I don’t personally encounter a lot of genre bullies. The only criticism I get on a regular basis is from my daugher, who also screams and covers her eyes when people kiss on television, which tells you where she’s coming from.

(One of these days, though, her curiosity is going to force her to take a book off that shelf, and she’ll be hooked. She’s a paranormal gal if ever I’ve seen one.)

Part of my immunity may be that I possess a disdainful stare of my own that has the power to make those who displease me burst into tears and scurry into hiding. In general, I don’t let judgmental people bother me because usually judgmental people don’t know what they’re talking about, which gives them zero credibility, which makes everything they say almost as meaningful as the diatribes of the adults in the Peanuts animated specials (”bwah bah, mwah bah bwah blah muh gwah“).

At any rate, I’m out of romance stereotypes for now. If you have any others, please share, and I’ll see what I can put together by way of defense, then we’ll kick it around to toughen it up.

Remember, being defensive (in the prickly sense) will encourage attack. Relax. You have nothing to be ashamed of. You’re reading (or writing) a romance novel, not beating up an old lady and stealing her social security check.

Let the Romance Self-Defense entries be your guide to shutting down those uneducated stereotypes, but feel free to personalize your responses with your own humor, wisdom, and anecdotes.

Romance reader/writer and proud of it,

Kerry Allen

Today we continue tackling those negative stereotypes about romance. I will offer one, followed by what I think is a reasonable response. Since the goal is to present a united front, not create an army of rhetoric-spouting puppets, you should feel free to add your own touch. (If, like me, you have smartass and/or aggressive tendencies, just remember to wedge the thoughtful response somewhere between the sarcasm and jabs to the larynx.)

Negative Stereotype #5

I can’t believe you read that tripe / trash / smut / drivel.

Well-Reasoned Response

“That statement says two things to me: (1) You consider me a sensible person of intelligence and refined taste and (2) you consider romance novels to be nonsense produced for the dimwitted and culturally bankrupt. Either you’re wrong about me or you’re wrong about romance novels, and I assure you, you’re not wrong about me.

I’ve traveled the world and visited other eras through the pages of romance novels. I’ve learned about everything from candlemaking to running an orange grove. I’ve studied human nature at its most vulnerable and at its strongest, in its darkest moments and its most radiant. Through romance novels, I’ve been exposed to things I will never have the opportunity to experience, some I would never want to and some everyone hopes for.

There are many worthwhile things to be found in the pages of a romance novel. If that wasn’t the case, someone of my sensibility, intelligence, and refinement would not continue to read them year after year.”

Kerry’s Personal Touch

“I take it that when you read this book, you didn’t enjoy it. I had a sticky moment with that thing on page 73 myself, but overall I find it quite engaging. What about it left you with an overall bad impression?

Oh, you haven’t read it and are making a sweeping generalization about a subject about which you know nothing? Then shut the fuck up.”

Kerry’s Even Worse Response

I would never say this in a remotely serious context because it doesn’t do me or you or the image we’re trying to project here any good, but to me, the above statement fairly begs for a response of “Where do you think I got my encyclopedic knowledge of hawt sex?”

Although promising Hawt Sex 101 would convert certain people on the spot, they’re probably not the ones we want representing the genre…

I’ve given this stereotype all the thought I can, and this is the best I can come up with on my own. Contribute your suggestions to the movement, and together we will construct the Ultimate Defense of Romance!

Today we continue tackling those negative stereotypes about romance. I will offer one, followed by what I think is a reasonable response. Since the goal is to present a united front, not create an army of rhetoric-spouting puppets, you should feel free to add your own touch. (If, like me, you have smartass and/or aggressive tendencies, just remember to wedge the thoughtful response somewhere between the sarcasm and jabs to the larynx.)

Negative Stereotype #4

Is there a lot of hot, steamy sex in that book?

Well-Reasoned Response

“The sexual content of a romance novel might comprise one percent of its word count, which hardly constitutes a lot, and hotness and steaminess are highly subjective terms. You would have to read it and decide for yourself.

While you’re at it, see what you think of the plot and characterization that make up the other 99 percent of the story and also make for far more interesting discussion.”

Kerry’s Personal Touch

“If that’s what it takes to get you to buy my book, you betcha.”

I’ve given this stereotype all the thought I can, and this is the best I can come up with on my own. Contribute your suggestions to the movement, and together we will construct the Ultimate Defense of Romance!

Today we continue tackling those negative stereotypes about romance. I will offer one, followed by what I think is a reasonable response. Since the goal is to present a united front, not create an army of rhetoric-spouting puppets, you should feel free to add your own touch. (If, like me, you have smartass and/or aggressive tendencies, just remember to wedge the thoughtful response somewhere between the sarcasm and jabs to the larynx.)

Negative Stereotype #3

Romance is for frumpy middle-aged housewives.

Well-Reasoned Response

“Romance readers could not be a more diverse group. Romance is enjoyed by adolescents to great-grandmothers. Professional homemakers to professionals with a whole alphabet of degrees at the end of their names. Women. Men. In all countries. Of all races and religions. By people who may have nothing in common other than enjoyment of romance novels.

Romance is for everyone.”

Kerry’s Personal Touch

“Are there any housewives anymore? And are you implying that if such a domestic engineer exists, she’s sitting on her ass all day with a book instead of managing childcare and household responsibilities? Shame on you.”

Also All About Kerry

“I started reading romance novels when I was about ten, which is hardly middle-aged. I may be middle-aged now, but I don’t live in a house, and I’m not a wife. As for frumpy… Don’t go there.”

I’ve given this stereotype all the thought I can, and this is the best I can come up with on my own. Contribute your suggestions to the movement, and together we will construct the Ultimate Defense of Romance!

Today we continue tackling those negative stereotypes about romance. I will offer one, followed by what I think is a reasonable response. Since the goal is to present a united front, not create an army of rhetoric-spouting puppets, you should feel free to add your own touch. (If, like me, you have smartass and/or aggressive tendencies, just remember to wedge the thoughtful response somewhere between the sarcasm and jabs to the larynx.)

Negative Stereotype #2

You know how it’s going to end, so why bother?

Well-Reasoned Response

“At the end of a mystery, you know the crime is going to be solved. Going along for the journey is why you bother.

The same applies to romance. There are lot of words between Chapter One and the predictable happily ever after. The unpredictable dwells in those intervening words. There may be crimes to solve, wounds to heal, evil to vanquish, physical and psychological adversity to overcome, and any number of other story elements of equal importance to the central theme of falling—and staying—in love.”

Kerry’s Personal Touch

I got nothin’. This one is so self-explanatory, I can’t crack wise about it.

I’ve given this stereotype all the thought I can, and this is the best I can come up with on my own. Contribute your suggestions to the movement, and together we will construct the Ultimate Defense of Romance!

Today we begin tackling those negative stereotypes about romance. I will offer one, followed by what I think is a reasonable response. Since the goal is to present a united front, not create an army of rhetoric-spouting puppets, you should feel free to add your own touch. (If, like me, you have smartass and/or aggressive tendencies, just remember to wedge the thoughtful response somewhere between the sarcasm and jabs to the larynx.)

Negative Stereotype #1

Romance is porn for women.

Well-Reasoned Response

“People read romance for a variety of reasons. Some read for pure escapist fantasy. Some read because they find it life- and hope-affirming. The many styles and subgenres of romance offer additional incentive to read, including all the qualities that lure people to mystery and humor and urban fantasy.

A statistically insignificant number read a 300-page book solely for the 5 pages of sex scenes.”

Kerry’s Personal Touch

“If it was porn of any kind, men would be reading it by the millions.”

I’ve given this stereotype all the thought I can, and this is the best I can come up with on my own. Contribute your suggestions to the movement, and together we will construct the Ultimate Defense of Romance!

The previous post was obviously me being, to one degree or another, a smartass.

The mission to win respectability for romance cannot be achieved by one author saying the right thing during an interview. Writers and readers together must present a united front.

It can be difficult defending oneself from condescension. It’s often easier to speak up when it’s for a cause. Causes, however, have mottoes and slogans and scripts for their proponents to work from to ensure a consistent message is presented to the public.

RWA would seem to be in the ideal position to organize such a movement. They have access to authors who have encountered the prejudice and authors who have countered it with aplomb. They have a site that could serve as an educational hub. Placed in an area accessible to the general public, readers, who endure many of the same attacks as writers, could also learn how to respond to the harsh and unfair criticism of their reading preferences. RWA could issue press releases to disseminate the information through magazines and web sites that cater to romance readers.

As of yet, however, I have been unable to locate any indication that RWA is addressing how to respond when writers as well as readers are confronted with a negative stereotype about romance.

Guess we have to address it ourselves.

The next couple of posts will feature some of those annoying things people have to say about romance novels, and suggested modes of response, sans my smartass attitude.

Okay, my smartass attitude will be rearing its ugly head, but I’ll separate it from the more considered, credible response.