A
Amber Zade
Guest
Give me a moment to take my place behind the pulpit.
I remember the first time I learned there were women who didn't have orgasms. I was beside myself. "You mean, they don't have orgasms ever? Years and years of marriage, no orgasms?" I asked.
I learned there were women who had children and grandchildren and would say, "Sex, I've never seen the big deal."
Well, ladies, not necessarily these ladies but ladies in the world at large, sex is a big deal. It's a huge deal and the idea of women leaving this life without having an orgasm, is like someone leaving the planet without ever witnessing a sunrise. Except, a lot of the time, an orgasm is better.
I didn't grow up in the bible belt and was raised by a mother who had no trouble talking about sex. Nor did any of the women in her family have trouble talking about sex. They were not saying things like, 'I was just about to drift to sleep and he bothered me again...."
When I first started writing 'seriously' I joined a number of online RWA Chapters. They give classes online and looking for tips on how to write a sex scene, I signed up for a class called Schmexy Times given by an erotica author.
I should have known better. I like things to be called by their name unless it's a word the character would obviously use or unless its a natural outgrowth of the couple's relationship. This word Schmexy made me cringe. Why I asked myself. Why?
Day 1 was devoted to finding names for body parts. We were supposed to make a list. Day two was devoted to sexual acts. We were supposed to make a list. Day three was devoted to euphemisms for THE act. Day four we wrote a scene about a first kiss. The only exercise I participated in was the first kiss scene. Then I had to tune out the rest.
At one point I started to write an article for a romance writers publication about what bothered me about the Schmexy class. The publication had taken my articles before. I failed miserably. I could not get out what I wanted to say. I knew my audience, a group of southern women, some of them wrote inspirational fiction, at least one of them wrote M/M erotic fiction. Still, how to explain what bothered me without alienating my audience?
I've written all sorts of backwards, upside down stuff but I finally had to give up on this article.
This EL James nonsense has bothered me from day 1. Everywhere I go I carry a book. For a while, carrying around a book was an invitation for people to introduce 50 Shades of Grey to me. I was asked by a waitress, a lady at CVS, and a nurse in my doctor's office if I had read 50 Shades. Giggle giggle. Blush blush.
My problem with it? It's not new. It's not revolutionary. It does nothing to spark a discussion on women's sexuality which we dearly need to have, some day, maybe; if we ever get the nerve.
Power exchange fiction is older than the Marquis de Sade. Anne Rice has written 5 books which were all better written then 50 Shades. There's also The Story of O and don't forget a little book, and movie called 9 1/2 weeks. Lolita, although more than a little creepy, is essentially power exchange fiction. Belinda, a book by Anne Rice is interesting because the power exchange is not typical; it's the young girl with control. All bookstores have these books and more. Even little tiny indie book stores right smack on top of the Bible belt have these books. People who read, have been reading them for years.
Some of these books are fabulous because they give a perfect picture of one aspect of human sexuality that yes, hasn't gotten a lot of air time. My problem is, from everything I've heard, 50 Shades doesn't hold a candle to these books. So, they've sparked a discussion, but the wrong one, and a rather immature one, where we're still just sort of toying with the idea, not really understanding the drives of the very real people who engage for whatever reason in this totally authentic and real lifestyle.
Incidentally, if you are squicked out by the idea of power exchange, most vampire fiction, most lycanthrope fiction has power exchange elements. Imagine a vampire in a classic pose; the woman's neck is bared, she is under the vampire's spell, and he is about to drink. Imagine the pack mentality and structure described in shifter novels. We use these 'devices' if you will, to express and explore parts of our collective psyche's and especially the many varied aspects of our sexuality. We often use supernatural beings as proxies for our hidden desires and curiosities.
So, color me pissed off when EL James, a not so great writer by all accounts, gets attention when if you wanted a mature discussion of power exchange relationships, you had only to turn to Laurell K Hamilton, who not only weaves it into her fiction, but participates in an alternative lifestyle and has gone to the trouble of educating herself on the subject of BDSM.
I don't personally think the world needs more BDSM fiction and if I see one more of those understated book covers meant to emulate 50 Shades, I may hold a book burning.
What I think the world needs is more female characters who own their sexuality. No this doesn't mean always being in charge. It doesn't always mean someone else being in charge either. It does mean a woman who doesn't depend on a man for her orgasm. Weird? Maybe. Women's bodies are intricate, we should get to know our own bodies and do so fearlessly. I'm all for taking a look at our parts. Our bodies have kinesthetic memories. The more often we do something, the more often it can be repeated. So - yes - I - am - saying - the - unthinkable. Women - all women - might consider - getting to know our bodies and learning how to give ourselves orgasms. There's no confusing sex with love when you can get physiological fireworks without a man.
Also, USE YOUR WORDS. Call things by their name. None of this lovebud stuff. Stop that! {Unless it's a part of how you speak to your lover - then it's endearing} Otherwise, OFF with the euphemisms! Maybe romance would be laughed at a little less if we weren't tiptoeing around the lovemaking part of our books.
Finally, the lovemaking part of our books is important. There are lots of ways to have sex. There's sex for pleasure. There's sex for release. I'm not against any sort of reason for sex, unless and until it becomes the only reason or way you can relate to people. Then it becomes compulsion at least and addition at worst.
However, ultimately, sex is a holy sacrament between two people. That's when it's the best, that's when it's lovemaking, and that's what romance writers are trying to express.
I remember the first time I learned there were women who didn't have orgasms. I was beside myself. "You mean, they don't have orgasms ever? Years and years of marriage, no orgasms?" I asked.
I learned there were women who had children and grandchildren and would say, "Sex, I've never seen the big deal."
Well, ladies, not necessarily these ladies but ladies in the world at large, sex is a big deal. It's a huge deal and the idea of women leaving this life without having an orgasm, is like someone leaving the planet without ever witnessing a sunrise. Except, a lot of the time, an orgasm is better.
I didn't grow up in the bible belt and was raised by a mother who had no trouble talking about sex. Nor did any of the women in her family have trouble talking about sex. They were not saying things like, 'I was just about to drift to sleep and he bothered me again...."
When I first started writing 'seriously' I joined a number of online RWA Chapters. They give classes online and looking for tips on how to write a sex scene, I signed up for a class called Schmexy Times given by an erotica author.
I should have known better. I like things to be called by their name unless it's a word the character would obviously use or unless its a natural outgrowth of the couple's relationship. This word Schmexy made me cringe. Why I asked myself. Why?
Day 1 was devoted to finding names for body parts. We were supposed to make a list. Day two was devoted to sexual acts. We were supposed to make a list. Day three was devoted to euphemisms for THE act. Day four we wrote a scene about a first kiss. The only exercise I participated in was the first kiss scene. Then I had to tune out the rest.
At one point I started to write an article for a romance writers publication about what bothered me about the Schmexy class. The publication had taken my articles before. I failed miserably. I could not get out what I wanted to say. I knew my audience, a group of southern women, some of them wrote inspirational fiction, at least one of them wrote M/M erotic fiction. Still, how to explain what bothered me without alienating my audience?
I've written all sorts of backwards, upside down stuff but I finally had to give up on this article.
This EL James nonsense has bothered me from day 1. Everywhere I go I carry a book. For a while, carrying around a book was an invitation for people to introduce 50 Shades of Grey to me. I was asked by a waitress, a lady at CVS, and a nurse in my doctor's office if I had read 50 Shades. Giggle giggle. Blush blush.
My problem with it? It's not new. It's not revolutionary. It does nothing to spark a discussion on women's sexuality which we dearly need to have, some day, maybe; if we ever get the nerve.
Power exchange fiction is older than the Marquis de Sade. Anne Rice has written 5 books which were all better written then 50 Shades. There's also The Story of O and don't forget a little book, and movie called 9 1/2 weeks. Lolita, although more than a little creepy, is essentially power exchange fiction. Belinda, a book by Anne Rice is interesting because the power exchange is not typical; it's the young girl with control. All bookstores have these books and more. Even little tiny indie book stores right smack on top of the Bible belt have these books. People who read, have been reading them for years.
Some of these books are fabulous because they give a perfect picture of one aspect of human sexuality that yes, hasn't gotten a lot of air time. My problem is, from everything I've heard, 50 Shades doesn't hold a candle to these books. So, they've sparked a discussion, but the wrong one, and a rather immature one, where we're still just sort of toying with the idea, not really understanding the drives of the very real people who engage for whatever reason in this totally authentic and real lifestyle.
Incidentally, if you are squicked out by the idea of power exchange, most vampire fiction, most lycanthrope fiction has power exchange elements. Imagine a vampire in a classic pose; the woman's neck is bared, she is under the vampire's spell, and he is about to drink. Imagine the pack mentality and structure described in shifter novels. We use these 'devices' if you will, to express and explore parts of our collective psyche's and especially the many varied aspects of our sexuality. We often use supernatural beings as proxies for our hidden desires and curiosities.
So, color me pissed off when EL James, a not so great writer by all accounts, gets attention when if you wanted a mature discussion of power exchange relationships, you had only to turn to Laurell K Hamilton, who not only weaves it into her fiction, but participates in an alternative lifestyle and has gone to the trouble of educating herself on the subject of BDSM.
I don't personally think the world needs more BDSM fiction and if I see one more of those understated book covers meant to emulate 50 Shades, I may hold a book burning.
What I think the world needs is more female characters who own their sexuality. No this doesn't mean always being in charge. It doesn't always mean someone else being in charge either. It does mean a woman who doesn't depend on a man for her orgasm. Weird? Maybe. Women's bodies are intricate, we should get to know our own bodies and do so fearlessly. I'm all for taking a look at our parts. Our bodies have kinesthetic memories. The more often we do something, the more often it can be repeated. So - yes - I - am - saying - the - unthinkable. Women - all women - might consider - getting to know our bodies and learning how to give ourselves orgasms. There's no confusing sex with love when you can get physiological fireworks without a man.
Also, USE YOUR WORDS. Call things by their name. None of this lovebud stuff. Stop that! {Unless it's a part of how you speak to your lover - then it's endearing} Otherwise, OFF with the euphemisms! Maybe romance would be laughed at a little less if we weren't tiptoeing around the lovemaking part of our books.
Finally, the lovemaking part of our books is important. There are lots of ways to have sex. There's sex for pleasure. There's sex for release. I'm not against any sort of reason for sex, unless and until it becomes the only reason or way you can relate to people. Then it becomes compulsion at least and addition at worst.
However, ultimately, sex is a holy sacrament between two people. That's when it's the best, that's when it's lovemaking, and that's what romance writers are trying to express.
TMI, but there's the truth, not from a book, but from a 57 year old woman's real life sexual experiences.
