grrr!

[erastes]

Dear Publishers

I'm getting a LOT sick of seeing this on various sites:

"[x book] contains subject matter that some readers may find objectionable: male/male sexual practices."

Look, if the book is already labelled as a gay erotic romance, that's pretty much a given, yes? Plus - it might be a surprise to you to know that some people find heterosexual practices objectionable so put it up on all your books - or NONE! All Right?

No love at all,

Erastes

PS. This was on a book about shape-shifting squid-sex, so a warning about that would have been nice too, just sayin'

Comments

erotica

[orchard-mnt.livejournal.com]

so..it's a site for erotica (smut) most has a label, such as male on male, or weird fantasy creatures or whatever...why not just have a standard short and brief spot for a label or a code, and , so those looking for (or to avoid) certain story lines...

being smaller, more standardized, would make it less of an eyesore and would take away the subjective-negative nastiness

[gehayi.livejournal.com]

I want a whole slew of warnings for content. No, really, I do. For example, I think that it would be lovely if books came with the following warning:

"The only editor this book has seen is Spell-Check. Proceed with caution."

Or this:

"WARNING: contains badly researched and/or badly written sex. Virgins and the sexually inexperienced are advised not to read this book, as it will give them an inaccurate picture."

Or this:

"This book is a wallpaper historical. May prove harmful to the health of anyone who knows actual history."

Or, for the benefit of stupid people:

"This is a gay erotic romance. The blurb SAYS it is a gay erotic romance. The principals are named Adam and Steve. The cover features two men embracing and kissing each other.

"If, after all this, you buy this novel and are shocked by the presence of the gay in it, you have only yourself to blame."

[alankria.livejournal.com]

"WARNING: contains badly researched and/or badly written sex. Virgins and the sexually inexperienced are advised not to read this book, as it will give them an inaccurate picture.
And those who are sexually experienced are cautioned not to drink or eat while reading this book, as they risk choking.

There, fixed it for you. =D

[clarelondon.livejournal.com]

I'm with you on that, I remember being quite startled when I first saw that particular phrasing. By all means post notice about content that's considered adult-orientated, but what really grips my s**t (sorry, Hubby's ex-naval phrasing slipped out there) is giving a subjective opinion on it i.e. 'some readers may find offensive'. Back off, I'm adult, I'll make my own decisions!

How about 'contains subject matter that some readers may find highly stimulating and intriguing and rewarding'?!!! God forbid we should ever publish GOOD opinions, it's getting more like the news every day, seeing potential controversy and offence in everything. Gawd, they touched a nerve here *hehe*

[gehayi.livejournal.com]

Oh, good addition! I like that!

[rwday.livejournal.com]

"[x book] contains subject matter that some readers may find objectionable: bigoted, judgmental editorial comments.

Re: erotica

[alankria.livejournal.com]

erastes' point is that the books are already labelled with their content -- "the book is already labelled as a gay erotic romance." What more warning do people really need after that? Adding the line that "some people might find this objectionable" is
a) pointless
b) perpetuating the attitude that homosexuality is Other and that it's okay to consider it objectionable.

[leebenoit.livejournal.com]

Oh, yes! Perfect.

The other objection (heh) I have to these editorial warnings is that they destroy the surprise of, say, a fine rimming scene or other scary anal hijinks. "Aw, and I thought all they'd do is snuggle."

One publisher affixes cute little icons to book blurbs that tell you what type of pairing to expect, what types of sex, even what type of ending! Grrr.

[zamaxfield.livejournal.com]

They might as well all say "sanitized for your protection and come blank.

I don't mind a warning, but since I've been reading het romances for years and no one put a warning like, Warning: this book contains sex on horseback, then I never did understand the need to put one on lgbt. Romance readers pay for erotic literature, hopefully have more than two braincells to rub together, and are capable of turning a page if the party gets rough.

[rwday.livejournal.com]

What is it? Fanfiction? I used to get amused by the massive headers you'd see in some fanfics warning for everything from BDSM to character death. Why not just warn for everything, that way we can just skip the story and read the warning instead. (Which in the case of a shape shifting squid romance, might just be a good idea.)

[anderyn.livejournal.com]

Enquiring minds want to know -- shapeshifting squid sex?! Where? What book was THIS?

Meanwhile, on the warning front, if you're in the erotica section of the store (virtual or brick&mortar), then you shouldn't need any warnings. It's EROTICA, therefore there will be sex.

[aunty_marion]

What I was wondering, too... *g*

Re: erotica

[erastes.livejournal.com]

http://www.loose-id.com/detail.aspx?ID=376

[leebenoit.livejournal.com]

Nope, this is a royalties-paying e-pub. Their "anal sex" icon looks like an inverted heart with a coy little asterisk for a bum-hole.

Some publisher blurbs and warnings are as bad as movie trailers for spoilers. I have saved hundreds over the years watching the best parts of films that way!

Re: erotica

[orchard-mnt.livejournal.com]

what i was saying is that a subset would be nice...gay, freaky fantasy, old folks... whatever...some folks are offended...though what they are doing in that genre at all is beyond me...you open that can of worms, you should expect an eye full and not complain....

yeah...i'm offended by the language "objectionable" too... but I think a fair and SHORT warning would be a good idea...

Re: erotica

[anderyn.livejournal.com]

The writing in the sample did not actually entice me. Maybe they need warnings for bad writing?

[orchard-mnt.livejournal.com]

lol...you've brightened my day

[valarltd.livejournal.com]

I always warn for het.
I figure if folks have found my site, they know they're in for Teh Ghay. But they really don't want het coming at them all unannounced.

But you're right, the whole "may find objectionable" is insulting.

[suryaofvulcan.livejournal.com]

Imagine if they had written: "[x book] contains subject matter that some readers may find objectionable: inter-racial kissing."

Let's hope it doesn't take another 40 years for that type of wording in 'gay' warnings to become just as unacceptable.

[lee-rowan.livejournal.com]

I would appreciate being warned of invertebrate sex. If it's between invertebrates and humanoids, um.. no thanks. If it's between one squid and another, I'm happy for them but I don't want to be in the bedroom.

[lee-rowan.livejournal.com]

"Warning: This book contains subject matter that small-minded, hateful bigots may not want to read, as it may intrigue them."

[gehayi.livejournal.com]

Actually, it's between a male human and a male shapeshifting octopus. I assume the sex takes place when they're both in human form, but I wouldn't swear to it.

[crawling-angel.livejournal.com]

It's like saying a Snickers bar contains nuts, *rolls eyes*

[angelabenedetti.livejournal.com]

Seriously! Bad enough we have to put up with spoilery "warnings" on fanfic; if it's spreading to commercial fiction too, that's just a good sign of which publishers to skip, IMO. :(

Angie

[angelabenedetti.livejournal.com]

I'm sorry, this is just stupid. If I can find het romances with bondage, rape and snowballing but no sign of a warning on the cover for any of it (and that's not any kind of complaint) then the gay romances shouldn't be giving me the impression that their own publisher is handling them with tongs and decontamination suits. :/

Angie

Re: erotica

[mongrelheart.livejournal.com]

t.y.! i too was curious.