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."


(Read comments) - (Post a new comment)


[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)


[info]evilsqueakers
2007-05-04 03:48 pm UTC (link)
*grins* On the wank reports themselves, or just reported ones (like, say VB)?

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]tangentialone
2007-05-06 12:01 am UTC (link)
Yeah, I know. But I guess someone could make the mistake if they didn't read FW regularly.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


(Read comments) -

 
   
Privacy Policy - COPPA
Legal Disclaimer - Site Map