The thing that irritates me is:

I *love* a good love story.

But too many romance publishers (maybe it’s the authors, or the “formula,” I don’t know) have emasculated the male to such a point they’re just woman-meets-eunuch stories, or woman-meets-‘woman-in-disguise-of-a-man’ stories.

(I’m also upset that so many romance books also portray men as merely lust-driven animals, but that’s another rant.)

What happened to guys who are guys?  Why can’t a self-reliant, confident, successful woman meet a regular ol’ guy and fall in love (and not want to change him, or make him ‘stronger, faster, better than he was before’)?

I thought love was allowing your mate to be themselves, and loving them anyway.


4 thoughts on “the thing that irritates me

  1. Hi Heather! Thanks for your comments on my weblog =]

    This is a really cool topic, something I’ve been thinking about lately as well. Could you elaborate on it at all, I mean, what qualities do you think might make a good regular guy instead of a eunuch or a lust-driven animal? Which characters would you say are examples of great fictional guys?

    I was thinking of making my own list, but I think it’d be neat to get a bunch of people’s opinions =]

  2. Hi there!

    I think it would be easier if I pointed out the things I see that are wrong, and go from there, lol.

    Mostly, when I read a typical romance novel, the guys aren’t believable, and that’s my biggest complaint. I mean, while it is a joke that guys “only have one thing on their mind,” that isn’t really the case. They have interests of their own, they have personality quirks that effect how they act. Most often, I don’t feel like the guys are fleshed out enough as people.

    Also, one thing I’ve learned from being married is that guys don’t think like women do. They don’t generally sit down and worry about where their relationship is going, and they don’t worry about what they’re going to wear. They don’t always have a solution, and deep down, they need us just as much as we need them despite the tough exterior.

    They also aren’t all A-type alphas, however, they do feel protective over those they love.

    Most of them are normal looking, not drop-dead-gorgeous, calvin-klein model wannabes.

    Every one of them has flaws. No one is “perfect,” and while a romantic couple should be “right” for each other, neither member should be a God. (Unless you’re writing a mytho-romance, hehe.)

    Furthermore, men aren’t the cause of all evil (hehe). I notice in a lot of romances, the guys are always the one to screw things up, and then the book ends with them begging on their knees for forgiveness. I’m sorry. NOT a turn-on. No one is *that* wrong all the time.

    Good examples? The hard part with that is the fact that the good ones don’t generally stand out because they are believable as a character. They aren’t exceptional in absolutely every aspect (nor are they completely horrible in every aspect).

    My picks?

    -Carlisle from “Twilight.” His relationship with Esme was beautiful. There should be more romance like that.
    -Romeo, from “Romeo and Juliet.” Now he wasn’t a “man,” per se, but he was a good male character.
    -The Highwayman, aka. The Stork, from “The Highwayman” and also Cadderly from “The Cleric Quintet.” (by R.A. Salvatore)

    Anybody else want to weigh in?

  3. Thanks so much! I’m going to pay more attention, the next few books I read, and see if I can pick out characteristics that work, and ones that are too alpha or emasculated =]

    . . . Although I *have* dated guys who worried about what they were going to wear; it drove me nuts! ^_^

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s