Reverse psychology re: abusive romances

sunandshadow · Dec 7, 2008

Sorry for the confusing title, I couldn't think of any short way to explain it. By 'abusive romance' I am talking about the type of romance where the 'hero' holds the heroine captive, ignores her saying no or expressing anger or fear, perhaps forces her into marriage, and the sex is somewhere on the border between pushy seduction and outright rape. Then the reverse psychology part applies to me when I accidentally find myself reading one of these. I begin reading any romance with the desire to cheer on the main characters' developing relationship, and looking forward to them getting a HEA. But when I read one of these, I sometimes end up totally turned around: hoping the heroine will kill the hero and finally make her escape, and disappointed when she loses my respect by forgiving him and he gets a happy ending he doesn't deserve.

Moreover, I write romance, but this sort of experience makes me feel compelled to write a 'romance gone wrong' which actually does end with the heroine killing the hero - except that would be no fun to write, has no audience, and makes me feel slightly ill to think about too closely.

Anyone have any thoughts or advice on this? :Wha:

Horseshoes · Dec 7, 2008

Well, I'm wih you completely on finding an abusive relationship off-putting, especially one disguised as a romance that somehow goes from rape to HEA.

Write what you like. Do it well enough and you may find you're not at all alone in liking it. Well-written books oft find their audiences.

veinglory · Dec 7, 2008

Different people have different kinks, in romance and other genres. I don't like it in most cases, but see it as a 'live and let read' thing.

IceCreamEmpress · Dec 7, 2008

I hate books like that, too.

And as I said recently somewhere else, there's such a mindset in publishing that male-domination fantasies are much more popular than everything else--based on the feedback from readers of the publishers who supply male-domination fantasies. It's like the Jif company taking a survey of their buyers and saying "Roast beef sandwiches will never sell! All of our buyers prefer peanut butter!"

lexxi · Dec 7, 2008

sunandshadow said:
Moreover, I write romance, but this sort of experience makes me feel compelled to write a 'romance gone wrong' which actually does end with the heroine killing the hero - except that would be no fun to write, has no audience, and makes me feel slightly ill to think about too closely.

It probably wouldn't be romance, unless a secondary male character turns out to be someone the heroine can hook up with at the end.

But it could be good female empowerment fantasy, which might appeal to different readers, or even to the same readers who are able to enjoy different kinds of stories.

veinglory · Dec 7, 2008

As much as my tatstes are the reverse, pretty large modern surveys back up the popularity of this fantasy. I am irritated that the vaste majority of romance has some kind of alpha male when I prefer alpha female beta male romance. But the readership does lean that way.

para · Dec 8, 2008

What are you reading if I might ask? I've never come across anything like that in contemporary recently (last fifteen years) but then I do pretty much stick to category, so I could be missing a bunch of stuff.

sunandshadow · Dec 8, 2008

para said:
What are you reading if I might ask? I've never come across anything like that in contemporary recently (last fifteen years) but then I do pretty much stick to category, so I could be missing a bunch of stuff.

No you mostly won't find it in contemporary unless you are including urban fantasy in that, or reading specifically BDSM-flavored stuff. For the most part extremely dominating heroes occur in historical, historical fantasy, urban fantasy, and futuristic/science fiction. Oh and yaoi/slash/hentai/fanfiction/etc.

And thanks all for your insights.

sunandshadow · Dec 8, 2008

lexxi said:
It probably wouldn't be romance, unless a secondary male character turns out to be someone the heroine can hook up with at the end.

But it could be good female empowerment fantasy, which might appeal to different readers, or even to the same readers who are able to enjoy different kinds of stories.

By calling it romance I meant that it should seem at the beginning to be a romance, with that style of book cover and contract with the reader, etc. But no it would not have a secondary male character or a HEA. Unless they were in a sequel. I can kinda see it as female empowerment fantasy, although I always kinda disliked that genre. Also, I usually write gay romance, so in that case both 'hero' and 'herine' would be male. So I guess maybe this story idea that keeps pestering me would just be drama or psychological drama? I dunno. I still am really dubious about the idea of writing a book I myself wouldn't want to read. (Although... I liked Death Note and a few other psychodramas... Argh. *confused* )

Stacia Kane · Dec 8, 2008

See, I love alpha males/dominant males...but an abusive man is not an alpha male. He's a coward who has to bully people, and a child who cannot take "no" for an answer.

I'm pretty sure I mentioned this here before. My heroes KNOW who they are, and they KNOW who's in charge. They don't have to be cruel, mean, or disrespectful to women in order to prove it.

At least, that's what I attempt to show.

veinglory · Dec 8, 2008

I think one person's abusive is another's alpha. There is no objective boundary.

IceCreamEmpress · Dec 8, 2008

veinglory said:
I am irritated that the vaste majority of romance has some kind of alpha male when I prefer alpha female beta male romance. But the readership does lean that way.

If you survey the readers of the alpha-male romances published by All Alpha All the Time, you are going to get results suggesting that those readers love romances featuring alpha males.

There isn't any way for Harlequin/Mills and Boon, say, to find the readers who don't like the stuff Harlequin/Mills and Boon publishes, because they don't have contact with those folks.

A lot of women who read old-school romances like Georgette Heyer--which are not All Alpha Male All the Time--wouldn't turn up in a survey of people who identify themselves as "romance readers."

The industry said erotica would never sell. The industry said paranormal would never sell. The industry said male/male would never sell. All of this was based on the exact same kind of surveys that they use as arguments for why femdomme would never sell.

veinglory · Dec 8, 2008

I agree. But I have also read the sexual surveyes, RedBook, Hite etc. And, depressingly, the proportions are pretty close between most common fantasies and most common romance subgenres. My fantasies just happen to be in the minority.

sunandshadow · Dec 9, 2008

DecemberQuinn said:
See, I love alpha males/dominant males...but an abusive man is not an alpha male. He's a coward who has to bully people, and a child who cannot take "no" for an answer.

I'm pretty sure I mentioned this here before. My heroes KNOW who they are, and they KNOW who's in charge. They don't have to be cruel, mean, or disrespectful to women in order to prove it.

At least, that's what I attempt to show.

The hero never thinks he's being cruel/mean/disrespectful, he always thinks the heroine is being childish/perverse/rebellious. Sometimes he's right. But as I personally see it, the hero does not have the right to assume control over the heroine and her life unless she wants it that way and gives him permission. I have no complaint with consensual D/s. But you don't see that in historicals, you see a man telling a woman he's going to hold her prisoner until she agrees to marry him, he won't accept any other choice from her. Which can also work, if it's the beginning of the story and the middle of the story has the heroine demonstrating that she can out-think or out-sneak the hero and he can't force her, so if he wants her he has to apologize/ask nicely. It's like that saying "If you love something, set it free, if it comes back it loves you too."

MsK · Dec 9, 2008

DecemberQuinn said:
See, I love alpha males/dominant males...but an abusive man is not an alpha male. He's a coward who has to bully people, and a child who cannot take "no" for an answer.

I'm pretty sure I mentioned this here before. My heroes KNOW who they are, and they KNOW who's in charge. They don't have to be cruel, mean, or disrespectful to women in order to prove it.

At least, that's what I attempt to show.

I agree with DecemberQuinn. I love the alpha male, but an abusive man is definitley not an alpha male.
And yeah, sunandshadow, I think it would be okay to have the heroine kill the 'abusive' male, but it surely wouldn't be romantic.

HeronW · Dec 9, 2008

I've had beta readers tell me that if MC 1 rapes/forces MC 2 then there had better be a really damned good reason for A: it to happen, and B: something equally or even more redeeming that makes them friends/lovers/mates etc afterward.

Brindle Chase · Dec 9, 2008

I have no advice as a writer, but as a reader, I can tell you I read a book like that not long ago by a top selling author and I was a bit turned off that the romance bloomed from an unconsentual beginning. In my book, rape is rape and not something that should be written about as entertainment. IMHO.

Satori1977 · Dec 19, 2008

I agree with pretty much everyone here. I like dominant, assertive, alpha males. Those that kind of "take charge". But I don't like abusive, coercive men. Rape is rape, no matter what happens between the MC's later on. I think it is disgusting when rape turns into romance. It perpetuates certain stereotypes in real life, and the cycle of violence. It is saying it is ok for a man to hurt a women if he "loves her". That a man always knows best. Now most people would understand this is just fiction, but I know I started reading my mom's steamy romance novels when I was 12 years old. A young girl, especially one without a good male role model in her life, might think this is the roles of men and women in society.

On the same note, I also don't like submissive, weak women characters. I like the heroines to be tough and assertive as well, and to not take any crap from the hero. Those are the type of dynamics I enjoy in a romance.

Azrel · Dec 24, 2008

I agree with Satori/Nicole - rape is rape, it is NOT a sign that the hero/heroine are in love. I was also turned off a fairly well known romance author because her alpha males are abusive in several of said author's books and the heroines were the embodiment of submissive. In one of the books it went from rape to romance - maybe Brindle Chase and I had read the same author/book. :Shrug:

As far the OP's last question... it would work, just not as romance. At least in my limited experience in reading romance. :Shrug:

Cyia · Dec 24, 2008

sunandshadow said:
The hero never thinks he's being cruel/mean/disrespectful, he always thinks the heroine is being childish/perverse/rebellious. Sometimes he's right. But as I personally see it, the hero does not have the right to assume control over the heroine and her life unless she wants it that way and gives him permission. I have no complaint with consensual D/s. But you don't see that in historicals, you see a man telling a woman he's going to hold her prisoner until she agrees to marry him, he won't accept any other choice from her. Which can also work, if it's the beginning of the story and the middle of the story has the heroine demonstrating that she can out-think or out-sneak the hero and he can't force her, so if he wants her he has to apologize/ask nicely. It's like that saying "If you love something, set it free, if it comes back it loves you too."

*cough* Twilight *cough*

That's one of the main complaints with that book - that the MC is totally overpowered by the male character. He stalks her; isolates her; forces her to marry him to get his way and even holds her captive. His only reasoning is that he's protecting the woman he loves and people eat it up like rainbow sherbert claiming it's sweet and romantic. (granted he didn't rape her - but his dad did suggest he drug her before they had sex)

The same thing happened with "Luke and Laura" on whatever soap opera those two were on. He rapes her and they end up one of the pentultimate "romantic" couples in soap opera history.

It's prevalent in TV and books that the guy who legally would be classified a stalker is just "persistant". No matter how many times the object of his affection says "no" (or screams it, or slams doors in his face..." he goes the "your mouth says no, your eyes say yes" route. Or thinks that he's wearing down her resolve when any normal woman would be annoyed to the point of restraining order.

Rape is rape. Male as the alpha, female as the alpha, M/M or F/F. If both partners aren't 100% willing, it's rape. Period.

There are people (I know some :Hammer:

) who rationalize that bodice ripper style stuff as saying it was appropriate for historical style romance because it took the rsponsibility off the woman who wasn't supposed to want or enjoy sex. If she was coerced (though she obviously secretly wanted it) then she was off the hook.

IMO, that kind of thinking is sick.

frimble3 · Dec 25, 2008

Start with the murder (justifiable homicide IMHO) then describe the romance in chunks of story pieced together from the witnesses, evidence, etc, as part of the murder investigation. If you want actual 'romance', well, that could be the parallel story of the detectives investigating the case. That way you can slide in all kinds of opinions on the dynamics of the relationship. Maybe not your preferred genre, but if it works?

sunandshadow · Dec 25, 2008

Nah, telling it in that order wouldn't get my point across, the point being that the hero and heroine were fundamentally compatible, the heroine might have fallen in love with him, except he repeatedly ruined any chance of that by refusing to listen to her, and didn't deserve her love because he didn't respect her, acknowledge her as an equal with a right to freedom of choice, etc. I was imagining it as a first person story from her perspective, with lots of introspection and interior monologue, in strict chronological order. Not a mystery, more like a classical tragedy (the trainwreck in slow motion kind, or the 'for want of a nail...' kind). The idea just weirds me out because I hate tragedies and wouldn't voluntarily read one, so I have no business writing one.

Cyia · Dec 25, 2008

Have you thought of making the murder a "near miss" where the guy pulls through and has something of an epiphany about his behavior. (or even better, where he doesn't and expects the heroine to come crawling back ashamed of her behavior only to have her leave him when she's sure he's able to survive.) It could be a catalyst moment for him to rethink his life and become a decent person that she may - or may not - choose to keep in her life once he's cleaned himself up.

sunandshadow · Dec 25, 2008

That would be a valid way to salvage the story from being a tragedy. I don't think I'd personally do it that way because in this instance I'm also reacting against the silent convention that heroines of romance novels aren't allowed to kill anyone, even the villain. I'm mostly a pacifist but, I do believe some people are so dangerous and/or evil that execution (preferably swift and painless) is the correct thing to do to them. I would have great respect for a female main character who made the difficult decision that a particular character had to be eliminated for the safety of everyone else, then carried out that decision in a no-nonsense, minimal-drama way.

GirlWithPoisonPen · Dec 25, 2008

sunandshadow said:
That would be a valid way to salvage the story from being a tragedy. I don't think I'd personally do it that way because in this instance I'm also reacting against the silent convention that heroines of romance novels aren't allowed to kill anyone, even the villain. I'm mostly a pacifist but, I do believe some people are so dangerous and/or evil that execution (preferably swift and painless) is the correct thing to do to them. I would have great respect for a female main character who made the difficult decision that a particular character had to be eliminated for the safety of everyone else, then carried out that decision in a no-nonsense, minimal-drama way.

The original ending of "Ever After," the retelling of Cinderella with Drew Barrymore, had her defending and killing the evil duke when tries to take liberties with her. They had to cut it out because it made the prince's "rescue" of her less heroic.

I have to admit that I couldn't get past the fact that Jamie beat the crap out of Claire in "Outlander" and never finished the book.

Reverse psychology re: abusive romances

Impractical Fantasy Animal

lisapreston.com

volitare nequeo

Hapless Virago

bold enough for both those XXs

volitare nequeo

Impractical Fantasy Animal

Impractical Fantasy Animal

Girl Detective

volitare nequeo

Hapless Virago

volitare nequeo

Impractical Fantasy Animal

Down Under Fan

Dancing on the edge

Listening to the Voices In My Head

Azrel

Rewriting My Destiny

Heckuva good sport

Impractical Fantasy Animal

Rewriting My Destiny

Impractical Fantasy Animal

Mata Hari