Smart Bitches Trashy Books | All of the romance, none of the bullshit.

I was way into Sheikh romance for a while as a teenager, before I went to college and engaged in Muslim Studies, at which point I realized that with the way the characters are behaving, “Happily ever after” is followed shortly by a one-way ticket to stoning. That, and oh yeah, he forced her to marry him in the first place.

That being said, I think there’s a certain appeal in bucking the system and becoming part of the fantasy. Thinking “If I were to hook up with the young, devilishly handsome ruler of an oil-wealthy, non-theocratic Islamic nation, I WOULD CHANGE HIM AND ALL THE CENTURIES OLD WAYS LAID FORTH IN THE Q’URAN!”

Well, no discussion of sheikh romance would be complete without mentioning the original sheikh romance, named…er, “The Sheikh” by EM Hull.  It was published in 1920 or thereabouts, and then made into a movie starring Rudolph Valentino.

It is SUPREMELY politically incorrect, featuring the kidnapping, rape and subjugation of our feisty English heroine. She finally decides that this submission must be love, and resolves to stay with her desert lover despite his control issues.  To add even more fuel to the fire, it turns out that her desert lover is not an actual Arab (God forbid that one of those should despoil the flesh of a fair English maiden).  No, no- our ‘hero’ Ahmed is a half-English, half-Spanish guy who somehow (I forget how) wound up in charge of a desert Arab tribe.  Fun for the whole family!

I’ve never read one, either, although personally I think a lot of the appeal is “he’s got crazy money and his own private gas pump”, which is really sexy in the current economy.

At least, that’s my theory. That and that a lot of women still secretly dream of being taken to a harem and pampered like shar-pei’s all day long. Too bad it wears on one and you can’t exactly just leave.

It’s funny - I LOVED the boss/secretary stories. The millionair/poor girl stories, those Diana Palmer cowboy stories. Still have a few on the keeper shelf.

But I just couldn’t get into the Sheikh stories. (Although that cover with the woman in the silver hair does look familiar). I could never get over the idea that more than likely this woman would be sharing her husband with other wives/mistresses. And with more information sufacing regarding how women are treated in some of these countries… it gets even worse.

How is it possible to separate the fantasy from reality - when the reality shows up on the news nightly.

Maybe back in 1980 - you could over look it, but today? I would be interested in hearing from writers too - what steps they use to explain aspects of the culture that make the HEA harder to pull off.

Trac’s point above about completely ignoring cultural realities is an excellent one.

Wasn’t the appeal for this setting generated partly by movies such as “Lawrence of Arabia” and actors Omar Shariff, Yul Brenner, et al? Didn’t all of us want to waltz with the King of Siam? Any whiff of the exotic and forbidden, whether it was men or locale, seemed to have American women yearning to step right into those harem pants or whatever costume the scenery required.

While I’ll gladly confess to the hots for kilt-wearing men, I never read the sheikh romances; they rank right up there, IMO, with the having-the boss’s-baby,  corporate-take-over-by-unplanned-pregnancy embarrassments.

My first recollection of coming across the sheikh-fantasy thing was from reading Lace, after which I couldn’t think of Arabs and goldfish in *quite* the same way ever again. 

Since I don’t really have a thing for them, it’s very likely I’m talking out of my ass here, but I’ve always had this vague idea that the sheikh romances were really in their zenith during that same period when romances were in that phase of the masterful hero who knows all/little woman who must be saved, protected, told what to do, and be called a “little fool” at least once during the course of the story.

It’s as if the sheikhs are the most alpha of the alpha-hero type, which never appealed to me since it always seemed like the heroine has to do all of the conforming to the desires of the hero.  Perhaps the appeal for some women is that aspect of giving up complete control and having the person its given to acting in what the woman can perceive as in her best interests? 

On another note, I don’t know if the romance version of a sheikh is better or worse than Scott Adams’ version.

Sandra Brown wrote a sheikish romance.  He was the illigitmate son of a sheikh really. I read it when I was a teenager and romance was a new genre.  Anyway, I have found memories of that book.  The Tiger Prince.
If I read it now I probably wouldn’t like it as much.  But the memories of it are good.

I have an irrational affection for The Tiger Prince.  It’s on my keeper shelf.  One of those books that I’m pretty sure I shouldn’t like—given my highly evolved feminist sensibilities and all—but I’m a sucker for it nonetheless.

My weakness is for men in kilts, gladiators, that kinda thing (yeah yeah, sue me).

Since Middle Eastern Dance is a consuming hobby of mine (like six classes a week and a performance troupe).  I know WAY too much about ME culture to even remotely find sheikhs sexy.  Toss in a stint in my younger days dancing in a Moroccan restaurant and dealing with the owners, family and customers.

Nope nadda.  Uh huh.  I know too much.

HOWEVER, Kilts, gladiators, vampires, paranormals….sheesh, even pirates.  Guess ignorance is bliss for cheesy reads.

And my word is easy 43,
hrmpt.

My mother was, apparently, a big fan of the sheikh romance back in the 80’s, because that’s what most of the romance novels I snuck out of her room to read when I was a teenager were about.  So I have fond memories of them because they were the first romances I ever read (the very first one, however, was Kathleen E. Woodiwiss’s Shanna), but I have absolutely no desire to reread any of them.

You think it has to do with the powah of love overcoming even the hugest of problems—in this case a sociocultural one?

Kinda makes sense when you look at other themes like paranormals, secrets, time travel, etc. All these problems are pretty insurmountable the same way the sociocultural ones used to be. In a sense, the werewolf is the new sheik.

But the sheik is still around simply because we love tradition.

I dunno. Just a thought. LOL. Word veri is analysis21

I’m sure I read a sheikh romance or two in my early teenage years, when I was mass-consuming romances for the illicit thrill they provided (hormones overcoming feminist sensibilities, like whoa), but I can’t remember any specifically. Recently, however, I flipped through a newish sheikh romance at work and was far less than impressed.

I’m just too informed on current events and ME culture to buy into the world that book tried to set up, and my hormones are no longer strong enough to overcome my good sense. Consequentially,  I spent most of the time talking to and mocking the book (which had my co-workers giving me some funny looks).

The woman had a pretty good life, a good job, decent income, etc. Then she gets kidnapped by sheikh-dude and after getting brainwashed by his c**k of multiple orgasms, decides that she’s going to give it all up to be his little woman out in the middle of the desert? Um, WTF?

No mention of the likely multiple wives, her having to convert to Islam or having to wear the hajib, and certainly no mention of her being stoned or the husband’s right to damn near whatever he wants with and to her, legally. (Unless one or both are things the “hero” threatens her with in a sexy way to get her to do what he wants. Yeah.)

I’m just too much of a feminist these days to enjoy kidnapping, forced sex and the woman making all the compromises, giving up her identity utterly on the man’s demand. “Plots” like that are a guarantee that the book in question is soon due to make a short trip, ending abruptly against the nearest wall.

I can’t stomach sheikhs, secret babies, or kilts.  They jar me out of the fantasy wham bam, no thank you sir. However, some of my comfort reads have elements of the All-Powerful Calgon, disguised differently.  Calgon in a form I can swallow.

I do like one sheikish story: Robin Schone’s The Lady’s Tutor.  I suspect Schone tried to subvert the typical sheikh theme.  The hero has a strong mother who owns her choices, he lets the heroine find her own way out of her situation, and he schools her most awesomely in teh sex (no wham bam little fool).

My comfort reads are from my teen/I’m different/so very special period, and they mostly have talented/different/strong heroines.  I got off on lonely, not helpless.

My old school “I shouldn’t but"s are ‘90s Harlequin Presents/M&B set in Australia (Susan Napier, Lindsay Armstrong, Robyn Donald).  When I’m sick and need predictability I read Betty Neels.  O BBQ!  The shame!

My “I was sooo a teen"s are Ann Maxwell (Elizabeth Lowell)‘s fantasies like Timeshadow Rider and Name of a Shadow.

My newer comfort read is Stephanie Laurens’ A Secret Love. It has a lovely relationship between the h/h (and friends/families), and it rings those almost-sibling, not quite squicky bells.

I see others upthread have mentioned having good memories of some romances but no desire to reread them, and that triggered a few memories for me. I have to agree; I went through hundreds of romances in my teenage years and there are a few that really stand out in my memory as so incredibly hot and romantic, but after making the mistake of trying to reread one—Upon a Moon Dark Moor by Rebecca Brandewyne—I realized that those books are better off remaining good memories. I’ve just changed too much as a person, learned too much over the years to find the same naïve enjoyment I once did.

Add me to the list of people who don’t want to read sheikh romance, though I know someone’s buying it, otherwise HQ wouldn’t keep churning them out.

However, having said that, I am a fan of Loretta Chase’s Captives of the Night and Catherine Asaro’s SF novel The Veiled Web.  The latter is a futuristic about a Western ballerina who ends up married, somewhat against her will, to a Moroccan tech genius. She’s secluded in his family’s estate and the novel deals with her adjustment—or lack of adjustment—and some tech skullduggery.

How did I not say this?

Ultimate comfort read: Pride and Prejudice :)

There’s some definite yearning for Calgon in P&P... but they all had to work for the Calgon ending.  It isn’t over-the-top unrealistic like sheikh books; E’s a woman I can relate to, someone who yearns for the Calgon but knows the price is high.  But she gets it anyway.  Extra big sigh.

When I tell a man I love P&P, I feel a little of that “I shouldn’t like this, but oh, I love it so” because I know the face he’ll make.  It’s considered such a women’s book.  Not in the ghetto of Oprah books, but definitely pigeonholed.  The saving grace, that keeps me from feeling outright shame, is that it’s a “classic” and well written. And it severely lacks man titty.

Oh, and I got so caught up in the sheikh thing I forgot to mention my comfort reads: The Grand Sophy, These Old Shades and The Devil’s Cub (Heyer), P&P (Austin), Windflower (“Laura London”), The Temporary Wife (Balogh), Miss Whittier Makes a List (Kelly), Midsummer Moon (Kinsale), and The Duke’s Wager (Layton).

I think the secret is that harem pants flatter and hide hips.  You feel sexier, and since tall-dark-and-repressive is right there…  :shrugs:

Does Cleo Cordell’s “The Captive Flesh” count as a sheikh romance?  It occupies a place of honor in my porno box.  (Didn’t care for the sequel though.  Bleh.  Disappointment.)

I’ve never been a big fan of the sheikh thing, although I’ve read a few historical romances with that device.  (DEFINITELY don’t like any of those cheesy Harlequin categories that feature sheikhs.)  A part of me is still wide-eyed over the infamous plum scene from that Susan Johnson book.  I was young and impressionable at the time.  I’m not sure I’ll ever recover.  Maybe I don’t want to.

My comfort reads are my Nora Roberts and (older) Linda Howard books.  They’re infinitely re-readable for me, and that’s comforting.  Another comfort read, while not a romance, is the Belgariad and Mallorean series by David Eddings.  I probably re-read them once a year.  Mostly for Hettar.  I just love me some Hettar.  (Speaking of long and lanky dudes.)

Brian Whitaker, the Guardian Middle Eastern correspondent, wrote an excellent piece on Shiek Romances a while ago:

http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/brian_whitaker/2006/03/those_sexy_arabs.html

Being of Arab decent as well as romance reader, I find these Sheik romances annoying, yet often hysterical. Annoying because I think they smack of Orientalism, and hysterical because….well, if you met enough real-life sheiks you would understand. Sadly, I have not heard of many Muslim women reading romances about touped television evangelists, and I am plugged into the Arabic fiction scene. If that happens though, I would definitely check it out :)

Not that I love the sheikh romance, per se, but I have read a bunch of them. Mainly during my Bertrice Small phase in high school. The heroines of her novels were constantly being abducted off to a harem where the had the dirty, dirty “up-the-butt” sex with someone. Then they went back to being Lady Whatshername in England after being rescued or escaping.

Didn’t Nora write a modern day sheikh romance? The heroine was a jewel thief, and she was stealing a necklace from her father, who abused her mother. Jeez, what was it called? I remember the hero’s name was Philip and he was ALSO a thief. Huh. Can’t remember the name, although I own it.

I feel a re-read coming on.

I generally steered clear of both the sheikh romance and the strong brave marries white captive girl romance after reading one or two.  There was something about the disconnect from reality that has to happen.  Although the idea of a pampering spa-like harem might be nice for a vacation…

My comfort reads…well, I don’t go back much anymore.  My romance choices and experiences have vastly changed since I got in a relationship…and not because it’s spoiled the fantasy.  I just have less time on my hands and I find that if I put a romance down, I lose the momentum of the plot and when I try to pick it up again I find that I’ve lost interest.  It actually makes me quite cranky.

MaryKate, I wanna say that was Hot Ice. And iffygenia, I have a deep love for the Elizabeth Lowells, many of which I first read as a teenager. Some of them have the women-being-treated-as-property-and-learning-to-like-it themes that irritate me now, but found incurably romantic when I was younger. Most of them are also historicals, so it is a teensy bit more acceptable, but only teensy. The contemporary Donovan books? LOVE THEM.

I started reading romance in the era of the sheikh romance, and I think they are unintentionally funny. And doesn’t the sheik have to also be a playboy raised in Europe? That seems to be a theme….even at the time I thought they were silly.

I’m currently making my way through all the very early Linda Howard novels, and I’m surprised at how much I like them, although I tend to dog ear all the sections that bug me for later reviewing reference. I just finished one Linda Howard that had practically every other page marked, and was giggling through a large chunk of the book. (There was a sheik in that one, too!) I love the old romances where the heroine makes the hero pay for all the crap he does. Make him suffer, girl!

But what is WITH every single woman in these novels being a secretary? Was that really the only job choice for women in the 80s? Or is it just a romance fetish?

my verification word: how15 (I’m having an 80s Indian captive flashback!)

Natalie - Shanna was my first romance as well. Those are books that I remember fondly - but I’m almost afraid to read because I’m not sure how they would hold up. The one where the hero is the monster/husband and devilish flirt - that one still has to be good. Doesn’t it?

Same with Johanna Lindsey. Man I loved those books! There was that one with Russian Prince who drugged the lady (or his servant did) and she turned into a horn dog and he HAD to have sex with her for her own good. That was a favorite when I was 17 - but today? I don’t know.

My comfort reads - Jayne Ann Krentz - and I know I’m going out on a limb but I do believe I have her complete backlist. So that’s a lot of comfort. Linda Howard - her Silhouette years. Nora, of course. New reads I find myself going back to - Julia Quinn - To Sir Philip with Love - LOVE that. Someone mentioned a Stephanie Laurens - that’s may favorite of that series.

I love diving into new books. I love the excitment of a new story. My favorite thing is to find a new author.

But when it’s been a tough day, week, whatever - there’s nothing like a comfort read.

“It’d be like somebody writing a romance featuring Chinese characters who can’t pronounce Rs properly going around quoting Confucius all the time. “

Charlie Chan has romance books? Oh my!

I’ve read more of those awful Bertrice Small harem books than I care to remember. Definitely just an excuse for anal sex, threesomes, and pube shaving. 

I also seem to remember a book where the teenaged heroine is kidnapped from her finishing school along with her stepmother. During the sea voyage, the kidnapper (who, it turns out is a westerner acting as the factotum for some nasty sheik) tutors the girl in sexual techniques without actually deflowering her by getting it on with her stepmother while she watches. Then he makes the heroine go down on some burly, blindfolded seaman, just for practice. She ends up in the harem, where she’s obliged to use her new skills on the sheik but eventually escapes and falls in love with the guy who kidnapped her.

One of those raunchy/squicky reads that’s lost in the mists of time.

It strikes me that the appeal of the Sheikh romances has to do with a certain fantasy element of imagined Sheikhdom, namely, a supposed heightened sensuality—hot desert winds, cool fountains, slight and slithery silk garments, unusually juicy fruit, attar of roses. If only one could have a really intense sensuality as part of a fictional culture without the elements that are so incompatible with a modern woman’s self-determination.

Somebody sent me to this column today and after reading the topic and replies, I remembered why I dislike this site.  It should be titled TrashyBitchesNoBrains.com

fantasy element of imagined Sheikhdom, namely, a supposed heightened sensuality—hot desert winds, cool fountains, slight and slithery silk garments, unusually juicy fruit, attar of roses.

I think there’s a lot of truth in this.  I’ve read the odd sheik romance in my time (although tried one recently as a quick read while waiting for son to come through surgery and just “gack”) and I was trying to figure out why as the comments made so far didn’t resonanate with me.

But I think this might be it.  I’m a fantasy reader first, and this is the answer that sounds right for me personally.

I’d like to second Catherine Asaro’s “The Veiled Web” that has some of the staples in an SF-ish story but actually tries to address the issues of differing faiths and if that can work in a marriage.  Includes a nice scene where the heroine goes to the baths with the hero’s female relatives and realies the cross she wears around her neck and never really thinks about is what is suddenly culturally inappropriate.  And one of the big issues for them is how to raise children within two faiths. Even if they’re not ready to have children, they recognise the need to discuss the issue before making a real committment to each other.

So while I’m sure there are some simplifications and I can’t comment on the accuracy of the Muslim household shown, it certainly tries to take the issues seriously.

MaryKate, if you can remember the name of that modern day sheikh book by Nora, could you post it? It sounds far more interesting than the usual run of the mill sheikh fetish books.

My word: size12 Um…ouch? Crossing my legs now.

The Nora Roberts book is Sweet Revenge. It has a very real feeling for what life would be like in a harem, both the good side and the bad. Its one of my favorites.

For comfort reads I always stick with Nora or Jayne Anne Krentz, in any of her personalities, Jayne Castle or Amanda Quick. Usually sweet romances with just a touch of mystery make me all warm inside.

Thank you, KristenMary! Hopefully it’ll be waiting for me at work tomorrow. I’ll get to spend my weekend enjoying it.

Word: expected85

Heh. Yeah, if I’m not careful I’ll end up reserving just about that many of her books.

sheikh sheikh sheikh your Nora?

Well, darn, I almost had a shot at my first comment here being something useful, but KristenMary beat me to it by noting Sweet Revenge (which I love) is Nora’s contemporary harem book.

As to sheikh fantasy, I’ve never been into it and view it much in the way that I view novels set in India: It’s the exotic fantasy without being TOO exotic.  It’s the Disney brown hero or more socially acceptable half-breed or the “no, I actually just have a tan and was adopted by the unwitting A-rabs” guy and the “fair maiden” experiencing a furren culture without having to really pull the reader into the icky stuff like religious issues or actual interracial romance.

And Bertrice Small scarred me for life with Wild Jasmine. Emperor Akbar sleeping with Skye O’Malley? Eek! (Not to be confused with Admiral Ackbar, though I’m sure it’s happened.) Not to mention that she turned one of India’s most famous starcrossed heroes, Selim, into an incestuous freak and had Jasmine’s only Indian husband as some dirty mistress keeping, anal-lovin’ oppressor.

One thing that irks me about the sheikh romances (besides being highly improbable) is their need for a white, anglo woman. I know that’s how most readers are able to identify with the heroine but it seems to imply middle eastern women aren’t good enough? Like they don’t have enough problems.

One of my old favorites was Wishes by Jude Devereaux. My first chubby heroine.  The hero tells her he likes girls with a little meat on their bones because his mama was a large woman as well made me smile then though it makes me wince now.

my code problem41
so true, so true

Oh God, did someone just mention Admiral Ackbar in the context of a romance novel?  I have to go hurt myself now.

Nien Nunb, on the other hand- woo hoo!

Security word:  cans38.  I swear they’re real.

I do not think you have thought your cunning plan all the way through.

Maybe these writers only want white, anglo woman to wind up as politically oppressed sex slaves hopelessly isolated in a far Middle East country.

I myself have often thought that would be a promising career move for someone like Paris Hilton.

Incidentally, this site (which I probably found here, come to think of it, but I’ll paste a link anyway)? IS ALL KINDS OF FREAKING ME OUT! Good god, everything sounds so very, very bad.

http://sheikhs-and-desert-love.com/

Okay, I will post more later as my hands are currently greasy with healing hand lotion.  Damn dry skin.

ANYWHO!!  I’m not one for the sheikh romance for the most part, but I do remembering searching out all the titles I could of Iris Johansen’s sheikh series for Loveswept.  Also, and I’m surprised I didn’t see this in my skimming: Catherine Coulter’s Devil’s Daughter anyone?  I admit to rereading that one in parts, more for the brother’s romance.

Also thirding? The Veiled Web , which I really enjoyed. Sheikh romances have never appealed to me personally, just as boss/secretary romances don’t. I’m definitely a gladiator and kilt kind of girl.

As for comfort reads, I generally go back to YA romances, where I don’t have to worry about most of the things that tend to annoy me about romances for adults.

I am Muslim, and I find them offensive in terms of what people think we would do. We won’t force you to convert, we aren’t all crazed rapists, etc. I think it is stupid to perpetuate a myth or stereotype based on what people did thousands of years ago. Ahem…Scots? Highlanders? English crazed Knights?...they were all barbaric. I have read one sheikh book and I hated it. stupid writing anyway, regardless of the sheikh part. there were pirates and amnesia and rape. I hated it. Another story. I am not against other people enjoying them, but I am curious to know what makes it so nice??? Do tell me.

dillene: Catfish-headed aliens need love, too!  It could be a whole new subgenre!

secret word: across53. 

I suddenly feel the need to go do a crossword puzzle.

“Arab men of that age bracket are often feared, distrusted, and objects of suspicion, except in romance, where men of that age in that culture are objects of sexual fantasy.”

It’s the element of the unknown that makes them attractive, plus a dash of danger, and a titillating soupcon of dirty secks. In real life, not something I go looking for. In a romance novel, bring it on. For me, the sheikh romance is more about sex than any other genre. It’s about harems, weird positions, hours of gratuitous boinking in many orrifices with many partners. Did I mention harems?

That said, I don’t really read the sheikh romances anymore. Mostly they don’t seem to exist (maybe I’m not looking hard enough). Now that I’m older, I am too attuned to cultural inconsistencies to enjoy the story. Add to that: I’m not interested in reading an accuratly portrayed ME romance (based on what I see on the news every night). A ME heroine and sheikh create a less exciting relationship to me (I dare an author to make me eat my words, though).

I think you’re looking at the sheikh romances through 20-30 years of hindsight.

Imagine you had never heard in your life of a hijab, or stoning, or al-Qaeda, or the Taliban, or any of it. They don’t exist in your world. Imagine your gossip columns were full of stories about Saudi and Kuwaiti princes discoing the night away at Studio 54. Imagine that one of your screen idols, Rita Hayworth, had married a playboy “sheikh” (actually, a Pakistani prince and not actually Arab, but given that it’s 1978 you don’t know the difference).

Back then Arabia was just some mystical place “out there” where men were dominant and women submissive and the clothes looked nice. That’s it. Arafat, Khadafi, and the gang were not thought of as representative of historic Arabs, and the idea of Arabs in general being a threat was laughable.

As for the hijab, it’s more common now women have themselves chosen to wear it more often in the past 30 years. It’s very tiring to hear American women rant on about how horrible it is that these women have to wear the hijab, when the majority of women who wear it in Arab countries have chosen to do so voluntarily. Even in Iran the discussion isn’t about the hijab itself but about whether stylish colours are acceptable (as they are in the Gulf nations).

Unfortunately, American TV networks just love stories about how poor defenseless girls are being “forced” to do something that isn’t stereotypically American. I don’t know how many women I know have been nearly pushed into screaming fits because their acquaintances and work colleagues *won’t believe* they wear the hijab voluntarily.

“When I tell a man I love P&P, I feel a little of that “I shouldn’t like this, but oh, I love it so” because I know the face he’ll make.  It’s considered such a women’s book.  Not in the ghetto of Oprah books, but definitely pigeonholed.”
  I teach high school English and last month had my students do literature circles, where they chose the novels they read from a pretty long and varied list.  One all-male group chose to do P&P, over many much more “masculine” (and several shorter and easier) choices - and they loved it! I’ll admit I was surprised at their choice, but I guess that’s encouraging that it’s not too badly pigeon-holed.

Thank you Charlene. It is a choice, even Mohammed gave women. It is a personal modesty based choice. Don’t worry. We are not all trapped, stoned (violence wise not smoking), women. Thank you all for being as sensitive as possible about this. We already deal with enough prejudice in everyday life.

One all-male group chose to do P&P, over many much more “masculine” (and several shorter and easier) choices - and they loved it!

That’s hopeful indeed!  I’ve always wanted to talk P&P with my otherwise-well-read male friends… but they haven’t read it!  P&P came to mind when Sarah posted Crossing the Gender Lines:

Men… are not taught as easily to relate to a female protagonist. I asked Hubby… whether he had ever read a book, for school or for pleasure, that featured a female protagonist. He had to think about it, and said, “No.”

Coming full circle with this topic….  I think the adventurous, wild romance of “Arabia” (the “Arabia” of the popular imagination, and of the explorers) appeals to men as well as women.  My male friends love TE Lawrence (“of Arabia”), Freya Stark, Wilfred Thesiger (Arabian Sands).  But I’ve always assumed the sheikh romance novels are written for, and read by, women.  Is there an inbetween genre written in that adventurous-romantic setting, but without the sheikh tropes that now seem so dated?  I can only think of the Elizabeth Peters novels.

Well I do not think anyone here identified a particular religion but for an overall view of womens rights in that region I do not think The Human Rights Watch is a big dealer in myths.

http://hrw.org/women/overview-mena.html

“Violence and insecurity resulting from war has had particularly detrimental effects on women in Iraq. Insurgent groups have targeted female professionals including politicians, civil servants, journalists, and women’s rights activists. These groups have also attacked women for what they considered “immoral” or “un-Islamic” behavior, like dancing, socializing with men or not wearing a hijab, the Islamic headscarf. Iraqi women’s participation in the country’s reconstruction efforts is also routinely undermined.”

I am Muslim, and I find them offensive in terms of what people think we would do. We won’t force you to convert, we aren’t all crazed rapists, etc.

Y’know, in hindsight, I think my comments are even more asshole-ish than usual, and I’d like a chance to clarify.

First of all, I spent the first 18 (almost 19) years of my life in Malaysia. Now, Malaysia is a fairly liberal Muslim country. I mean, they try to deny that Malaysia is a Muslim country, but at the same time, Islam is the state religion, y’know? So we have a very lovely secular constitution, that guarantees all these rights, including the right to practice any religion.

HOWEVER. A Muslim cannot marry a non-Muslim. The non-Muslim has to convert. If the non-Muslim doesn’t want to convert? Or, hell, if the Muslim wants to leave Islam for another faith, or no faith at all? Tough titties. It’s pretty much a legal impossibility at this point (though my sister, a lawyer back home, is doing what she can to unsnarl this mess, and more power to her). And that’s what informed my comment about the heroine having to convert to Islam.

Now, it’s entirely possible that Middle Eastern laws regarding inter-religious marriage don’t suffer from trisomy on chromosome 21 in quite the same way Malaysia does. But we’re not talking about the garden variety Muslim dude here, like a businessman, or a cop, or a fireman—we’re talking sheikhs. We’re talking big deal clan chiefs, many of whom take pride in tracing their lineage back to the Prophet Mohammad. And I’m guessing (and this is just a guess, mind you) that any non-Muslim women who marry into the sheikh’s family will face a LOT of social pressure to convert, even if there isn’t any legal pressure per se.

And mind you, I’m not saying that conversion is a bad thing. Being godless myself (and finding organized religion a rather puzzling thing at best, which is how it’s been ever since I was a wee ‘un), I honestly have no investment in who converts to what, though legally forced conversions like what happen in Malaysia make me deeply uncomfortable.

It’s just that in any sort of union involving people of two different faiths—especially when they’re both monotheistic, because the friction between a Buddhist and a Hindu, or even a Christian and a Hindu (again, keeping in mind my sample source), marrying are, from my observations, considerably less—I would expect this sort of issue to be a huge part of the dialogue between the protagonists.

What bothers me is the utter lack of dialogue—indeed, the seeming lack of any sort of awareness of these sorts of issues. There’s escapism, and then there’s Orientalism (as somebody observed up above).

Not only have I read a sheikh romance, but it was titled Sheik. AND NOT ONLY THAT - it was written by… Connie Mason. Oh yes. I read it. More than once. It’s worth every penny - I never laughed so hard in all my life.

But anyway, Charlene has it right - these books only work if you have absolutely no clue whatsoever about the real culture. A 15-year-old Catholic white girl living in Indiana in 1987 just has a vague notion that somewhere way far away, there is a place with lots of sand and camels where people wear long flowing robe-like clothes and men are crazy rich and powerful and oooh it’s all so exotic. Like much of old-skool Romance, it’s not even historical fiction - it’s a cartoon.

Plus, there’s all the kinky sex. The sheikh romances always had the kinkiest sex.

It suddenly occurs to me that the romance in Robin McKinley’s The Blue Sword is sort of a sheikh romance—at least, it follows the “desert prince kidnaps outsider woman and they ultimately fall in love” plotline.

re shiekh Romances, I’m actually working on a little article on those, and I’ll say now that IMO there is a multi-level dynamic in these books, which is VERY SIMILAR to that which occurs in the “noble savage” Romances.

Anyway, regarding Muslim women, this is such an interesting issue, because there is some f*ed up things we see in the media happening to women in countries that have become—whether they are or not—identified as Muslim countries.  But IIRC Islam is the second biggest religion in the world behind Christianity—and I think we can all name quite a few horrors carried out in the name of that religion, as well. Big religions = big chances of f*ed up behavior among those who want to play the god card to justify whatever.  OTOH, big religions = plenty of people who are good and devout and abhor the ugliness perpetrated in the name of their religion.

The bottom line, IMO, is that women are victimized everywhere, and that rape and torture are still powerful political tools, which just adds to the ugliness of it all.  Having taken domestic violence law, I can tell you that plenty of reaaaaalllllllly ugly stuff happens to women in the USA, and if you are ever looking to volunteer on behalf of women, that’s a great place to start.  Because contrary to popular belief, most battered women do leave their batterers (after an average of 2.4 attempts).

But anyway, I don’t know of one organized religion that doesn’t have weird repressive views around women’s sexuality—and that doesn’t mean that the spiritual core of each religion sanctions such beliefs and practices.  But hey, people are people, and there’s still a lot of fear and awe around women and sex.  From Chinese foot binding to FGM, I’m not sure there’s a culture or a religion that hasn’t engaged in violence to and subjugation of women.

As for Islam and women, when I was in the Middle East (more than ten years ago), I was absolutely shocked by the Muslim women I met, all of whom were incredibly bright, educated, world-aware, politically savvy, and absolutely adamant that Islam was not a religion that oppressed women.  These were women who had the choice, really, who had the mobility and the education and the money to move to a place where conversion would be perfectly accepted, but they didn’t.  And they were certainly more aware of world events and international politics than I was, even though I was in grad school at the time.  What I walked away with after that trip was the sense that it’s not spirituality that oppresses, but all the mundane evils: poverty, ignorance, bigotry, war, racism, fear, irrational hatred, and a boatload of ugliness that may attach itself to a religion or a country, but IMO is not intrinsic to it. 

Clearly Romance romanticizes many things that in the real world are beyond problematic.  And I wish we were able to talk about this process without it turning into some kind of uniform attack of defense of certain types of books within the genre.  Because it IS complicated, and it is a function of the imagination, which is often in rebellion against the conscious mind, and yet it’s also a product of culture and socialization, etc.  One thing I’m not sure I agree with is the idea that reading sheikh or Native American or paranormal Romances is pure escapism—often I think it’s a way to cope at some more elemental level with differences and fears and anxieties that can’t, for whatever reason, be tackled overtly or head on. 

Is that 500 words yet?  So much pressure now.

Beth, I think Mason titles her novels based on the hero’s occupation. (Viking! etc.) I’m waiting to read “Bartender!”, “Code Monkey!” and “Garbage Man!”

I really enjoyed The Twentieth Wife by Indu Sundaresan, though I don’t know if it counts as a sheik-romance per se.
I recall reading Shabanu: Daughter of the Wind and the sequel, Haveli in middle school at some point, and I liked them for the more realistic conflicts for the heroine—it goes way beyond the average emotional turmoil. Political unrest and family dynamics have heavy effects on things.
Peacocks Dancing by Sharon Maas does have the whole “hero is a prince of a beautiful, exotic and ancient land” element, but he gives it all up to become a monk, so I don’t know if that counts.

Big religions = big chances of f*ed up behavior among those who want to play the god card to justify whatever.

The more popular the actor, the higher the chances of v. deluded stalkers skulking amongst the general fans. It’s a simple matter of ratio—in every demographic of a certain size a little batshit crazy must fall.

Shit! Now I have to come up with 750. Talk about being hoist by my own petard.

Take your three sips first, Candy, and maybe make them gulps; although since you don’t drink alcohol, I’d recommend three sips of Coca Cola, which IMO, provides the best synergistic punch of caffeine and sugar.

Sheik romances never did it for me.  I avoid them like the plague.  Simply put, I have friends and co-workers who are Muslim (some are VERY HOT), but they’re just a little too extreme.  One man doesn’t allow his wife to shake hands of other men and he insists upon her being covered up when in public.

Funny thing, though, they have some of the most perverse sense of humor I’ve run across… Or maybe that’s my influence…

The more popular the actor, the higher the chances of v. deluded stalkers skulking amongst the general fans. It’s a simple matter of ratio—in every demographic of a certain size a little batshit crazy must fall.

Absolutely. 

One man doesn’t allow his wife to shake hands of other men and he insists upon her being covered up when in public.

For some reason, your comment reminded me of the situation many white women faced during the antebellum plantation years, where they were wealthy prisoners to a pedestal of womanly virtue, severely constrained and set up as the ideological opposite to the black women slaves.  Not that these white women—who, after all, had relative legal freedom, the privilege of whiteness, and money—were in a situation comparable to that of enslaved women.  But they were still caught in a very extreme ideology, wherein they were painted as de-sexualized icons of certain types of Christian and Anglo-Saxon “purity” (which was completely invented), and which entailed behaviors, customs, and beliefs that IMO have that same aura around them as in your example.  And that’s not even touching what was done to black women in England and the US via slavery, and often cloaked in the vocabularies of science and Christianity.

“had relative legal freedom, the privilege of whiteness”

Robin, I don’t know if women really had all that many legal freedoms. They owned nothing especially if married, were usually forced to marry or were a slave to the household they were born in etc etc. Not freedom at all in relation to the white, male, landowner in any respect.

I think in a present day comparison there are many Christian religious sects that are just as cruel to women as there are Muslim sects.

I think the problems in the Middle East and several other places is simply there is no separation of church and state and there are tons or fanatical religious groups running around trying to control things.

At least there is still some separation of church and state left here even if that is getting undermined all the time. I keep hoping we dump this superstitious junk and leave the organized religions to the history books but I have a feeling we will just get overrun with some new religious fanaticism just as bad eventually.

I learned at a young age to distrust the underlying sleazy nature of religion.

People just love being killer prejudice jerks in the name of jeeebus. I was always amazed at the ignorance pouring out of the mouths of the bible thumpers I was surrounded with.

I loved a quote I read in the paper this week from a local group called The Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence.

You should never say bad things about the dead, you should only say
good… Jerry Falwell is dead. Good!

Robin, I don’t know if women really had all that many legal freedoms. They owned nothing especially if married, were usually forced to marry or were a slave to the household they were born in etc etc. Not freedom at all in relation to the white, male, landowner in any respect.

Yes, I agree that white women enjoyed vastly inferior rights compared to those of white men—and maybe landowning men more broadly.  That’s why I used the word “relative”—because I think there’s still a huge difference between the property status a wealthy white wife occupied and the property status of a slave. 

What has always struck me as ironic was how much more equity women had in early Puritan New England than in early 19th century America, even though you could argue that 19th century America was comparatively secular to Puritan New England.

It’s just that in any sort of union involving people of two different faiths—especially when they’re both monotheistic, because the friction between a Buddhist and a Hindu, or even a Christian and a Hindu (again, keeping in mind my sample source), marrying are, from my observations, considerably less—I would expect this sort of issue to be a huge part of the dialogue between the protagonists.

This makes me think of that Bible verse (sorry, blame going to a Christian school for 6 years):

“Do not be yoked together with unbelievers. For what do righteousness and wickedness have in common? Or what fellowship can light have with darkness?” (II Cor 6:14)

As a Christian, I personally couldn’t marry anyone who wasn’t a Christian, and in particular not someone who practiced a religion that was so different (as opposed to someone who didn’t really know what he believed…heh).  And when it comes to these Sheikh romances, the issue of a Muslim marrying someone who, more than likely, is not Muslim is just something I can’t believe easily (same with Christian x Something else).  Hell, I have an easier time swallowing secret baby plots than two different religions coming together so peaceably.  Although it seems to me that these “sheikhs” really aren’t sheikhs, but more like hotties running around in the desert with loads of cash, with little regard to their true culture.

Don’t read any of them!!!!

Okay, I’m being a jerkface and not reading all the comments before mine, but I have to run in about ten minutes and it will take me longer than that to peruse everyone else’s opinions.

Here’s mine…don’t read them. But I already said that. Lemme ‘splain…I speak Arabic. I have spent the past eleven years of my life working and living around and amongst Arabs, both Muslim and Christian. I would love to read a realistic story about whitey falling in lurve with the hot sheikh. However, I haven’t found a writer yet that won’t fuck it up somehow. I read one where the hero was mucking out horse stalls without a shirt on. When the heroine walked in on his manly self, gasp!, he paraded around clenching his mantitties for her. No man raised in the Middle East (or at least the culture thereof) is going to prance about half nekkid in front of women. It just doesn’t happen. A lot of men are embarrassed just to be caught in a wife beater.

A lot of writers are also really bad about using the wrong dialect in their books, which is a personal pet peeve knowing that each region of each country has its own dialect and that Tunisians can barely hold a conversation with Iraqis, the differences are so great.

And somehow, the woman always manages to assimilate perfectly into her new culture because her husband is so wonderful, as is his family, the royal court and the entire country. They love her blonde self! Yeah, that happened once, in Jordan, and never again.

The cultural differences make a great story, but I have yet to find an author who can realistically write this without mounting a white steed and galloping off into the clouds of Shehrezade and Cinderella.

And there’s my soapbox of the day!

“better19”...no I wasn’t, definitely better now!

the romance in Robin McKinley’s The Blue Sword is sort of a sheikh romance—at least, it follows the “desert prince kidnaps outsider woman and they ultimately fall in love” plotline.

Heh, that’s true about the romance part of the story.  But in the middle, outsider woman learns to kick ass and gains status in her own right.  I thought those bits were great when I was 12.  Wonder what I’d think now.

Interesting how we were much less critical readers as teenagers.  Being uncritical then, we read a lot of stuff that horrifies us now; does that mean we accepted the unfortunate messages/stereotypes, or did we just skim past them?  Which is of course a subset of the usual question, how does reading this stuff affect our thinking about ourselves as women.

I’ve read only a handful of sheikh books over the past 20 years - one was dramatically titled the Sheikh’s Virgin Bride. *snicker, snicker* The heroine nearly wet herself watching the hero, whom she was there to marry, frolicking around on a resort beach.

*record scratch*

In the desert?  At a beach?  *_* Okay, that’s beyong me. But anyway, that’s the reason I really don’t dig sheik books - the desert. I can deal with cool, even humid tropical climes. But the desert. Egads, man… I’m too spoiled to an airconditioner for that to EVER work for me.

Good thread.  Seems that no-one here likes sheikh romance so God knows who’s buying it all! 

That said, I’ve got to echo everyone else.  I read a few sheikh romances when I was a teenager and hated them.  Hated them then (when I knew nothing of islamic culture) and I still hate them now (when I’m a bit more informed) so I don’t think that my hating them has anything to do with my perception then or now of islamic culture.

I think the reason I hated/ hate them is that the underlying “hook” of these books is about submission. And I don’t mean that in a BDSM sense of submission.  In fact, repression would be a better term.  It was like the authors wanted the heroines to be repressed.

In the desert?  At a beach?  *_* Okay, that’s beyong me.

Aqaba, maybe:  http://www.visitjordan.com/MajorAttractions/Aqaba/tabid/68/Default.aspx

Very beautiful, assuming you ignore the massive security fence on the beach dividing Jordan and Israel. 

Which reminds me of one of the most beautiful things I’ve ever seen while traveling:
http://www.visitjordan.com/visitjordan_cms/MajorAttractions/Petra/tabid/63/Default.aspx

BTW, I love all the titles people are providing here, because I’ve had a difficult time sorting through all the sheikh Romances as I’ve been trying to choose what to read.  I’ve got another list now, which is so great!

Hated sheikh romances then (when I knew nothing of islamic culture) and I still hate them now (when I’m a bit more informed) so I don’t think that my hating them has anything to do with my perception then or now of islamic culture.

Same!  I read a couple Harlequin or Silhouette sheikh novels as a teen, then learned to avoid that plot.  I did know a little about Islam, but honestly it never occurred to me that the books were portraying Muslims.  I mean really, they weren’t!

My problem was the hackneyed plot, the flat characters, the boring helpless heroine (oxymoron, anyone?), the hero who was interesting but an unlovable jerk.

Probably as an adult I’d be appalled by the cultural stereotyping.  As a teen I just treated the books like a fantasy novel with sadly thin world-building.  This probably goes back to Charlene’s point about 20 years of hindsight: the popular notion of “Arabia” really was a fantasy, not remotely close to reality.

Seems that no-one here likes sheikh romance so God knows who’s buying it all!

Maybe there are sheik lovers out there who won’t admit it in public.

Hey, I still cover my Black Lace books when I’m at work!

Personally, the only sheik romance I’d like was Disney’s Aladdin.

Is my ignorance showing, yet?

“Maybe there are sheik lovers out there who won’t admit it in public.”

Secret Baby = Secret Sheik

Sorry to drift off-topic, but since Secret Babies are being mentioned, I’m going to admit to being a Secret Baby fan.  I realise that they are a particularly hated plot device by the Bitchery and I agree that MOST Secret Baby books are pretty awful.  But there are a few goodys out there.

It’s the whole - totally ridiculous - notion of a guy thinking a woman is incredibly attractive because she has had his baby that gets me. (Ha! Wishful thinking or what?). 

However, I have my limits.  I cannot deal with purist secret baby.  It is just TOO wrong for the heroine to simply not to tell the hero about the baby because it’s “her problem” (argh!).  She can never be an appealling heroine once she’s done that.  So there needs to be “good” excuse.  Hello amnesia!

Another favourite excuse of mine is when the heroine TRIES to get hold of hero to tell him the news but can’t because he is a totally inaccessible billionaire who didn’t give her his private number EVEN WHEN THEY WERE SHAGGING (what a prince!) and whose entourage won’t pass her messages on.  I think those of you in the know may be recognising a Lynne Graham plot here…

I cannot be alone in my insanity.  Can I?

I think those of you in the know may be recognising a Lynne Graham plot here…

I cannot be alone in my insanity.  Can I?

Oh Joanna, now you’ve made me feel like I *have* to reveal my secret love for Lynne Graham so you won’t feel so alone.  Yes, every book is Persuasion in some shape or form, and yes, many books feature a large discrepancy in power between the guy and the girl, but dammit, I’ve read nearly all of them anyway.  ::Sob::

As for the hijab, it’s more common now women have themselves chosen to wear it more often in the past 30 years. It’s very tiring to hear American women rant on about how horrible it is that these women have to wear the hijab, when the majority of women who wear it in Arab countries have chosen to do so voluntarily.

Charlene, I guess the thing is that even though I’ve heard many times that wearing the hajib is voluntary, when stories like that of Dua Khalil (spoken of eloquently and powerfully by Joss Whedon here) come out, “voluntary” takes on a different meaning. 

Admittedly, I know disgracefully little about Middle Eastern and/or Muslim culture, but I think when both men and women grow up in a culture with such decided views on what constitutes acceptable behavior for women, it’s at least a little likely that the “voluntary” aspect has something to do with cultural cues that have been displayed and reinforced since that woman’s childhood.  I often wonder how my personality would be different had I grown up in a different culture - would things that bug me now not bug me had I grown up hearing, seeing, and experiencing the idea that acceptable behavior for women falls into a pretty narrow band in comparison to the culture I grew up in?  Would I find it perfectly acceptable for the men in my life to be able to direct nearly every aspect of my existence?  Or would I be another Dua Khalil because sooner or later I would’ve done something considered perfectly innocent in the Western world?

Because I did grow up in a culture that allows women to move around in the world nearly as freely as men, my perspective is one where what I see are all the ways in which ME women have to, or at least believe they have to, conform to the laws of men.  From this perspective, it’s more difficult to see any cultural benefits for women which women might have actually dreamed up; all of the cultural benefits, such as they are, appear to have been dreamed up by men for the ultimate benefit of men. 

But maybe the hajib or the burka are such things and I just can’t see that.  Maybe there’s a form of cultural imperialism involved here where I think women having the same rights as men is the most desirable state to live in and thanks to my imperialistic viewpoint my mind is automatically closed to the concept that women could feel completely satisfied living in a system which so strongly favors men and the rights of men.  Maybe what Joss Whedon had to say wasn’t eloquent at all, but merely a furthering of unfounded myths and gross cultural misunderstandings.

Plus there’s the “of course” element involved here where religion practically *is* the ME culture in some ways, which is something else that Americans are taught from birth is a less-than-desirable method of building a framework for civil rights, so there’s another hurdle of (mis)understanding to get over.

I hope this isn’t coming off as me being judgmental or rant-y as you said American women tend do to, because that’s not my intent.  Chances for interaction with the opposite point of view on this subject don’t come along every day, so I felt the need to take advantage of that and put some thoughts out there for discussion.

Dua Khalil Aswad was not Muslim, she was a Yazidi, a member of a very insular religion (I think mostly tied with Kurds), who was murdered for having a relationahip with a Sunni Muslim. The Yazidi community has condemned the murder.
This is a problem of tribalism, and more generally of extremely patriachal culture.

As others have said, such violence against women is found in all arenas: In India, in Buddhism, in the U.S., in Christianity, in Iraq, in Islam—the list is horrifically long.

Honestly, it all depends on the extent to which you practice your religion.  Christians aren’t supposed to marry non-Christians (among many other things, heh), but the word “Christian” in and of itself doesn’t have one strict definition for most people.  And some consider themselves Christian but maybe don’t really practice it, per se.

And, yes, being considered wicked by your partner would definitely kill any possible smutty goodness.  ;)

Thank you Candy for clarifying. I don’t find anyone here an asshole. I also understand there are definitely problems with the religion I was raised as (but have rejected. I’ve seen how Islam can work and my family is from Pakistan. I just wanted to make sure people knew we aren’t all barbaric crazed blue meanies.

“I’m not sure what trips my triggers. I can’t watch The King and I, for example. Just can’t. Its portrayal of Thailand and Buddhism make me want to punch Rodgers and Hammerstein in the crotch. Ditto Flower Drum Song. And it’s not like some kind of overblown political correctness at work here; I felt that way the first time I watched the musicals, and I must’ve been eight or nine years old at the time. I certainly had no idea about the political implications of what I was seeing.  The roots lie in the same frustration and anger I felt as a kid every time I saw somebody on TV who was supposed to be Chinese or Japanese but clearly speaking gibberish. Why weren’t the filmmakers even trying? Didn’t anybody care? Were they really that disdainful?

But West Side Story? No problem, even though I die a little every time somebody allegedly Puerto Rican opens his or her mouth.”

ACK! Candy, no dissing the R&H!

What next The Adventures of Tom Sawyer?

Oh and you forgot South Pacific. Remember Bloody Mary? Oh my my my.

As an aside, several of the actors who were Chinese American and interviewed recently were very thankful for Flower Drum Song even if it did romanticize several unsavory stereotypes. They now have a place in American Theater History and they are quite happy about it. I figured at least someone would be upset, but not a word.

As far as West Side Story goes who knew New York gang members could do pirouettes and entrechats that well!
I was amazed.

I think these do bug me in some way, I see the red flags, but I also remember as a kid thinking they were so cool. I still fondly remember old Popeye cartoons or that original Aunt Jemima Syrup bottle, or that story of Little Black Sambo, or Tonto from The Lone Ranger and my favorite bedtime story of all time The Five Chinese Brothers.

I for one never considered the five brothers being identical as a racist reference to all Chinese people looking alike. I just took the authors word that they were identical quintuplets or something and the whole mechanism for the story is that they are identical.

Nowadays, I guess, it’s racist to make those Aunt Jemima plastic syrup pitchers but it is really great to sell them on EBAY for a hundred bucks a piece as Black Americana. I never did get that… (Racial Stereotypes are ok, as long as it’s profitable nostalgia?)

Anyway, I do not think people like these things for “bad intent” anymore than I honestly believe these things were made from “bad intent”. I have seen some utter garbage joke books that were made to hurt, They are really easy to pick out from this fantasy stuff. I honestly think they will be looked at eventually as from a time of people not knowing the truth and well it is called fiction.

I review a lot of the current BDSM romance books and think “oh man” and say my piece and then get beat on because “I just did not get it” no matter how insulting the story actually is to people who are in the lifestyle.

Still for all my bitching do not ever think the writer did it maliciously. Maybe I am an idiot *shrug*.

TeddyPig: I don’t think the authors of sheikh romances, nor R&H, nor Laurents, Robbins and Sondheim were malicious in their intent. I hesitate to use the term racist on their work, because it’s such a charged term, but it’s certainly culturally blind in a lot of ways. And that’s the nature of things, I think, and they’re not going to be perfect by any means for a long time; however, we’re striving to be more aware, and seeing the state of things as they are now vs. how they were 40, 30, 20, even 10 years ago, I’m amazed at how much progress we’ve made. And I’m sure we’re we’re committing all sorts of horrible cultural gaffes now that we’ll look back on in 25 years’ time and go “DOH, how could we have done that?”

Lack of malice aside, as you know, a work doesn’t have to be malicious to drive one bugnuts.

Forgive me because I’m a dirty lurker who’s about to explode into a minor freakin essay!
One of my favorite parts of studying in Egypt last summer was dashing into the hijab shop around the corner and buying a bunch of scarves there.  Ceiling to floor selection of colors, textures, patterns…
A friend would wear three different scarves and then braid the three veils and let them hang over her shoulder.
Another lady would meticulously coordinate the color of her shoes, bag, clothes, and hijab- the most together woman I’ve ever met.
And then there’s the girl I see at all my school’s intramurals in swish pants, long-sleeved tee, gym shoes, and hijab.
I resent the earlier quote from the Human Rights Watch article, which I’ve read in full and which refers to Iraqi women in Baghdad.  These women are under enormous pressure to veil, but the situation causing this pressure has just as much to do with organized crime, large-scale violence, and political agendas as it does with religion.  Also, to imply that the situation of women in Baghdad (who certainly live their lives courageously in the face of overwhelming violence) is somehow the standard of women in the Middle East or Muslim women throughout the world is misleading.  With approximately 1 billion Muslims in the world today, the lives of a poor Egyptian woman and an upper-class Indonesian woman and a well-educated Arab-American woman will no doubt differ in many dramatic ways.  There are so many stories to be told about Islam and life as a Muslim woman that any generalization is instantly false and any specific case only gets at a part of the whole.
Oh my.  So, wrenching myself 180 and forcing myself back to the original topic, in my experience sheikh romances have ranged for me from roll my eyes, puke, and then wash my hands to feel clean… to, wow, this might have been good but all of these little details are off and I know there are other subtle things that I’m missing this time around but are, nevertheless, wrong.
For me, the best of the best is Robin Schone, who I’ve often disagreed with; however, she at least has something interesting to say about sexuality and culture and the various ways that people have to deal with loads of baggage when they have sex, regardless of where they come from.  Even she sent me into an eye-rolling session when she had a character in a short story yell out something in fusha Arabic along the lines of, “One time, God willing, one time,” but transliterated the phrase in an absurdly academic style.  The overall impression for me was equivalent to some guy heaving about on top of a woman, straining for orgasm, while shouting out phrases in lovely King James Bible-esque English.
On the other hand, straying away from a specifically sheikh romance (sorry!), Loretta Chase’s Mr. Impossible bothered me because of the cartoony feel of all of the Arab supporting characters (although her transliterations of Egyptian colloquial were accurate and unassuming). 
I guess that while I tend to embrace all of the schmaltz and the fantastical nature of romancelandia’s portrayal of life, distortions of Arab and/or Muslim cultural elements hit a special squick button for me.  This is mostly because it’s been my experience that highly educated, highly experienced people who should know better feel perfectly comfortable holding on to a slew of stereotypes about the Middle East and about Muslim women.  Not that cartooning up Scottish culture is a great service to humanity, but I think that our society is open to the idea that life in Scotland is not all about brawny men in short kilts (alas…) However, people *honestly* harp on harems and hijabs as though that was the entirety of life for 1 out of every 6-7 people on the face of the planet.
Wrapping up this word vomit, I really loved the conversation about recognizing violence against women in the States.  Given that all politics is local and whatnot, and that sexual violence is a reality in everyday American life, I would love to see people in the US care about survivors’ issues here with as much passion as they seem to care about women’s lives in other countries.  Then again, if we honestly addressed our own culture’s baggage re:women, then we could no longer walk around feeling superior to all those “backwards” countries where women are violated by their intimate partners and girls are valued less in the public sphere and political agendas are played out upon women’s bodies…

I do not think the Human Rights Watch implies anything they tend to spell it out with verifiable facts and tend to be very conservative in what they report on. Gay activists are always on their ass about being slow to come to a decision on the reporting of certain events etc etc. 

From some of the gay rights issues I have knowledge of (China and Russia recently) they usually are very particular and not inclined to make overall generalized statements but… when they do say such things, watch out.

So if you really have questions about any of their statements please write them and they will be glad to share the well documented issues they have on file case by case and their reasoning for stating what they did.

Sorry to be unclear, Teddy Pig.  I don’t think the Human Rights Watch article itself implies anything untrue.  They produce solid work and I referrenced an article of their’s on the status of Iraqi women in Baghdad in a research paper.
What I do think is unclear is taking a paragraph describing very specific pressures placed upon Iraqi women and then leaving that paragraph here as a rebuttal to any attempt to recognize the diversity of ways that women’s lives are impacted by Islam.
I do not want in any way to minimize violence directed at women anywhere.  But I do think that any attempt to convey an impression *about an entire cultural and/or religious system* should acknowledge the breadth of experiences encompassed within Islam.  I was not criticizing the Human Rights Watch article, I was criticizing using that particular paragraph in a post to make a point.

Liz,

In my own experiences in school and in the military, people can be surprising close and very good friends despite whatever differences they may have in their personal beliefs. I am not characterizing people here.

My point was that there are serious issues of rights especially in those countries that do not have a distinct division between church and state.

To maintain a context to other countries in that area I left the link to the entire article.

Well, Candy, thank you for this. You have cemented all of yourselves in my mind as a website I respect for being intelligent, sensitive and still able to laugh at mantitty. Now too common to find all that at once, so thanks. and thank you fellow commenters for giving me things to think about. Smart Bitches forever!

Love Sheiks.  Give me a Susan Mallery or Kristi Gold sheik book and I’m in heaven.  Sandra Brown’s Tiger Prince… Sigh.  Love. Them.

Well, I’ll admit it. I like the sheikh books. I know a hell of a lot about the middle-east. (I even speak Azeri)  I know the Sheikh books are completely unrealistic and silly.  I will definitely second the notion that the writing is orientalist.  (and I have read Said’s work thank you very much.) 

I read romance for the escape value. Some plots annoy me and some trip my trigger. 

I think Sheikh books are really another incarnation of the viking archetype.  Yep, I like viking romances too. 

Does anyone know of a contemporary romance in English (alas I do not read any Scandinavian languages) with a Scandinavian hero.  I read Cindy Dees’ Medusa Prophecy and loved it.

But I do think that any attempt to convey an impression *about an entire cultural and/or religious system* should acknowledge the breadth of experiences encompassed within Islam.

YES!

I started no less than three times to write a post on the diversity of governmental structures in the region we popularly call the “Middle East,” and stopped myself every time because I don’t have either the breadth or the depth of knowledge to get into a detailed debate of any particular system.  But I think what you say here is SO important, and I’d add to it that Islam is not the only religion in the Middle East AND that some conflicts in other areas we tend to lump together as “over there” aren’t necessarily driven by religion at all. 

For example, I had really very little knowledge about Darfur until my International Human Rights Law class, and was surprised to find out that the conflict there isn’t based on religion (both sides are Muslim), but on caste or class differences between the herding population and the non-nomadic population, sparked when the herding population (deemed the inferior group by the Dutch settlers, IIRC) began to graze their cattle on the non-nomadic population’s land (because of the desertification of the region). 

I also spent a couple of months studying some decisions of the Israeli high court system, which is modeled on the US Supreme Court, and despite the establishment of Israel as a “Jewish state,” the high court really struggles to recognize and honor the same fundamental freedoms we have in the US, where we insist on the separation of church and state.  In fact, while the Israeli social and political realities might be much different, the legal decisions are sometimes VERY politically progressive.  For example, the high court deemed it unlawful to apply any techniques commonly viewed as borderline torture (e.g. sleep deprivation, stress positions), EVEN IN the so-called ticking bomb situation.  I know that Jordan is a constitutional monarchy, despite the fact that the country is overwhelmingly Islamic (like 95% or something). 

As an American woman, it is sometimes difficult for me to see certain practices as neutral or even empowering in other religions, but I realize that I am viewing those things through my American eyes.  I think of that case in Turkey, for example, where the Muslim woman was prohibited from wearing her hajib in school (Sahin v. Turkey), and wonder what is supposedly more empowering in prohibiting that woman from expressing her religious views than allowing her to wear a symbol that is not part of my culture and religion, that I may, in my own cultural space, see as not liberating?  Why is it any less legitimate for a woman to show respect to her husband and her religion that way than it is for women in my culture to wear a wedding ring or a white dress on their wedding day or black upon the death of a spouse or whatever?  Or what about the law in France prohibiting any religious symbols for children in government schools?  Does that really create social equality or is it a denial of the right to express religious identity? 

I am definitely not someone who embraces organized religion for myself, but I think when we come to a place where we see all things religious as enslavements of some kind, we are impressing a similar form of intolerance on those we want to liberate.  And when you think of all the Muslim women in the world, I totally agree that we need to look closely at the nature of their specific experiences.  Violence is wrong wrong wrong in any context, IMO.  But I think that since 9/11, especially, there seems to be a powerful impulse to see all the elements of Islamic religion as negative or potentially violent or as repressive.  Personally, I think when people become so extreme as to commit acts of terrorism, we’re waaayyyy past religion and into something else entirely, something that may invoke religious vocabularies but are, in fact, of another character altogether.

I have to admit I never knew how hard core these countries are but while looking up this topic on Wiki…

Same-sex intercourse officially carries the death penalty in several Muslim nations: Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Iran, Mauritania, Sudan, Somalia, and Yemen. It formerly carried the death penalty in Afghanistan under the Taliban. The legal situation in the United Arab Emirates is unclear. In many Muslim nations, such as Bahrain, Qatar, Algeria and the Maldives, homosexuality is punished with jail time, fines, or corporal punishment. In some Muslim-majority nations, such as Turkey, Jordan, Egypt, or Mali, same-sex intercourse is not specifically forbidden by law. In Egypt openly gay men have been prosecuted under general public morality laws. On the other hand, homosexuality, while not legal, is tolerated to some extent in Lebanon, and has been legal in Turkey for decades.

In Saudi Arabia, the maximum punishment for homosexuality is public execution, but the government will use other punishments — e.g., fines, jail time, and whipping — as alternatives, unless it feels that homosexuals are challenging state authority by engaging in LGBT social movements. Iran is perhaps the nation to execute the largest number of its citizens for homosexuality. Since the 1979 Islamic revolution in Iran, the Iranian government has executed more than 4000 people charged with homosexual acts. In Afghanistan after the fall of the Taliban homosexuality went from a capital crime to one that it punished with fines and prison sentence.

I don’t know but Muslim gets repeated an awful lot there. I think I’ll just buy DVD’s with Turkish oil wrestlers and leave the travel out.

No we know WHY there is no Gay Sheikh romance. The HEA would have to occur while they were running for their lives.

Well, Singapore, which is primarily a Buddhist country, criminalizes gay sex, with a sentence of life imprisonment, and up until 2003, US states could criminalize it, as well. OTOH, religiously diverse but racially still really segregated South Africa, under its new constitution and government, has embraced gay marriage as fully constitutional. Of course, they still use whipping/caning as a form of punishment for juvenille offenders.  And until 2005 (Roper v. Simmons), the US joined the few countries—including Iran, Iraq, and Saudi Arabia—in executing juvenile offenders.

Yeah Robin but death? 4000 kill by the government in one country for homosexuality?

Oh man… If they do that to homosexuals and keep count then I just start buying the rest the bad news.

Yeah Robin but death?

I find the US pre-Lawrence situation more shocking, though, Teddy, because at least in Iran, for example, adultery, apostasy, burglary and petty theft are also capital crimes.  Yeah it seems monstrous, but at least it’s not just gays who are singled out for execution.  But in the US, to allow criminalization of a certain type of adult consensual sex well into the 21st century in a supposedly democratic society is very much selectively discriminatory against gays, especially gay men.  As is the fact that some states still have residual marital rape exceptions, despite the fact that the Supreme Court struck down the marital rape exception in 1984.

I don’t believe legislation on sex stems solely (even primarily) from religion.  Such legislation emanates in large part from a desire to control and segregate; there are those who use religion to justify their position of privilege.  So, not a causal line
religion—> sex laws
but rather a common origin:
control-freaky impulse—> sex laws and control-freaky interpretation of religion

I’m no expert on sheikh romance, but I have the impression that the sheikhs themselves are frequently portrayed as control freaks but less frequently in any serious way as Muslims (or really, as representatives of any plausible Middle Eastern belief system).

OTOH, in the few sheikh romances I’ve read, minor characters (or whole tribes/cities) are portrayed as some version of “scary Middle Eastern woman haters”.  This places the entire romance against a backdrop of omnipresent threat, which is useful to create tension and isolation, or to necessitate dramatics such as disguises or chase scenes.  The diffuse “cultural” threat reinforces that the heroine is dependent on the hero for her physical safety, and fosters a Stockholm syndrome atmosphere that helps to explain her rapid attachment to the hero.  I would bet that this setup helps readers buy into the intensity of the heroine’s feelings even where the hero lacks obvious lovability.

Simply put: if all the available males are bad guys, then the heroine is perfectly rational in choosing the bad guy who offers safety and orgasms.

The only seven countries in the whole world (mind you that includes some pretty bad places) that still retain capital punishment “THE DEATH PENALTY” for homosexuality are the Muslim nations of: Afghanistan, Iran, Mauritania, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, and Yemen.

Legislation? We can use such a civilized term here? They KILL people for being Gay.

That’s it, that’s all, not because they are doing anything wrong, but being Gay.

Which does not say much about the right to privacy and other types of civilized behavior. What am I saying oh man…

I honestly try not to pick on specific religions but in this case um yeah I think they need to work on some things in the PR department before attempting to sell this one…

I think that there is a lot of potential in this romance sub-genre waiting to be tapped if you examined a sheikh in a, perhaps, more 3d level in an urban setting.

Wealthy men of the Gulf area seem to bury themselves in materialism to escape themselves and their lives. I could just imagine a character in this role feeling conflicts about his beliefs and the reality he percieves, his duties to his family and tradition but a sense of isolation and incompleteness as well that he can’t deny… I can see him forging a relationship with a woman, Eastern or Western, who is strong as he is, understanding, serves as a balance and complement to him. One whom he treats with love and compassion, in his protective and controlling way (surely she can show him the light about how to use his control when and if he misuses it (probably due to his rather spoiled upbringing) ?).  Not to mention conquering those socio-cultural barriers.
I would LOVE to read this book. An author could take a holiday to Dubai on research too!

P.S. A relative of mine has remained unmarried and is on-off with a rather high-up man for 20 years because of his family’s disapproval of any marriage between them. Both Arabs, of different nationalities.

A bit off the current topic, but re: posted question/joke about middle eastern women reading baptist televangelist romances—there was (maybe still is?) a French erotica genre featuring slave women and masters in the American South. But I suspect it was really men reading that.

Your post made me happy, Bee, because I remember being in Cairo during the summer holiday time of year.  All of the better-off Egyptians fled the city for Alexandria and the Mediterranean coast and a huge wave of Saudis moved into the apartments in all of the classy neighborhoods.  The Saudi women tended to wear all black but only a very loose, almost not there scarf tossed over their very styled hair.  Heavy makeup, outrageously expensive sunglasses.  So they were, so to speak, letting their hair down.  My teacher loves to tell a story about a flight from Jeddah to Cairo.  As soon as the plane took off, the women popped into the lav and changed into v. fashionable jeans, shirts, and stylish headscarves.
  The flip side of the coin are all of the crazy stories told about Saudi pretty boys on the prowl in Cairo nightclubs.  Heavy on the alcohol, heavy on the women.
  The same thing often happens with Iranians when they take vacations in Damascus.  Party hard…
  Relating this back to what TeddyPig keeps posting, I think no one here is arguing that the legal codes found in many Middle Eastern and North African countries (as well as some Southeastern Asian countries) are full of sunshine and human rights.  These legal codes are sometimes related back to supposedly Islamic norms of governance (not always- Egypt’s campaign against homosexuality is being enacted in a legal setting where the relationship between religion and the state is tense and often outright hostile).  So, yes, as you point out, you read “Muslim” in this context a lot. 
  But please explain to me how this has anything to do with what your average Muslim might feel about any particular issue?  As a practicing Catholic, I differ sharply from my church on a variety of issues from same-sex marriage to birth control.  As a point of comparison, think about the Episcopalian churchs here in the US that are aligning themselves with Anglican clergy in Nigeria who support an often violent anti-homosexual agenda.  Islam does not have a monopoly on religious intolerance, and Christian governments have engaged and continue to engage in more than their fair share of persecution.  Clearly religious identification *alone* cannot explain away why governments continue to persecute people.
  Moving on, the strains of Islam taken up by governments may or may not reflect the religious thought and practice of the majority of the population.  Islam is a fairly decentralized religion with its fair share of theological choices.  For every law that is touted by some government as Islamic, you’ll likely find a mujtahid out there who would give you a very different ruling on the issue.  “Islam” is not a monolithic entity- it matters whether someone follows Maliki, Shafi, Hanafi, or Hanbali thought.  It matters if someone considers themselves a Salafi or a reformer.  It matters if one is a Twelver or an Ismaili.  It certainly matters if someone is Sufi.
  And just as there is diversity in religious structure, there is diversity in individual religious experience.  The Saudi women who remove their abayas to reveal outrageously hip jeans, the Saudi men who go and party hard in the nightclubs along Pyramid Road- these people are Muslim.  Whatever one might assume about their lives is probably far off the mark.
  My point?  Generalizing from the government level down does little to illuminate what religion means in lives of your average joe (or fulan…)

“These legal codes are sometimes related back to supposedly Islamic norms of governance”

I think I already pointed out earlier that I find it hard to swallow your insistence that there is a separation of church and state in those 7 Muslim nations when its plainly documented again and again by more than just one intelligent group with a web site.

I know you insist on defending your chosen religion fanatically. I am more than sure there are good people who practice Islam who do not follow this thinking. Just like I am sure there are Catholic Priest who do not molest children. But… if there is no reversal of policy or policing within the religious organization to correct these matters is that not contributing to the persecution continuing?

I just do not get how you ignore the facts in front of you when 4000 people have died in Iran since 1979 just because they were Gay. I find it hard to so casually write it off as some form government faux pas which the people of that country mostly Muslim in no way supported the policy.

My common sense says if you have a government sponsored Death Penalty for people who are homosexual then you probably do not have many qualms about ignoring other human rights issues.

At least in my opinion you have a small PR problem there.

I don’t think I even defended the Catholic Church’s position on anything, much less defended it fanatically!
I will only point out that plugging your ears and humming loudly when other people challenge you + calling your partner in dialogue :-) a fanatic is an excellent way to hear nothing but the sound of your (off-key?) humming.  No one ever learned anything about the world around them by being self-righteous, but unfortunately I feel that we live in a society that mostly rewards this sort of I’m right and you’re an idiot mentality. 
Please note that I never used the phrase “separation between church and state” that you have repeatedly attributed to me. 
Nor I am arguing that members of organized religion should remain silent the face of evil done in the name of their religion.  I believe I am doing my part when I teach 5-7 and 8-10 year-old children about sexual abuse in a child safety education program.  I do my part when I integrate LGBTQ issues into a workshop that I teach college-aged students about sexual violence.  This does not mean that priests never abuse children but it does mean that you have no right EVER to claim that all Catholics silently support child abuse.
The only people who will be able to change the Catholic Church in a positive fashion are Catholics who remain within the church, always pushing for and leading a life that embraces ideas like women’s equality and same-sex marriage.  It is equally true that the only people who will be able to affect change in Muslim communities are Muslims themselves.
  I understand that you are involved with LGBTQ rights work, so surely you have heard of being an ally.  There are a wide array of individual and groups of Muslims who are working for a wide array of changes within Muslim communities.  If your goal is to affect positive change, partner with Muslims who share your values and be a good ally for them in their struggles.
  Tarring 1 billion people with the kind of contemptuous ignorance you have displayed here will not affect the change you wish to see in the Muslim world.  It will only alienate the moderate Muslims who might otherwise have been your partner in working for LGBTQ rights.  It will only increase the hate crimes that are perpetrated against Muslim Americans and Arab Americans.  It will only make you truly irrelevant when the time comes to dialogue.
*LizL has gracefully descended from her soapbox and returned to her reading of Howl’s Moving Castle, a book blessedly free of sheikhs, a topic she has become somewhat allergic to recently*

Generalizing from the government level down does little to illuminate what religion means in lives of your average joe (or fulan…)

I really wish more Americans would travel outside the US regularly, because that very disconnect becomes personal very quickly.  I have had numerous discussions with people while traveling abroad about what they see of America via Bush or certain media outlets, and it’s not necessarily accurate or pretty.  The irony of our nation’s incredible diversity and equally incredible insularity never ceases to amaze me.  I wonder, sometimes, if we weren’t so isolated in the US if we would let half of the stuff go on in our foreign and domestic policies that we currently tolerate, embrace, or ignore. 

*I’m not reading Howl’s Moving Castle, but I am really hungry now for some fesenjan.  And dammit, there is no good Persian food in my area.  Or Egyptian, Syrian, Lebanese, Israeli, Armenian, Afghani, Turkish, or any other Middle eastern restaurants around, either.*

“Tarring 1 billion people with the kind of contemptuous ignorance you have displayed here”

Yeah, associating their majority presence in countries with Death Penalties and Human Rights violations as a sure sign of problems within the organization itself is a little much I know.

You go on feeling superior in your ability to “visit” these places without the fear of grave reprisal and remain unaffected by all this bother. Sorry to wreck your travelogue my dear.

I’ll just leave you with the death of a 14 year old boy shot on his doorstep by police because he was gay. This was after a fatwa was issued by Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani a Shia Islam Leader (that is the second largest denomination in the Islamic Faith for those of you keeping track of such things).

Human rights groups have condemned the “barbaric” murder of a 14-year-old boy, who, according to witnesses, was shot on his doorstep by Iraqi police for the apparent crime of being gay.

Ahmed Khalil was shot at point-blank range after being accosted by men in police uniforms, according to his neighbours in the al-Dura area of Baghdad.

Campaign groups have warned of a surge in homophobic killings by state security services and “religious militias” following an anti-gay and anti-lesbian fatwa issued by Iraq’s most prominent Shia leader, Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani.

I rest my case, you go on now.

I travel often and I hear many generalizations about Americans. I hear myself say similar things. Everybody does. It’s hard especially talking casually not to generalize from regime to citizen or from TV show to everyone. >>>BUT<<

< I totally understand why Teddy is discomforted. It is nerveracking traveling somewhere that >

>>WHAT YOU ARE<<< is not respected or even illegal. Probably you will be fine but if one thing goes wrong…. I got in a very bad situation last winter in rural Turkey and a military police man would not help because I was a foreign woman. I was wearing a head scarf and being careful but I attracted the wrong person’s attention anyway. That is the worst problem I ever had there but it was frightening that I did not have the police on my side. That does not mean all Turkey is bad or not safe. You can have a bad experience anywhere and my friend had a bad experience in Alabama once. It only makes you think differently when you see how the government can create a culture of looking aside so that people are confident they can get away with it. So I agree that laws of tolerance are necessary but of course they do not guarantee how people behave.

I am not sure this is relevant to sheikhs! Maybe it is relevant to how the American woman feels in the story when she is kidnapped by Alec Guiness for his harem :-)

I totally understand why Teddy is discomforted. It is nerveracking traveling somewhere that >>>WHAT YOU ARE<<

< is not respected or even illegal.

I think we’re all in agreement with this sentiment.  What I think some of us question is the idea that any culture, nation, or religion can be characterized in a certain way in its entirety.  The US is widely considered to be the most egregious international human rights violator, for example.  Our history of slavery, of decimation of Native Americans, of many other things (e.g. Abu Ghraib) do not acquit us of persecuting people for who they are, either.  In fact, I’m not sure any country or religion is innocent in this respect.

“That does not mean all Turkey is bad or not safe.”

You are right Turkey is actually a rather progressive nation in the area.

I highly recommend a Gay Romantic movie called Steam (check out Netflix) which is filmed there. Their culture has for a centuries silently integrated homosexuality with a certain set of rules to be followed. Fascinating social studies stuff.

Robin, I understand our nation has a very dark history of Human Rights issues. I bring them up often myself, but in relation to what is happening just as of May 5th of this month with that 14 year old boy being gunned down in front of his own home for being Gay. He was turning tricks to feed his family no less and they had just spent days interrogating his father.

I believe we can and should use our Freedom of Speech to question the role that Islamic Religion and that asshole Shia Islam Leader’s little website fatwa against homosexuals played in his death.

If it is found insulting for making a simple judgement call to those expounding on the beauty of the Islamic religious practices and ladies fashion wear… well tough.

Hell, I was raised in the Four Square church and my grandfather is an ordained pastor. I give him hell when I hear stupid bigoted shit comes out of his mouth. But even though he is my own Grandfather I do not sugar coat the reality of his ignorant beliefs or the deaths they might have caused.

I personally don’t like Sheikh romances, except this one which is a graphic novel/manga that I just found recently. (japanese girl is kidnapped and used for blackmailing her doctor father into performing surgery on her captor’s sister, captor and girl get lovey dovey on an oasis, captor’s dad tells him that he can’t keep her as his wife, so he should just enjoy playing with her now and then dump her, the works. And that’s just the first chapter!)

I mostly prefer reading mideval romances, knights of the round table, king arthur sort of things. I love the knights. :3

The Blue Sword was modelled in part after the Sheik, as Robin McKinley says here.  It was kind of a backlash against the rape-her-until-she-loves-you theme.