigmatize women enjoying porn by saying "but this is different and better because "emotions" are involved."

What does that even mean?

I mean, I could write a seriously fucked up emotional journey for characters in an erotic setting that I'd bet you wouldn't want anywhere near your "Women's Erotica" genre label, even though it would fit your definition. (actually... I already have, lol.)

It's the same issue I had with the term "Simple" erotica. There's nothing lesser or wrong with writing strokers and calling them such. Softening it just plays to pearl clutchers who don't want to admit to lowering themselves in their own eyes by indulging in sex-oriented fiction.

"Women's" erotica is pointless if the term "women" is only meant as a softener to the term "erotica" and if it has no basis around being women centric in any way, that's all the term is, a softener to say this isn't that "icky porn that big gross men like."

Let's work on destigmatizing the enjoyment of sex fiction instead of working to further try to bend the genre into something that makes it more palatable to the general public.

I guarantee that whether you call it "Women's Erotica" or "Emotion-driven Erotica" (which would be more inclusive again than "Women's" as a label.) it's going to fall under the same decency regulations that hardcore strokers fall under. 'Cause it's all porn, so it's all treated as porn. And personally, I like my porn hard, not softened to appeal to people who would look down on me for writing it even as they secretly get off on reading it.

I get that Erotica can be a divisive term, but instead of diminishing what it is, why not, instead, try to use it as a way to empower women readers and writers by putting this effort into destigmatizing the enjoyment of it instead of trying to hide it behind a softer label?

 

[Cagivagurl]

The problem I have with this is the fact that you put "just" in front of porn as if it's lesser if it doesn't fall under your definition of "women's erotica" (which, speaking as a woman, isn't inclusive, it's decidedly exclusive by invoking a specific gender. Erotica is as inclusive a title/genre as it gets.) It's not.

I write emotional journeys with a psychological edge to them (I enjoy building a relationship around a character's fears, desires, and ideals, particularly when those things are at odds), and I write stories that are about carnal desires being met and nothing more. Both are erotica. Both are porn. Neither is more or less porn than the other just because one has an additional element to the story. Both serve their purpose and are enjoyable in different ways but are ultimately still porn regardless of what bows and ribbons I try to stick on them to make it seem less "icky" to the people who need it to have a less offensive seeming genre label.

What I'm saying is this idea is unnecessary and just serves to further stigmatize women enjoying porn by saying "but this is different and better because "emotions" are involved."

What does that even mean?

I mean, I could write a seriously fucked up emotional journey for characters in an erotic setting that I'd bet you wouldn't want anywhere near your "Women's Erotica" genre label, even though it would fit your definition. (actually... I already have, lol.)

It's the same issue I had with the term "Simple" erotica. There's nothing lesser or wrong with writing strokers and calling them such. Softening it just plays to pearl clutchers who don't want to admit to lowering themselves in their own eyes by indulging in sex-oriented fiction.

"Women's" erotica is pointless if the term "women" is only meant as a softener to the term "erotica" and if it has no basis around being women centric in any way, that's all the term is, a softener to say this isn't that "icky porn that big gross men like."

Let's work on destigmatizing the enjoyment of sex fiction instead of working to further try to bend the genre into something that makes it more palatable to the general public.

I guarantee that whether you call it "Women's Erotica" or "Emotion-driven Erotica" (which would be more inclusive again than "Women's" as a label.) it's going to fall under the same decency regulations that hardcore strokers fall under. 'Cause it's all porn, so it's all treated as porn. And personally, I like my porn hard, not softened to appeal to people who would look down on me for writing it even as they secretly get off on reading it.

I get that Erotica can be a divisive term, but instead of diminishing what it is, why not, instead, try to use it as a way to empower women readers and writers by putting this effort into destigmatizing the enjoyment of it instead of trying to hide it behind a softer label?

Erotica, as with most things in life has shades.
Being a musician, I'm going to see if I can explain my perspective.

Music... It starts off as a small group of people playing singing together. Lets call it folk, it broadens a little into country, then alt country, Indie, Indie pop, Then Pop rock, Rock, heavy rock, metal, death metal. All are music. Of course I haven't even mentioned classicaal or Opera.
There are so many shades, all of varying degrees of power.
A soft vocal group enjoying a quiet song, to a full on concert by a death metal band.
Not everybody likes folk, or death metal.
We choose what we like, we have our own tastes.

Erotica is the same. We like what we like because it arouses us, just as the music does.
As a site promoting erotica, I don't have an issue with categories.
I do like that stories are broken down and grouped together. It makes it easier for us all to find what we're looking for.

As human beings, we all enjoy different elements of sexuality. We have our kinks. Part of that is accepting that we are different.

Is there room for something like erotica for Women, who enjoy a more emotional ride???? Call it what you want. I think we should accept that people, regardless of their gender, or gender fluidity. Are drawn to the erotica that suits them.

Bookshops around the world will happily tell you that WE sells... It exists, it's a thing. People like it. They're happy to acknowledge their enjoyment of such.

OK, it doesn't appeal to everybody, but then again. Look at how many categories there are already...
People like to find what they're looking for without scrolling through hundreds of stories that wouldn't interest them...

Just offering my perspective, and why this topic interests me.

Cagivagurl

 

[Erozetta]

Erotica, as with most things in life has shades.
Being a musician, I'm going to see if I can explain my perspective.

Music... It starts off as a small group of people playing singing together. Lets call it folk, it broadens a little into country, then alt country, Indie, Indie pop, Then Pop rock, Rock, heavy rock, metal, death metal. All are music. Of course I haven't even mentioned classicaal or Opera.
There are so many shades, all of varying degrees of power.
A soft vocal group enjoying a quiet song, to a full on concert by a death metal band.
Not everybody likes folk, or death metal.
We choose what we like, we have our own tastes.

Erotica is the same. We like what we like because it arouses us, just as the music does.
As a site promoting erotica, I don't have an issue with categories.
I do like that stories are broken down and grouped together. It makes it easier for us all to find what we're looking for.

As human beings, we all enjoy different elements of sexuality. We have our kinks. Part of that is accepting that we are different.

Is there room for something like erotica for Women, who enjoy a more emotional ride???? Call it what you want. I think we should accept that people, regardless of their gender, or gender fluidity. Are drawn to the erotica that suits them.

Bookshops around the world will happily tell you that WE sells... It exists, it's a thing. People like it. They're happy to acknowledge their enjoyment of such.

OK, it doesn't appeal to everybody, but then again. Look at how many categories there are already...
People like to find what they're looking for without scrolling through hundreds of stories that wouldn't interest them...

Just offering my perspective, and why this topic interests me.

Cagivagurl

Right, but OP has already said it's not meant to only be geared towards women in any way it's meant to be inclusive. She negated the term herself by stipulating that it's not at all about, by or for women.

 

[NancyVeeners]

But that's just the point: it's *not* an inclusive term, is it? You might envisage the genre itself as being inclusive, but by using a name that's exclusive by definition sooner or later you risk the genre becoming exclusive as well.

Why do we need to buy the whole package? Most of us write erotica as a hobby, and even the mainstream writers among us keep their identities separate, I suspect. You might have better luck championing this cause from the mainstream side of women's fiction; here, I suspect by now most of us have reached the point where we shrug and carry on what we've been doing - which, for plenty of writers here, includes writing "emotional journeys" in their erotic works.

There are plenty of stories here that are more than "just porn" without being "women's erotica". Emotion is far from the only factor that can elevate a story above the level of "just porn". And I think most of us, at least here in the Hangout, try to achieve that in dozens of different ways, without feeling the need to confine ourselves to such an exclusive label as "women's erotica". We're proud writers of erotica, smut, porn, whatever you want to call it, but above all we're writers.

Dear colleague
thank you for your contribution to the discussion. A critical contribution is always useful for a proposal in this early phase.

We are writers! I couldn't agree more, and I advanced this risky proposal because I believe that the 'new-old' genre could open an opportunity for Erotica to reach a wider audience. Or--as you say--we could be just happy to keep it as a hobby. This is perfectly fine.

About your other notes, I agree with you. Therefore I suspect you may have not read my proposal in three points, so I quote it below, just in case. But if you have already considered it please disregard the PS.

Thank you again for your contribution to the discussion and good luck with your creative writing!

Best
NV

Dear fellow readers and writers

thank you all for your amazingly rich response to my Women’s Erotica proposal, both those on-topic and those off-topic. Indeed, I love some of the digressions and I look forward to answering all the contributions to the discussion. But it will take time.

So, I join @Cagivagurl in being interested in seeing where it goes. Here are a few simple proposals for continuing the exploration of the new-old genre of Women’s Erotica.

• Definition: we adopt the definition of Women’s Erotica (in short: WE) given by the Women’s Fiction Writers Association. Our adaptation would be: “Erotic stories in which the plot is driven by the main character’s emotional journey.” You can find more about this definition in Wikipedia (read the second part of the Wikipedia article) and on the WFWA website.
• Examples: we select a few examples from our stories that comply with the definition. For example, we could create a shortlist (hopefully long) of writers and readers, and each could propose two stories of WE, one written by herself or himself, the second by another writer in the shortlist (so we can discuss the story with the author). Or any other idea: the aim is to generate a 'corpus' of WE works and evaluate the potential of the proposed (cross)genre.
• Name: the genre’s name is problematic and potentially misleading, because Women’s Erotica is genre-based, not gender-based, so it is inclusive. Women, Men, and LGBTQIA+ readers, writers, and characters are welcome. We could find better names, but in this first exploration, I’d suggest keeping it as a provisional term using the acronym WE until anything better emerges. By the way, WE sounds much better than WF, in that we can begin our statement with "WE, readers and writers of Women’s Erotica…" It echoes well, doesn't it?

These suggestions emerged from the discussion. I could have overlooked interesting ideas, so I apologize to the proponents and welcome other proposals.

Readers and writers of WE, cheers from the Mediterranean!

NV

 

[AwkwardlySet]

Dear @Erozetta
Like Women's Fiction, Women's Erotica is genre-based, and it comes with the advantages and problems of an inclusive term. The advantage is that Women's Fiction exists and is here to stay, and it has a clear and accepted definition. Admittedly, it is a problematic genre, and as you say potentially misleading. But WE need to 'buy' the whole package, or leave it. And I think it is worth the attempt. Finally, there is no reason why Women's Erotica should be 'less' erotic than 'general' Erotica. On the contrary, Women's Erotica is usually MORE Erotic. But it is not just Porn...
Thank you for your opinion!
Best
NV

I don't mean to be contrary, but I would like to point out one more aspect of the term that might be misleading. You keep making the WE - WF parallel, in the sense that WE in erotica is what WF is in fiction. Now, this is from Wikipedia:

"Women's fiction is an umbrella term for women-centered books that focus on women's life experience, that are marketed to female readers, and includes many mainstream novels or women's rights books. It is distinct from women's writing, which refers to literature written by (rather than promoted to) women."

The definition you want to use for WE in erotica is not even close to what WF seems to be in fiction. I mean, I could be misunderstanding your posts in this thread but that's how it looks to me. More than that, the term seems to galvanize many people here, so rather than being stubborn about it, maybe it would be better if some non-misleading term was used instead.
Personally, I see nothing wrong with your idea about a specific subgenre, so I would advise being pragmatic about it

 

[NancyVeeners]

Personally, I am deeply interested in the concept, where it goes and what it has to offer.

Are you suggesting a new category (WE)

Or are you suggestion a forum based discussion board?

Getting the owners to move on adapting a new category might be problematic. It seems there have been members fighting for new categories for a very long time. All to no avail.
Cagivagurl

Dear @Cagivegurl

no, I am not suggesting a new category. WE is a cross-genre, so it cuts across categories. There could be-say-Lesbian-sex stories that are WE and others that are not WE, and both the former and the latter could be excellent erotica.
WE could therefore be just a tag,

But what I suggest comes even before the choice to adopt a tag: I would like to understand if WE it is a 'good' cross-genre, selecting a few stories we consider WE, creating a 'corpus' of WE, and discussing if it shows potential for reaching a wider audience (like WF, or even more. I believe Erotica has a huge untapped potential). I believe that selecting and discussing WE stories could be useful and fun, and I hope a few of the discussant of the thread could participate in the experiment.

Best
NV

 

[NancyVeeners]

I don't mean to be contrary, but I would like to point out one more aspect of the term that might be misleading. You keep making the WE - WF parallel, in the sense that WE in erotica is what WF is in fiction. Now, this is from Wikipedia:

"Women's fiction is an umbrella term for women-centered books that focus on women's life experience, that are marketed to female readers, and includes many mainstream novels or women's rights books. It is distinct from women's writing, which refers to literature written by (rather than promoted to) women."

The definition you want to use for WE in erotica is not even close to what WF seems to be in fiction. I mean, I could be misunderstanding your posts in this thread but that's how it looks to me. More than that, the term seems to galvanize many people here, so rather than being stubborn about it, maybe it would be better if some non-misleading term was used instead.
Personally, I see nothing wrong with your idea about a specific subgenre, so I would advise being pragmatic about it

Dear Collegue
thank you for your answer. There are two definitions of WF in Wikipedia, you'll find the WFWA one (which is the one I propose to adopt) below the one you quote here.
From this misunderstanding I suspect you have skipped my 'summarizing' proposal, so I quote it below. I apologize if you have already considered that proposal, just disregard it.
Thank you so much for your frequent and interesting contributions to this discussion!
Best
NV

Dear fellow readers and writers

thank you all for your amazingly rich response to my Women’s Erotica proposal, both those on-topic and those off-topic. Indeed, I love some of the digressions and I look forward to answering all the contributions to the discussion. But it will take time.

So, I join @Cagivagurl in being interested in seeing where it goes. Here are a few simple proposals for continuing the exploration of the new-old genre of Women’s Erotica.

• Definition: we adopt the definition of Women’s Erotica (in short: WE) given by the Women’s Fiction Writers Association. Our adaptation would be: “Erotic stories in which the plot is driven by the main character’s emotional journey.” You can find more about this definition in Wikipedia (read the second part of the Wikipedia article) and on the WFWA website.
• Examples: we select a few examples from our stories that comply with the definition. For example, we could create a shortlist (hopefully long) of writers and readers, and each could propose two stories of WE, one written by herself or himself, the second by another writer in the shortlist (so we can discuss the story with the author). Or any other idea: the aim is to generate a 'corpus' of WE works and evaluate the potential of the proposed (cross)genre.
• Name: the genre’s name is problematic and potentially misleading, because Women’s Erotica is genre-based, not gender-based, so it is inclusive. Women, Men, and LGBTQIA+ readers, writers, and characters are welcome. We could find better names, but in this first exploration, I’d suggest keeping it as a provisional term using the acronym WE until anything better emerges. By the way, WE sounds much better than WF, in that we can begin our statement with "WE, readers and writers of Women’s Erotica…" It echoes well, doesn't it?

These suggestions emerged from the discussion. I could have overlooked interesting ideas, so I apologize to the proponents and welcome other proposals.

Readers and writers of WE, cheers from the Mediterranean!

NV

 

[Omenainen]

But what I suggest comes even before the choice to adopt a tag: I would like to understand if WE it is a 'good' cross-genre, selecting a few stories we consider WE, creating a 'corpus' of WE, and discussing if it shows potential for reaching a wider audience (like WF, or even more. I believe Erotica has a huge untapped potential).

Potential how? Reaches wider audience how? Are you talking about advertising the stories somewhere outside of Lit? To whom and how would that work? Or are you talking about commercial potential?

 

[NoTalentHack]

The proposed definition of women's erotica and its potential inclusions, in a nutshell:

"A Loving Wives BTB is Women's Erotica."

 

[StillStunned]

About your other notes, I agree with you. Therefore I suspect you may have not read my proposal in three points, so I quote it below, just in case. But if you have already considered it please disregard the PS.

But your proposal seems to be this:
1. Adopt a name that doesn't reflect the authorship, the readership or the subject matter.
2. Select stories that fit a definition you've forced into a name that it doesn't match.
3. Recognise that the name isn't a good one, but keep using it anyway until a better name emerges, while ignoring the fact that various suggestions have already been put forward in this thread.

You see why people here are struggling with this? Like I mentioned above, whatever the WFWA does has very little relevance for what happens on Lit, and I think your idea would get far more traction if you abandoned the name and used something that's a more accurate reflection of what you want to achieve.

 

[AwkwardlySet]

Dear Collegue
thank you for your answer. There are two definitions of WF in Wikipedia, you'll find the WFWA one (which is the one I propose to adopt) below the one you quote here.
From this misunderstanding I suspect you have skipped my 'summarizing' proposal, so I quote it below. I apologize if you have already considered that proposal, just disregard it.
Thank you so much for your frequent and interesting contributions to this discussion!
Best
NV

As I said, I could be misunderstanding these definitions. I had read the "broader" definition by WFWA but it seemed to me that their definition offers some more specifics in comparison to the one of "Romance Writers of America", that it's also about romantic content, about historical or fantasy or thriller elements, but that it doesn't "correct" the main part of the definition - that it's "an umbrella term for women-centered books that focus on women's life experience, that are marketed to female readers, and includes many mainstream novels or women's rights books."

I'll be glad to concede this point if others understand this differently, but this is how it looks to me.

 

[Kelliezgirl]

The proposed definition of women's erotica and its potential inclusions, in a nutshell:

"A Loving Wives BTB is Women's Erotica."

So, you're saying we should make you a sandwich?