From: Lambda Literary ~ The Fetishizing of Queer Sexuality. A Response.
The first lesbian novels I ever read were purloined pulps found in the homes of people whose children I babysat for in high school. At the time I didn’t put together the fact that these straight couples were using my lesbian life to fuel their sexual fantasies, but that was definitely the case.
I really do not get where Victoria Brownworth is coming from at the beginning of this article. First she distances “real lesbians” from “Lesbian Pulp”. Anyone with half a brain or Google skills knows that there were several lesbians who wrote Lesbian Pulp Fiction back during it’s golden years including such well known authors as Valerie Taylor. Victoria Brownworth even admits to reading them but obviously she did not enjoy them because they had S. E. X. ewwwww!
So how is that really a good example of her argument?
We have lives beyond what we do in bed. And what we do in bed never involves a man.
I am sorry but from my point of view Valerie Taylor wrote whatever paid the fucking rent and sex sells and where the fuck does Victoria Brownworth get off judging the motives of a lesbian writer she obviously knows so little about besides having no clue what Valerie did in bed?
If you aren’t familiar with M/M fiction here’s what it is: Straight women fetishizing the lives of gay men.
So what about Josh Lanyon and Rick Reed or or ??? Oh fuck this “nice reasonable” shit! Victoria Brownworth has no clue what the hell she is talking about and could care less who she hurts with her incredible sweeping generalizations!
Victoria Brownworth assumes she knows the TRUE gender and sexuality of all authors writing Gay Romance. She assumes she knows the TRUE gender and sexuality of the readers. She assumes every Gay Romance is somehow exploitative.
The most insulting part of this whole article is she assumes that no one can easily verify the accuracy of these various false statements she presents. Does everyone at Lambda Literary still use snail mail and crayons?
When we give straight writers the power to say we got our own relationships wrong and they know better, we are embracing our own oppression.
Victoria Brownworth just shut up. No honestly, if you can not write a decent story that sells as well as Annie Proulx or Marion Zimmer Bradley then do not accuse me of “embracing my oppression”.
Accept the facts for what they are… You Victoria Brownworth have a distinct and questionable lack of any talent or intelligence and no one gives a fuck how loud you are or how politically correct or accurate YOU SAY your stories are… You suck! You can’t compete honestly for the simple fact you have no skill and you know this. So you run and hide behind your Gay Ghetto mentality and question everyone’s authenticity with no facts. How self serving can you get?
Sorry to be so blunt but your little irrational lashing out in public spewing highly prejudicial and demeaning lies left and right demanded it. I don’t care if you think the books I read are trashy porn and I don’t care if you and your Lambda Lit goon squad ignore this entire genre like Lambda has ignored Gay & Lesbian Pulp Fiction and it’s important place in our history for years now.
I don’t even give a flying fuck that you and the rest of your precious crowd snicker whenever such bestsellers as Larry Townsend and his Leatherman’s Handbook are brought up. Despite the fact he has obviously sold more books than any of you. Sex sells!
But do not negate me as a reader or my place in the Gay Community to sell your literary lies.
Fuck you, we like this!
PS… Thank you EREC for the wake up post this morning.
Tags: eBook Commentary
Chris wrote,
*applauds wildly*
Link | August 22nd, 2010 at 6:45 am
Emilie wrote,
I just did an LJ post on this. I saw Sarah Black had said something about a post of Elisa Rolle’s: http://elisa-rolle.livejournal.com/1106485.html I hate that something like that article would make Elisa feel doubt and discouragement. Elisa does an awesome job on her LJ. She writes wonderful reviews and showcases beautiful book covers and other art.
Summarizing what I said, I took the article as prejudging and not doing the research. I was also insulted that she decides who a “true bisexual” is. We decide for ourselves, in my opinion and in my case. Not to mention her judging who is genderqueer or not. There was just so much wrong information in the article. It was really distressing.
Link | August 22nd, 2010 at 7:54 am
TeddyPig wrote,
Lambda Literary has a long and storied past with such prejudices. They continually judge and miss-judge the author’s sexuality making it more an issue than the quality of the writing. Look at the mess they have made of their awards.
Such a sad and strange group.
Seems they are hell bent on maintaining their marginalizing non-inclusive policies despite how ignorant and hurtful they are.
Link | August 22nd, 2010 at 8:02 am
Cat Grant wrote,
I’d like to know which m/m books Brownworth read that contain all these rape scenes she’s talking about. I haven’t found them in any of the books I’ve read lately. Brownworth appears to be a “feminist” in the Andrea Dworkin mold, believing that any act of penetration equals rape.
Between this brouhaha and last year’s kerfuffle over their awards, I wonder how anyone can take Lambda Literary seriously. Seems to me they’re nothing more than a bunch of pseudointellectual snobs trying to justify their overpriced, useless educations.
Fuck ‘em all gently with a chainsaw.
Link | August 22nd, 2010 at 8:14 am
Chris wrote,
They seem to take the tired old “literary works are superior to genre works” argument, then toss in the whole thing about the author’s sexuality… *sigh*
Link | August 22nd, 2010 at 8:17 am
Ally Blue wrote,
I wondered the same thing about the rape scenes, Cat. I read that and went “WTF’s she talking about?” o_O Am not about to get embroiled in that whole ugly mess, though. I’m not good at arguing with people who are prone to misunderstanding things and twisting people’s words. I’m a pretty straightforward person and I don’t have a tact gene, so I’ve learned to keep myself and my opinions out of the wank.
Someone had brought up the point about the timing of this latest sandbox scuffle being veeeeery interesting, though. You do have to wonder about that, huh? Was this all orchestrated to cause dissent in the ranks at a crucial time? Hmmm…
**strokes imaginary beard**
Link | August 22nd, 2010 at 9:57 am
Jason wrote,
I couldn’t agree more. Some ‘true lesbian’ doesn’t need to tell me how to be a true gay or what I should read.
~smooches~
Jase
Link | August 22nd, 2010 at 9:57 am
Ally Blue wrote,
That was the thing that really pissed me off, Jase. The insult to readers. I’d say that she didn’t intend to insult gay male readers, but TBH I think she did. Maybe I’m wrong. I hope I am. But I don’t think so.
Link | August 22nd, 2010 at 10:10 am
AnneD wrote,
My way or the highway… *le sigh*
I think I rather prefer the old ‘ different strokes for different folks’.
I had no idea there was only one way to be gay straight or in between, how silly of me!
Link | August 22nd, 2010 at 10:22 am
erastes wrote,
admittedly, my gay fiction/romance reading is limited to gay historicals for the most part, I too haven’t seen all this rape.
Yes – in fanfiction, there are large communities dedicated especially to rape, and yes, even in gay historicals I’ve seen “non con turns to love” in perhaps ten or so books out of the several hundred gay historicals that exist (www.speakitsname.com)
But, Ms Brownworth, I’ve seen this trope hundreds and hundreds of times in heterosexual romance. This doesn’t make it right – OF COURSE – but it does sell, and if the publisher will allow it (most won’t these days, aren’t journos supposed to do their research?) It’s not a theme of gay romance, it’s a theme that was established in het romance. And it does happen, yes, I know that’s unpleasant to admit, but it does. gay or straight.
Myself, and all the other sane writers of the gay historical genre, are ignoring this flak–even from the gay male authors who say that they will only read porn written by men because otherwise it intrudes into their fantasy of having sex with the author. I’ve never once cared about the sex of the author of a book — to even care about that knd of thing seems to me as slightly odd.
Link | August 22nd, 2010 at 1:20 pm
Tracey wrote,
First, I would like to know who made her the spokesperson for all LGBTQ people throughout the world and exactly why anyone needs her to define what a “true lesbian” (as opposed to what? an imaginary one?) is.
Second, isn’t it a bit odd to assume that ONLY writers of sexuality A write Genre B? Why, in Ms. Brownworth’s world, can’t all writers of every sexuality write exactly what they choose to write?
Third, I find it most peculiar that an organization filled with writers who have been marginalized because of their sexuality is intent on marginalizing other writers based on their sexuality.
Link | August 22nd, 2010 at 1:42 pm
Katrina Strauss wrote,
There will always be self-appointed gatekeepers in any given genre. Thank goodness for us pesky gatecrashers. ;)
Link | August 22nd, 2010 at 2:31 pm
Emilie wrote,
A reader on AfterElton was upset by that original article. I said there was considerable discussion of it here and at Elisa’s LJ. Also, I called you a rabblerouser. I guess that would make me one of the rabble.
Link | August 22nd, 2010 at 7:30 pm
kirsten saell wrote,
But, Ms Brownworth, I’ve seen this trope hundreds and hundreds of times in heterosexual romance. This doesn’t make it right – OF COURSE – but it does sell, and if the publisher will allow it (most won’t these days, aren’t journos supposed to do their research?) It’s not a theme of gay romance, it’s a theme that was established in het romance. And it does happen, yes, I know that’s unpleasant to admit, but it does. gay or straight.
Why, exactly, does this not make it “right–OF COURSE”? I enjoy a lot of non-con–doesn’t matter what letters happen to be in the slash-tag, it’s a turn-on for me. Plenty of other women enjoy it, obviously. And I’m no cringing, simpering victim-in-waiting or wussy throwback to the 1950s, either. Hell, I had a boyfriend recently nickname me “Athena”, ffs (although he wasn’t referring to my virginal nature, heh).
I mean, isn’t implying that a woman’s enjoyment of non-con is “wrong” exactly the same thing Brownworth is doing in regard to m/m? Isn’t she implying that you all are not PC enough because you “exploit” another group’s sexuality, or not feminist enough because you don’t choose to explore sexual agency and power through female characters?
I said it elsewhere just a half hour ago, but it bears repeating: The greater act of feminism isn’t in saying “women enjoying [insert kink here] is wrong wrong wrong,” but in saying, “fuck you, I like it.” Even if it’s the eeeeevil non-con.
Link | August 22nd, 2010 at 9:15 pm
erastes wrote,
@Kirsten- I didn’t mean the trope in books, obviously. One can write whatever one likes, and I’ve written rape myself more than once. I personally don’t enjoy it for titillation – but I know some people do, and I’d never say to anyone “you must not write this.”
Link | August 23rd, 2010 at 1:44 am
Erastes » Blog Archive » Eyes, heart, Pig (all Hail) wrote,
[...] swayed by my opinion is entirely pointless. Tracey’s comment summed it all up for me, I think, on Teddypig’s (all hail the Pig) post: I find it most peculiar that an organization filled with writers who have [...]
Link | August 23rd, 2010 at 2:28 am
Lee Rowan wrote,
I wish she’d take some of that energy and aim it at Prop H8 in California. But marriage is so ‘heteronormative’ that she probably doesn’t approve of that, either.
The pulp covers should’ve been warning enough about the quality of what followed…
Link | August 23rd, 2010 at 2:36 pm
TeddyPig wrote,
The only thing I liked about the article was those covers.
I just like them especially the Gay Pulp ones. They just speak of a different time and the exotic frightening taboos no one should talk about. It’s too bad the person writing that article seemed to be a throw back to that era but oh well.
Link | August 23rd, 2010 at 3:57 pm
Jessica Freely wrote,
You know, maybe in a weird way, Brownsworth’s attack, in being so blatant and hostile, is a good thing. For a long time I’ve seen a lot of hedging in our community. People making all kinds value judgments based on content and identity: It’s okay for women to write about gay men as long as we do it realistically. It’s okay for us to write for gay men but not for other women. Non-con should be punishable by death, etc.
I’m not talking about “I don’t like this, I prefer this,” but rather “this makes a book bad, and you girls shouldn’t be writing it.”
It’s nice to see, in these comments and elsewhere, authors finally standing up for themselves and saying that they write what they write because they like it, and they don’t need permission from anyone to do that, and if you don’t like it, well, it’s a big wide world, isn’t it? So stop trying to control us.
Link | August 25th, 2010 at 7:25 am
Max wrote,
This is a response I sent to someone asking me about it on a gay site I’m a member.
First, let me set something on the record here. I’m a gay writer that lives in England. The writers that the Out.com article talked about were English writers. The MM erotica writers I personally have contact with are English, with the exception of one who is an american that lives in Japan with her husband. So, while I don’t write in the genre, I know people that do.
LAMBDA is a very american site, with an american political outlook that is quite alien to writers in England. We do not share that outlook, and we do not share the sensibilities about the state of the LGBT-scene that is hinted at or directly expressed in that article. In fact, the political foundation of it – and it is a political article – is quite obtuse to us. Our hot-button issues are different, as well as our understanding of our place in society in general.
That’s where I’m coming from, and that’s where I think most of my MM romance writer acquaintances come from, and that’s why many of us have reacted quite strongly about it. The LGBT-community that Victoria Brownworth is describing is not our LGBT-community.
As to what she is saying, my interpretation is that she does what she accuses the MM romance writers of doing – she appropriates the male gay experience under a definition coloured by her experience as a american lesbian, and she excludes writers that are actually part of the lgbt-community as bisexuals.
I believe that both Erastes and the other writers define themselves in either transgender or bisexual terms. The writers I know are bisexuals. Therefore, a lesbian starts an exclusionary turf-war about the gay male experience with bisexual women without including gay men in the discourse.
That sounds more confrontational than it is – it is just to illustrate how silly the article was, and how flawed the argument is, and it brings me to my view about the existence of male/male romance.
I think it is a good thing. It is a genre in its infancy, driven by women since men don’t generally tend to write in the field. Romance has always been a very exclusively female genre, and this subgenre is no different.
Many of the writers in the subgenre comes out of fan-fiction and slash-fiction, and it is their first experience with commercial publishing. As of yet the quality is quite low, because not enough time has passed since the inception of the subgenre and the healthy growth of competency in the writer cadre.
Having that situation, that it is an amateur subgenre that is growing up as we speak, I rather that it grows large and wide and deep with many voices that tell stories. I would rather that the subgenre allows for scope in both quality and numbers now, because what that will mean is that once the bar is set for quality, there will be a large funt of talent that will normalise one of the most taboo of all sexual and romantic relationships, the gay male one.
I’d rather have a large audience out there that thinks nothing of men being in relationships with other men, whether these relationships are sexual or romantic or both, than I would have us lock ourselves into ghettoes, enforcing an exclusion of everyone that is not accredited to write about these things.
Because, that exclusion is in effect what Brownworth is arguing for. Sickening as it may sound, she is in effect like a black woman that is arguing for the separate but equal principle for black men. I told you it would be long. :)
Link | August 26th, 2010 at 1:46 pm
TeddyPig wrote,
Max,
I came out in San Francisco around the time of the huge political upheaval when Harvey Milk was killed and as radical a time as that was and for all the angry shit I heard talked about even I do not get where the hell Victoria is coming from.
As a gay guy I started reading Patricia Nell Warren about a gay runner and never once questioned if a woman (straight or lesbian or whatever) should be writing a love story about gay men. I went on to read Marion Zimmer Bradley’s The Catch Trap and I never wondered about the writer’s “authenticity” when writing about gay circus performers.
I fucking enjoyed the hell out the stories I read.
From my point of view Gay Literature is the great equalizer. The great big plain brown literary paper bag wrapping a naughty sex magazine that allows everyone to have a voice and a place at the table if they want one and it will NOT and NEVER WILL BE about WHO the fuck wrote the story… if the writer happens to be straight, gay, bisexual or “closeted to the point of not being identifiable” it is and should only be about…
THE STORY
Anything else is like judging the winner of a sporting event based on the color of the jersey they wear. I tend to buy and read books not authors or their sexuality.
Is it good sometimes or bad sometimes to read and try to understand the authors many of whom may come from tough backgrounds of denial and shame? Sure, but it really does not change what it is they put in writing. It does not change the subject of the story or how well it was written or what that story means to the people reading it.
So Victoria Brownworth is in plain and simple language the nuttiest fucked up narrow minded jerk Lambda Literary could probably find to post on their website. The sad part is there does not seem to be anyone there who is catching on to that fact and maybe they just really could care less how unprofessional and ignorant they look.
Victoria Brownworth is not out to help anybody or promote anybody but herself. She wants to be the star of her own little drama with a spotlight of martyrdom that she wraps herself in.
It’s not about being in the US or really speaking for the gay community or having any well researched political stance it’s just made up issues she wants to use to play attention whore. Another lazy nut case with a internet soapbox.
Link | August 26th, 2010 at 4:05 pm