Romance is not porn.

I feel like this should go without saying, right?

And yet, not a day goes by when I don’t read some tweet, some article, some inane facebook post by someone who has never even read a romance novel, decrying “mommy porn” or “mummy porn” or “porn for women.”

And then, just yesterday, I caught this little forehead smacker on the NPR book blog (hat tip to @sesmithwrites on twitter):

“The American Library Association and Barnes & Noble were among the groups named by conservative group Morality in Media in its “Dirty Dozen List” of “the top 12 facilitators of porn.””

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2013/04/02/175987431/book-news-american-library-association-barnes-noble-called-facilitators-of-porn

Okay, full stops between every word required this time.

Romance. Is. Not. Porn.

This comparison does a disservice to romance writers and readers, and it does a disservice to the hardworking men and women in the pornography industry and their fans as well.

So why do we have to keep having this conversation?

Lauren Dane had a wonderful post on this subject, which I’ll link to here and encourage you to go read in its entirety, because it’s worth reading: “On Mommy Porn and Other Pejoratives”

Dane says:

Generally, it’s a thing that whenever women are good at something, successful at it, dominate it, media needs to belittle it. “Mommy porn” is a prime example of such behavior. The ways it is used against us to shame and belittle are manifold. By using “mommy” we are yet again reduced to a function. We’re not people, we’re uteruses who make macaroni and cheese and endlessly do laundry. We can’t like sex. We can’t understand books. We’re just “mommies” “Housewife porn” is much the same, only you can add in ironing of shirts and vacuuming.

Well said, Lauren.

An equally disturbing aspect of this comparison to me, is using one artist’s labor to insult another’s (and yes, pornography, especially really good pornography can be art).

Pornography is a visual medium. Porn models work hard to maintain their (pretty amazing in many cases) physiques. They allow the camera and then their audience to watch them do incredibly intimate acts as part of their work. And many of them create a beautiful product from this. I don’t know enough about the porn industry to talk about it in depth, but I recognize hard work when I see it, and I’m not about to use the work of others as a slur. Those folks work for a living, and I respect that.

I write sexy fiction for a living. As part of the love stories I write, I include description of sexual acts. Now, there are no actual bodies on the page or in my computer screen. No one had to do an insane number of crunches to achieve the stuff that happens in my books because it’s fiction. But it’s sexual. And I’m not going to apologize for allowing my characters to have a sexual life and I’m not going to apologize for indulging in that and allowing it to be part of their story.

I am frustrated by the insinuation that the two worst things a person could be are either female or sexual. There is nothing wrong with female. There is nothing wrong with celebrating our sexuality as human beings, and there is nothing wrong with reading about sex or watching two or more consenting adults doing it on screen.

So for those out there who feel the need to disparage romance as “mommy porn,” do us all a favor: go read some. If you like it, read more, and don’t feel guilty.

If you don’t like it, come up with a reason why that addresses it for its literary merits (or lack thereof). You don’t like the trope, or the language was too adverb-heavy. The hero’s best friend drove you nuts, and you can’t believe there’s going to be a sequel based on THAT guy. The author’s voice didn’t sit right with you, or there wasn’t enough conflict. Address the story. Address the language. 

But don’t make it about the author’s gender, and don’t make it about sex. Make an argument based on words. Because that’s what we’re talking about here. Words. And words are wonderful.