Log In

Home
    - Create Journal
    - Update
    - Download

LiveJournal
    - News
    - Paid Accounts
    - Contributors

Customize
    - Customize Journal
    - Create Style
    - Edit Style

Find Users
    - Random!
    - By Region
    - By Interest
    - Search

Edit ...
    - Personal Info &
      Settings
    - Your Friends
    - Old Entries
    - Your Pictures
    - Your Password

Developer Area

Need Help?
    - Lost Password?
    - Freq. Asked
      Questions
    - Support Area



goblin ([info]goblin) wrote in [info]otf_wank,
@ 2007-05-03 08:47:00


Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
Romance Novelists Fight for Justice!
At the latest Romantic Times convention, author Lauren Baumbach's posters and fliers that promoted her stories were removed by the staff of the Hyatt. When she asked why, she was told they made people uncomfortable. The RT staff did not back her up, although several authors did. Why was her promo material removed when other, far more explicit posters were left up? Her's were for m/m romance.

She blogs about it here (the blog is lurid pink and orange and has a nekkid man chest at the top--not entirely SFW). Most of the comments are supportive, but about halfway down the page Carol Stacey, "Publisher of Romantic Times BOOKreviews magazine," responds. She says that m/m romance isn't reviewed by Romantic Times because it wouldn't reach the "target audience." Posters call her on this--RT held a poll and in fact, the majority of respondants would like m/m romance reviewed in Romantic Times.

This wank is complete with "some of my best friends are gay", "Everyone I interacted with from RT was polite and smiling, but so were those girls in school who stabbed you in the back," f/f romance is hot but m/m romance is disgusting (male poster), and a yaoi writer who understands Lauren B's predicament because she has a "writer soul."


(Post a new comment)

Links to tangents
[info]threegoldfish
2007-05-03 02:53 pm UTC (link)
I've been following this a bit but it gets super confusing when you add in a rant supposedly from the CEO of Romantic Times that may or may not be a troll (Signs apparently point to yes.) Comments here are interesting. Me, I just wonder which fandoms Jules Jones used to write in and if they're any good.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

Re: Links to tangents
[info]octavia
2007-05-03 04:28 pm UTC (link)
My general reaction to the whole kerfluffle has been an unintelligible sound along the lines of, “Ghurk?”

Uhurr.

Makes you wonder just what was in the water at that RT convention thingy.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Re: Links to tangents - [info]acaciah, 2007-05-06 04:01 pm UTC
Re: Links to tangents
[info]octavia
2007-05-03 04:57 pm UTC (link)
I've only just now read the full rant. And I fully admit it: I was tearing up.

I am certainly aware of the function of blogs, but Romance Books are not a Political forum. We are a fantasy business that reflects Everywoman. She doesn't want sadness, discontent, fighting and negativity in her life, for that she watches the news or reads the newspapers. Our writers and editors are sometimes fragile, as the line of our work is pure emotion.

*sniffs*

You don't have to feel confused and resentful about a romance writing career if you are truly of good heart. Occupying your mind with ill thoughts or wallowng in attracting negative people and forming negative perceptions just continues to perpetuate the cycle of feeling unsuccessful.

*hides face in hanky and makes snorting noises*

Someone should stand up and say: I'm not taking this anymore."

Me! Me! Me!

(Seriously. The whole thing is comedy. gold. This woman is the CEO?! And is there a jurisimprudence law she doesn't break?)

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Re: Links to tangents - [info]willywanka, 2007-05-03 05:52 pm UTC
Re: Links to tangents - [info]mmanurere, 2007-05-03 06:28 pm UTC
Re: Links to tangents
[info]sunhawk
2007-05-03 06:34 pm UTC (link)
The rant blog has the BEST first comment:

Laura said...

But are you going to the prom with her?


AWESOME.

(Reply to this)(Parent)

Re: Links to tangents
[info]jat_sapphire
2007-05-03 07:22 pm UTC (link)
Amy at Smart Bitches called Falk and...huh, nobody seems to know if the ranter was Kathryn Falk, including Kathryn Falk. She certainly seems batshit insane enough, even (presumably) without margueritas.

My actual guess that it was somebody at RT, but not Falk, who does not appear to know her ass from a blog and her NewAgeySecret shit from a flame about murder by bad review.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Re: Links to tangents - [info]threegoldfish, 2007-05-03 08:07 pm UTC
Re: Links to tangents - [info]puipui, 2007-05-03 08:17 pm UTC
Re: Links to tangents - [info]octavia, 2007-05-03 09:09 pm UTC
Re: Links to tangents - [info]jat_sapphire, 2007-05-04 12:58 am UTC
Hold me, it's that damn deja vu again - [info]monsley, 2007-05-04 03:51 pm UTC
Re: Hold me, it's that damn deja vu again - [info]jat_sapphire, 2007-05-04 10:41 pm UTC

[info]frequentmouse
2007-05-03 03:10 pm UTC (link)
My favorite comment so far:

I am a private reviewer, attached to no publication or publisher, or reviewer site.

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]wonderfish
2007-05-03 03:24 pm UTC (link)
So, just some jackass who goes around telling people what they think about things, then? Like the rest of us?

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]frequentmouse, 2007-05-03 03:48 pm UTC
(no subject) - magpiggles, 2007-05-03 11:12 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]tangentialone, 2007-05-06 12:05 am UTC

[info]cleolinda
2007-05-03 09:50 pm UTC (link)
A maverick reviewer! Reviewer for hire! Will review for food! Am asshole, will travel!

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]frequentmouse, 2007-05-03 11:05 pm UTC

[info]ladybirdsleeps
2007-05-03 03:32 pm UTC (link)
I want to be sympathetic, but the blog design and "Sensually Wicked Man Love" is making me laugh at her instead.

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]firebad
2007-05-03 04:37 pm UTC (link)
Same. It sucks what happened to her, but she keeps referring to her "material" as "tasteful." I'm looking at that colour scheme and thinking HELL U SAY.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]lostmahmarbles, 2007-05-03 06:46 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]hallidae, 2007-05-03 06:52 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]bitca, 2007-05-03 07:30 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]lostmahmarbles, 2007-05-03 08:40 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]cycnus, 2007-05-04 06:10 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]angstymcgoth, 2007-05-04 01:43 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]cycnus, 2007-05-04 06:03 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]angstymcgoth, 2007-05-05 01:20 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]seiberwing, 2007-05-04 05:14 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]cycnus, 2007-05-04 06:00 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]seiberwing, 2007-05-04 06:05 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]tangentialone, 2007-05-06 12:21 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]threegoldfish, 2007-05-03 06:53 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]sorchar, 2007-05-03 07:28 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]julesnoctambule, 2007-05-03 07:44 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]julesnoctambule, 2007-05-03 07:47 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]threegoldfish, 2007-05-03 08:11 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]julesnoctambule, 2007-05-03 11:43 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]magnolia_mama, 2007-05-04 02:17 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]sparkysrevenge, 2007-05-04 06:59 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]monsley, 2007-05-04 03:56 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]puipui, 2007-05-03 08:30 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]singe, 2007-05-03 10:32 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]puipui, 2007-05-03 11:25 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]brown_betty, 2007-05-04 03:19 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]singe, 2007-05-04 03:46 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]puipui, 2007-05-04 10:31 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]singe, 2007-05-05 02:32 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]julesnoctambule, 2007-05-03 11:41 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]glossing2, 2007-05-04 12:40 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]julesnoctambule, 2007-05-04 07:02 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]fairy_tale_echo, 2007-05-05 04:58 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]issendai, 2007-05-04 01:24 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]janegraddell, 2007-05-04 02:27 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]issendai, 2007-05-05 01:41 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]sidewinder, 2007-05-04 02:47 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]evilsqueakers, 2007-05-04 03:58 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]sidewinder, 2007-05-07 01:26 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]evilsqueakers, 2007-05-07 07:56 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]sparkysrevenge, 2007-05-04 07:01 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]issendai, 2007-05-04 05:14 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]pet, 2007-05-04 04:08 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]sorchar, 2007-05-04 05:31 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]lostmahmarbles, 2007-05-04 06:13 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]sorchar, 2007-05-04 06:18 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]sorchar, 2007-05-04 06:21 am UTC

[info]xero_sky
2007-05-03 03:40 pm UTC (link)
Wow, that Stacy chick has awesome public relations skills. So much pretentious fail in one comment had to have taken real talent.

(Reply to this)


[info]darkeyes
2007-05-03 04:55 pm UTC (link)
"Then again, some of my best friends are stupid. I've even had bigots in my house!"

Hee! That made me giggle way more than it should. :)

Ah yes. Good to know that RT's staunchly sticking by their anti-gay bigotry under the guise of "there isn't a market for m/m so it's not economically feasible to do reviews for them" policy. I'll say this about RT, they're consistent.

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]pepperlandgirl4
2007-05-03 06:50 pm UTC (link)
They're thieves. Authors buy ad space in the RT in return for reviews. Well, only authors at small presses and e-publishers. The implication is that anybody who buys an ad will receive a review. They do not make it clear that m/m authors are shit out of luck, nor will they refund the money and cancel the ad if the author requests at learning they are shit out of luck.



(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]vzg
2007-05-03 05:38 pm UTC (link)
Wasn't there a group of people claiming that the only reason the majority of the votes were for the review of gay romance was because people were creating fake accounts to review multiple times? Methinks they'd say anything to make sure teh ghey is kept out of their masturbation material.

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]sunhawk
2007-05-03 06:35 pm UTC (link)
You'd think the admins would log IPs and ignore duplicate hits in the case of an important poll, wouldn't you? Or is that some sort of faux-pas in Romance circles?

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]vzg, 2007-05-03 07:13 pm UTC

[info]sidewinder
2007-05-03 07:07 pm UTC (link)
That, and that is was all just a bunch of m/m writers and publishers only joining up to promote their "agenda".

Argh. I remember that wank the first time around. Seems like nothing has changed.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]aposiopetic
2007-05-03 11:58 pm UTC (link)
A month or two ago, there was an article on UsaToday.com that was talking about gay rights over something or other. One commenter said that if you look at polls, a bunch of people were in favor of (insert gay-related thing here).* Someone else commented that you can't trust online polls, because "the gays are well connected**" and skew results on purpose.

I don't remember the exact wording, but I just couldn't stop laughing at the idea that being gay automatically made you an internet whiz.


*Note: pun not intentional, but I'm keeping it anyway. I'll love it as if it were my very own &hearts
**That one too

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]vzg, 2007-05-04 01:02 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]puipui, 2007-05-04 01:32 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]vzg, 2007-05-04 01:33 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]aposiopetic, 2007-05-04 03:18 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]vzg, 2007-05-04 03:35 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]txvoodoo, 2007-05-04 02:57 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]aposiopetic, 2007-05-04 03:12 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]txvoodoo, 2007-05-04 03:29 am UTC

[info]evilsqueakers
2007-05-03 09:16 pm UTC (link)
*sits on hands* I'm not gonna troll, I'm not, I'm not. It's so hard though. Because the stupidity of Falk is mind-boggling. *sighs* Plus, I kinda wanted to fangirl most of the sane writers going, "Wait, what? Bitch, are you serious?" about this whole debacle. Not about the circle of wank, but the fact Falk can't seem to answer a sentence in a straight line for all the world. Seriously.

The first SmartBitches link's comments mention FW.
But this is nothing less than wank, though it makes anything in fandom wank look like fluffy bunnies and sunshine.

So close, yet still off a community or two.

Romance genre, I knew I read it for more than the purple prose (yes, Stephanie Laurens, I'm looking at you). It was also funny to see so many mentions of fanfiction in the discussion, too. *grins* Apparently, slash writers aren't buying enough m/m books. Though, I'm still shuddering from the last m/m book I read. I need to buy the bleach on that section of my brain.

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]crysiana
2007-05-04 02:38 am UTC (link)
Sadly, the comment on it being more extreme than F_W made me think of people like, say, Usagi Kou. I mean, yeah, the reason we point and laugh is because these are crazy and pointless wanks, but there's been some crazy shit on Fandom Wank in its time.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]evilsqueakers, 2007-05-04 03:48 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]tangentialone, 2007-05-06 12:01 am UTC

[info]kalika_maxwell
2007-05-03 11:16 pm UTC (link)
I wish there were good m/m books to buy, but I've never heard of any that would suit my tastes. And er, considering the sample, this one ain't for me either. Woe. Are all the good writers fanficcers or something?



(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]panthea
2007-05-04 01:18 am UTC (link)
The only decent m/m books I've ever found were fantasy books that happen to have gay or bisexual main characters (Lynn Flewelling, Tanya Huff [Huff's Smoke and... series starring a particularly adorable gay boy who works in Canadian television and happens to be a wizard]), which are good on the fun-story front, but sadly devoid of porn. And believe me, I've looked for good print porn. Alas.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]issendai, 2007-05-05 01:35 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]acaciah, 2007-05-06 05:13 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]acaciah, 2007-05-06 05:14 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]ruffwriter, 2007-05-06 10:31 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]panthea, 2007-05-07 04:40 am UTC

[info]evilsqueakers
2007-05-04 01:23 am UTC (link)
Be glad if you've never read Razor Burn. *nods*

(Reply to this)(Parent)


(Anonymous)
2007-05-08 04:27 pm UTC (link)
I like Matthew Haldeman Time's stuff. He only has one published book (and many short stories) on his website but I think he's really good.

matthewhaldemantime.com

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]sneer
2007-05-04 04:28 am UTC (link)
But what are their thoughts on ya--

o wait nm

(Reply to this)


[info]phosfate
2007-05-04 03:59 pm UTC (link)
I can only think of this in terms of a Variety headline: HOMO ROMO PROMO? NO-NO.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]notjo, 2007-05-04 05:37 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]phosfate, 2007-05-04 05:47 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]panthea, 2007-05-05 05:45 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]splorch, 2007-05-04 07:41 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]onaga, 2007-05-05 01:33 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]digigirl132, 2007-05-05 02:54 am UTC

 
   
Privacy Policy - COPPA
Legal Disclaimer - Site Map