Because a woman with SOME kind of vulnerability (even if she's otherwise perfectly in control) is a million times more drop-dead sexy than one that isn't. Sorry, but there you are...
Maybe for you, but attractiveness is entirely subjective. I don't have a problem with these types of romances existing, I just have a problem with the lack of variety. Some women do like being completely in control, and some men like not being in control. Some women aren't vulnerable, and some men like them that way. But where are the stories for those women and men? I'd settle for even one or two of them existing.
Vulnerability is not the same as a weakness or failing. I don't want perfect female characters. What I do want is female characters for once who have the weaknesses usually seen in male characters- temper, rushing into things, overprotective of their love interest, controlling, and/or demanding. These are weaknesses, but they are not vulnerability. And personally, I relate more to these things, which is why I would like to see them more. Because I'm not very "feminine" and rarely relate to female characters.
Well, such characters exist in fiction, but are probably a rarity in out and out romantic tales (erotic or otherwise) - the reason, as I state in my last post, is that such books are often written to a set formula, and the demographic that form their main customer base demand certain character types.
Another possibility (and I confess, I don't have evidence for this) is that such romances are usually written by (a) males, who equate female attractiveness with a certain amount of helplessness, or (b) females who tend to be of the more traditionally "feminine" (anonymous' italics retained deliberately) type.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Another possibility (and I confess, I don't have evidence for this) is that such romances are usually written by (a) males, who equate female attractiveness with a certain amount of helplessness, or (b) females who tend to be of the more traditionally "feminine" (anonymous' italics retained deliberately) type.
Reply
Leave a comment