erastes: (Default)
I've had a response from EPIC - not in response to my two emails to the Chairperson, but from a former President, Brenna Lyons who seems to have been told of my dissent, rather than having read my emails or seen my posts.  I'll post both her letter and my response to it.


You know me from ERWA, I'm sure. I don't know what was said on what list. All I know is that you somehow got the mistaken idea that EPIC is bigoted against GLBT romance. If you'd give me a moment and some patience, I'd like to explain what we're dealing with here.

Read more... )

Hi Brenna,

Thank you for responding.  I understand that you are responding to my public comments, and not to my TWO emails to the Chairwoman?  I don't know why my letters have been ignored, or my concerns not addressed.

Read more... )
erastes: (pissed off)
I've just fired off a letter of complaint to EPIC about their award categories. I don't know if they have been the same every year, but I only noticed them this year because, for the first time, I was eligible to enter.

However - reading the categorisations, there's no way I could enter as they stand.  They are categorising "romance" as: A story that takes one central, monogamous, romantic relationship between a man and woman from its inception to its happy, satisfying conclusion

Then as you read down the list, one (one being me) finds that one can't put one's gay historical romance into Historical Romance or Erotic Romance or Erotic Romance Historical Fiction because those categories say that they follow: "the basic tenants (sic) of genre romance" - so see above.

There's one - ONE! - GLBT category which lumps everything else together. Not does this not only skew perception that they consider GLBTQ romances can't "actually" BE romances but it's ludicrous. Utterly ludicrous.  So Age of Sail has to compete with shapeshifters and fairies and ghosts and criminals and contemporary and... well - you get the gist. I have suggested, politely, that they might reconsider in light of the way some people might consider it homophobic.  I doubt that it'll make any difference, but it made me feel a little better.

Romance Writers of America attempted to define romance in this way - last year? Year before? And there was an enormous kerfuffle about it - why are we going backwards with this?  I would have thought that ebooks, by their very nature were more liberal? Or am I missing something?

Then may I add "monogamous"? WTF?  Where do people who are writing love triangles go - if they aren't erotic?


erastes: (Default)

December 2012

91011 12131415
16 171819202122


RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Oct. 24th, 2017 07:25 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios