Reading secular romance (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Theology] >> Morality & Ethics



Message

Leslie_JnJs_mom -> Reading secular romance (5/9/2008 10:56:11 PM)

There are plenty of women that are christian who would never pick up a porn magazine yet read romance novels that are about just as bad. What are your thoughts on this?



StephK -> RE: Reading secular romance (5/9/2008 11:00:41 PM)

I used to read them and some are just as bad as porn. They are also usually just plain bad in every way. I haven't read one in a long time. I really don't like the genre that much now. There are so many great books out there that I would rather read something of quality now than the bodice rippers.



OneOfHisJewels -> RE: Reading secular romance (5/9/2008 11:01:00 PM)

I have said for years that women's pornography comes in the form of the written word. Even so called "christian" romance novels can be problematic. Remember the very original Jannette Oke series? "Love Comes Softly," and all that? I enjoyed reading those when I was 12ish, etc. but in retrospect, I think her husband characters are WAY TOO PERFECT. No poor guy in real life could ever measure up.



Leslie_JnJs_mom -> RE: Reading secular romance (5/9/2008 11:09:23 PM)

I used to read them as well but quit a long time ago. I used to love the books taking place in 1800's.



redeemedsaint -> RE: Reading secular romance (5/10/2008 9:43:45 AM)

They are bad period. They are pretty graphic sexually.



WhiteRoseBlessings -> RE: Reading secular romance (5/10/2008 10:43:32 PM)

I dated a guy briefly who, during a conversation about porn, said, "Yeah but romance novels are no different." He said that in the hopes of trying to "catch" me. However, my response to him wasn't what he expected as I agreed with him, told him romance novels were indeed a level of porn and that I didn't read them for that very reason.

If the cover of the book shows a woman with one of her legs hiked up and wrapped around a man's waist while one of his hands are running up the back of that leg which is now uncovered because the dress was only a few inches below her thighs to begin with . . . then yes, that's a pretty good indication that the book is going to be pornographic.

If a simple car ride within a chapter cannot be described without first detailing the curvature of the woman's chest and the rippling muscles bulging through the man's shirt, that a pretty good indication that the book is going to be pornographic.

I also feel the same way about soap operas.

Porn comes in many varieties, all designed to appeal to our erotic senses.

Dress it up any way a person likes and call it something dreamy - "romance novels" . . . it is still porn.





While I very rarely read Christian romance novels, I do like them (occasionally); but I prefer the emphasis to be on "Christian" rather than "romance" in those particular cases.

This is probably for a different thread . . . but I think society as a whole is reaping the consequences of romanticizing romance . . . where everyone lives happily ever after, nothing bad ever happens and life is perfect because of "true love." None of that is reality; yet so many people are building their hopes and dreams on it being reality. Then when real reality presents itself, many people don't know how to respond.

Sigh. I'm seriously getting off-topic, so I should stop for now. LOL



As to the OP, while I haven't read every secular romance novel out there (and don't plan to neither), yes for the very most part, secular romance novels does equate with porn . . . and for that very reason, I most very likely won't read them (that, and a few other reasons).



tenfour -> RE: Reading secular romance (5/11/2008 11:52:47 PM)

I ask this out of curiosity (as a man I don't think I'll be picking up a romance novel any time soon). Is it possible to lust after someone that doesn't exist?

Although these books don't sound spiritually uplifting, if the plot treats sin as if it is not sin.



broken2live4him -> RE: Reading secular romance (5/12/2008 7:51:39 AM)

I know a number of christian women reading those secular romance novels. When they read the books and are reading the sex scenes described in the books, they are imagining the hero not their spouses in those scenes. Those romance novels are soft-porn. I used to read those novels years ago. I'm glad I stopped. My friends though who still read those books have some serious problems with their thought life but can't understand why. [sm=crazy.gif]



everythingat -> RE: Reading secular romance (5/12/2008 8:10:00 AM)

What about contemporary or classic literature that deals with romance? Do people feel it's a sin to read anything of a sexual nature? And what if the sex scene in the novel is meant to be repulsive instead of attractive?



rnershigh -> RE: Reading secular romance (5/12/2008 8:42:39 AM)

I don't think it's right to group ALL romance books in the "porn" category.[8D]
Maybe the more erotica-romance could be construed as being equivalent to porn for woman, but most romance books are called "romance" books for a reason! LOL.

Although it seems it is becoming more of a trend to go to the limits in sex scenes in romance books (that I have seen, which I don't really like at all, just give me romance!!!)[:)]

I still read secular romance and when I have come across romance books with explicit sex scenes, it is a turn off to me.
It's not the sex scenes that I read the romance for.
It's for the development of the relationship between the hero and heroine.
For the HEA.
It's the characters, the plot...the sex is secondary IMO.
One of my favorite romance books is Venetia by Georgette Heyer and if anyone has read a Heyer book, she has NO sex scenes in her books at all.
The dialogue, secondary characters, and romance between the hero and heroine is what makes Venetia one of my favorite romance books.

I can think of some authors that are good romances to read, that I wouldn't call "porn".
Judith McNaught
Julie Garwood
Stephanie Laurens
Nicole Jordan
Catherine Anderson.

There are more, but those are the ones that come to mind easily. So don't brush the romance genre with one stereotypical brush and say it's "porn for women".
Romance gets such a bad rep from everyone (not just Christians.LOL), do we really need to say that women that are Christian that continue to read secular romance are wrong or bad for reading it?



gengwall -> RE: Reading secular romance (5/12/2008 10:57:57 AM)

Lust is the desire for anything forbidden. If a novel causes a woman to "desire" the image of a man or model of a man that her husband can't possibly live up to, it is just a lust producing as graphic porn which portrays the image or model of a woman that a man's wife can't possibly live up to.



StephK -> RE: Reading secular romance (5/12/2008 11:18:19 AM)

Like rnershigh has said not all romance novels are sexually graphic. Those aren't the one's I think the OP is talking about. There are some well written novels that really aren't a problem but let's face it there are a lot of them that are just shy of being labeled porn.



rnershigh -> RE: Reading secular romance (5/12/2008 2:26:35 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: StephK

Like rnershigh has said not all romance novels are sexually graphic. Those aren't the one's I think the OP is talking about. There are some well written novels that really aren't a problem but let's face it there are a lot of them that are just shy of being labeled porn.


Actually, I read a lot of romance still and I can say it's the other way around.
MOST romance books aren't bad, yes there are sex scenes in a lot of them, but majority of them are tasteful and definitely not "porn".

Writing sex scenes just for sake of writing it, and doesn't further the relationship or plot I would call "written porn" because that's not a story at all.[8D]
I think most erotica and a good many erotica-romance books out there fall under that and most romances do not.
But the former category is definitely NOT romance and the latter category borders the fence of both erotica and romance.
If the OP is talking "written porn" in some books, then I'll agree there are books out there that could be categorized as such, and I would label them erotica books and not romance books. Just my opinion.



StephK -> RE: Reading secular romance (5/12/2008 2:35:57 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: rnershigh

quote:

ORIGINAL: StephK

Like rnershigh has said not all romance novels are sexually graphic. Those aren't the one's I think the OP is talking about. There are some well written novels that really aren't a problem but let's face it there are a lot of them that are just shy of being labeled porn.


Actually, I read a lot of romance still and I can say it's the other way around.
MOST romance books aren't bad, yes there are sex scenes in a lot of them, but majority of them are tasteful and definitely not "porn".

Writing sex scenes just for sake of writing it, and doesn't further the relationship or plot I would call "written porn" because that's not a story at all.[8D]
I think most erotica and a good many erotica-romance books out there fall under that.
But the former category is definitely NOT romance and the latter category borders the fence of both erotica and romance.
If the OP is talking "written porn" in some books, then I'll agree there are books out there that could be categorized as such, and I would label them erotica books and not romance books. Just my opinion.


It has been a while since I've read them so maybe they are not as graphic as they were back when I was reading them. It's kind of like movies were during then too. I am ashamed to admit that I read some really raunchy books back then. [&o]



rnershigh -> RE: Reading secular romance (5/12/2008 5:30:22 PM)

LOL.
Are you talking about those "bodice ripper" books from the 70s and 80s (even part of the early 90s)?[:D]
Those particular romance books usually had heroes that were really abusive and total jerks.
There were lots of rapes and boderline rape scenes.

The heroes and heroines in romances now are more PC.
The sex scenes are only different in that they aren't as...flowery (?)lol. Hard to explain, but I know that contemporary romance books I have read weren't that explicit and the sex scenes were short (exception is Linda Howard, she writes a pretty steamy love scene).
Paranormal and urban fantasy tend to have more explicit sex scenes (Christine Feehan is a good example, she writes some steamy scenes).
Historical is usually (I say usually, but there are some rare examples) not too bad, but it'll depend on the author how explicit she gets.

Tracy Anne Warren's sex scenes are tasteful and the story is decent (all the ones I read were regencies).

It varies across the various romance genres and the authors.

Some are more graphic in writing their sex scenes, but then I've noticed they are more descriptive writers in general.

So I hesitate to say that all romance is this way or all romance is that way.
There are similarities shared between all romance subgenres, but big differences depending on which subgenre romance it is..



StephK -> RE: Reading secular romance (5/12/2008 5:59:52 PM)

Yes it was the 80's. I then moved on to suspense and thrillers about serial killers. [:D]



Focusing -> RE: Reading secular romance (5/13/2008 1:03:07 PM)

I avoid it. As a single woman, I do not need to have those thoughts running rampant through my mind. They do nothing whatsoever to maintain my thoughts as pure.

I could quote a bunch of scripture, but all anyone needs to do is search for the term "sexual immorality" and see how frequently the Bible addresses this issue ... and warns us against it.

Not only that, if I were to fill my mind with all this *romance* ... that will infiltrate my mind and create a sense of expectation that I have in my BF, and that would be completely unfair to him. I think it's wiser to allow our romance in real life to be pure, not have outside influences mar the affection that develops naturally between two people. If I read something that I think is *romantic* based upon characters in a fictional book, I could easily miss the sweet things he does just for me that are special. I don't want to miss out on that. [;)][:)]



WhiteRoseBlessings -> RE: Reading secular romance (5/13/2008 1:08:57 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Focusing

I avoid it. As a single woman, I do not need to have those thoughts running rampant through my mind. They do nothing whatsoever to maintain my thoughts as pure.

I could quote a bunch of scripture, but all anyone needs to do is search for the term "sexual immorality" and see how frequently the Bible addresses this issue ... and warns us against it.

Not only that, if I were to fill my mind with all this *romance* ... that will infiltrate my mind and create a sense of expectation that I have in my BF, and that would be completely unfair to him. I think it's wiser to allow our romance in real life to be pure, not have outside influences mar the affection that develops naturally between two people. If I read something that I think is *romantic* based upon characters in a fictional book, I could easily miss the sweet things he does just for me that are special. I don't want to miss out on that. [;)][:)]
Excellent, excellent post, Sam.
Every single word of it. Excellent.

[sm=thumbsup.gif]



Focusing -> RE: Reading secular romance (5/13/2008 1:11:23 PM)

Thank you. [:)]



WhiteRoseBlessings -> RE: Reading secular romance (5/13/2008 5:02:08 PM)

My pleasure.



Shugs -> RE: Reading secular romance (5/13/2008 5:39:03 PM)

If the worst thing someone can say about a romance novel, is that it causes a woman to have higher expectations of men, then that is not a reason against them. I cannot truly speak on them because all I know are the old Harlequin "bodice rippers". They were horrible!!!
But having high expectations is not a bad thing. Lowered expectations is the doom of many a relationship.



WhiteRoseBlessings -> RE: Reading secular romance (5/13/2008 5:50:40 PM)

There's a BIG difference between having high expectations and unrealistic expectations. The majority of romance novels creates the 2nd type.



rnershigh -> RE: Reading secular romance (5/13/2008 6:18:01 PM)

I dunno about that.
Maybe some women will come away with unrealistic expectations after reading a romance.
But most know these are just fiction and the stories and characters aren't supposed to accurately reflect reality in any way.
I view all the books I read (not just romance genre) in this way, it's only fiction and I will suspend disbelief in how things ought to really be to enjoy the few moments I am reading.



WhiteRoseBlessings -> RE: Reading secular romance (5/13/2008 6:21:18 PM)

Most women I know who read that stuff thinks it's reality; they hinge their hopes on those types of books.

They believe that "fairytales" really do come true and they're just waiting for their time.


[shrugs]


To each his own.



gengwall -> RE: Reading secular romance (5/13/2008 6:29:31 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: rnershigh

I dunno about that.
Maybe some women will come away with unrealistic expectations after reading a romance.
But most know these are just fiction and the stories and characters aren't supposed to accurately reflect reality in any way.
I view all the books I read (not just romance genre) in this way, it's only fiction and I will suspend disbelief in how things ought to really be to enjoy the few moments I am reading.

Take the statement above and replace "reading a romance" with "viewing porn", plus a few other gender and gramatical changes, and here is what you get:

quote:

Maybe some men will come away with unrealistic expectations after viewing porn.
But most know these are just fiction and the stories and characters aren't supposed to accurately reflect reality in any way.
I view all the porn I look at (not just the magazine genre) in this way, it's only fiction and I will suspend disbelief in how things ought to really be to enjoy the few moments I am looking.

Does the fact that it is unrealistic make porn any less degrading and sinful? Do you really believe that to "suspend disbelief in how things ought to really be to enjoy the few moments" that a man looks at porn makes porn ok? This is where the problem lies and romance novels can have as detrimental an effect on relationships as porn can. ANYTHING that measures the opposite sex against an unobtainable standard degrades the opposite sex regardless of how believable it is.



Page: [1] 2   next >   >>



Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5 ANSI