Saturday, July 22, 2006

Defining Romance Rebuttal

Okay, I'm trying to stay calm here. A letter to the editor in the latest RWR just hit my burn button big time. I thought we, in the twenty-first century, had not only learned a little political correctedness, but had progressed beyond such discrimination.

I know, I'm a naive person living in her own little world and I should know better.

Anyway, here's a few of her quotes, and my response. I've got to get this off my chest!

"romance isn't about just any 'two people' celebrating 'love in all its many forms.' Organizations such as the Man-Boy Love Association would certainly refer to themselves ... [as such] while they actively promote pedophilia."

Sorry, Janet W. Butler. RWA does not need to legislate against pedophilia, because the United States government already has. It's illegal. Just like RWA does not need to legislate against writers stealing or murdering in the name of research. It's illegal. And RWA is not exactly the sort of group to attract pedophiles.

"A preference for 'one-man, one-woman' stories represents what RWA has always claimed is romance's target demographic: college-educated, married, middle-class, monogamous, and moral."

Oh really? I bet a ton of non-college-educated woman read romances. In fact, our most successful author in our organization is not college educated. And would you have us return to the days of no sex before marriage in our books? What's your next step, banning erotica?

"If anyone's in danger of being 'censored' here, it's believers in 'what comes naturally': one-man, one-woman romance. We in RWA owe it to ourselves not to let that happen."

Ohmigod, are you serious? First, natural to who? Second, do you actually believe that writers of homosexual fiction are out to tell us that we can't write heterosexual fiction? Do you really think that we're in danger of having heterosexual romances banned because some people want to write homosexual fiction?

I don't think RWA needs to discriminate. We all write romances. Let's just think of love and play nice with each other. Geez.

Okay, that's it for my rant today. I feel better.

Comment Away, if you want!

3 bonus scribbles:

randy 7/22/2006 02:28:00 PM  

Haven't received my August issue yet, but you've got me checkin' my mailbox...

Sara Hantz 7/22/2006 03:45:00 PM  

I'm certainly keen to red the rest of this article....this is seriously worrrying

Diana Peterfreund 7/22/2006 07:28:00 PM  

You said it, scribbler. Why does everything have to relate back to someone's political pet issue? It's fiction for goodness' sake! (It's liek hte ridiculousness i heard on teh news this morning, about a US Congressman from GA saying that the best thing that we can do for the middle east right now is pass a defense of marriage act. Um, huh? What am I missing, becuase I for one, can see nothing about "defending" "marriage" can POSSIBLY stop bombs from falling in Lebanon.

This is ridiculous. It's politics trying to wend its way into an artistic organization where it doesn't belong. I think I'd like to send that lady a copy of Lolita, which I read and loved because I think it was an amazing and highly moving story, despite absolutely hating and condemning pedophilia.