Attitudes in the M/M community

To be honest, I don't understand the "objectification" complaint at all.

I mean, objectification is when a character is reduced into an object. For example: a fantasy novel where there's only one female character, she's hot, and she's a love interest. That's objectification. She doesn't have her own story or identity. She's not a person. She's a thing. The reader doesn't want to be her; they want to have her.

So how are men in m/m objectified?

There's always a wide variety of male characters. There are fat male characters, thin male characters, evil male characters, stupid male characters. Generally the only hot guys are the leads. And the reader isn't expected to just drool over the guys; we're expected to empathize and identify with them. They have backstories and problems and goals.

So... how are they objectified? Some of them are written poorly, I guess.

(The conversation about this has become really toxic. And that sucks. To be honest, I don't feel comfortable engaging with people outside of AW about it. Too many hurt feelings.)

Lillith1991 said:

There is very prevelent idea that pretty pretty man sex is a requirement in writers and readers outside of AW, and any book that focuses on the a M/M relationship without sex isn't a Romance because there's no sex or is a bad one because of the lack of sex. That is where I see the objectification coming in, at a macro instead of individual level. And this atitude in my experience can and often does seep into people's writing, how they treat their characters and stuff of that nature.

Click to expand...

So when you say objectification, what you're talking about is women having a sexual fetish for gay men. Or, like, women seeing gayness as sexual.

One of my first Goodreads reviews for But I Never Said I Didn't Love You! complained I couldn't call my book M/M romance because there isn't any sex so it's just a nice coming out story, completely ignoring it had the formula of Guy Meets Guy, Guy Dates Guy, Guy Has To Choose Between Guy And Another Guy, Guy Choose Guy, Guy Says "I Love You", HEA. At the time I wasn't aware there were any qualifications that a M/M romance had to include sex, so I made note to sex up the next books I wrote.

Because

BenPanced said:

One of my first Goodreads reviews for But I Never Said I Didn't Love You! complained I couldn't call my book M/M romance because there isn't any sex so it's just a nice coming out story

Click to expand...

When I read this, I was ready to be pissed off and offended. A book doesn't need sex to be called m/m.

Then I actually took a look at your reviews for that book.

None of them actually say that.

I don't believe you need sex to have romance in M/M relationships. For those of us who were in the closet and developed close friendships with straight men to the point of falling in love with them, I think it counts as romance. I had my fair share of meeting a guy and becoming best friends to the point of falling in love with them, only to have the person you love fall for a girl, and having to pretend you are happy for them, then go through jealousy, sadness that comes with all that. I was a virgin all through that period of my life.

Lillith1991 said:

Both, definitely both. Some of the women doing this are doing it from the fetish standpoint

Click to expand...

K. Thanks for clarifying. It helps.

I'm bisexual, so I have experience with my sexual orientation being objectified. I'm pretty sure you do, too.

But the thing is: it doesn't bother me when men get off on lesbianism. If men think two women kissing is hot, cool. I do, too. There's nothing wrong with that. I don't think getting off on someone's sexual orientation is wrong. Men get off on lesbian porn all the time. Heck, there's a huge chunk of gay porn that sexualizes straight men.

It bothers me when men demean my sexuality.

I guess what I'm saying is: I don't think women getting off on homosexuality is automatically a problem. It's only a problem when writers demean homosexuality. And (in general) I don't think the m/m community demeans homosexuality.

and others from the false assumption being gay is about sex.

Click to expand...

I agree that's a shitty thing to do. It does make me uncomfortable. On one of the new Walking Dead episodes, two female characters just kissed. Some of the male fans were making sexual comments about it. It doesn't bother me if men think f/f action is hot, but the moment was supposed to be tender and sweet, and it bothered me when male fans IMMEDIATELY linked it with sex.

So yeah, I can see where you're coming from.

I'm not entirely comfortable with some of the stuff I see in the m/m community, but I'm really uncomfortable writing about it because I don't want to come off as if I'm saying "MY way to write m/m is the RIGHT way".

I don't want to police female sexuality. I don't want to tell other writers what they should write.

But...

If I were friends with men who posted half-naked women on Facebook as often as some m/m community members post half-naked men, I'd probably unfriend the men. I'd think they were objectifying women.

And I think the original blog post (assuming we're talking about the same one) had a point when it referred to the outrageous attention given to some male m/m authors - I mean, the men in question don't seem to object, so I guess I shouldn't either, but it does feel as if there's a not-entirely-healthy fetishization going on there. Maybe.

I don't know. My thoughts aren't completely coherent on this (obviously!) but I did want to at least post and say that I think it's something that deserves more thought and more conversation. And I think it's important that the conversation be respectful, not the attempts at silencing and shaming that I saw in some of the responses to that first blog post.

If I'm writing about a group that has struggled to be heard and someone from that group speaks? I should damn well listen, even if I end up disagreeing with what they say.

It's a shame that M/M romance books today are still being put in "erotic romance" or even "erotica" categories by publishers, even if they don't have one naughty bit in the book. And I still see readers 1-staring books for "I thought these guys would have sex", even if the book tag says "sweet".

I think it's because a lot of readers still expect M/M romance = sex. Especially readers new to the genre.

Viridian said:

To be honest, I don't understand the "objectification" complaint at all.

I mean, objectification is when a character is reduced into an object. For example: a fantasy novel where there's only one female character, she's hot, and she's a love interest. That's objectification. She doesn't have her own story or identity. She's not a person. She's a thing. The reader doesn't want to be her; they want to have her.

So how are men in m/m objectified?

There's always a wide variety of male characters. There are fat male characters, thin male characters, evil male characters, stupid male characters. Generally the only hot guys are the leads. And the reader isn't expected to just drool over the guys; we're expected to empathize and identify with them. They have backstories and problems and goals.

So... how are they objectified? Some of them are written poorly, I guess.

(The conversation about this has become really toxic. And that sucks. To be honest, I don't feel comfortable engaging with people outside of AW about it. Too many hurt feelings.)

Click to expand...

I'm guessing it's because in addition to being a story about two characters exploring their sexuality or having a relationship, if it's erotica, it is intended to arouse the reader sexually? You could argue that heterosexual male (and female) characters are objectified in romance and erotica too, but if it's written by and for the demographic being objectified, then it's all right.

Except heterosexual men sometimes point out (usually when women are complaining about how they're often portrayed so shallowly in genres like SF and F) that men usually don't write M/F romance or erotica, and it's mostly written by and for women, and the heterosexual male characters are idealized, unrealistic men that exist to fulfill female fantasies, and the books with naked male torsos on the cover are every bit as objectifying of men as half-naked barbarian women are on the covers of fantasy novels (of course, this argument is sometimes made, not because the men are genuinely upset by the naked, male torso covers, but because they want the women to shut the fuck up about images like this, or this, on fantasy or SF novels covers).

The thought about M/M romance is that it's usually written by and for heterosexual women who are somewhat titillated by the stories and portrayals of gay male sexuality, even if they're fleshed-out characters that are written reasonably accurately (and they sometimes aren't).

I don't know what to feel about this. I enjoy reading M/M romance and erotica sometimes. For whatever reason, I find gay, male characters fun and interesting to relate to, both in non-sexual, non-romantic contexts and in sexual and romantic ones. I have a gay, male pov character in my first novel (the one I'm trying to shop), and I'm developing him and his romantic life more in book #2. It's not specifically a romance or erotica (it's a fantasy novel), so any sex won't be graphic, and I'm striving to make the characters believable and not cliches or female wish-fulfillment fantasies, but I'd be a liar if I said there isn't a bit of a thrill that comes from writing them (same as I get from writing my heterosexual male pov character, come to think of it) as sexual beings.

Still, I hope I'm not leaving slime trails of my own fantasies the page to annoy or offend my readers or anything. I want readers of all genders and orientations to be able to read it without rolling their eyes, let alone being hurt or offended by my portrayal of this character.

But if I were actually writing erotica or romance, then it would be more appropriate to write to the fantasies of my audience, and chances are, it would be heterosexual women. Do gay men read M/M erotica much, or do they (like heterosexual men) tend to gravitate towards sexual content that's more visual and focused on the mechanics of the act rather than the emotions and relationship?

I think, as always, people can get angry and defensive when they're told that something they enjoy might be harmful or disrespectful in some way. It can feel like having your favorite toy taken away. What I'm trying to parse is if the defensiveness and dismissal on the part of female M/M erotica and romance writers is akin to the reactive anger that some gamers and game designers (as an example) feel when they're told that the way female characters are traditionally portrayed in video games are offensive to at least some women.

I'm also trying to figure out whether or not there's a way to write M/M erotica and/or romance that wouldn't been seen as exploitative?

I think there are certainly women who fetishize gay sex just as there are men who fetishize lesbian sex.

I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with that. We get turned on by what we get turned on by. I'm cool with that. The trouble comes when people can't separate their fetishistic objectifications from the real life human beings.

Happily, the m/m writers I've met on AW aren't like that at all.

But there will always be some readers like that, and I'm sure there are some authors like that, too.

In fact, I often get the feeling like the authors I know here are the exceptions rather than the rule.

One day, Alexis Hall will write something I disagree with.

Today is not that day.

http://www.quicunquevult.com/i-may-...-i-will-try-my-best-not-to-be-a-dick-about-it

His response to the original post (which I agree was not an shining example of any sort) and, more significantly, to the comments in response to the post.

kuwisdelu said:

I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with that. We get turned on by what we get turned on by. I'm cool with that. The trouble comes when people can't separate their fetishistic objectifications from the real life human beings.

Click to expand...

I'd agree with this, and it applies to the depiction of heterosexual relationships and individuals too.

But I still wonder if there's a line that one can cross in erotica or romance intended for a particular audience, even if it doesn't impact the expectations one has of real, flesh-and-blood people.

I remember the first time I found a romantic partner's porn stash (I was very young back then). I felt so incredibly bad, and not just because the women he was fantasizing about were all platinum blonds with impossibly ginormous breasts (while I myself am dark-haired with ordinary ones). I mean, I knew that he didn't expect real life women to look like that, since none of his girlfriends ever had, and he treated all of us with respect and seemed to find me attractive.

But it was very disturbing looking at these images, because they were (to my way of thinking) grotesque. The women had clearly had surgery (this was ages ago, before the time of digital enhancement) to give them the, um, attributes they had, and the breasts were out of the range of what nature could provide naturally, and they really would stop them from functioning normally. It's the same kind of horrified feeling I get when I read about genital mutilation or bound feet. The masculine equivalent might be a penis that hangs down to one's ankles, but I wouldn't find such an image sexy (maybe some women would, I dunno), so it weirded me out that someone who seemed like such a nice guy could be turned on by something that seemed so damaging to the people involved (though of course, they did choose to have the surgery in question).

But sometimes the romantic fantasies and fetishes people have about the behavior and personalities of the opposite sex are just as dysfunctional and crippling in their way as four-foot long, gravity-defying breasts.

But we can't really control what turns us on, obviously. And if it's just written about, no actual people are harmed, so I don't know.

Roxxsmom said:

...I think, as always, people can get angry and defensive when they're told that something they enjoy might be harmful or disrespectful in some way. It can feel like having your favorite toy taken away. What I'm trying to parse is if the defensiveness and dismissal on the part of female M/M erotica and romance writers is akin to the reactive anger that some gamers and game designers (as an example) feel when they're told that the way female characters are traditionally portrayed in video games are offensive to at least some women.

I'm also trying to figure out whether or not there's a way to write M/M erotica and/or romance that wouldn't been seen as exploitative?

Click to expand...

I definitely agree with you on the first part of this - the idea that people are reacting angrily and defensively when they should, in my opinion, be shutting up and listening. And honestly, I'm not sure it's as much the writers of m/m as the readers. I'm not saying no m/m authors have reacted defensively, but in general I'm not recognizing most of the names writing the most virulent replies to the blog post currently in question, which means if they're authors, they're fairly minor ones.

In terms of whether it's possible to write non-exploitative m/m? I certainly hope so. I mean, I think it's absolutely, without a doubt possible for gay men to write it. Is it possible for women to write it? Again, I don't want to fall into the "I'm doing it right" trap, but... there are definitely authors I've read, authors I emulate, who I think are doing it right. But then I worry that maybe my definition of "right" is too closely aligned with my personal taste in literature - like, I tend to like authors who are writing things that are... I'm fighting not to say "good" or "well-written"... KJ Charles, Janey Chapel, Joanna Chambers - authors who can really write, who create characters first and foremost and don't worry so much about pandering to a specific set of tropes...

Yeah, that wasn't a very good job of being non-judgemental. But when I read stories by those authors, I really feel as if they respect their characters and are writing with the story in mind. I really don't think they're exploiting anyone.

Roxxsmom said:

But I still wonder if there's a line that one can cross in erotica or romance intended for a particular audience, even if it doesn't impact the expectations one has of real, flesh-and-blood people.

Click to expand...

Well, it certainly gets tricky.

To answer Captcha's question first, I certainly think it's possible for a woman to write non-exploitative m/m romance and/or erotica. I think writers on this board do it all the time.

But to go one step further than that, I actually think it's okay to write exploitative material sometimes, provided the intentions are clear (one of the few times in fiction I think author intention actually matters).

As long as people can compartmentalize it, I think pretty much all sexual fantasy is fine and healthy.

Where it gets tricky is that romance and erotica novels (despite sometimes being derided by others in the literary community) possess a certain amount of legitimacy that pornography and other intentionally-sexually-exploitative entertainment does not, so it's not as easy to separate pure fantasy from realism.

(The only kink that truly squicks me out is probably race play, but I'd defend that in a clearly fantasy situation, too.)

Captcha said:

I definitely agree with you on the first part of this - the idea that people are reacting angrily and defensively when they should, in my opinion, be shutting up and listening.

Click to expand...

I agree with you on almost everything. Thanks for the link, btw; Alexis Hall is a well-spoken man.

But I disagree with you here. This needs to be a conversation, and the conversation needs to be civil. Women are not obligated to shut up and listen to gay men. We're dealing with two different oppressed groups here: women (who have had their sexuality repressed and policed for ages) and gay men (who are, you know, gay).

If a woman wrote an unfair and rude post about gay men, then gay men would probably get defensive about it.

If a gay man writes an unfair and rude post about women, then women are probably going to get defensive about it, too.

I'm sick of a lot of things in the m/m genre. I'm sick of being called a straight woman. I'm sick of being told that gay men write more authentic stories. I'm sick of worrying about pen names. I'm sick of gay men who think it's okay to shit on female characters. I'm sick of sexist gay men who never get called on their shit. I'm seeing of seeing all the sexism in the m/m community blamed on women.

And if I wrote a blog post about it, I would still try to be as fair as possible. It's important to respect your fellow writers and readers; it's important to discuss things.

A man can't stand on a soapbox and expect people to listen while he covers his ears. And you can't punch someone in a sore spot and expect them to ignore it.

Maybe we don't disagree after all.

POINT IS. There is a profound lack of empathy going on in both sides, here. Everyone needs to have a little more respect.

I admit, I am shocked by how many women call themselves allies but still trot out arguments like "I have a gay friend." Clearly they have no actual interest in social justice at all.

Viridian said:

Maybe we don't disagree after all.

POINT IS. There is a profound lack of empathy going on in both sides, here. Everyone needs to have a little more respect.

I admit, I am shocked by how many women call themselves allies but still trot out arguments like "I have a gay friend." Clearly they have no actual interest in social justice at all.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I probably misspoke/overstated the "shut up and listen" part - we should shut up and listen first, then really think things through, then respond respectfully and see what happens.

I'm not saying there are no sexist gay men. But when I'm writing m/m or taking part in the m/m community, I kind of feel like--like I'm visiting their house? Like I'm playing in their sandbox, only for them, it's not playing and it's not sand, it's their real lives? I don't really know how to express it, but I do think, for me at least, that I need to give more deference to the opinions of gay men when I'm writing about gay men than I do when I'm writing about a different group.

Like, if it came down to it that there actually WAS no non-exploitative way for a straight woman to write m/m, I think I would have to stop writing m/m. Or if some other unsolvable hypothetical issue arose between gay men and m/m writers. The gay men should win that one, because writing m/m is something I do, being gay men is something they are. I think their reality trumps my fantasy.

Now, that's just a hypothetical. I don't think there's anything on the horizon that would convince me I couldn't continue writing m/m with a fairly clear conscience. I'm just trying to find a way to express my general attitude toward the genre.

Viridian said:

I'm sick of a lot of things in the m/m genre. I'm sick of being called a straight woman. I'm sick of being told that gay men write more authentic stories. I'm sick of worrying about pen names. I'm sick of gay men who think it's okay to shit on female characters. I'm sick of sexist gay men who never get called on their shit. I'm seeing of seeing all the sexism in the m/m community blamed on women.

Click to expand...

Which is why I write the stories I want to write and usually do not get involved in discussions like this

The authentic thing makes me roll my eyes. I had that said to me a few times by yup...straight women and guess what(Outing myself) I am transgendered!! I lived 30 years as a gay man. So I think that people should think before they pass judgement because they NEVER know who is on the other side of the pen.

I am not offended easily either. If an author does a bad job portraying their characters straight, gay, bi, trans or whatever, I don't bother to read them.

There is a bit of a stigma that LGBTQ romances (not just M/M) are somehow more erotically charged than heterosexual books. When I was querying my YA f/f, I definitely encountered that, as one publisher told me directly that they only published 'sweet YA romances with a low heat level, not lgbtq' ... my book has a low heat level with a sweet HEA, but by the fact that it was two girls made it 'erotic' in that publisher's mind.

I love high heat level M/M ... but I also love a sweet romance, if it's well done. One thing that I think M/M publishers could do better with, is making the covers more accurately reflect the content of the book. I've noticed that M/M covers do tend to feature (not a hard and fast rule) to feature more people in states of undress than hetero romances, even if the content of the book itself is fairly low heat. I understand that sexy covers sell, but it's not doing the image of LGBTQ romance as something that is always about the sex any favours.