Sex in M/M Books ... Do Readers Want More or Less? The Results

Last Thursday at the request of an author I posted a poll re the above. Readers AND authors responded as you always have, with great enthusiasm, and gave very different answers to the questions. This is probably going to be the most difficult poll to wrap up and give coherent conclusions based on your comments but I'll give it my best shot.

Your comments were very revealing and what I took away from them were the following: You see M/M romances as two categories of books - sweet M/M romances, and M/M 'erotic' romances where the sex is anticipated and very much desired. What is very clear to me and I hope to you, is that M/M romances are labelled as 'erotic' because they are published by epublishers. It doesn't matter if the M/M romance has very little or no erotic content, that is the perception and the reality. To reinforce this perception, some ebook publishers have been emphasizing the sexual content of their books (Samhain, Phaze, for example) by "heat" ratings and even ebooksellers like ARe are doing so.

On the other hand, M/M romance books published by mainstream print publishers do not have to contend with the 'erotic' label. I have bought many M/M books published by Simon & Schuster, Harper Collins, Kensington etc., where the main theme is sports or mystery etc. with a gay romance subtext, and the publishers do not publicize the erotic content even if the books contain a lot of sex. Print publishers for the most part do not promote the sexual content of their books (unless they are 'erotic' publishers such as Aphrodisia), there are no 'heat' ratings, and you only find out how much sex is in the books when you buy them or read the reviews. Standish, which I would rate as erotic, is published by P.D. Publishing Inc. and there were no labels placed on it.

As with every poll, I received email comments from gay men about this whole debate, and at the end of this post I will share a few of their concerns about the way they are portrayed in M/M books. I think one comment I saw goes like this --

"M/M fiction is women's fantasy interpretation of what gay men's relationships are like"

Now on to the poll:

Must M/M romance, by definition, contain explicit sex?

Most readers and authors seem to agree that M/M romances do not have to be sexually explicit but there was a definite expectation that M/M 'erotic' romances would be. Generally, erotic M/M books were more popular with readers than their tamer counterpart and this is borne out by sales figures.

Here's what the Loose Id publisher said -

....... I would note that while some of Loose Id's m/m authors can get away with less erotic content and still sell, they almost invariably don't sell as well as m/m authors who have more erotic content. I don't know if that's because of our particular market (after all, m/m books may be among the few we have that can get away with less erotic content than our other stories) or if that's a universal.

and my response

I don't consider Josh Lanyon's books to be "erotic" (he probably won't like me saying this) *g* but they still sell a lot I would think. I buy his books because of the characterizations and the stories. Perhaps his books are a few of the exceptions that you mention.

Below are some of your very extensive comments on this question -

Not for me. I don't mind if there is no sex at all. I just love a good story.

No. It's romance, not porn.

M/M romance should encompass all types of heat levels, from sweet to hot and heavy and explicit, just the same as "straight" erotica. One of the problems with writing gay romance, is that you're already perceived as porn, smut or outside the "norm" by the industry and some readers.

Personally, I'm increasingly bored with sex in m/m fiction. How many times can I read the same scene in practically the same words?

It seems that those readers who would like a bit more content or story in their books rather than a whole lot of smexin are increasingly being pushed out because sex sells.

No. I don't think so. I think erotica must, but romance can be about falling in love, the build-up, and the walk to the bedroom, but a writer can close the bedroom door in our faces and allow us to imagine what transpires within. Sometimes a suggestion of what will happen or what happened can be sexier than describing it in detail.

"Must" might be a bit harsh but for me, most of the time yes, to some degree. Why can't MM romance be treated in the same category like straight romance? If it is an erotica read, than of course the sensuality and sex scene will be higher. If the MM is just a romance and not erotic, again keep it in the same category just like straight romance. The only difference is instead of a heroine and hero, there are two heroes falling in love together.

Definitely not. Nobody is suggesting that m/f romance must contain explicit sex, so I don't see why m/m romance has to be all about the sex. A romance is a love story - the love has to be there, but the sex is an optional extra.

No, but apparently this is not universally understood.

M/M romance doesn't necessarily require sex but if it's a M/M erotica I would say yes. Sometimes I want to read a sweet love story and sometimes I want a hot sexy love story ;D

No. But it needs to be clear that the book is an erotic romance or a non-erotic romance. I get rather ticked when I buy a book that leads one to believe it's an erotic romance, and nothing really sexual happens. It's the whole 'meeting reader expectations' thing.

I agree with what others have said. If I was purchasing m/m erotic romance than yes, I would expect explicit sex. However, if I was reading m/m romance, no, not particularly. I personally think it's ridiculous that m/m is being categorised as 'erotica' just because it's m/m and that there is a perception - it seems mostly by publishers - it is somehow kinky and taboo and therefore 'fits' into the erotica genre. WTF. Makes you wonder if any of them have actually read what they're publishing.

You also had brought up a point about how much of the m/m is published by erotic publishers. I don't have stats, but I'm betting you're right, that most of it is, and this contributes to the "problem." I have m/m in my current series, but I have a mainstream publisher. I love them for this. They didn't care. They just wanted a good story.

We have to assume that sex sells, and sells well. Publishers wouldn't ask for explicit content if they didn't believe their readers wanted it. Beyond that, honestly, I don't know what to think. Mixed messages abound on this topic. There seem to be nearly as many preferences as there are readers.

Definitely plot and characters for me. Stories consumed with sex is just too flat and repetitive. Sex is not a must. I will buy a gay romance with no sex. And if there is sex let it be explicit and must be at least 75% plot and 25% sex please. In this later case Lee Rowen and Josh Lanyon have the right balance. And Please when we say M/M it must be pure M/M. I just hate M/M/F!

I think M/M romance should include all types of romance. If you’re buying an erotic romance, then you’re going to expect sex.

Would readers still buy/read M/M romances if the books do not contain explicit sex e.g. Wicked Gentlemen or Captain's Surrender?

Without exception every one who commented on the poll gave a resounding "YES" answer to this question. I don't know if it was the examples I used, but you were all pretty well in unison.

Here are a few of your comments -

Yes, I have both of those books. Whistling In the Dark was another great book without explicit sex.

Buy/Read: I LOVED Wicked Gentlemen. So yes on that one.

Absolutely! Especially Captain's Surrender is one of my five all time favorite m/m romance books and I loved Wicked Gentlemen, too!

I think, above all, most readers are looking for a good story, well told, with characters they care about. I don't think there's anything wrong with having explicit sex scenes (much of my own work does), but in the end, it has to be integral to the story...and the story is what matters. Otherwise, why bother reading a book. If you just want to see lots of men fucking and sucking with no context whatsoever, get yourself onto the website of Treasure Island Media and check out their offerings.

Definitely again. Captain's Surrender has been selling pretty well over the past year. It's been #1 in gay romance on Amazon, so I can't complain :)
Sure looks that way. In fact, Captain's Surrender and Charlie's "Lessons In" series are books I recommend to friends who are fine with the idea of gay romance but aren't keen on explicit sex in a story.

I don't have numbers on Captain's Surrender, but the numbers on Wicked Gentlemen say, "Yes."

My point was simply that they have both received a lot of notice online for one reason or another, and that helped their sales. Another example is Whistling in the Dark........ In such a competitive market, it can sometimes be difficult to go digging through all the publishers, so the effect of word of mouth can't be ignored in these cases.

There was, of course, also this very valid comment:

Well, how would you know BEFORE you bought the book? I know most publishers have increasingly ridiculous sex ratings, but a 'sweet' book can be anything from a few scenes to no scenes. Unless you buy the 'two fister' every time, there's really no way to know what you're getting.

Let's not forget that a number of print M/M books with minimal sex that have gone on to huge successes, including WG and CS have gone viral and become successful because of positive word of mouth and reviews, so we should not minimize the effect of these factors that contributed to their triumphs. Many of these books were released by small pubs such as Blind Eye Books, and they leapt over their competitors from large NY publishing houses by a combination of excellent writing, smart marketing and word of mouth. By the way, Captain's Surrender was not released exclusively as a print book by Linden Bay but is available as an ebook as well..

What do readers prefer more -- anticipation or instant gratification?
(In other words, a slow build-up of sexual tension or a quick cut-to-the-chase)?

Again you were split, although the majority seemed to prefer a slow burn

I tend to prefer anticipation, though either is fine as long as it's well written. What I don't like in the instant gratification stories is the 2 heroes declaring their undying love right afterwards, esp if they've only known each other a few hours. I like the relationship/love to slowly build.
Looking at my books/stories, with very few exceptions I write the anticipatory set up and it's very well received. I've received comments many, many times about how people love that 120+ pages pass before sex, instead showing major relationship investment.

Personally, I think this depends on the context of the story and if you have several sex scenes, a mix of the two is probably more interesting. A slow build up, both in real life and on the page, can be undeniably sexy, but so can a passionate, fling your clothes to the floor (or sidewalk) madly coupling encounter. It's whatever works in the story...

One of the most enjoyable books that I read recently is The One That Got Away. This book was all sexual tension, anticipation, s-l-o-w burn and the sex didn't happen until well into the final chapters. I read it as a "free" read a year and a half ago and it stayed with me and I read it again and again over that period of time. I pimped it to everyone who would listen until they were sick of me and the damn book.......It probably is not to everyone's taste ....... but I really "got" this gift that the authors had written for their fans. My point is that M/M romances don't have to have sex in every chapter to resonate with readers.

It depends on what works for the story. Wave beat me to the punch by mentioning The One That Got Away in which the build-up of sexual tension was unbelievably sensual and erotic and was an integral part of the story. There are others that essentially start with sex such as Laura Baumbach's A Bit of Rough and T A Chase's Home of His Own and the meat of the story deals with the development of the relationship between the two men. I guess the bottom line is that the reader - whether it be anticipation or instant gratification - needs to be convinced that it adds to the romance.

Lately I'm kind of burned out on sex scenes. I skim most of them. I'm more interested in sexual tension. In a lot of books, the sexual tension is a lot hotter than the actual sex. But a few months ago, I was reading erotica/porn anthologies, which are nothing but sex.

Either is good, dependent on the context. Sometimes I like it fast and gritty and other times I like it slow and sweet.

From my experience I like both as a reader, as long as it's convincing. The couple can come together with fireworks, bells and whistles in the first page, as long as there is plot and conflict and spanners in the works enough to keep me on the edge of my seat throughout the rest of the book. I also adore the "will they won't they" tease of things like "Gentleman's Gentleman" by Lee Rowan.

As a reader, I prefer stories that establish some kind of connection other than 'Bob was hot, so was Joe, so they fucked.' But guys, especially young guys, are sometimes screw first and ask questions later, so if a writer's done a good job a story that starts with a bang can be very good indeed.

Generally I prefer to get to know the characters first.

Meaningful build-up. It doesn't have to be slow. Only significant.

Considering most m/m romance, whether erotic or tame, has fairly young heroes, doesn't realism dictate some portrayal of vigorous sexual appetite? I don't think I've ever known a man in his late teens, twenties, or thirties who's been blase enough about sex to bypass opportunities.

Readers and authors alike maintain that the only worthwhile sex scenes are those that advance the plot. Yet there are countless books from which the smexin' could be culled and the plot would remain intact. So, how do people define "advance the plot" or "integral to the plot"?

Here are your varying explanations of how you perceive "advance the plot"

Every scene in the book should advance the plot in some fashion whether by revealing information or something about the characters' personalities. In that respect, sex scenes are no different to any other scene. So, if you haven't learned anything new about the characters/plot during the sex scene it shouldn't be there.

So, how do people define "advance the plot" or "integral to the plot"? I don't know. As a writer, if the sex isn't truly integral and if it could be cut and the plot would still work, then maybe it doesn't need to be there in the first place.

When I write, I use the same test that Sam uses - did we learn anything about the characters or the plot or conflict? And it has to be a decent amount of stuff, and not one line or 2 that I can move to another scene. If not, the scene isn't important and it gets cut.

The sex scene needs to add something which wouldn't be there if the scene wasn't there. Something other than just sex. It needs to mark a change in the characters' relationships, or state of mind or circumstances. So you could have the first time, the time when one of them was deceiving the other and it showed, the time when they started to understand each other... you know? Points where something has changed and the sex can help demonstrate what it is and what its results on their relationship are.

I define “integral to the plot” to be “integral to the STORY,” which I in turn define as “necessary.” Sex rarely actually moves the plot, but it frequently defines character or changes the relationship between the participants. And yes, I think that’s important. Sex for the sake of watching two boys get it on is great, but if I’m reading or writing a story, I want there to be a point – or a goal – for every scene.

I would say the sex doesn’t always need to advance plot (in terms of what is going on in the story), but it does need to say something about the characters. It does need to show where they are in the relationship, where they’re going, where they want to be, where they are in conflict, allow them to have a conversation they might not have out of the “bedroom”, allow the reader to feel the connection between them. Basically, for me, ever scene in a book should have a point. In erotic romance, sometimes the point is to show the passion, show the desire that is relevant to their story

Pffff...There are no real criteria. It depends on the author and his/her skill. I'd say the scene must ring true. Sex is a part of life and I like to feel it,s "normal" for the characters to have sex at that particular moment, in that context. The sex is a reflection of where they're at, at what stage or the relationship they are, and show us, for instance, how they're starting to trust each other, or that the sex has moved beyond mere sex. It's hard to explain well, but you know it when you read. When the scenes become sex for the sake of sex, I start skipping them. It's often the case once the couple is firmly established as a couple and the challenge is mostly gone.

Oh, Wave. I could write a book about this.
"Advance the Plot" means that the sex leads to an escalation of the emotional line of the plot that complicates the motivations of the characters.

How do people define "advance the plot? A good example of this can be found in J. Lanyon's "Snowball in Hell." The detective character, Matthew Spain observes the reporter character (and murder suspect), Nathan Doyle having gay sex early in the story. Because of this, Matthew begins to hide evidence of Nathan's sexuality (which is also his own) from the other police investigating the murder. Matthew goes so far as to shield Nathan from a police search which he knows will expose Nathan's sexuality, even though Nathan is a suspect and should be treated, essentially, without mercy. In this instance, the sex scene changes the way the characters behave and therefore it advances the plot.

"Integral to the Plot" is the same thing, essentially, because the characters would not act the same way if the sex scene had not occurred and therefore the sex can be said to be "integral."

Can heroes be promiscuous? To what degree and under what circumstances? When do readers stop forgiving them for being "cock whores?"

On this topic many of you disagreed and I have selected a few disparate comments

As a recovering cock whore, I plead the fifth. But seriously, this is a difficult task (making a promiscuous character sympathetic) but I think it can be done, as can most things...if they're done with skill, compassion, and feeling.

It's not a matter of forgiveness so much as verisimilitude. I've never met a true cock whore so I don't believe them in fiction. I've met promiscuous men who, for emotional reasons have easy virtue, but cock whores are an invention of pornographers, not real people.

Anything's possible, and the degree etc. depends on the story. Some readers will never forgive infidelity, which I think is slightly unreasonable; just as in real life, people do sometimes slip, and not all men see physical infidelity as a deal-breaker. I hate to keep saying "it depends on the writer and the story," but, really, it does;

I also don't think that men put the same degree of importance on physical faithfulness. So my characters are (in general) more concerned with the emotional loyalty of their partners than with their physical faithfulness.

I’ve never written a promiscuous hero – which I define as a guy who sleeps around even after he meets his One True Love – but I don’t mind reading them if they’re well-written and have sound motivation for their behavior.

Depends on the characters. But once the h/h hook up, I prefer them to be exclusive if the book is billed as an erotic romance.

Yes. Nathan in Snowball in Hell exhibits promiscuous behavior. It makes sense psychologically, and I think readers mostly know where he's coming from.

This is really an issue if authors are not going to portray gay men somewhat realistically but through rose coloured glasses. Even women cheat in real life and in books and I don't understand why readers get so upset if one of the heroes cheats (but eventually at the end of the book there is an HEA.) Almost 6 years after it was written, Chris Owen's bestseller Bareback is still garnering admiration and criticism. If the writers don't give us flawed protags (cheating could be a real character flaw, creating major conflict in the relationship), wouldn't we, as readers, question their characterizations as being totally unrealistic?

And you got me. I loved the Adrien English series, and didn't really hate Jake, just wanted to slap him around a little. But I don't see that series as strictly romance, I see it as more detective fiction with romantic elements.

Promiscuity: Not once our heroes have met. I'll stop reading a book if one of the heroes has sex with someone else after they've met the other hero.

Part of what makes us identify or believe in a story is our own history -- and our education. We all bring our own experiences and beliefs to anything we read. And then of course there's the role of imagination. The essential thing in good m/m (or any) writing is not...would any man do this? It's...can this writer sell this premise to this reader at this time?

Going back to Jake in Adrien English...I was shocked by the amount of hateful comments I've heard readers use toward him. Granted I haven't had the time to read past the first two books in the series, but I don't hate the poor guy. If anything I feel a bit sorry for him that he's unable to accept himself for who he is. I've met that guy. I know him all too well.

Yes, certainly. It totally depends on the build-up of the character.

LOL... I don't know... my romantic side tells me No, I prefer not. But sometimes it's OK if there's a valid reason or it's part of the character's development. For example, I find it hard to read the guy in "Standish" carrying on with the man who practically broke up his relationship with his one true love, although in a way, I understand why he's doing it.

I prefer that once the protags get together that they are monogamous, but if well-written and it furthers the story, I can deal as long as it is over before the HEA. I'm not in the group calling for Jake's head (though I did want to smack him in THYS), but it bothered me that he was in multiple "relationships" while he was with Adrien. But maybe we needed to see that about Jake -- or him live through it himself -- so that he could be redeemed and for him to get to a sweeter HEA with Adrien. Hmmmmm... I guess we'll find out in Book 5.

How much emotional intensity can a sex scene contain before readers start screaming, "Yuck, emo!"

50/50 here. Emotional intensity could work both ways - it could turn readers off or on -

Waxing poetic about the scent of his skin and comparing it to summer's rain on the beach at dawn (I made that up) doesn't really work for me.

Give me emo or give me death. On the other hand, a thirteen-year-old girl in a grown man’s body will never do much for me. It’s a delicate balance.

It's all about the writer's skill.

huh. That's hard to quantify. You already know that guys who squee and bust out the waterworks constantly annoy the fuck out of me. As for pure overall emo...I read a book a while back that made me want to slit the character's wrists for him so he could die already.

Tears as an emotional shorthand, no. Intensity is fab. Even anguish. But deliberately-crafted plot misunderstandings just to drag the whole damned thing out another 4 chapters – noooooooooooo.

I am all for emotional intensity in the protags to further the story or character development, but when a man cries every five minutes like a little girl *coughtorencough* it gets to me. I'm not a fan of constant crying but I don't mind at all reading about the protags emotions. Sometimes sex can be very emotional.

As with everything in life, I think it's a matter of degree. Certainly men have emotions, but their emotions are not always as much on the surface as women's emotions.

I like emotional intensity, but I don't like dithering

...depends on the characters. The emotional intensity needs to match the guys. Some characters are just more in touch with their feelings than others. That being said, purple prose is really annoying.

I'm not a great fan of crying, but I do love a scene where a character is struggling with his emotions, and then breaks down. Men do suffer, and cry – but it's their conditioning that makes it harder for them. Contemporary gay men may find it easier, I don't know, as I'm talking from the historical perspective in this answer (as in most of my answers), but a young man who has either been to a English prep then boarding school with all it's "make a man of you" ethos – has a father who has probably drummed into him what a man "is" is going to find blubbing difficult. But when it happens it can be hugely dramatic. Many earlier m/m were notorious for this—I won't name names—but the heroes were so girly I was surprised when the other hero found dick in his breeches.

What are the biggest sex-scene turn-offs and turn-ons?

I get turned off when a sex scene starts to read like a "This is how to have safe, painless, well lubricated m/m sex, manual." Other than that, pretty much anything goes, except scat, golden showers and stuff like that.

Turn Offs - Too much trash talk – I hate stories where the hero starts saying "oh yea you like that, bitch , don't you?" when he's supposed to be IN LOVE with the man he's in bed with. Turns ons? Sound taste touch smell sight.

Turn-ons - little details that show one or the other character has thought hard about how to please the other. Tenderness (or the kind of forcefulness which you know everyone wants at that point.)

Offs include: Too long. Too boring.

Ons include: emotional relevance. New character information.

Turn-offs: Boring characters. Cut and paste descriptives we've seen a thousand times. ie the one finger, then two etc. intro to anal sex.

Turn-offs - overly mechanical sex scenes that don't have anything to do with who the characters are. Turn-ons - little details that show one or the other character has thought hard about how to please the other. Tenderness (or the kind of forcefulness which you know everyone wants at that point.)

Technically, anything involving extreme kinks like golden showers and scat, but generally, bad writing. :)

Turn offs: Immediate LURV!!!! (like the sex has magically replaced emotional bonding and the development of a robust relationship) LMAO Bad, bland dialogue so I have no idea who’s talking (or probably care). Sex for its own sake – and although I can’t define that, I know it’s happening when I get confused with the ‘he’ i.e. ‘his’ leg’ crossed ‘his’ thigh and ‘he’ gave a groan LOL. (It’s always a tricky thing to write in m/m but not a problem for good writers). It means I feel they’re just going through the motions, like a porn movie progression.

Turn ons: Need and nervousness! LOL Desperation and desire. Repression and raggedness. Sexual tension, unrelieved or otherwise. Am I cruel or what? Realistic sexual interaction – I like body actions to sound like they’re happening to real people not just marble statues. In fact, I’m really turned on by an author’s style – if their own care and passion and enthusiasm is invested in the scene, it shines through the characters.

I have a short attention span and I'm quickly bored.

No-nos: potty games, blood, strong BSDM. Gratuitous sex that doesn't further the plot. Menage-a-whatever. Yes, please: anything well-written that don't include the above.

For me creativity in a sex-scene is a turn-on, but too much creativity is a turn-off. Sex in a photocopy room? Interesting! Being fucked on a Xerox machine while dictating a memo? WTF!

Is there such a thing as a sex scene that's too long, or too short? When and why do the long ones start losing your interest?

Here are a few of your responses. I found the first comment to be astounding! I have never read a sex scene that's chapters long -

Yes, there is. Laurell K. Hamilton write sex scenes that are CHAPTERS long and I long ago started skipping 95% of them. They're badly written at that (see "mechanical sex" above). Those lose my interest before the sex even begins, usually in the chapters-long pre-sex talk.

It’s not the size of the sex scene, it’s what you do with it.

I've read a sex scene that went on for about 40 pages. Ouch.

Well-written, I can take a long scene, but I will absolutely skip pages to get back to the story when it no longer furthers the plot/character development or becomes the same words over and over. I want the first sex scene -- whether it be a kiss, a blowjob, or intercourse -- to be deliciously detailed, and after it doesn't matter so much (less is more in many cases). And don't give me a technical sex manual, please.

Yes, to both, and it isn't necessarily the long ones that fail to hold my interest. It's to do with what's being revealed during the scene. ie. if it's nothing, then it's boring.

Here's what a reader said during the last poll. "The sex HAS to be relevant. There's nothing worse than reading a 200-page novel and 150 pages are sex, (for me, anyway)." Do the rest of you feel that way?

It depends on whether I bought the book knowing that the 150 pages of sex was what I was getting. I mean, sometimes I buy an erotic novel expressly for the erotic stuff. Other times I want something more romantic. Ratings can be handy, here.

Yes. I start skipping the sex scenes when a book just has page after page of sex.

This seems to be the most consistent theme -- no reader wants to read page after page of sex.

YES! I've quit reading more than one book because all they did was fuck. Okay, plot complications covered in first 2 chapters, now we bang for another 12. Booooring.

Definitely. I have pretty much been put off from buying new m/m by authors who are unknown to me by the thought that I'm going to be wasting my money on nothing but sex. I *wish* that they would make a clear distinction between the m/m books which are written as erotica and the m/m books which are written as romance, because then I would buy more of the latter without being worried I'm going to get 150 pages I'll want to throw away.

I don't ever finish novels like this. I get too bored on page three.

I will say, however, that the sex in my books -- how much, how often, how vanilla or kinky, how soon, etc. -- will always depend on the particular story and its particular characters. In some of my books, there's no sex until well over halfway through the book. In others, my guys start going at it within minutes of meeting each other. I have to let the needs of the characters and their story dictate how much (if any) sex there's going to be, and what type. That's the only criteria I can use, unless I want to end up with a dull, dead tale that no one wants to read.


Has Ellora's Cave gone over the top?

This publisher has always been known for its strong emphasis on the "erotic" element in its romance books. (In other words, explicit content in m/m fiction.) So, is the EC equivalent too much? A lot of posters at various romance-fiction-related sites have said they won't read books with that degree of sexual saturation; they claim it is not only tiresome, but undermines plot and character development.

About 95% of you indicated that you don't shop at Ellora's Cave and the reason probably is because EC does not release many M/M books and this blog reviews predominantly M/M. The answer would most likely be different on another blog. Personally I check out the EC website from to time because I find the blurbs amusing and sometimes horrifying, as in watching a train wreck! Here are a few of your comments -

I don't think EC set the standard so much as got there first and entrenched themselves. I think many publishers have gone over the top in the past year.

EC: Can't be unbiased here, since I publish almost exclusively with EC. If a book isn't in my interest zone, I pass. Since I've read some pretty over the top stuff from NY to other small presses I don't think EC is much different.

I don't read 'em. I think I've read one, and I didn't think much of it.

***************
Before we conclude, as promised, here are a few comments from ACTUAL gay men who feel that female M/M writers don't "get" them, and that their portrayals in M/M books bear no likeness whatsoever to who they really are, even taking into consideration that writers are selling fantasies. Here are a few of their comments -

How would I like to see gay men portrayed?

I'm not sure how to answer that. Other than 'like people.' When I pick a mystery, or a general novel, it's for the usual reasons -- interesting story, well written, etc. -- but when it contains a gay main character, I also hope to be able to relate to the character, identify with him to some extent. This is something I seldom do with romance characters, but I'm not sure why. They just don't seem like real people. I can't put myself in their place. Maybe the gay men in these stories are supposed to be mythical creatures known as 'gay men' but with little relation to the living prototype, much like fictional pirates. Just a thought.

Another thing I've run into that annoys me is readers being completely oblivious to issues gay men & women must run into on a regular basis. I don't mean they have to be extremely politically informed; just aware that there are some negatives. For example, I recall someone on Josh's LJ criticizing Jake Riordan for being so wrapped up in conflicts and pressures 'entirely of his own making.' Um, no, he's a detective with the LAPD and a member of a nice, Irish Catholic family. He didn't make up all his issues with being gay, just for the sake of drama.

Similarly, it's unrealistic to show gay couples showing affection openly, everywhere, without providing some explanation, especially for a story set in, say, rural Alabama. If someone's going to write a love story between 2 American men, they need to be aware that the couple will always think twice before kissing across a table at Applebee's.

What seems to bother some female readers of M/M books the most is the whole perception of casual hook-ups between gay men, so I posed this question -

Are gay men more likely to be promiscuous than their straight counterpart?

Promiscuity is very subjective, of course; but all things being equal, probably so. I think it's mainly a question of availability; when you have 2 dicks in play rather than just 1, more action is likely to take place. In actual practice, it means straight men just aren't able to be as promiscuous as they might like (they have sex with women who may be culturally programmed to be less sexually adventurous) given the opportunity. That being said, gay guys are individuals. There are variations in both sex drive and personal standards, same as with anyone else.

One thing I've picked up on in these stories, which I wouldn't mind seeing changed: promiscuity in gay men being equated with emotional coldness or other problems of that sort. Liking sex, for its own sake, doesn't have to be a character flaw.

He went on to give examples of a few gay characters in books with whom he could identify -

Henry Rios & John DeLeon, from Rag And Bone by Michael Nava -- a sweet, middle-age/second-chance romance with distinctive characters that practically step off the page.

Adrien & Jake, obviously. Josh's strong point is his characters, and there are none better than Adrien & Jake.

The main quality these characters all shared is that I felt like I knew them after reading, even if (as is often the case) there were no graphic sex scenes in the novel

******************
I would like to end this poll by giving my 2 cents on something that has been bothering me for a while and this goes to characterizations -- no, not "gay for you" or "chicks with dicks", *g* but another pet peeve. I have read a number of M/M romances where writers seem to feel the need to rationalize why a character is gay, and this has become an important plot point in some M/M books. Typically the gay character suffers some traumatic event in his childhood, such as rape or sexual abuse, which then sets him on the path to his sexual orientation. I think there are enough studies around which have established that gay men and women are born that way -- it's part of their genetic makeup, so I don't understand how being raped can "make" someone gay. We don't rationalize why someone is heterosexual. I think we need to put a fork in this storyline. Just my take.

The author who dreamed up all of this work for you and me agreed to "out" herself.... no, she's not gay, *g* she is K.Z. Snow. I should also indicate that a few of the questions were provided by Josh Lanyon since he has a keen interest in some of the topics, but I did have to ask him, although I have a sneaking suspicion that he didn't mind being asked! KZ, Josh and I would like to thank you for your time and effort in participating in this poll -- I'm sure you were busily engaged in doing something much more exciting when you took a time-out to complete the survey. I hope that the results will be of help to all the authors who participated when you're writing your next M/M book since a lot of the comments are from readers. This poll also gave the readers an opportunity to tell their favourite authors what they would like to see (or not) in upcoming books.

I'm sorry I couldn't make this post any shorter I tried, I really tried. I didn't include half as many quotes as I would have wanted but ALL of them are available in the original blog post here.

I must apologise for not posting these results earlier but my ISP had a disastrous server crash over the weekend and the early part of this week which affected a large area of Canada. Consequently I could only access the blog and email intermittently. Obviously this meant that I could not respond to the comments posted by some of you on the blog -- I wasn't ignoring you, I just couldn't read your comments or reply to them.

One last thing - NO MORE POLLS FOR AT LEAST 2 MONTHS PEOPLE!! *g*
Thanks everyone.

And that's a wrap!