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

[NoTalentHack]

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

I mean, who doesn’t like a nice sandwich?

 

[NancyVeeners]

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.



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.

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.



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.

Dear colleague

Starting from the end: of course it is 'my choice' and your answer could be no. Nothing wrong with your choice. But I am not suggesting anybody 'should' adopt anything, I just point out the opportunity implied by WE, and the idea is to create a corpus of WE stories and discuss them before any other move. If you (or anybody else) don't want to participate in the experiment it is of course perfectly fine. Let me thank you (sincerely) for your critical contribution to the discussion. Critical contributions are very useful in this early phase.

About your other points, I suspect you have not read my 'summarizing' proposal and the references I mention there, where the conflict between 'misleading' and 'clear' is discussed and how Women's Fiction' could be inclusive is explained. In a nutshell, Women's Fiction was created as a Feminist term long ago, now it has evolved into the WFWA definition and (like many other dominant designs, like for example the QWERTY keyboard) it is here to stay. I believe it is a great opportunity for the writers of Erotica who want to expand their reader base and it could be interesting and fun to discuss the issue with those interested.

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

Take care!
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

 

[Kelliezgirl]

I mean, who doesn’t like a nice sandwich?

I could go for an ice cream taco about now...

 

[THBGato]

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

Okay. Well why don't you create a list of literotica stories you feel fits the criteria and share that here? Then we can start discussing specifics, rather than arguing about the abstract.
T x

 

[AG31]

On topic: I'm enjoying the discussion, but I'd vote against adding the category. Even if you get browsers (people, not software) to make the intellectual leap to accept that it's not really by, for, or about women, the category overlaps too much. It could literally be applied to some stories in ALL of our existing categories. Let's just make sure there's a tag "emotion driven" and another "driven by emotion". Currently neither one exists, although there are quite a few stories with "emotion" as a tag.

Off topic:

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.

"Simple" erotica, as I have proposed it, doesn't at all mean to "soften" a story. It's meant to point out that erotic stories with little attention to plot or character can display a lot of attention to artistic merit. "Stroker" implies little attention to artistic merit. See my post for more info. But thanks very much for remembering the term!!!!

 

[NoTalentHack]

I could go for an ice cream taco about now...

Tell me about your emotional journey when you get one!

 

[AG31]

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,

Huh! I did think you were suggesting a new category. So it seems we agree on my thoughts in reply #280.

I'm enjoying the discussion, but I'd vote against adding the category. Even if you get browsers (people, not software) to make the intellectual leap to accept that it's not really by, for, or about women, the category overlaps too much. It could literally be applied to some stories in ALL of our existing categories. Let's just make sure there's a tag "emotion driven" and another "driven by emotion". Currently neither one exists, although there are quite a few stories with "emotion" as a tag.

 

[Kelliezgirl]

Tell me about your emotional journey when you get one!

Good ice cream is always an emotional journey.

 

[AG31]

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

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

This is wonderful!!! It's a great gift to an analysis junky like myself.

 

[Erozetta]

On topic: I'm enjoying the discussion, but I'd vote against adding the category. Even if you get browsers (people, not software) to make the intellectual leap to accept that it's not really by, for, or about women, the category overlaps too much. It could literally be applied to some stories in ALL of our existing categories. Let's just make sure there's a tag "emotion driven" and another "driven by emotion". Currently neither one exists, although there are quite a few stories with "emotion" as a tag.

Off topic:

"Simple" erotica, as I have proposed it, doesn't at all mean to "soften" a story. It's meant to point out that erotic stories with little attention to plot or character can display a lot of attention to artistic merit. "Stroker" implies little attention to artistic merit. See my post for more info. But thanks very much for remembering the term!!!!

I read your post, hence the opinion I stated in mine. A stroker is a stroker, regardless of the bows you want to tie on it to make it look like something it's not. Your definition paints strokers as though they have no artistic merit by default.

I disagree with that idea wholeheartedly. Trying to differentiate one type of stroker from another is no different to the idea of "I want the porn I consume to be viewed as having more merit by adhering this definition to it and trying to get others to comply so I don't have to feel bad about liking porn."

It's attempting to soften, sugar-coat, idealize, and/or minimize the "ick" factor of written porn consumption (in this case). It serves no other purpose as without that term you can see exactly what it is: A short story written with the intent of some sort of sexual gratification for the reader. (Be that emotional , psychological, physical, or other) And there's nothing wrong with that. There's nothing "lesser" about that.

If you want to recategorize certain strokers, that's one thing. I would absolutely support that, but to call it something else because you don't like the connotations attached to it's common term is (and this is only my opinion) completely unnecessary and self serving.

 

[AG31]

The advantage is that Women's Fiction exists and is here to stay, and it has a clear and accepted definition.

I'm afraid that this is "clear and accepted" only to a (probably small) group of people who are interested in finding definitions for the kind of stories they read or write. Look how many authors have to be shown wikipedia definitions. You'd think AH would have more people who shared your understanding if it was really "clear and accepted." So, once again, my vote for tags "emotion driven" and "driven by emotion" just so that the very particular among us won't miss a story by simply searching for "emotion," which does already exist.

 

[Kelliezgirl]

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

What is the basis for saying "it is here to stay"?
I looked up the WFWA. It's an 11 year old organization with 2000 members.
I'm sure the World Polka Federation thought Polka was here to stay too.

 

[AG31]

I read your post, hence the opinion I stated in mine. A stroker is a stroker, regardless of the bows you want to tie on it to make it look like something it's not. Your definition paints strokers as though they have no artistic merit by default.

I disagree with that idea wholeheartedly. Trying to differentiate one type of stroker from another is no different to the idea of "I want the porn I consume to be viewed as having more merit by adhering this definition to it and trying to get others to comply so I don't have to feel bad about liking porn."

It's attempting to soften, sugar-coat, idealize, and/or minimize the "ick" factor of written porn consumption (in this case). It serves no other purpose as without that term you can see exactly what it is: A short story written with the intent of some sort of sexual gratification for the reader. (Be that emotional , psychological, physical, or other) And there's nothing wrong with that. There's nothing "lesser" about that.

If you want to recategorize certain strokers, that's one thing. I would absolutely support that, but to call it something else because you don't like the connotations attached to it's common term is (and this is only my opinion) completely unnecessary and self serving.

I don't know why you insist that affirming artistic merit as a possibility in a story without attention to plot or character constitutes wanting to "make it look like something it's not." I don't take the trouble to affirm that the story is erotica, that one of it's purposes is to arouse the reader., because I'm assuming that members of AH don't need me to state the obvious. You're just wrong about this. Just wrong to think I'm trying to make an erotic story look non-erotic. Just wrong.

 

[AG31]

so I don't have to feel bad about liking porn."

I don't REMOTELY "feel bad about liking porn." I'm just DELIGHTED to like porn, to read it (especially simple erotica) and write it. Read my bio, read my afterword to Twelve Maxbridge Street, read my participation in all kinds of posts here in AH and other forums.

You have an idea in your head that didn't come from me. I wish you'd correct it. I'm not sure why I care... It's the clarity thing, I guess. I don't like to be misunderstood.

 

[AG31]

If you want to recategorize certain strokers, that's one thing. I would absolutely support that, but to call it something else because you don't like the connotations attached to it's common term is (and this is only my opinion) completely unnecessary and self serving.

Unnecessary I get, but self serving???? Why would my proposal for recognizing some erotica as "simple erotica" be self serving? I don't get it. Can you elucidate?

 

[AG31]

I'm sure the World Polka Federation thought Polka was here to stay too.

What???? Is it gone????

 

[pink_silk_glove]

Unnecessary I get, but self serving???? Why would my proposal for recognizing some erotica as "simple erotica" be self serving? I don't get it. Can you elucidate?

Because your personal crusade (with absolutely no one else on board) to change the label of what we all know as stroke is merely because you are ashamed that you like and write stroke, while the rest of us, whether we're into stroke or not, are totally fine with calling it stroke and hold no such shame. That is why it is self-serving. It would be much easier for you to accept that stroke is okay rather than getting the entire rest of the erotica world to change the label to some euphemism just to skirt your personal shame.

 

[AG31]

(with absolutely no one else on board)

Au contraire. A number of people are on board. Pay attention.

you are ashamed that you like and write stroke,

I've addressed this in this thread here.

 

[AG31]

Because your personal crusade (with absolutely no one else on board) to change the label of what we all know as stroke is merely because you are ashamed that you like and write stroke, while the rest of us, whether we're into stroke or not, are totally fine with calling it stroke and hold no such shame. That is why it is self-serving. It would be much easier for you to accept that stroke is okay rather than getting the entire rest of the erotica world to change the label to some euphemism just to skirt your personal shame.

It seems a little odd to label a "personal crusade" (which may or may not have garnered followers) as "self-serving" on a site dedicated to conversation about writing.

 

[Erozetta]

I don't know why you insist that affirming artistic merit as a possibility in a story without attention to plot or character constitutes wanting to "make it look like something it's not." I don't take the trouble to affirm that the story is erotica, that one of it's purposes is to arouse the reader., because I'm assuming that members of AH don't need me to state the obvious. You're just wrong about this. Just wrong to think I'm trying to make an erotic story look non-erotic. Just wrong.

I didn't say anything about making it look non-erotic. I said you're relabeling it to make it appear as though it's better than the term "stroker" implies (from your perspective. The majority of us are fine with some, or even all of our work, being labeled a stroker because there's nothing wrong with writing strokers. It is not a lesser art form as you imply by trying to lift your own style above it with a new term.)

 

[Erozetta]

I don't REMOTELY "feel bad about liking porn." I'm just DELIGHTED to like porn, to read it (especially simple erotica) and write it. Read my bio, read my afterword to Twelve Maxbridge Street, read my participation in all kinds of posts here in AH and other forums.

You have an idea in your head that didn't come from me. I wish you'd correct it. I'm not sure why I care... It's the clarity thing, I guess. I don't like to be misunderstood.

The loudest preachers are often the biggest sinners, yet they often don't see it that way.

 

[NancyVeeners]

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.



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.



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

Dear Omenainen

thank you for your contribution. Your points are really interesting. The first one (the potential for a vast readership) is central but needs a longish post, so I'll answer it later or tomorrow. Let me answer here just other points which seems to generate so much criticism.

I would welcome a better alternative to Women's Erotica (and to Women's Fiction as well).

But the WFWA, well aware of the problems we discussed here, tried to find a different 'brand' for their genre and failed. They worked with professionals in branding and re-branding, to no avail. This is what happened to Women's Fiction and this is why I say that it is here to stay. Some organizations tried to get rid of it for the very reasons we discussed, but it is still there: for example, you find Women's Erotica as one of the categories Amazon lists. So adopting name and definition allows us to build on something that already exists, and 'is here to stay' (I believe).

In principle, Women's Erotica looks (to me) even better than Women's Fiction for various reasons. One of them is that most men eskew Women's Fiction, while (I believe) they could be interested, and even attracted to Women's Erotica.

But again, I would welcome a better name for the genre and even a better definition. I believe that we 'just' need a 'new brand' that could appeal to people who usually don't read Erotica. My guess is that it is not easy at all, and dumping Women's Erotica we risk to throw out the baby with the bath water. But maybe my whole attempt is naive, so I am ready to dump it and get back to writing...

Cheers!

NV

 

[AG31]

The loudest preachers are often the biggest sinners, yet they often don't see it that way.

Well, that doesn't apply here. And since you have no evidence except what you see here, I suggest you re-visit the evidence.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

Well, that doesn't apply here. And since you have no evidence except what you see here, I suggest you re-visit the evidence.

You just submitted the evidence in this post.

 

[AG31]

There's no evidence against him, so he must have done it.