Controversial topic.

I'm slowly slipping into the older generation. But the core of most romance from the beginning was a prince rescuing a princess. And to be honest, if you look at most romantic commedy, this is the basis.

Now, you've had a somewhat pivotal change in this, being the woman who doesn't want to be saved. Yet, in these romantic commedies, you still have the eventually recognition that this world conquoring woman, who resists love, who is herself saving the world, or climbing atop it, she eventually comes to realize she doesn't want to save the world, and eventually lets some guy "save her from being super-over-achiever".

Question, and I'd like to hear from young and old on this. Deep down, do you woman secretly wish to be rescued (from anything). Is that the core of romantic fantasy?

I'll be honest. I kind of see the "Prince of Tides" guy gets rescued, as a sort of appealing alternative. But I also can't help having that inner desire to be a knight who rescues. I think that's hardwired.

mistri said:

Women don't all want the same thing, you know.

If you look at Harlequin, for example, their Harlequin Presents (Modern Romance in the UK) series, often emphasises the heroine being swept off her feet (and often being saved from something (herself, career, whatever) in the process.

Their Harlequin Romance series (Tender Romance in the UK), is more about women looking for a man to be by their side throughout life.

Some women might only want to read one type of book. Others will read a broad range. Some women will fantasise about being saved; others won't.

Click to expand...

Sticks head in the grinder-riskier question:

Okay, first, I don't mean this in that being rescued means giving up a career, or artistic aspirations, or taking a step down the ladder.

My question though is what is deep down in the heart? Is the "macho"- "I don't need you, can take you or leave you," bit, overdone? Obviously, not everyone needs a relationship, and definitely not equally. I don't doubt that. Believe it or not, I believe that some have, whether they recognize it as such, dare I said it? The gift of celebacy- in which that desire isn't there, or at least so diminished it can easily be ignored. Obviously if that is the case, then biologically that desire for "other" may not be there.

However, in most woman, who have "desire for a relationship", who generally don't feel like an Island, what is the core of that desire? My gut feeling from having known "power women", most of them don't love being "power women" and those who appear most adept at it, have actually become rather cold and calloused, having hardened a part of themselves. (Perhaps being forced to, in that necessity demanded they pull up their bootstraps and fight to rise above)

Does Romantic Commedy have any basic truths? I think the fact that we love it, is because often it hits home. You have a woman who claws, scratches, and fights to climb a corporate ladder to prove she's every bit as tough as a guy, but deep down, she has that other desire, to be vulnerable in the hands of a strong man. If it is such an appealing picture for them to be this amazone, and simply want to discover this understanding buddy-co equal with no expectations, then why aren't movies and books that depict that, very popular? Those are the guys who always get dumped by Meg Ryan -Sleepless in Seatle, You've Got Mail. She wants Hugh Jackman, who doesn't "need her" or put his masculinity on a coat rack by the door.

In a sense, Cold Mountain's appeal wasn't the satisfaction she could do it all by herself in the end. You wanted Jude Law to make it back, and take the load off her shoulders. There was something entirely dissatisfying about the end of that story, though it was compelling up to the end.

Susan Gable said:

Boy, Nate, you ask interesting questions.

I think romance speaks to the deep-seated desire in all of us to be loved, cherished, cared for.

I'm a very independent woman, strong, more logical than emotional despite the emotional books I write <G>, and there are moments when my husband feels like I don't need him for anything. But when push comes to shove, and my back is against the wall, do I need him? You betcha. Is it a need to be "rescued?" Ummm...I don't know if I'd call it rescued. It's a need to sometimes be able to let my guard down and let someone else be the strong one. The need to sometimes be taken care of because sometimes it gets tough taking care of yourself. I need stroking and nurturing as much as the next person/woman.

There's just something wonderful about having someone to share your life with. A friend you can always count on.

Even the strongest/toughest woman (or man) gets lonely.

And you certainly can't pair your strong heroine with a whimpy guy, so he has to be strong enough to rescue her if she needs it. He also has to be strong enough to let her rescue him if he needs it. Only a strong guy can let his woman be as strong as he is, or stronger at times. And I mean that emotionally more than physically, but physically as well.

Susan G.

Click to expand...

I appreciate your responce. It's very honest. My question may sound different to people of different generations. I doubt human nature changes that much, although human behavior does. Once upon a time, people needing other people was just assumed. Now, there's this tendency towards invulnerability, invincibility, "I don't need other people to be happy..."

In my mind, I think there is a notion, especially in younger people, that there is a virtue in not needing someone. "I don't need anyone..." Well, is that honest? Is that really what they feel, or is that more of a reaction to the world they've seen, where you harden yourself against being hurt and disappointed?

I don't mind needing other people. In fact, over they years I've gotten better at it. And I'm not ashamed of it.

maestrowork said:

I don't write "romance" but I write story with strong love themes. In my first book, the heroines save the male protagonist. And in a subtler way, he helps them, too.

But I agree... just because deep down you (as a woman) want to find someone who loves and cherishes you, etc. doesn't mean you're a weakling. This being "romance" genre, you're talking about love and relationship here (and not about some independent man or woman who is perfectly happy being single...)

I don't think the "who rescues whom" is a true premise either. I think some very good romance or love stories are about the guy and the girl (or some variations) saving each other -- sometimes from their bad relationships, situations, etc., sometimes from themselves.

Take Pretty Woman (I know, it's not a "romance" novel but bear with me -- it's based on Pygmalion) for instance. Sure, Edward saves Vivien like the Prince in shining armor. But SHE also saves him. And that's why their relationship is so strong, because they save each other, they're meant to be together. And she turns out to be strong, independent, resourceful, and the ending would have been fine if Edward never comes back for her -- we know she will do just fine. The ending is actually about HIM being saved -- by going back to Vivien, he saves himself. This being romantic comedy, there's a happy ending. It taps into our desire for loving and being loved back, and it goes both ways.

We've come a long way from the "Someday my prince will come" days.

Click to expand...

There's no doubt women want to save men. But in a context. They see the "MAN" worth saving. They aren't looking to save a wimp, but to transform a bound frog into a prince. In a sense, they believe in the strength, and want him to believe. So, there is saving going on, on both sides.

No doubt, we men want to save as well. And nothing is as frustrating as feeling impotent (and I don't mean sexually), unable to be what she needs. We want to feel like we make a difference. That is deep seeded, not that we are tollerated because we can tell a good joke, but that somehow we've made someone else's world better.

In fact, there is an innate attractiveness in a woman that realizes they are benefited by our being there. I'll be frank, feeling expendible really s*cks.

veinglory said:

I love very soft, even effeminate men. Looking at shonen ai comics and a good number of books I don't think I am alone in that, although hardly in a majority...

Click to expand...

We're still waiting to see if there are any Amens out there? Can you give more examples perhaps?

veinglory said:

The rise of the snag or metrosexual? http://www.deccanherald.com/deccanherald/july232004/she3.asp

Click to expand...

Strength and sensitivity are not antagonistic to each other. I actually think men had poor role models for many years, because we had so many fathers going off to war in every generation. They sired a few kids, disappeared for years, in a country coming out of a depression. So, you had lack of natural bonding and natural affection. "Toughen up son...pull up your bootstraps..."

There is a healthy strength, and it is not devoid of sensitivity. It should be natural for men to hug, not pull away, as it is in many mediteranian cultures. And we have stereotyped roles to a great degree. But again, most of this can be explained culturally.

I think what you are seeing is more of a natural man. However, sensitivity devoid of strength isn't natural either. That's why I needed a clarification. I've rarely seen a woman who liked a wimp. And being strong enough to be yourself is not being a wimp.

However, I'm a little less on the "glit/glam" side of the metrosexual thing, because to me that's just one more superficial adornment that is more of a distraction from who a person really is.

Lisa Y said:

Funny I should find this thread today. Last night, I babysat my friend's daughters. I read 3 fairy tales :Fairydust (abridged versions!) to the 3 year old. One was Cinderella, one was Sleeping Beauty, and one was Snow White. I was thoroughly disgusted with them when I was through. Why? Because I feel I was poisoned by them as a child.

I say this partially to be funny, but also, there is some truth to it. Yes, I have wanted to be "rescued" my whole life and can honestly say that as a teen and young adult, I "waited" for that "man" to come and "take me away". At nearly forty (and married) I am still "waiting" for that "man" to "take me away".

I do believe that the allure of the romance novel for many women (not all) is that expectation that was ground into us as young girls. I know I sound like a feminist, but really, I'm not. I just hate the thought of those two girls I babysat last night "waiting" for their prince.

Click to expand...

Strange as it may seem, I think women help create good men, in the sense that men want to be good mates/lovers. BUT, men don't want to ask men. And a woman who takes the time to learn "MAN" which is a means of communication that is foriegn to some women, and translates the feminine perspective into the language of MAN, women can be great teachers.

Lisa Y said:

I think I'm a lousy teacher

Click to expand...

Well, you start by being a student first. Teaching comes latter. If you are a good student, eventually you have potential to be a great teacher.

Few people get really good relationship teaching. My parents certainly didn't equip me, and neither did my school. And most certainly, I didn't get it from t.v. In my confused youth, I even tried the infamous Clint Eastwood scowl, thinking that was cool, and wondering if the Don Johnson half-shaven look might work, because my best friend's girlfriend liked it. All of those, "What were you thinking stupid things that people do." Well, not all people, just us, "What were you thinking people". You try your best with the knowledge you are given, but unless you find someone who knows more than you, you are stuck guessing, and for years I guessed wrong.

But I was an eager learner, and through years of studying, figured at least enough things out to be passable.

scullars said:

For a lot of us, we never relied on waiting for a "white knight on a horse" to rescue us; if we'd waited around for him, we'd be homeless and starved to death.

Click to expand...

This is tricky in my book. Some people stop believing in the White Knight. That's different than not wanting one.

And for the record, I don't believe relationships are for everyone. Some people can absolutely find companionship and be more than satisfied with healthy friendships.

I can absolutely say without a doubt, as a male, I want to rescue a princess. There's something in me that wants to not only be needed, but to be relevent. I've seen many women who did well without any male in their lives. That doesn't mean they were happy with life that way. They were often disallusioned. But that's what attracts some to romance, a desire to see what they haven't felt.

So, is there something down in their core that wants to believe in the fairy tale? I think so.

Nothing would break my heart more than the feeling "I'm totally irrelevant." In some way, I have to know I've made someone's life better. If my wife could take or leave me, and simply tolerates me as one of her options. If I knew she absolutely felt that way, I'd say "cut me loose. If you feel I'm a burden and not a blessing, then please don't do me any favors."

To me, saying "You are not necessary" is extremely emasculating. And I'm being hoest, if that's how someone felt about me, there wouldn't be any reason to stay in that relationship.