Saturday, August 21, 2010

Why I hold Lamba Literary in the Same Contempt They Hold M/M

Lambda Literary: The Fetishizing of Queer Sexuality. A Response. (2010)
Me: Slash Fiction--is Appropriate is Appropiate (going back a few years, but nothing has changed)

If you don't want to click the link here is the executive summary:
  • I don't apologise for what I find romantic or sexy, and I don't accept that it makes me a pervert.
  • I write and read whatever the hell I want to, utterly without shame.
We're slash, we're brash, get over it.

16 comments:

Teddy Pig said...

"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. That’s at the core of M/M writing–not the queer gaze but a distorted gaze."


I can already tell the idiot that wrote that has to sell her books using her victim status.

Pity me for I am oppressed!

Sorry but I have better things to do than listen to people so dependent on their label for authenticity.

roslynholcomb said...

I guess I'm missing something here. In what way is M/M any different from hetero guys getting off on girl/girl porn? Not real lesbians of course, but young, nubile, siliconed to their backteeth "girls." Haven't lesbians and pretty much all women found this offensive? Of course it hasn't gone away, but it's pretty much universally disdained. I'm not sure why women think should get a pass on this. I'm not saying that they shouldn't write it, or read it if so inclined, just that I would think you shouldn't be surprised that there are gay people that find it offensive.

I think anytime someone outside a marginalized group creates sexually explicit material for the consumption of those outside the group, it can be problematic. This is the by definition privilege and exploitation, and I'm really not getting why this is surprising or offensive.

justacat said...

I think anytime someone outside a marginalized group creates sexually explicit material for the consumption of those outside the group,

Maybe because it's incredibly presumptuous of this author to assume that it's only people outside the marginalized group (a) creating the material, or (b) consuming it; or, alternatively, that if people outside the marginalized group are creating it that they're doing so for the consumption of those outside it as well? Or because there are all sorts of reasons for writing and reading m/m that have nothing to do with fetishization, and that are very different from the "classic" reasons hetero guys get off on so-called "lesbians"?

She's sounds like an idiot because she's writing obviously without having bothered to do any research or reading about the phenomenon she's discussing. It has nothing to do with giving anyone a "pass" on anything.

(Sorry, couldn't help but butt in here...)

roslynholcomb said...

Maybe because it's incredibly presumptuous of this author to assume that it's only people outside the marginalized group (a) creating the material, or (b) consuming it; or, alternatively, that if people outside the marginalized group are creating it that they're doing so for the consumption of those outside it as well?

I think it's somewhat disingenuous if not downright deceptive to say that most, that is the overwhelming majority of the writers and consumers of M/M stories are not heterosexual women. My problem is why do they have a problem with acknowledging this? I

Or because there are all sorts of reasons for writing and reading m/m that have nothing to do with fetishization, and that are very different from the "classic" reasons hetero guys get off on so-called "lesbians"?

I'm still waiting for some evidence that A.) It's not the exact same thing and B.) Why do they care so much? And this notion that it's not primarily a fetish is absolutely absurd. If nothing else it's most assuredly exploitative in the exact same way that men are when they get off on "lesbians." Are women really so damned hypocritical that they can't simply acknowledge this fact?

Teddy Pig said...

I think it's somewhat disingenuous if not downright deceptive to say that most, that is the overwhelming majority of the writers and consumers of M/M stories are not heterosexual women.

Um maybe because they (as in Gay Romance authors) are hitting year end bestseller status over at A Different Light which you must admit sells mainly to the GLBT crowd.

Check your facts.

roslynholcomb said...

Of course, but I think even you would have to acknowledge that there's a difference between M/M and gay romance written for an actual gay audience. Further, I think we'd all agree that the overwhelmingly majority of M/M books being written and sold right now are written by and read by, het women. I could've sworn that you were one of the ones that pointed out the differences. I know I've seen more than one discussion on the matter.

Teddy Pig said...

Actually no.

I am the one who pointed out that M/M seems to hold a bad connotation and I refuse to use that stupid phrase while talking about Gay Romance.

Also in my opinion Gay Romance has always been written by women (gay or straight) going back to the likes of Patricia Nell Warren and even such well known authors as Marion Zimmer Bradley had a go at Gay Romance before Annie Proulx made it all go mainstream.

My thing is I find segregation to be a nasty crutch of the narrow minded and bigoted so this whole idea that the authors have to tell everyone about their sexuality and not simply be judged for their writing simply to be considered "part of the club" is so backwards and ignorant I cannot believe I have to say anything.

Victoria said...

I am "the idiot" who wrote this and thus has to use my "victim status" to sell my books.

If you had a clue, which you obviously don't (nor spellcheck, apparently--it's LAMBDA, a Greek symbol), you'd know that the only people invoking victim status with regard to the spurious M/M debate vis a vis my article were themselves M/M writers.

Lee Rowan: I'm a victim! Erastes: I'm a victim! Straight married lady afraid to use her name: I'm a victim!

Anyone even remotely familiar with my (award-winning) writing knows it's all about empowerment, not victimization.

Nevertheless, I have written extensively about real issues of oppression. When straight writers objectify queer lives, that IS oppression. Many M/M writers do this. And to put the likes of Erastes and Lee Rowan in the same catregory as Patricia Nell Warren and Annie Proulx is an absurdity that hardly bears commenting upon.

If you have better things to do than "listen to people so dependent on their label for authenticity," then perhaps you need a different venue. Because that is ALL the M/M cadre does--invoke their labels and their plea for authenticity. The whole debate was spurred by Erastes unbelievable claim that the "lazy journalist" from OUT deliberately made up a sexual orientation for her (straight). In the space of three days she then claimed bisexual status, trans sex [sic] status and Intersex status.

Please. I know who I am and have no self-loathing over it. One does wonder, though, why the same never seems to be true of these particular M/M writers.

And spare me--if straight men are writing lesbian porn is that now F/F? Or just the same straight titillation oppression of women that it's always been---Victoria Brownworth

Emily Veinglory: said...

"if straight men are writing lesbian porn is that now F/F? "

Sure, why not?

Personally I am with Teddypig on the battle of the labels. I don't care and use most of them interchangeably. Including porn/erotica/literary-sex-only-there-for-artistic-reasons

But you just keep on ranting.

Anonymous said...

And we *still* don't know which Victoria Brownworth books are banned in Canada. Both Amazon US and Amazon CDA lists look the same to me.

Because the comments are now closed at the LAMBDA blog, we'll never know which titles, or if it's true.

Teddy Pig said...

How can you accuse another lesbian of “appropriation” and question their "authenticity" for writing Gay Romance when you yourself write Gay Porn?

marcus said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
marcus said...

My comments went wonky, so I'm sorry if I wound up spamming anyone who had follow-up comments sent to e-mail. I've just deleted and addressed my opinion in my own blog.

Anonymous said...

Nice website , I never found erecsite.blogspot.com before in our google Drive up this great work!

Erastes said...

victim? who's a bloody victim? not me! *laughs* This is what amuses me so very much about your seemingly all-knowing attitude, the way you assume how you know anyone, just from reading blurbs or snippets of their work. Even if you read all of my work, you wouldn'tknow me any better, so don't keep assuming you do. I don't do victim. The day I consider myself victimised by hacks who can't check their facts, who consider a seventeen year old (self?) nomination (not a finalist) to be something to proud of,(seriously, don't you think it's about time you took that off your bio?) who reeks of hypocrisy because it's ok for a real lesbian to write gay porn but not bisexuals to write it, is the day I'll lie down and die. You'll have to froth a lot harder at the mouth to victimise me Ms B, sorry to disappoint.

Anonymous said...

Hello. I got the message post it?