Here's Jo! And yes, this topic is far too racy for Cabbage Patch Kids.
That's my only picture. it's from my first historical and it's the closest I've ever been to a cover that could be rape. And that's the book that has the closest to a rape in it, but it's a wedding consummation, and there are reasons. It's still not a comfortable situation, and I don't think any reader would have been thrilled by it.
Yes, right after sex, we have… rape. Rape, whipping, or any other kind of highly undesirable behaviour on the part of the hero toward the woman who's suppose to become the loving love of his life. There is actually a term – “heroic rape” -- back from the dark ages of the true bodice ripper. The time when I stopped reading romance.
There’s been a lot of debate around the web recently about a book in which the “hero” imprisons and rapes the heroine. I don’t want to name it or get into it because I haven’t read the book so that would be unfair. What is bothering me is an idea that’s floated to the surface during this furore – that rape and abuse is okay in a historical romance, but not in a contemporary romance.
Huh? Does that strike you as badly as it does me?
One explanation is that, well, men didn’t know any better in the past. What?
Certainly some men back then thought they had a right to any woman they fancied, especially a poor one, or one they came across in the wrong part of town. That doesn’t happen now?
There were men who thought once they had a woman she didn’t get to leave until they said so, so if she didn’t want sex, that was too damn bad. That doesn’t happen now?
There have been all kinds of reasons that men in the past raped women, including as part of hostilities, but all those reasons happen today. The thing is, with the probably exception of warfare, few of those men would think it was okay, and few of their fellow men would if they knew about it. No more than today, at least.
And unless the woman was the man's wife (those marital rights) it was a crime. A serious crime. If the victim was poor the law might not work as keenly as if she were rich. If her virtue was soiled, the offence might be seen as less vile than if she were virtuous. If the rapist was powerful, he might not be pursued, or at least might have good lawyers. But that doesn’t happen now?
An extension of the men not knowing any better, is the very peculiar idea that an author has no choice but to have her historical romance hero whip, imprison, rape etc, because all men were like that back then. Nonsense. One thing I know, and I remind myself of it as I write, everything I put in a book, everything, is a choice I make. I don't get to say that history made me do it. If I don't like what a particular aspect of history involves, I won't go there.
Then someone said that a hero harming a heroine was understandable because he was a duke.
Boggle.
Is it that being an aristocrat, especially a duke, makes morals and self control impossible? The poor 6th Duke of Devonshire. You'd never guess what wickedness lurked, would you?
There are too many dukes in historical romance. Way too many, but...
Ah, that's the explanation! We’ve run out of reasonable ones and are now getting transmogrified alien dukes from the planet Ugh, where they truly don’t know any better. And anyway, we all know aliens are instantly smitten with lust for Earth women and just can’t help themselves.
Hey, keep those slimy tentacles to yourself, your grace!
But seriously, I don’t like the idea that historical romance is a suitable place for fantasies that readers couldn't take in contemporaries. What do you think?
Come to think of it, are there already contemporaries with these sorts of situations?
Jo