I made a post for a submission call yesterday on erotic_authors, referring to a writing competition being held by one of the RWA chapters, NEORWA (north east ohio)
http://community.livejournal.com/erotic_authors/94348.html
I asked them:
1. Do the entrants have to be:
a. a member of NEORWA?
b. a member of RWA?
2. Is it heterosexual only?
And this is the answer I got to question 2. WHY am I constantly disappointed when I get this sort of response?
2. There is no specific statement about heterosexual or not. However, this is an RWA contest, I'd honestly have to say that most of the judges may not go for non-heterosexual, especially in any category except Erotic or First Declaration of Love.
This call was posted on Redlines and Deadlines, too. Which is the blog for Ellora's Cave.
http://community.livejournal.com/erotic_authors/94348.html
I asked them:
1. Do the entrants have to be:
a. a member of NEORWA?
b. a member of RWA?
2. Is it heterosexual only?
And this is the answer I got to question 2. WHY am I constantly disappointed when I get this sort of response?
2. There is no specific statement about heterosexual or not. However, this is an RWA contest, I'd honestly have to say that most of the judges may not go for non-heterosexual, especially in any category except Erotic or First Declaration of Love.
This call was posted on Redlines and Deadlines, too. Which is the blog for Ellora's Cave.
no subject
Date: 2009-02-15 09:51 am (UTC)Something must be done. Please get JX accepted, published, and win the Booker prize.
:)
no subject
Date: 2009-02-15 04:36 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-02-15 04:36 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-02-15 06:07 pm (UTC)Remember, I've read JX. So I KNOW what I'm talking about.
no subject
Date: 2009-02-15 05:44 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-02-15 08:47 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-02-15 10:28 am (UTC)It makes me want to write romances so I can become a judge for this kind of thing and then be all, "Heterosexual? Boo!" ;)
no subject
Date: 2009-02-15 04:37 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-02-15 08:47 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-02-15 08:50 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-02-15 08:52 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-02-15 08:53 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-02-15 11:17 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-02-15 03:20 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-02-15 04:37 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-02-15 11:50 am (UTC)What does this mean "First Declaration of Love"? "Erotic"? MM romances are erotic.
I noticed that EC did not offer any MM titles AGAIN on Friday - of the 8 new releases there were 6 het romances and 2 menages which they listed as "gay/menage" so clearly they are moving in another direction.
no subject
Date: 2009-02-15 02:01 pm (UTC)Please note that RWA doesn't want anything involving gays in long-term relationships. Either it's the de-sexualized first realization/first admission of attraction and/or love (which makes gays safe and un-shocking), or it's nothing BUT sex (which reinforces the stereotype that gay relationships are mainly based on sex--and that also reinforces the idea that things like marriage and adoption are wrong, since gay relationships can't be founded on love).
Or there's the menage idea that EC and so many other romance publishers use, which features two guys and a girl. As a rule, the two guys are madly attracted to each other, and often have been before the book started...but then here comes this woman. And she is so fantabulous that she can even make gay men want her. Often, the gay guys can't even get it up if she isn't in bed with them. Don't you just love the lessons there?
a) No one is REALLY 100% gay.
b) Homosexuality can be fixed.
c) Homosexuality can and should be fixed by the person of the opposite sex in the threesome. All lesbians can be turned by the Power of the Penis; all gay men can be converted by the Valor of the Vagina.
Corollary 1: It's not possible for a threesome to be male/male/male or female/female/female.
Corollary 2: If you can't turn a gay man straight, obviously you're not good enough/sexy enough/etc. as a woman.
There are times I just want to thwap the entire industry over its collective head.
no subject
Date: 2009-02-15 02:24 pm (UTC)http://tinyurl.com/b3er58
I did a wrap up as well and here's that link (I don't think Erastes would mind since she contributed)
I think Erastes should enter just to confound those bastages.
http://tinyurl.com/csqtb2
no subject
Date: 2009-02-15 04:48 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-02-15 02:43 pm (UTC)http://www.afterelton.com/blog/brianjuergens/mores-for-gays-video-blog-vlog-25-surviving-valentines
(it's only in about the last minute or so of the video, but I thought what he was saying was really interesting)
no subject
Date: 2009-02-15 04:47 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-02-15 03:28 pm (UTC)First declaration is just that: the first I love you of a couple.
If I had anything ready, I'd send 'em gay werewolf detectives for the paranormal.
In Ellora's defense, people have to WRITE the m/m romances. And it takes about 2 years to get one through the editing process. You're only allowed to have 3 books in process at any time.
They do the release schedule by some arcane ritual probably involving chicken blood and unholy alignments of baleful stars. If there are 32 books ready in any given month, there may only be one or two ready that are m/m. Remember, you're looking at stuff sumbitted in late 2006, early 2007.
And there is an m/m coming on the 25th. (which means Naomi and I can send them our next story)
no subject
Date: 2009-02-15 04:46 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-02-15 06:08 pm (UTC)*sends chickens*
no subject
Date: 2009-02-16 10:14 pm (UTC)I think this is part of the confusion on both sides, because no, having explicit sex doesn't automatically make a book erotic romance or erotica. There are bazillions of mainstream het romances from NY publishers which have very explicit sex scenes, including oral and occasionally (one Jo Beverley novel comes to mind) toys.
A "sweet" romance is where the doors close. A "sexy" or "spicy" romance is where they don't. An erotic romance is a whole different level, where the plot itself revolves around some sexual issue or conflict, requiring a lot of focus on sex while the conflict is resolved. But a lot of people don't get this, and too many publishers don't bother to sort things out either, adding to the chaos. So when someone -- including someone working in the industry -- says "erotic" there's really no way to tell what they mean at this point. :/
Angie
no subject
Date: 2009-02-15 04:43 pm (UTC)Many editors are using the excuse of "we just can't get the m/m - we'd love it, but we aren't getting it." I suppose part of that can be due to the fact that there are a lot of publishers--most writers seem to be happy to stick with their publisher-and not as many writers to go around. I don't think that's ECs rationale though, sadly.
no subject
Date: 2009-02-15 06:08 pm (UTC)As is JX.
*hides*
no subject
Date: 2009-02-15 12:36 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-02-15 03:31 pm (UTC)Hence redefining e-publishers as vanity publishers, shutting out GLBT writers, and all the other shenanigans.
no subject
Date: 2009-02-15 09:57 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-02-15 04:45 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-02-15 07:36 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-02-15 08:20 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-02-15 08:30 pm (UTC)