Talk:Erotic romance novels

Romance Top‑importance

	Literature portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Romance, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to fictional romance in literature and romantic fiction writers. If you would like to participate, you can edit one of the articles mentioned below, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.RomanceWikipedia:WikiProject RomanceTemplate:WikiProject Romanceromance articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Sexology and sexuality Low‑importance

	Human sexuality portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sexology and sexuality, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of human sexuality on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Sexology and sexualityWikipedia:WikiProject Sexology and sexualityTemplate:WikiProject Sexology and sexualitySexology and sexuality articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

[edit]

you mention Ellora's Cave & Samhaim, but no mention of Black Lace (a very popular British publisher of Erotica), or Spice, or even Avon Red. Don't these companies at least merit a MENTION? (oh, and Nexxus too!)

Who is Child[edit]

The photo talks about "Child" and a book. This person , which I presume is a writer of this type of novels, is not mentioned anywhere else in the article. So, who is this "Child"? 190.245.190.244 (talk) 15:01, 20 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Characterizations of erotic romance novels in Focus of Novels section was largely opinion with little fact[edit]

There was no citations to back up the opinion and several apsects contradict reality and it all seemed to be written by a fan of erotic romance novels trying to justify why they aren't porn and thus are OK for women to read. Start with "The sex scenes, while explicit, are there for the purpose of character development." which is maybe true in some cases but it could also be that some such writters simply used it as a excuse to write litterary porn in disguised as art. As for "Erotic romance is not classed as pornography." well that is a much debated argument and given that porn is very much a "I know it when I see it" sort of thing, such novels could meet the defintion of porn offered by some. As for it's argument "Works of pornography consist of sexual acts without a plot line", that's patently untrue in some cases. While many porn fils do indeed lack plot lines, especially these days, there have been many porn films with a plot line, even if you might argue the plot line was poorly thoughtout or bad, or just thrown in to try and claim the film as art and justify the porn content. It's still qualifies as a plot line. Examples include Deep Throught, Debbie Does Dallas, and Pirates. You also have to remember that porn photos collections and porn magazines still qualifty as porn even though there explicit photo spreads have no plot lines by they very nature as still images. Finally "Erotic romance however includes well-developed characters and at least one primary plot with the possibility of subplots." which again is debtable in all case and porn could have well developed charactors and subplots (as some porn films haved had) as having explicit sex scenes does not prevent charector dvelopemnt. As for "The primary and/or subplots can stand alone without the explicit sex, but the characterizations in the story will suffer dramatically if the sexual content is removed", I might agree with the later to some degree in many cases but not all but whether the "characterizations in the story will suffer dramatically if the sexual content is removed" is much more debatable. I think it comes accross as an attempt to justify hjaving explicit sex in the novels and not have to admit one get's off on said content, especially for women whom had stigmas against liking porn that go way back. This is all just another part of the larger porn vs erotica debate. For sll these reasons I removed the content. If you wish to put back any such content then find a reliable source for said opinions that makes such claims and be clear they represent opinions not facts. --Notcharliechaplin (talk) 20:51, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]