|
|
Irene (![[info]](http://www.journalfen.net/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small} birene) wrote in ![[info]](http://www.journalfen.net/img/community.gif){kind=small} fandom_wank,@ 2006-09-09 12:25:00 |
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
| Current mood: |  amused |
Nobody expects the m/m Inquisition!
This was brought to my attention via my flist on LJ:
Romantic Times Book Reviews publisher Carol Stacey has an inquiry about m/m erotic romances:
Is this really a turn on for women and a "growing" market? I have been resistant to review them in Romantic Times BOOKreviews because I do not feel we have many readers who want this type of book. I would love your input on this in a poll I have created. [Note: You have to be registered to vote]
Cue ten pages of very polite wank in the poll forum. Well mostly polite. It gets juicier the longer it brews.
Highlights:
As the "love them" option soon takes the lead in the poll accusations of trolls, shenanigans, conspiracy and sockpuppetry fly in the direction of the posting m/m lovers. OMG!!! It's the intrawebs and it's trying to push its gay m/m agenda!11!
Jenster: That said, I find it EXTREMELY interesting that the overwhelming majority of posters on this thread are: 1 - For M/M romance and 2 - Not regular posters. Frankly, it makes me a little suspicious.
Could it be that someone informed the genre lovers? What do you think?
"Brokeback Mountain" is repeatedly mentioned as the prototype of m/m romance. 
Robert_Cloud defender of everything Free Speech and 1st Amendment: If RT doesn't do m/m reviews the terrorists win! I say so, and I don't even like it because I was molested as a child, so there!
A fangirl who of course hast to ask the wanky question: Why would anybody not like m/m?
Many endeavors of JUST MY OPINION!
On page five BZH Anne says its not her cuppa as she's straight AND celibate. She then rants on about the ev0l gay lifestyle:
To extol a life choice that is more detrimental than most (their suicide rate is 6 times the national average. that alone should tell y'all something!) can hardly be healthy either for them or for the reader or for the society at large. Since it exists, live with it. But DON'T glamorize it! This is as bad as the rappers glamorizing gangsterism and violence against women. The road to hell is steep enough that those on it take little steps to keep from falling straight down. But even little steps will get ya there, eventually. And then what? Say ooops, wrong turn? Too late.
Finally on page six PauletteW brings the classic: m/m = pedophile what are the authors/readers thinking?
Responses: Er no, do some research. (Well, I said it was a polite wank.)
PauletteW: Fuck your research! Priests molest boys and teachers their students! I saw it on tv!!!
Erastes mocks one of the more bigoted posts ...
I hesitate from replying, actually, because although I know bigotry like yours exists, I don't like to glamorise it by stooping to mock it.
... which makes Glee (a mod?) appear (page nine) and delete it:
I erased most of your quote as your comments seem harsh to me and I trust you will reconsider your statements about BZH Anne. If you want your choices and respect it would be greatly appreciated if you show someone else respect for the choices they have made. Your comments about someone else have offended me; this is a message board with lots of viewers-let's keep it positive please.
Pleaze, won't somebody think of the bigots!?
Robin_Cloud to the rescue: Dumbass! If you have to censor someone, censor the bigot not the mocker!!11!
And fun is had by all.
Hey, did I mention this is my first wank report? *runs away*
