Sorry for the delay, all. I've been busy working on another project (non-writing) that will be unveiled on Wednesday.
Okay, so in the last post we covered: YES, we romance readers definitely objectify men sexually...but that it isn't really a bad thing as I believe it supports gender equality....oh, and I threw in some hot eye candy as well. How did I forget that?
Now where was I... I need caffeine.
Oh yeah, today's post is how we do it better.
Point One: We lust after men with a variety of appearances whereas the media seems to objectify on one type of woman.
 |
| I think they have serial numbers instead of souls. |
 |
| Something for everyone here. I call dibs on the one with the long hair. |
Point Two: We also care about the guy's personality and accomplishments. When all the guys are lusting after (insert starlet name here), do they really care about what she does or how she feels about, well, anything? Now when romance fans are discussing books, you'll here things like: "Oooh that cover's yummy. Is it any good?" "Not really, the hero was an asshole/ moron. Try (insert title). The hero was hot...and sweet/ brave/smart/funny."
Point Three: We welcome baggage. The media always bitches about women having "too much baggage." I dislike a drama queen as much as the next person, but it seems "baggage" has become a blanket term covering everything from life experience, to emotion, to even the slightest hint of a personality. It's like they want women to be cyborgs.
 |
| Resistance is futile. |
Final point and summary: Although we lust after a hot romance hero, we also see him as a human being, with unique virtues and flaws. Romance heroes, as well as men in general, are all individual human beings. It makes the concept of falling in love (and lust) always fresh and exciting, no matter how many books we read.
So true XD Hey, who's the guy in the first picture ;)
ReplyDeleteI dunno but I wanna um... borrow him for awhile.
ReplyDeleteWe absolutely do objectify better! But it raises the argument, is it really an objectification if the object is represented in a truthful light? Our hunky heroes have qualities that are not likely to be found in any modern man, but for the most part they could be real people walking down the street (or onto the stage at a rock concert). So, is it really objectifying? Or, are we simply adding a little more light and color to the already magnificent qualities of the good men out there?
ReplyDeleteSince we get so lecherous about certain physical attributes, I'd still call it objectifying...but only a little. ;)
ReplyDelete