ne by men tends to exploit women, include the ultimate fantasies of men, ect. So couldn't it maybe be argued that trashy romance novels are sort of like women's version of porn? Admittidly, I haven't read any, but it seems to me that most (or all) are written by women, and contain lots of steamy sex scenes. These books, like porn in the normal sense, don't really develop characters, or have important plots. I'm sure it'd be a stretch to call them literature. They portray women's ultimate fantasies, getting swept of your feet in some ludicrously romantic way, something is unlikely to happen in real life, just like two super hot girls with huge tits probably aren't going to be willing to sleep with you at the same time in real life. I realize that kind of fuels the "women want to be loved, men want to be fucked" sort of stereotype, but I'd be willing to argue there is some truth to that.
Monday, March 9, 2009
Porn for women
I've been reading all the old blog entries about how pornography mainly exploits women because its all written from the standpoint of men or whatever that exact Sontag quote is, I don't have my book with me. Pornography done by men tends to exploit women, include the ultimate fantasies of men, ect. So couldn't it maybe be argued that trashy romance novels are sort of like women's version of porn? Admittidly, I haven't read any, but it seems to me that most (or all) are written by women, and contain lots of steamy sex scenes. These books, like porn in the normal sense, don't really develop characters, or have important plots. I'm sure it'd be a stretch to call them literature. They portray women's ultimate fantasies, getting swept of your feet in some ludicrously romantic way, something is unlikely to happen in real life, just like two super hot girls with huge tits probably aren't going to be willing to sleep with you at the same time in real life. I realize that kind of fuels the "women want to be loved, men want to be fucked" sort of stereotype, but I'd be willing to argue there is some truth to that.
ne by men tends to exploit women, include the ultimate fantasies of men, ect. So couldn't it maybe be argued that trashy romance novels are sort of like women's version of porn? Admittidly, I haven't read any, but it seems to me that most (or all) are written by women, and contain lots of steamy sex scenes. These books, like porn in the normal sense, don't really develop characters, or have important plots. I'm sure it'd be a stretch to call them literature. They portray women's ultimate fantasies, getting swept of your feet in some ludicrously romantic way, something is unlikely to happen in real life, just like two super hot girls with huge tits probably aren't going to be willing to sleep with you at the same time in real life. I realize that kind of fuels the "women want to be loved, men want to be fucked" sort of stereotype, but I'd be willing to argue there is some truth to that.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No no there is definitely some merit in that. The kind of women for whom trashy romance novels are written are the most two-dimensional caricatures of an adult female possible, just like Girls Gone Wild or whatever is created with the most stereotypical, flat male ever in mind. They tap into the really base, simplified innermost wishes of women - comfort, reassurance, love, commitment, and really hot sex.
ReplyDeleteWe could probably also call Twilight borderline teen-girl porn... it does the exact same thing. It also romanticizes, even fetishizes pregnancy and an abusive relationship but OKAY that is another post entirely.
But isn't it sad that even in porn for women, the women are flat (character-wise, not chested) and usually ridiculously attractive? As for commitment, I've read one or two in my day and there's a lot of one night stands (really dramatic, loving ones) and whatnot, which I think is pretty interesting.
ReplyDeleteOh, Twilight... "you too can be strong if you submit to your boyfriend!"
lol isnt the boyfriend in those books imaginary?
ReplyDelete