Conflict in the M/M Romance Genre
Conflicts seem to erupt in the M/M community on a regular basis. I’ve been observing (and sometimes participating) in these dust-ups for the last eight years. There are some things I’ve observed that I feel could prove helpful. You may disagree, that’s cool, but at least you’ll have thought about things from a different perspective.
COMMUNITY
In this most recent squabble, I’ve seen several people talking about community and what it means to be a guest in someone else’s community. I noticed that they were actually talking about different communities. There isn’t one M/M community. There is a community of people who read and write romances about gay men and another community of people who are gay men and allies who write about gay men (sometimes in the form of a romance and sometimes not). Two overlapping communities, each with a difference emphasis. And in a very real way, we are guests in each other’s community.
Because we tend not to think about these communities as separate, there are often comments that don’t make sense to us. For example, some in the romance community don’t understand why there is conflict at all and want people to be “nicer.” Those in the gay/ally community understand that being “nicer” doesn’t get you respect.
Of course, there are people with an affinity for both communities. Like sexuality and gender, these communities aren’t binary. And like most generalities, there are always exceptions. However, I do think it’s constructive to think about M/M as overlapping communities and then ask what our relationship is to them.
IDENTITY POLITICS
In every conflict, I’ve been stunned by the number of women who don’t seem to want to listen to gay men. I find that stunning because we’re the topic. We’re what you’re so interested in. Logically women should be thrilled when gay men express an opinion, any opinion. Too often, though, they’re not. This confused me for a long time until I remembered that we all have multiple identities.
I’m a white, male, cisgender, homosexual writer. At various times I speak from one or more of those identities. When, as a gay man, I raise an issue in the M/M world, very often I’m no longer seen as gay and simply become a man. What a large portion of the community hears is women being criticized by a man, which does not go down well. What I hear as a gay man, though, is completely different. I hear straight people being disrespectful of me and my community and that does not go down well either.
Always remember that there can be an important difference between what’s being said and what’s being heard.
GENRE AND AUTHENTICITY
M/M romance, gay romance, and gay fiction are all separate, distinct genres. You may like and read one or all of them, but they are different. In the het world, the corresponding genres—which translate roughly to romance, chick lit and literary fiction—are not clumped together.
For a lot of reasons, the genres that make up M/M are clumped together. Amazon’s hands-off approach to genre, the sometimes overly aggressive marketing of publishers and authors, the struggle to find an audience to connect with, all of these contribute to the mish-mash. And, since the genres are small, working together does help. But it also hurts.
Each genre has very specific rules, but the basic difference between them has to do with authenticity. The level of authenticity takes its lead from the het world. I’m not a reader of het romances, but they don’t have a reputation for presenting women (or men for that matter) at their most authentic—which is more the purview of chick lit and literary fiction. Romance is a fantasy genre. By its very nature, the characters are not authentic, they’re not meant to be—whether we’re talking het or m/m. They need to be believable within the constructed world, but they don’t need to be real. They are often the best versions of real. And yes, I know that when you’re talking about genre you’re always talking about a spectrum and books that overlap genres—again, these are generalities.
It is important to talk about the differences between genres because when people don’t understand them, it leads to conflict and disrespect. One of my first experiences in the world of m/m was finding out that I was wrong. Readers would read my work and say that what I had written was wrong because it violated the rules of the romance genre. This has led me to attempt to make it clear that I’m not a romance writer and am not even trying to follow those rules. But it still happens. Just last year a reader complained that my book Femme was too much about prejudices within the gay community and not enough of a romance. I understand the reader doesn’t understand genre, but she also failed to understand that saying a book is too much about gay issues is going to be offensive to a gay author.
Something I’ve seen, and something other gay authors have also noticed, is that too often female readers feel completely comfortable saying that they don’t like to read male authors. Think about that for a minute. Women want to read about gay men, but they don’t want to read gay men. I know that the comment is rooted in the belief that women write better romances but…if you can’t see the homophobia in those statements, you really need to give it some thought. A lot of thought. And if you’re still having trouble just exchange the word gay for the word black. Would you say that you don’t like to read books by black writers? In public?
DO YOU EVEN LIKE GAY MEN?
After one of the conflicts, I saw a comment by a very successful m/m romance writer who said she felt the m/m community was splitting into two, losing its sense of fun, and becoming something she didn’t like. At the time I felt, and still feel, that this was a veiled reference to the increasing number of gay men entering the community. Without saying so directly, she made it clear she’d like us to go away. And certainly, I think a lot of her fans agree.
Many of the comments I see during these flare-ups have that same subtext. A lot of women, readers and writers, seem to prefer gay characters to real life gay men. I’m not in any way saying that people should not read and love romances. There’s nothing wrong with it as long as you remember that it’s not authentic, and not meant to be. Gay men are never going to live up to the characters in the stories you’re reading. We’re prickly and difficult and opinionated—we wouldn’t have come as far as we have if we weren’t.
We’re also not going away. To quote an ACT-UP chant, “we’re here, we’re queer, get used to it.”
ALLIES
If you’re queer, one of the things you know is that it takes a long time, sometimes a lifetime, to clear yourself of the internalized homophobia that society pushes on each of us. When I see someone who considers themselves an ally make a misstep I think, there’s someone who’s not thinking about internalized homophobia. It’s too easy for allies to make a decision that they support LGBT rights and they’re done. They’ve made a decision and they don’t have to think about it anymore. Unfortunately, none of us is done. We’ve all internalized homophobia just as we’ve internalized racism and misogyny. You only escape these things by constantly confronting them. So, thank you for being an ally and you’re not done.
THE FUTURE
I’m actually heartened by many of the things I’m seeing on Facebook and in blogs. As painful as many find these upsets, they are making both communities stronger. They will make for better writers and better people. I’ve seen a lot of support coming from allies, more than I’ve seen in the past, and that is terrific. Thank you to everyone who is willing to listen to gay men, and thank you to those of you who are willing to consider what being an ally really means.
Change is hard. But it’s worth it.
About the Author
Marshall Thornton is the author of the popular Boystown series. He has been a finalist for the Lambda Award five times and won once. His romantic comedy, Femme is currently a Lambda finalist for Best Gay Romance. Other books include My Favorite Uncle, The Ghost Slept Over and Desert Run.
Find out more about Marshall at his website, marshallthorntonauthor.com.
Hi, Marshall, thanks for the Op/Ed. It’s always interesting to see things for others’ perspectives, and while I may not approach various things from the same perspective as you do (I’m not sure anyone is ever technically “thrilled” to be corrected or contradicted 😉 ), you’ve given up some good points on what seems to be a dividing line in the community, one I didn’t know existed until recently, and some of which I think is owed to a growing crossover of authors and readers from M/F to Gay Romance, or M/M Romance.
Although it would be great to always peacefully co-exist, I don’t see that happening because it goes against human nature. And the internet allows everything, good or bad, to happen faster and with a wider opportunity for reaction. One thing that always happens when conflict arises is that we all spend so much talking and reacting that we don’t take time to listen and reflect. I can say with all honesty that I’ve learned some not so flattering things about how I’ve maneuvered through the community over the years, as a straight ciswoman, and having my conscience tweaked a time or three I think has helped me learn how to become a better ally.
As I told a friend earlier this week, there’s a difference between “I’ve got your back,” and “Stand back, I’ve got this.” As an ally, the assumption of responsibility should never fall on attempting to drown out the voices of those we are here to support. I know I’ve crossed that line more than a few times, regretfully so.
This is one of the clearest summaries/wrap ups of the situation that I’ve seen. After I began writing and publishing, the divisions became clear to me fairly quickly. I think it’s what leads to a lot of the low ball reviews many authors receive–because the reader has different expectations (rightly or wrongly). I’m a female writer who strives for authenticity and seems to keep moving further away from “pure” romance. The challenge is making that clear to readers when we all share a limited audience and publishing options. As a reader, I love supporting authors (male and female) who break the rules, go outside the box and tell stories I haven’t read a million times, but then I might be a minority.
Thanks for the comment. :)
Marshall, I really appreciate your thoughtful essay. I agree with everything you said.
From where I stand, one of the difficulties we face in our M/M romance/gay romance/gay fiction communities is that growth/evolution always seems to outstrip the language needed to discuss it with a minimum of misunderstanding.
Just as the language we now need to use in discussing digital media or gender identity has had to change from the much more limited conversations we had about social media or gender identity twenty years ago, so now for stories about gay men.
Developing an evolved language to accommodate the social complexities emerging in our literature is going to take honest, courageous, and disciplined conversation. Your article, and a few others I’ve seen posted during this current dust-up are important contributions to our forward movement. There will be wildly differing opinions, but as long as we remember the conversation is more important than the opinions, I’m convinced we’ll get there with minimal collateral damage.
Thanks Lloyd, I do think things are getting better and hope that they will continue to.
Nail hit firmly on head, Lloyd.
“Logically women should be thrilled when gay men express an opinion, any opinion.”
“Women should be happy a man is talking/talking to them/telling them what to do/mansplaining” is more often the truth from our perspective. That you’re a gay man we’re talking about gay romance doesn’t change the fact that too often men are condescending jerks who don’t understand why women aren’t thrilled a man is talking.
I mean let’s start with the fact you’re honestly surprised we’re not thrilled. That is a classic example of sexism. And gay men are notoriously sexist. But I never see gay men taking time out of their day to tell their fellows to hey, maybe be less awful to women. No, we just get yet another condescending post from a gay man lecturing us little womens.
“What a large portion of the community hears is women being criticized by a man, which does not go down well. What I hear as a gay man, though, is completely different. I hear straight people being disrespectful of me and my community and that does not go down well either.”
And fair enough, but I don’t appreciate the assumption that because I’m a woman writing MM that I’m straight. I’m not. Entire swaths of us aren’t. And maybe what we’re tired of is a white cis gay man telling us how to be queer, or very often, making nasty comments about trans people, or ace people, or anyone basically who isn’t a white cis gay dude, which again, your particular community is known for. So if queer women get defensive of a gay man lecturing them, maybe you should consider THEIR perspective and why we’re tired of cis gay white dudes being the end all be all, only acceptable branch of the queer community. I mean hell, I’ve heard gay men say they don’t like to use LGBT because the rest of those letters are irrelevant to them and they don’t want to be mixed up with them. So I have a lot of reasons for being really sick of posts like this.
” The level of authenticity takes its lead from the het world. I’m not a reader of het romances, but they don’t have a reputation for presenting women (or men for that matter) at their most authentic—which is more the purview of chick lit and literary fiction. Romance is a fantasy genre. By its very nature, the characters are not authentic, they’re not meant to be—whether we’re talking het or m/m. They need to be believable within the constructed world, but they don’t need to be real. They are often the best versions of real”
Wow, look at that, a man being sexist about a woman-driven genre. I’m sorry, who made you the authenticity police? What exactly does ‘authentic’ mean? Because there are some romances I haven’t reread in more than a decade, but me, my mom, and my sisters can all still quote are favorite lines and discuss our favorite moments. I’ve had people write to me to say that my books help them through hard times, with everything from exams to funerals. That seems pretty authentic to me. And ‘the best versions of real’ is a crappy justification. Like, no, romance novels deal with plenty of real world issues, even those of us who write fantasy. We aren’t just writing sparkly, happy books that show our favorite bits of life and ignore the ugly sides. It’s pretty obvious to me you don’t READ romance novels, which big shock there, a man shitting on a genre he then promptly starts lecturing us on.
“This has led me to attempt to make it clear that I’m not a romance writer and am not even trying to follow those rules.”
The rest of this paragraph, I’m not arguing with. Readers shouldn’t tell authors how and what to write. That being said, if you’re going to play in the romance sandbox, expect people to be mad you’re not writing romance. If you don’t write romance, maybe don’t hang out with us. I’m really tired of people using the romance genre to their own ends then getting mad when they’re called out for breaking genre rules. And “there’s nowhere else to go” isn’t a defense. If you don’t write romance, don’t hang out in romance. Hang out in gay fiction (ah, but that’s not where the money is, general fiction doesn’t even make a twentieth of what the romance genre pulls in. without romance that genre wouldn’t even be able to sustain itself).
As to gay romance = chick lit. No, that’s a poor comparison. Chick lit does have romantic elements, but it’s focus is not romance. It’s about women finding themselves, it’s very focused on the ONE, or on friendships and family. The romance is always secondary, even tertiary. So gay romance = romance, which means it’s beholden to the rules of the genre.
“Think about that for a minute. Women want to read about gay men, but they don’t want to read gay men.”
I don’t generally read books by gay men because their women are awful. Because they think it’s okay, even funny, for their characters to say things like “don’t be such a pussy” etc even they could have said literally anything else. I don’t read books by a lot of gay men because I’m tired of always being The Bitchy Ex, The Bossy Friend Who Exists Solely for the Gay Man, or some other gross stereotype. It’s bad enough that yeah, if I know for a fact the book was written by a gay man, I avoid it. The same reason I don’t read men in fantasy or YA, with rare exception. I’m tired of the way men write/treat women. And I’ve been burned so badly so often, I generally avoid burning myself again. But I also avoid women writers guilty of the same, because sadly they tend to mimic each other, and this genre has a lot of internalized sexism, too. But men, especially gay men, are always much, much worse in how they treat women.
“she felt the m/m community was splitting into two, losing its sense of fun, and becoming something she didn’t like. At the time I felt, and still feel, that this was a veiled reference to the increasing number of gay men entering the community. Without saying so directly, she made it clear she’d like us to go away. And certainly, I think a lot of her fans agree.”
No, this is a reference to the fact the MM community is increasingly becoming the queer community. It’s talking about the demand for POC, disabled, trans (and other queer) main characters – that are respectfully portrayed. So when people bitch about the genre not being what it used to be, they’re bitching about being held to a standard higher than cis gay white dudes fucking. It’s about how writers and readers alike are increasingly being called out when they write awful stereotypes.
Because I agree with your post in spirit. The way gay men are treated can be awful. I get really tired of the corner of the community that treats men like toys, like objects. I’ve called people out on that crap.
But at the same time you need to check your own sexist behavior, because a whole lot of this post smacks of it. Just because you’re gay doesn’t mean you’re not also a man, and being sexist.
Thanks for your comment. There’s certainly a lot here I’ll be thinking about.
Couple of brief points: You’re taking me to task for making generalizations while at the same time making some pretty big generalizations yourself. I don’t think gay men are quite as awful as you do, though I’m certainly sorry you’ve had bad experiences. There are bad actors in any group and unfortunately, they’re the ones we usually remember best.
I think one minority (bisexual women and lesbians) writing about another minority (gay men) is certainly an issue that deserves more attention and not something I’ve tried to include here. (It was getting to be a very long post.) I do know a lot of MM writers don’t identify as straight and have known for a long time. And, yes, I agree with you that there are people in the community who find them every bit as annoying as gay men.
I do try to be neutral about genre. Sorry if it didn’t come off that way to you. Whether I enjoy reading a genre doesn’t make it more or less valuable. In your criticism of my gay fiction/chick lit analogy you pretty much described what I think gay romance is. To me, a gay romance is ultimately more about identity — with the romantic element being more a reward for self-acceptance. I think you’re viewing it as being more like the traditional romance genre – which is how I view an MM romance.
Part of the reason to write this in the first place is that gay fiction isn’t a separate place anymore. Yes, there are places that lean more toward gay fiction but there are always MM writers there, too. I haven’t been anywhere in the last eight years that is exclusively gay fiction or for that matter anywhere that’s exclusively MM Romance – yes, some spaces may seem exclusively MM but they’re not if you look closely. So, there isn’t such a place as gay fiction for you to send me back to. Also, I have the same right to try a make a living as everyone else. Believe me, MM writers do their best to sell their books to gay men.
I’m sorry you have such a dim view of the way gay men write women. I make an effort to write women well. I think my primary editor/beta reader would get pretty pissed at me if I didn’t. But, you know, my point about not saying you won’t read male authors wasn’t that everyone should go out and read male authors. It was that you shouldn’t say it. It’s homophobic. You’re welcome to your tastes, you just should broadcast that any more than you should broadcast that you don’t want to sleep with black guys or fat guys or Asian guys or femme guys. That was my point.
I wrote this post from my perspective as a gay man. From your comments, you came to it with such an obvious dislike of gay men and the gay community (and perhaps that was earned, I can’t say) that I doubt there anything I could have said that would not come across to you as sexist.
From your comments, you came to it with such an obvious dislike of gay men and the gay community
No, I don’t hate gay men/the gay community, I am LEERY of them, because:
*9/10 books I read written by gay men treat women HORRIBLY
*Because gay men feel entitled to call me bitch/pussy/faghag/etc and get offended when I get mad
*Because gay men think it’s okay to just walk up to a woman and grab her ass or her TITS for the love of god and say things like ‘hey sister’ and AGAIN get offended when we get upset
*Because gay men think it’s okay to make comments on what I wear, what my friends wear, and the like, without caring how much it hurts or that their opinion was never asked for in the first place
*Because gay men think it’s okay to comment on how gross and disgusting vaginas and tits are, right in front of us, like it doesn’t hurt to be told our bodies are sickening just because gay men don’t want to fuck them.
*Because I don’t feel safe around most gay men, not anymore, after all of the above and other things
All of these things have happened to me, or right in front of me, and/or to friends of mine, and the men never apologize. They just tell us to grow up/chill out and go off to harass other people.
And that’s just the tip of the iceberg. We won’t go into all the nasty things I’ve heard gay men say about ace women, or lesbians, or transwomen. So no, I don’t hate anyone, but after all of that wouldn’t you be wary too?
And here I wake up and read post 1007 from a gay man lecturing women. So yes, I probably sound mean, but you have no idea how exhausting this kind of thing is when you see it almost on a monthly basis.
“I’m sorry you have such a dim view of the way gay men write women. ”
That is such a dismissive and condescending apology. It makes it sound like I’m just misreading the books instead, of you know, accepting that yeah, men can be pretty awful. You’re putting the blame on me for being offended, instead of accepting that yeah, men are to blame for being offensive.
“But, you know, my point about not saying you won’t read male authors wasn’t that everyone should go out and read male authors. It was that you shouldn’t say it. It’s homophobic. You’re welcome to your tastes, you just should broadcast that any more than you should broadcast that you don’t want to sleep with black guys or fat guys or Asian guys or femme guys.”
So your point isn’t that people should think about what they’re saying and improve, your point is that it’s fine if people want to be homophobic, they just shouldn’t admit it??? Because I have read this five times and that is what I take from it. And I think if that’s your point, then you might want to reconsider it.
“I doubt there anything I could have said that would not come across to you as sexist.”
Maybe you should consider that you are, in fact, sexist? All men are, the way all us white people are racist simply by dint of the society/culture we live in. We work every day to overcome all the crap we were raised in, but it’s not an overnight or instant thing. I will still wholly without intention fuck up. And I really don’t appreciate being dismissed with ‘I’m sorry you feel that way” and “you’ll just think everything I sayd/do is sexist”. Guess what? Those attitudes are sexist!
And I’m officially done. I won’t harass this post further. I shouldn’t have bothered at all. Like I said, your post is just one of hundreds just like it that I have seen in the 15+ plus years I’ve been in this genre. In another couple of months, some other man will come along and say the same things. But not a one of you, not a single one, ever takes time out of your day to write a post calling one another out for how you treat women. And if we dared to write about it (and we have), we’d just almost every gay man in the genre either telling us ‘not all men’ or writing their posts about how they’re not sexist, women are just wrong (which they’ve done).
Thanks for expressing your opinion.
Since you’re done I’m not going to defend myself point by point. I am going to make one comment for the general audience, though.
Our exchange illustrates my point that people say one thing and then something else is heard.
I said, “I’m sorry you have such a dim view of the way gay men write women.”
You called that a dismissive and condescending apology.
See, it’s not an apology at all. We’re not discussing my work or anything I’m responsible for. I meant sorry in its other meaning, sad. I’m sad that you have such a dim view of the way gay men write women. I haven’t done a survey so I don’t know whether your view is true or not. But, I’m sad if it is. And I’m sad if you just think it is. Both of those make me sorry.
The fact that you replies constantly boil down to “you just read it wrong” and not “maybe I phrase it poorly” frankly is all that needs to be said. Not once, anywhere, have you admitted maybe you’re wrong about something. You just keep telling me I’m wrong, that I’m not understanding you, instead of stepping back doing ‘okay, I should have said that differently” or “I didn’t think that through” or anything else. All you have to say is “I’m write, the woman reading this is wrong for reading it the way I wanted her to read it.” Just like practically every man I’ve ever met.
I thought you were done?
Okay, let’s add this up: you’ve called me sexist a couple of times, said a few things I find incredibly homophobic, criticized me for doing things you then turn around and do, and now you’re making it clear that the only appropriate response to all of that is for me to apologize for not writing clearly while you’ve gone through every single thing I’ve said and cast it in the worst possible light.
This is going really well. Should we hang out? Clearly, we’re meant to be friends.
Misandry in the face of misogyny does not make you a better person. It makes you just as bad as the misogynist. You need to seek professional help. You may call yourself a member of the LGBT community, but you are not an ally to that community. You are part of the problem.
And I have some bad news for you: Women DO NOT own M/M romance. As Marshall so eloquently pointed out, gay men were writing about their romances long before a woman set pen to paper to write about gay men. Ever hear of Walt Whitman? E.M. Forster? Christopher Isherwood? These authors were writing gay romance well before fan fic authors were even a thing. Learn the history of the group you allegedly know so much about.
And stop being so hateful! There’s too much hatred pointed at LGBTQIA+ people. Don’t add to it by making these nonsensical claims just because you had a couple bad experiences. I’ve had some bad experiences with women. I’ve had plenty of bad experiences with men. But I have the mental stamina to separate the few times men or women were horrible people from the rest of the male and female population. You apparently don’t like the idea of saying “Not all men,” but that’s how it is. Not everyone is going to be like those few people who were bad to you. You need to come to terms with that.
And take my advice above: Seek professional help to work through your anger issues.
You mention in your post that you’ve been around viewing and participating in drama in the community (or communities) for eight years and yet you don’t recall the kerfuffle posts like this stir up, or the dozens of posts explaining why women writers/readers should really Put Gay Men (Writers) on Pedestals and/or Should Not Write Gay Men in the last decade? (And because we’re being exclusive, only Gay Men and not, say, Bisexual Men or Trans Gay Men.)
In every conflict, I’ve been stunned by the number of women who don’t seem to want to listen to gay men. I find that stunning because we’re the topic. We’re what you’re so interested in. Logically women should be thrilled when gay men express an opinion, any opinion. Too often, though, they’re not.
With an attitude like that, are you surprised? 100% you sound like you’re saying that because you are a gay man and the people you’re speaking at are not your opinion is to be lauded and held above everyone else’s. Perhaps part of your lack of reception is because of that…
You’re reading that in a way it was not intended. If you write about vampires and a vampire had something to say about what you were writing, wouldn’t you be interested? The important part of what I said is that we’re the topic and so many people don’t want to listen to what the topic has to say. The disinterest in the topic is surprising.
Sigh. Although all those behaviors you list happened to you, Megan, not all gay men act in that way, and it’s unfair to assume that since it happened to you therefore all gay men are “like that.”
This exchange highlights to me the exact problem I referred to earlier, which if not solved will keep us fighting forever.
If a woman author sits down across the table from me, and sees every abusive husband, every sneering cleric, every Donald Trump, we have no hope of communicating except in justifiable anger.
If I sit down across the table from a woman author, and see only every devouring mother, every jealous sister, every Catherine de Medici, we have no hope of communicating except in justifiable anger.
That yields no peaceable fruit.
Without communicating, understanding is impossible. Our words and attitudes will grind against the rocks of historical injustice like the hull of a foundering ship grinds against a reef. The rocks will win, communication will lose. The rocks are bigger than we are.
We must patiently and no doubt imperfectly build a vocabulary and language which allow us to discuss these things in a way that leads us to creative answers—that is creative answers for everyone. My belief is that there is no such thing as “my side won” anymore. Everyone wins, or everyone loses. It’s that simple.
I’ve known quite a few people who clung to the wrongs done to them, holding them as precious trophies, as war medals, even — a source of pride. There is no forgiveness to be found inside in those treasures. I know, because I was one of those people. The step work of AA showed me there was a path to giving and receiving forgiveness that I was unable to find for myself. AA is not the only way, but it worked for me.
We live in the twilight of a patriarchal society that has oppressed and brutalized women and nonconforming men for millennia. I sense a wonderful reemergence of the sacred feminine beginning to manifest. To be clear, I mean the sacred feminine in women, and the sacred feminine in men — for the sacred feminine belongs to all just as the sacred masculine belongs to all.
For me respect for the sacred feminine begins with respect for the earth, then afterward respect for other people, but that’s a longer conversation that we can have here. In the meantime, I think we have to be willing to forgive the clumsiness inevitable in the early stages of our dialogue and inquire about intention if the intent is unclear to you. I commit to doing the same.
I’ve found the principles of non-violent communication, as described by Marshall Rosenberg to be really helpful. Your mileage may vary, but asking myself if I’m acting like a Giraffe or like a Jackal is useful to me.
So your reply to my comments is basically “Not all men.”
That’s right. That’s my reply. Not all gay men are as you describe.
You provided a list of horrible experiences you’ve suffered at the hands of gay men. I took you at your word that those events were true, and did not want to invalidate your experience in any way. On the other hand, I know that not all gay men behave in the way you describe, even though you tarred us all with the same very angry brush. So given those two logical constraints, my only possible response was, Not all gay men are as you describe. What other response were you looking for?
I thought my comment might leave a door open to further conversation, which is why I then turned to the importance of collaborative intention (rather than combative intention) and language skills needed to arrive at some kind of increased understanding.
So before I go any further, I ask for clarification of your intention in this conversation.
Do you want to work toward a creative and mutually nourishing discovery? If so, I’m glad to participate. We should find a forum where a longer dialogue is appropriate.
But if you’re just looking for a fight, I’m not the right gay guy for your purposes, and I’ll withdraw from further discussion with you.
Your call.
One of the hardest things in t h e genre, or genres is navigating the romance aspects and the fiction and not upsetting someone because the story is a slow build towards something with the potential to be very intense, once the individuals work towards it,which can take more than one book. As a writer, if I mess up, I want to know, if I portray something incorrectly, if I offend or hurt someones feelings, I hope they’ll tell me though dustups like this last one make me wonder if that would be the case or if someone would be worried about being able told to sit down and be quiet. We should all be able to l listen to one another with an open mind and heart and understand that if someone is saying something offends them, we should be listening to what they are saying and learning how we can do better not rationalizing why it’s okay. I am not a straight woman, nor is my youngest child straight. They and I were talking about a story I was working on just yesterday in the truck, and they said wait mom, you’ve messed up there, pan includes more than liking male or female, what about someone trans, ace, gender fluid or anywhere else on spectrum, if you aren’t going to be all inclusive with their dating the should just be Bi. They pointed out t h e potential to offend or make someone feel excluded, and I was left thinking about who this character was, his story and those he is involved with, and I had to thank them for reminding me to be careful where that story went as I wrote it and to be mindful of my terms and portrayals. We’re not perfect beings, to be helped in avoiding a potential mistake is far better to me, than making it and needing to be called on it later. I just think we need to open our ears and hear others when they speak. Sorry for the ramble.
Thanks for commenting.
You have highlighted an opinion that I’ve held close for a long time – that the “community” we daily refer to is a mish-mash. Of course there are going to be overlaps, and mutual strengths but also conflicts. Someone once described the “MM community” to me as coming from 3 sources: from MM romance, from het romance, and from the LGBTQ+ community. There are strong opinions, desires, loves and hates in all 3, so the chances of them living peacefully together is slim. Add to that a library of fictional stories on all themes and genres, written and marketed in a very wide range of style and craft, and it just stirs everything up, time and again. I don’t know what the answer is, to allow respectful, open, interesting, inspirational, thoughtful, educational, and constructive discussion. Especially through online text/blogs, where it’s all too easy to be potentially mis-said and mis-read, however carefully we try and word things. We all have a personal profile and agenda. We all have rights. We all deserve respect and a decent life. I enjoyed and appreciated this post, thanks.
Thanks Clare. I do think we can work together or at least side by side and all be stronger for it.
This was a very thoughtful post. But it does cut both ways, all of us can be and are tarred with the same brush.
I’m an editor, female, and I actually work with more male authors than I do female. In all my editing career, I have only ONCE been pulled up by a male author over my gender and ability to edit. He did decide to give me a chance and I’ve been his editor since then. It has always been my POV that surely it should be on the authors writing ability and nothing else that their books are judged. Most days I get the impression that is just me though. It really scares me how bitchy and aggressive the community can be, doesn’t life throw enough crap at each of us anyway? There has to be a better way, this community is filled with wonderful, creative and talented people that together can pull off miracles. Like when they fundraise or help people out etc, surely it’s time to work at getting along and working together.
Thanks for the comment.
All of my editors have been women, with one exception. It never occurred to me to even think about that, no less ask for a male editor.
For the most part, I think I’ve been critical of behaviors rather than books. Writing a book is certainly a process of sitting down with your conscience and attempting to do good. What that means varies from author to author. The benefit of these conflicts is to make authors more focused in what they choose to offer and to encourage readers to think about the value of the choices they make. As challenging as this can sometimes be, I think we’re heading to a better place.
I’ve been lurking and reading and learning a lot through this post over the last couple of days, and while this is just a random comment which doesn’t necessarily address anything being discussed specifically, I do think it bears saying in relationship to almost every single blow-up that’s ever happened in this community.
I had an author very wisely point out to me years ago, when the M/M romance genre first began to explode in both author- and readership, that he believed there were some women, authors and readers (certainly not all, of course), who don’t want to write/read about two gay men having sex, they want to fantasize about two straight men having sex. As unflattering a picture as that painted, I certainly couldn’t prove him wrong, nor would I have tried, but it is one of the things that I think becomes somewhat more obvious when things like the current bout of chaos happen, and I do think it’s where some of the dividing line in the community exists to this day. Whether we straight ciswomen want to admit it or not, we have been part of the problem on many occasions, and I’m grownup and thick-skinned enough to acknowledge it. And, while I doubt anyone enjoys having it pointed out that when you’ve thought you were being an ally by reading M/M romance, you might just be fetishizing, when it does get pointed out, a variety of things can happen, one of which is that gay men who are offended, rightly so, get told that this genre was created By Women and for Women, so back off.
The problem as I see it with establishing that mantle of ownership over the genre is that with this assumption of control comes a huge responsibility to make sure representation is as authentic as possible. Clapping back with “it’s just romance, get over it,” can’t exist in the same breath as lamenting that “no one takes romance seriously.” And no one wants to be a trope or a stereotype. It’s why I quit reading M/F romance–because I couldn’t find myself in any of the women, written by women. They all boiled down to the shrew, the victim, or the women who weren’t whole without the healing magic penis. If I find that insulting, I think I have to allow that gay men are going to be insulted by careless representation.
Thanks for such a well-considered comment.
The straight men who have sex with men idea has occurred to me as well. That raises interesting issues. For instance, are you appropriating if you’re not being authentic? And is it better or worse to be inauthentic? I don’t know how I feel about those questions. The only thing I’m sure of is that I don’t like seeing inauthentic work presented as authentic–which to some extent you’re doing simply by putting your book in gay fiction (rather than exclusively in romance).
(None of that is to say there are no real life alpha males in the gay community it’s just I don’t think they’re not as common in real life as they are in the MM world.)
This may be a sidestep – but I feel like I should say that these issues aren’t exclusive to the MM community. They are cropping up in literary fiction. There are a number of straight men and women who’ve taken up gay men as a topic. I think all of the same issues surround those books as well.
(If you do happen to see a healing magic penis anywhere, let me know. I’d love to pick one up.)
Thank you for the well-considered post. I’ve been watching the comments with… Concern doesn’t quite cover it. In the points about listening to marginalized communities, marginalized voices, I can’t agree with you enough. When we pick up figurative pen to write about someone who is not us, any not us, we have a responsibility to try to be as authentic as we can. To read, to research, to communicate. Will we slip sometimes? Yes. Of course. But we must earnestly try. For me, as a bisexual woman, it would be the height of hypocrisy to say otherwise.
Here’s my however. It’s a small one. I hope. We do need to listen to each other in this genre. Across the aisles. In all directions. Queer is more than just gay men. And romance as a genre has been a women’s space for a terribly long time. Genre has expectations and sets up a contract with the reader. What so many women hear when they hear men criticize how they write romance (whether it’s a true interpretation of what’s said or not) is that a man has entered a traditionally woman’s space to tell them they’re doing it wrong. I’m not saying that’s what you’ve done here. I’m not at all implying that’s what you meant. But only pointing out that there is that automatic resistance in one of the only places in literature – if not the only place – women have been able to claim as their own. Romance has been derided as less than through the decades simply because it has been written by women for women (for the most part, yes, exceptions, I know but the vast majority.)
Yes, some women writing romance need to learn to listen to the people they write about, which goes for gay men and transgender people and bisexual people and asexual people and demisexual people. Men writing in the genre also need to understand where some of that immediate resistance comes from, to understand the genre for what it is. Gay romance and even M/M romance is evolving, growing – has been doing so in the past ten years. Oh, gods, I went on way too long here. I think what I’m trying to say is that my eventual hope is to see them merge and continue growing with respect for both sides of the equation.
Thanks for the comment.
I pretty much agree with everything you said. It’s absolutely true that romance was and still is a woman’s world just as gay fiction was primarily a man’s world prior to 2000 (though there has always been LGBT overlap and intersection when you talk about gay fiction).
And I don’t mean to say that Romance should be a women’s only domain. More humans who believe in love? Heck, yes, please.
Of course, don’t worry. :)
Because I know, respect and trust you as both a person and an author, Angel, I feel safe questioning something you imply here, and that has come out in previous comments — specifically the concept of “owning” a genre. Is that even a valid concept? I’ve always assumed it was until I read these comments.
What would happen if nobody owned romance? Would it help us discover a more flexible and inclusive view of our diverse community? I think it might.
On reflection, it strikes me that some of this conflict (on multiple sides) is based on an unexamined territorial claim, with its inevitable possessiveness and defensiveness. In this context, ownership strikes me as being an unhelpful, capitalist, and historically (for our culture) patriarchal concept when it comes to our emerging community.
I frankly don’t care that women vastly outnumber men in the romance genres. It’s a fact I’m comfortable with. I do care when someone infers that I’m here only on suffrance of the “owner”. What if we let the demographics of authors be whatever it is, without anybody OWNING the genre, or even having some extra special claim on it–at least in our little corner of the woods? That might dissolve at least one layer of aggression/defense, perhaps.
Not looking to discuss this in detail here, although I think it’s worth some inquiry/exploration. Just throwing it out here, for the moment. I’m intrigued by the idea and need to think about this more.
Interesting comment, Lloyd. It made me remember that as much I do understand why romance is viewed as a woman’s world, there were gay romances prior to the beginnings of m/m romance. Certainly, Maurice (written in 1913/pubbed 1972) prefigures the entire genre since I think it hits all the right beats. And, there was a book called Gaywyck which drew heavily on the romance genre. Gordon Merrick has always been viewed as a romance writer. And, of course, since we’re writing about a sexual minority, gay fiction has concerned itself to some extent with love, sex, and romance. That doesn’t change the current situation but there have been times when m/m writers claim nothing came before them.
Yes, then we could dispense with the colonialist argument, “We got here first and regardless of everything else, we’ve planted our flag on this hill–it is ours;” or the gunboat diplomacy argument, “There are more of us here than there are of you, so we call the shots;” and even the defiant rebel argument, “You have no right to paint us like that.”
What would we lose if we gave up those arguments? I think we might lose the ruts in our discourse that will never, I fear, lead to healthy mutual respect.
Let’s face it — love is a mystery. We can all fantasize about it, only the brave dare write about it, and only the foolish claim to understand it. If we each do our jobs properly and leave the cookie cutters in the kitchen, we each will write about love differently from anyone else.
Hi Lloyd :) No, I’m not one of those people who would claim that anyone “owns” a genre. That would be a bit of nonsense for me to be spouting. No, I merely submit the history of the genre and how it has been perceived in the past. This is something we have to keep in mind when looking at how current comments are sometimes received – that these knee-jerk reactions, or sometimes even well-considered but uncomfortable reactions come from a place of history.
My only point is that historically, for the first hundred years or so of the genre, Romance (as a genre) was considered by the literary world to be “women’s fiction.” And often denigrated because of that perception. That’s something we can’t erase, the rather awful dismissal for so long of an entire genre of fiction simply because of who wrote it and who enjoyed it. Does that mean that women own Romance? Of course not. Does it mean that women have the right to say men are unwelcome? No. Again, of course not.
But the history of misogyny regarding the genre is real. That was my point and only made to explain much of the resistance one sometimes finds to critical male voices. Is there only one way to write Romance? No. Are there genre expectations that should be met for the story to be called a Romance genre story? Yes. That’s the case in any genre. But the criteria for Romance has shifted and those who cannot recognize and shift with that are doomed to be left behind as the genre evolves.
If you write about gay men, transmen, bisexual women, asexual genderfluid people, intersex people – yes, for all the gods sakes listen to the people you’re portraying. In striving for more diverse Romance, that’s more important than ever.
I only submit that there is that leftover bitterness from the history of the genre. It will fade in time. Just something to keep in mind.
Also, thank you – I appreciate that we can have a respectful conversation on topics such as these.
In addition – if I had cookie cutters, they would have some very very odd shapes. ;)
:D Yes, I wouldn’t want to get anywhere near your cookie cutters!
I see I took your use of “domain” too literally when I suggested there perhaps ought not be a domain at all. There is certainly a history of misogynistic disdain for romance in general, and I can only imagine the pain it has caused romance authors. I remember one such dismissal of romance as being “full of rape and adverbs”.
I think the staggering role romance plays in financing the publishing industry as a whole ought to be respected, too. Or maybe some of that misogynistic disdain is actually envy of those sales figures.
That said, I think there still might be something to this concept of “ownership” of the genre acting as a breeding ground for conflict. But that idea isn’t really germane to this conversation, and my thoughts aren’t even half-baked yet… so I need to stay quiet about it for a while.
Thank you for this thoughtful post. I’ve thought a lot about the overlapping communities you describe and I’ve noticed that almost every time I feel myself getting defensive over another author or reader’s comments it’s because that person has come to this wider community from a different place or perspective. I’ve always used mm romance and gay romance as equivalent terms but I’ve noticed that not everyone does and I found your explanation of terminology very interesting. I also appreciate that your explanation of romance vs fiction doesn’t demean romance but simply states the difference. My stories are firmly in the romance genre with characters who represent fantasies and ideals but I still seek input from gay and bisexual men because while my stories might not be realistic I don’t want them to be demeaning or hurtful because of a misapprehension on my part. I’m sure I’ve made mistakes and will make more but as part of this community I’ve also learned a lot about listening and accepting how varied our experiences can be.
Thanks for the comment. I appreciate it. :)
Thanks for this post. As a former leader of the RWA Women’s Fiction Chapter, I think your comparison of M/M romance, gay romance, and gay fiction to romance, chick lit, and literary fiction is spot on. I wish more people understood that.
Unfortunately, when it comes to readers of M/M romance, I don’t think it’s universally true that gay men are the topic they’re interested in. Some readers are no more interested in the lives of gay men, than the men who watch lesbian p0rn are interested in the lives of lesbians. Does that mean that authors shouldn’t be interested?
I guess every author has to make that call for themselves. For me, as a straight cis woman writing gay romance, I think I have an obligation to be an ally and an advocate. That means listening a lot and apologizing when I misstep. It means educating my audience and portraying my characters as authentically as possible within the genre conventions.
I hope that smart people can continue to have smart conversations about these topics, because we have lot to learn from one another. And that can only make our corner of the literary world better.
Thanks for the comment. And the support.
Marshall,
I found this post to be interesting, insightful and accurate in my experience (I’ve thought the same of other blogs you’ve written in the past). Thank you for your contribution.
I think it is well worth remembering we come from different tribes :)
We all come at these things with a different persona history. I’d call myself a feminist. I’m a British queer woman so I see myself as part of the LGBT community since 1980s(I’m 49).
I love reading… all types of fiction but not traditional romance. Not M/F romance. I certainly see the differences when I read book reviews. Because all gay books do get lumped together.
One of the weird things that I see often in reviews are comments about XYZ was so ridiculous it wouldn’t happen in real life.
1) it’s fantasy fiction, as you say, perhaps we don’t want real life for the hours we’re lost in that book…
2) more often I find myself thinking, But I remember exactly that event did happen in RL to me or a friend. It seems some readers have very little life experience and can’t believe that other people live lives so different to their own.
This is strange to me, because I always think on of the oys of reading is to broaden hozisons and see life through other people’s eyes.
I feel I have to say, like Megan, I’ve met some awful gay men, but I’ve also met awful straight men and awful women. Plus, we’ve all grown up surrounded by outdated racist, homophobic, and misogynistic views that we are shaking off or trying to over come.
Perhaps it is because of a difference in age, location in the world or some other factor, but I’d find it difficult to make the same statements about gay men that she makes. And I’ve a lot of experience hamfing out with gay men as work colleagues, side-by-side in politics, and in my social life. I think there are men and instances like those she describes, but in my expereience they are not typical of gay men in England.
Finally, I simply couldn’t read your words in the way that Megan interpretted them. Even though I’m a feminist and a woman. I can only think our different backgrounds & RL experiences make us read your post in a very different way.
I’ve been keeping well out of the recent kerfuffles and am almost certainly making a mistake by jumping in now, but…
I agree with the general points you’re making, for sure. And I go out of my way whenever I can (whenever the marketing categories allow me to) to point out that I write m/m, not GLBT fiction. I’m straight, I’m cis, I write m/m. (of course, then I get dinged when my books don’t have enough romance in them, or enough sex in them. Sigh.)
The only part I would challenge is the idea that “we’re the topic” (gay men are the topic) of m/m romance, and, connected to me, the question of “do you even like gay men”. Because, no, really, I don’t like gay men, no more than I like straight men or straight women or gay women or any other large group of diverse people. I’m not a sociologist–I don’t write about gay men as a population. I write about individual characters, some of whom are gay. So my characters are the topic of my books, not gay men in general.
Maybe this is more of a writerly quibble than a readerly one, or more of a technique issue rather than a philosophical one. Of course I support gay rights, just like I support rights for any and all human beings. Of course I acknowledge the oppression of GLBT people, just like I acknowledge the oppression of far too many other groups. And I accept responsibility for using what privilege I have as a tool for helping other people out.
But… I don’t write m/m as sociology. As a human being I’m interested in the experiences of the “average” gay man, but as an author? That’s not what my books are about. So of course as a human I listen to gay men when they talk to me, but as an author I don’t give their experiences precedence over my own characters and my own imaginings. A single gay man is an expert on his own life, absolutely, but he’s not an expert on my characters.
I don’t mean to suggest that you (or anyone else) have been trying to dictate how I write! So please take this post more as a “yes, but” rather than a “no”. I don’t write m/m as a paean to gay men, and I don’t really accept that gay men, as a group, are the topic of my writing. But I otherwise appreciate what you’re saying!
Thanks for the comment. I certainly can’t claim to have an issue with writerly quibbles. You could describe my whole post that way.
The problem with looking at communities and groups is that you have to make generalities. Generalities are all too often perceived as absolutes rather than as anecdotal statements of “most” or “the majority”… So, that in itself makes speaking out problematic. I wrote this in hopes that people would proceed more thoughtfully. Clearly, from what you’ve written you’re already doing that… so thanks.
One of the many reasons I write is to record not only my own experiences but those of the people around me. Yes, I write fiction–that’s the part that makes it emotional (and sometimes fun) rather than scientific. Having lost so much of my generation, it pains me to think of those lives passing unnoticed and unrecorded. I think remembering what we experienced is important.
I understand the sociology analogy, though I’d say that implies a scientific bent that I’m certainly not attempting.
Authenticity is a challenging question. A very wise female mm writer once said to me that “Romance is a fantasy genre.” On one level that does relieve writers of having to be authentic, since (as with any genre) it’s more important that characters follow genre rules than that they represent a community.
That said, I’m not sure you get a full pass simply because you’re not trying to be authentic. There’s a whole cottage industry of people examining the misogyny and violence against women in Game of Thrones and that’s hardly authentic or realistic.
But, I wouldn’t necessarily say that the point of writing about Game of Thrones is to get people to stop watching or even to change the show–it’s more effective purpose is to influence future fantasy series and also to encourage audiences to watch thoughtfully.
Two of the most brilliant musicals of the 50s are South Pacific and The King and I. They both reek of colonialism. I think it’s fine to continue to enjoy them (I certainly intend to), but you have to view them in context. A contemporary writer needs to be much more mindful of the issues these stories present before attempting something similar.
Anyway, thank you for being thoughtful.
I agree, writing fiction as sociology, from a gay or straight writer, is probably not something worth working toward.
So I guess I wasn’t just saying that “I” don’t write fiction as sociology, but that “we” don’t. That’s not the job of fiction.
I’m not sure how I feel about the “full pass” term – I know you were only using it lightly, but it does imply some sort of authority, some sort of group consensus on how people are writing, and I think as members of traditionally marginalized groups women AND gay men should be suspicious of any such authority. It’s part of a larger social polarization, I think, a larger movement toward judgmental expression… or maybe there’s no real movement at all and I’m just becoming more aware of it because modern technology allows every voice to be heard and everyone has SOMETHING they feel in black/white terms.
Okay, yeah, that last paragraph was barely even a response at all, just me spinning off into my own musings! Sorry!
Anyway, I agree with you that increased thoughtfulness is almost always a good thing. Keep up the good work!
Thanks. The only real authority for writers is the little voice that whispers over your shoulder while you’re writing, “Is this actually okay?” The answer is different from writer to writer and can change over time.