All the talk about the NASCARomance sanitizing the sport with a “no crashes, no alcohol/drugs, no sex” rule has got me thinking. All things NASCAR aside, I have to be honest, here: I like romances wherein there is a sex scene. I’m not reading the book FOR the sex scene, but it’s rare that I will enjoy a fade-to-black oblique reference to the hummuna-hummuna. Not only do I enjoy a good scene that moves the relationship forward (and back and forward and back) but a well-written sexual scene in the hands of a skilled romance author can be absolutely delightful. Back in the day, I used to steer clear of the AAR reviews that listed ‘Kisses’ as the heat level, and knowing that sexual explication is a preference of mine does make me want to steer clear of the NASCARomance line (although I might have to sample one for review, because, hey, why not?)
Preference aside, I have read a few very satisfying romances that didn’t progress past a hot make-out. In a YA novel like, for example, Major Crush, if the two lead characters had hopped off the tractor and into the hayloft, I’d have been a little skeeved, because the novel’s tone had a happy innocence that could have been lost with a big humpty-humpty scene. But that’s not to say that I have blanket expectations of YA or romance in general that there MUST or MUST NOT be sex, OMG, the children, think of the children.
What romances do you enjoy rereading that don’tfeature sexual scenes? Do you prefer just kissing or the whole megillah? A fade to black or an illumination to the part where they both pass out, “spent from passion?”
Georgette Heyer is still the queen of romances that probably don’t even have kisses. Even in the romances in which the two characters are married, you have to read very very closely to make sure that the characters have actually had sex. And she manages to pull it off brilliantly.
Jane Austen does too, of course! 😉
But otherwise, I like my sex explicit and I like a lot of it. But I’m a slut, so what can I do?
Basically, if a book is a really well-written LOVE story, then I don’t really need a hot sex scene. And if an author can do both, so much the better (Julia Quinn, Laura Kinsale). If all you’ve got is the sex without the love, then it’s might as well be prøn (Bertrice Small, I’m looking at you).
One scene of ‘PG’ author Lynn Kurland’s that I loved, from Dance Through Time, goes something like this: that one bit of foreplay was all she was going to get. Jamie loved her over and over until she thought she would barely be able to stand, let alone walk. “You missed me,” she managed, eventually.
Honestly, I’d rather read this than wading through pebbly nubbins and turgid manhoods.
Um, what’s the point of Nascar without crashes? That’s kind of like Hockey without blood on the ice.
One of my favourite romances ever is a YA romance –
Some Girls Do
by Dahlia Kosinski, who sadly never wrote anything else that I can find – that only has kisses in it. But it’s so well done, and the characters are just so awesome, that I accept that as a YA romance that’s all that’s gonna happen. In general, though, I prefer romances with a heaping side of Ultra Hot Sex.
I feel a little cheated when there’s not any humpity-humpity.
I prefer my romances explicit for the most part. I like them well done and a well done fade to black is still well done.
Sunshine, comes to mind for rereads that don’t feature a sex scene. There’s explicit sexual reference and a nekkid scene but that’s about it. Stephen King has lukewarm sexuality in some of his stuff. An overview of the sex scene if you will. I can’t really think of any others off the top of my head. Pulling a couple out of everything I’ve ever read is likely to cause a stroke. My mind doesn’t work under those proportions.
I remember a lot of my YA books had kisses or subtle sexuality. The Milk Carton ones come to mind. Books that talk about sexuality but skim over the sex itself were common when I was younger too.
I don’t like books that show the kissing and petting to large degree then fade out or skim over the rest. It feels dishonest to me. If an author can go into the details of the hero with his face between the heroines legs then that author should be able to finish the scene in the same way.
Another thing I don’t like is the fade to black while the H/H is making out or going upstairs or whatever and finding out the next day nothing happened. I may just be assuming the world is made up of sex addicts but unless there is a damn good reason for them to NOT have bonked then it’s assumed they bonked. If the author then tells me they didn’t I don’t believe it.
It’s the same with scenes where the heroine is captured or whatever, especially in historicals. Most times she would have been raped so fast they would have still been tying her up. She wasn’t of course, even after 12 hours of being held. Sometimes there aren’t good reasons as to why she wasn’t and it drives me batshit. This happens more in movies and general fiction than in romance though.
Basically, I like honesty. Sex is a fundamental part of most romantic relationships. It should be there in some shape or form and it should be consistent.
I LOVE Cindy Holbrook, and her books never featured more than some kisses and maybe a non-explicit wandering hand every once in a while. The romantic tension between the characters and the humor of the situations made anything more explicit unnecessary. In fact, I think anything racier would have ruined the books. But she is definitely the exception.
I don’t read a lot of romance these days- I’ve wandered off into sci-fi/fantasy/mystery/horror for the most part. When I do read a romance I find myself skipping a lot of the sex scenes. I find them either too vague and flowery or, as in the book I read last night, out-of-nowhere crude. (The phrase “spunk and juice” gave me a particularly unpleasant shiver.)
If I’m going to take the time to read a sex scene I either want it to happen without a lot of extended description to slow the movement of the story, or I want to have to wipe the steam off my glasses when I’m done.
I generally prefer to read some well-done sex in my romance novels than not. But a good book is a good book… or something. But something that’s been driving me a bit crazy lately is when the author is constantly referring to the hero’s “cock” and using the more risque descriptive words for the H/H genitals. Then they start to kiss and WHAM! The bedroom door shuts in my face. Am I the only one who finds that a bit strange?
I enjoy the sex scenes. It just feels more real to me that if I get a vivid description of everything else- dinner, fighting, whatever, I should get a vivid description of their sex.
I rarely end up reading stories without sex, because I tend to stick to certain authors, or maybe because my random books from the library are just lucky. Honestly, it wouldn’t bug me so much in a historical, because I do get sick of the pregnancy- out- of- wedlock- let’s- get- married thing. It almost bugs me when the historicals do have sex, because I know there are some primative birth control methods, but the heroines never seem to use them.* But in a contemporary book, that would drive me insane, mostly, though I read Major Crush and loved it.
*Of course, if they get married with only a few kisses, I would be mad not to hear about their wedding night.
I either want the sex scene to move the plot, or I want it to be so smokin’ hot that it’s worth the wordcount on that basis alone.
What I can’t stand are sex scenes with a lot of trite descriptions. Blah blah blah burning fires blah blah pebbles nubbins blah blah crashing waves of ecstasy.
I have issued a ban on reference to the penis as a “muscle,” and another ban on heroines who “mewl” during foreplay. (Yes, Julia Quinn, I’m looking at you. Stop it. You are too good a writer to do that crap.)
Also, heroines are not allowed to have orgasms and not know what the hell just happened. I find it unbelievable that just because a woman is eighteen years old and was raised in a nunnery that she would have no flipping clue about her body. That takes some serious lack of curiosity or imagination.
(Not that I have the power to enforce any bans, but I can make them, can’t I?)
Yeah, I must admit, I can’t think of a single romance without sex where I didn’t feel steam-out-the-ears pissed I didn’t get my sex scene.
Having said that, though, I really enjoy Barbara Michaels/Elizabeth Peters, who never gets explicit. But her books aren’t strictly romance either.
If I’m reading romance, I better get some real sex. None of this “and he kissed her, and kept kissing her, and by the time they were naked and spent they knew they would be together forever.” Or whatever. Bleh.
I love love love the old Laura London Regencies, and there is no explicit nookie in them—yet I count them among the most erotic Romances I’ve read.
These days, though, I don’t know what’s more difficult: writing a convincing Romance without sex, or writing convincing sex scenes within Romance. IMO sex is such an important part of Romance that I wish more of it were more, uhm, inspiring, maybe. Or at least more passionately and thoughtfully written.
Some of the hottest scenes I’ve ever read were in Dorothy Sayers Whimsy/Vane mystery novels, Gaudy Night and Busman’s Honeymoon. Of course they’re never explicit, but there’s one scene in G.N. where they make eye contact… my heavens. Hotter than the most explicit scenes in anything else I’ve read. And B.H.- I never would have thought Latin could be sexy.
But in general, I do like a plot-moving sex scene here and there throughout the book. I remember being in the last quarter of For My Lady’s Heart and bitching to my husband that I -still- hadn’t gotten to a sex scene. Of course, the payoff was very nice, thank you Laura Kinsale.
well its not like we get to go thru life having a new first kiss once a day. so its nice to read about them.
i can take or leave most sex scenes. i mean really, how many different ways can part A goes into part B be written?
it irritates me when there is too much sex going on ( laurel K hamilton) .. get to the freakin story already!!
nice book with not so much sex was “for the roses” julia garwood? .. good book
i never read young adult novels, i was reading harlequins at 12 yrs old .
Years and years ago I read several of Mary Balogh’s old Regencies in which the hero and heroine hardly do more than kiss. Typically, this is not the type of romance I prefer, but these books were still satisfying for me due to the emotional connection between the characters. Not all authors can do this well, but I think Balogh’s a master of it. (Take, for instance, the scene in The Secret Pearl in which Adam and Fleur are riding in the carriage, and the only part of them that is touching is their linked pinkie fingers. It’s a physically chaste scene, but it throbs with emotional tension.)
I started my romance reading at about 13 on Georgette Heyer so I have some pretty fond memories of those stories.
Now however, while I don’t always need entire chapters devoted to the deed – I do like my romance reading hot. I’m definitely not a fan of flowery prose and prefer much more frank and honest descriptions – it just seems more real to me then, which is more likely to keep me in the story.
SB Sarah, I’ll also admit to not picking up books after AAR gave them ‘kisses’ ratings…
Except for nostalgic memories of some Christian romances (kissing, no booty) that I read ten years ago as an impressionable youth, I like my books hot. And I don’t care much for Nascar, so I’ll probably be staying away from these. But I cannot BELIEVE they would pass up the incredibly useful euphemism “stick shift.” That’s just gross negligence right there.
I wouldn’t say that I prefer just kissing, but if a particular author sucks at writing sex scenes, fading to black wouldn’t exactly disappoint me. So it kind of depends, I guess.
Like a lot of people, I grew up on Heyer and then on regencies in general and lots of really old Harlequins, so the occasional chaste romance doesn’t bother me, as long as the tone is right. And it can be just as satisfying as great classic romance flicks where there’s nothing more than kissage onscreen, and sometimes not even that.
I must be some kind of frigid English freak or something, because unlike all the other commentators so far, I tend to find I skip through most of the sex scenes in most romances. It’s not that I’m bothered by explicitness or anything, it’s just that most sex scenes induce in me a milder version of the glazed boredom we all agree is triggered by LKH’s worst excesses. In general, I’m really pleased for the couple that they’re having such a good time together, but voyerism isn’t really my thing, so can’t they do it without me knowing about all their slots and tabs and wobbly bits?
Now, subtle physical contact and glances and ironic remarks – that turns me on. Maybe it was too much neat Georgette Heyer for too long?
I like sex scenes if they’re at all believable from a mechanical standpoint, but sometimes I find myself trying to imagine where everything is, and it just doesn’t work! How is he lying on top of her and caressing BOTH of her breasts—shouldn’t he be holding some of his own weight?
The worst scenes are those where the heroine’s hymen (there’s always a hymen) is apparently halfway up her vajayjay, because the hero somehow manages to partially penetrate before he encounters the barrier. Unh-unh.
I’m fascinated by authors who manage to evoke the gut-clench feeling just by telling me the characters are kissing. It’s a testament to how well the story has set up that kiss.
With the authors who go beyond that . . . sometimes the scenes are interesting, often they are not. Too many authors seem to drop everything else to get to the humping, whereas the hottest scenes have everything else *and* the humping, all woven together.
No sex? No reading, far as I’m concerned. I read romances for the romance, sure, but also for the sex.
And my word is “moral85,” so I don’t want no complaining that I’m being less than pure, here. Bill Gates (or whoever wrote this program) likes me just fine.
When Rhett carries Scarlett up the stairs in Gone With the Wind, I wasn’t disappointed that I didn’t get to read about them breaking the bed. That would have been weird. You had to be a talented writer in those days to convey passion without all the panting and petting. That was a no-no. I think Mitchell did it well.
I like a good sex scene if it’s well written. I can’t stand the characters throwing it down every two pages. I feel like saying, “Dudes, there’s Vikings at the door. Put your clothes back on!”
I am like a lot of you, I love a well written sex scene if a)contributes to the story, b)is not unbelieveable—first time orgasm shock, and c)does not break up the storyline (we are about to discover some major clue or the characters are being pursued yet they have time to stop for some stress nookie.)
I do find myself skipping a lot of sex scenes if they are repetative or are not well written.
I don’t mind erotica books because it is to be expected to contain non stop body slapping action, just don’t turn a regular romance into a sleeze fest for no reason at all.
Two books came to mind while reading the comments here. The first, “Completely Smitten” by Kristine Grayson was so character driven and wonderful that when I got to the end and suddenly realized there had been no sex scene at all, and I wasn’t bothered.
The second book, “The Last Male Virgin” by Katherine Deauxville, is probably in my bottom three least favorite romance novels…maybe bottom two. The hero of the story has been living with an island tribe for years and has been celibate the whole time, leaving him 100% virgin. Should make for some explosive/amusing/entertaining cherry poppin’ sex, given how much of a big deal they made out of the fact that OMGHESAVIRGINNNN!!1! The writing was so-so and the characters were annoying and as it dragged along I got fed up and skimmed through until I found the first sex scene…I think it was two or three sentences before fading to black. I seem to recall something really frustratingly vague about “fireworks.” I felt so cheated…
I also like my romances explicit, but especially, I like them well done. I can enjoy a book without sex, but if that’s the case it must include great relationship & character development, and/or action and adventure (ie C.E. Murphy).
Quality writing is a must, then I look for something to keep it interesting…such as sex, and/or adventure…or both. Unrealistic or impossible sex scenes, and I toss that puppy out. If it’s not well written, don’t even bother.
I hate to admit this… maybe I should’nt I could get kicked off the site, but very often I find myself skimming over the sex scenes to get back to the story.
I really like a hot sex scene, if it includes and is the culmination of the emotion the characters feel for each other, and a really good sex scene should be an extension (*snerk*-extension) of the charcters personalities.
For instance, if the story up to that point has been a lighthearted romp then the sex should’nt be a dark, wet, river of umimaginable, multiple orgasmic dripping off the celing fixtures…you know?
and what really drives me crazy is when you can tell that the author is embarrased to be writing a sex scene and it comes off like dance steps…
And she does this to him-(one-two) and He does this to her (three-four)…
Also you can really tell when an author has been told by whoever that her book needs to be spiced up. You’ll be reading along enjoying the plot or the chase scene and then Boom! Bowbowchickachicka Because it’s really hot to have sex up against a moldy wall in a filthy bathroom in an opium den in China Town.
I don’t care how hot the guy is! Not enough Purell in the world people!
I enjoy a good erotic romance. I also enjoy a good non-explicit romance. What bothers me are the books that indulge in a great deal of explicit text, but include no payoff. If there’s extremely frank language, discussion of phsyical sensations, or any close-POV inspection of character arousal not veiled in euphemism, then I expect there to be a sex scene before the end of the book!
I read one romance recently (no longer on hand, or I’d provide the title and author) that I didn’t realize was intended to be “sweet,” given all the undisguised sexual feelings portrayed. When it ended with a proposal instead of a romp, I was highly disappointed.
Kardis: with you on the word use! I think I’m a touch desensitized to the word you referenced
but in the same text as any other non-PG term, yeah.
pxj
When I first read The Scarlet Letter, I was sweating just imagining Hester and Reverend Dimsdale getting it on. Best secret-baby novel ever written, that!
I, too, read a lot of YA romances that culminated in a kiss—- making out was the farthest they ever got, and a lot of the time it worked. I recently read “Twilight” by Stephanie Meyer, which I would use an example of an awesome YA parnormal romance that doesn’t have any nookie but at the same time is OMG intense and hot.
I like explicit sometimes, but I do think there’s something to be said for the well-written “fade to black.” I mean, if the characters are well-writen enough and they have the chemistry… I can kind of impose my own sexual fantasies upon them, rather than reading a disappointing slot A/slot B sex scene. Often, unless an author is really gifted, I do find myself skipping the sex scenes (which is a problem if they converse about something important during sex—- I mean, seriously, who talks about plot while they’re getting it on?).
That’s not to say I don’t like explicit sex. I do, I do, just my kinks tend to be a little different and I usually find myself more turned on by fanfic or erotica than romance novels. Romance novels give me the “Oh, it’s like falling in love,” shivers from the characterization, usually.
Once when I was a kid, I ate all the raisins out of a box of Raisin Bran*.
I do the same with a romance where the main plot bores me—I flip straight to the sex scenes. Sometimes I’ll go back and read the rest, if the H/H seem to have an interesting emotional connection.
If a book is compelling, it doesn’t matter to me how much or how little sex is in it. But life’s just too damn short for Bran Flakes.
*believing in truth in advertising, I then crossed out every instance of the word “raisin” from the box.
I don’t read “sweet” fiction but I’m getting increasingly burnt out on gratuitous sex. I love hot boinking when it’s written well, but I’m tired of the following used in correlation to pussies:
thatch (so it has a straw roof,)
needy (and emotional issues)
inflamed (and a nasty infection?)
Mmm, tasty. No wonder George is slurping up her love juice. Dee-lishous.
I am a demanding bitch. I want the sex to (a) be well-written and actually HOT and (b) advance the plot.
I’m of the get-on-with-the-damn-story school. I love the foreplay, the sexual tension, but pages and pages of sex and—mostly—I just glaze over. Maybe I’m not reading the right books, but writing sex is an artform. And most of what I’m reading isn’t art; it’s just bumping the word count. Frankly, I’d rather do it than read about it.