







by Candy • Monday, April 25, 2005 at 08:54 AM
Hey, all this talk about massive schlongs has made me think about a related issue: When did oral sex become de rigueur for romance novels? Because it wasn’t always this way. I remember reading many, many books in the Good Old Days in which the heroine was lucky to have her nipple lapped at before Lord Massivecockershire rammed it home. I remember reading Special Gifts by Anne Stuart when I was 14 years old and nearly passing out because it had this incredibly graphic oral sex scene in it. I went for a while without encountering any until I picked up a Lisa Kleypas novel. Nowadays, when I pick up a romance novel, I expect to read some oral lovin’ if there’s any sex in it at all--to the extent that I feel as if something’s lacking when the heroine doesn’t get any head.
Anyone want to weigh in on this? Is my memory about little to no oral sex in old romances wrong? Was I so young that I missed the act entirely because I didn’t understand what was being described? Was oral sex the old anal sex, as in “naughty things the author is not allowed to write about because we think the public will be grossed out by its ickiness”?
15 comments •
Trackback •
Categories: Random Musings
Tags: This entry has not been tagged yet.





by Candy • Monday, April 25, 2005 at 08:33 AM
So Connie Brockway is migrating from historical romances to contemporaries. Am I the only reader who has enjoyed her work in the past (I have three of her books on my keeper shelf) who’s not at all upset about this?
Here’s the thing: while I have enjoyed many of Brockway’s books, and she was an author on my autobuy list for about 5 years, I have always thought her voice was very, very modern. It didn’t bug me at all until the Bridal series was released. I read them both, and the characters and tone struck me as so modern and not-British (the characters seemed like Americans in period drag) that I gave up on Brockway entirely. This is by no means her fault, because I don’t think she has changed; I have. I have her McClairen’s Isle books still TBR, and every time I keep passing them over for something else when the time comes for me to pick something new to read.
Now that she’s writing contemporaries, though, I think I’ll have to check out her new releases again.
6 comments •
Trackback •
Categories: Random Musings
Tags: This entry has not been tagged yet.








by Candy • Sunday, April 24, 2005 at 04:36 PM
Monica Jackson takes on some of the covers for the top 100 romance novels at Barnes and Noble and Amazon. I laughed until I coughed. Sarah and I may be out of a job if she ever decides to turn cover snarking into a regular feature on her site.
(OK, not out of a job. Out of a hobby. A hobby that’s generated an amazing number of visitors.)
3 comments •
Trackback •
Categories: The Link-O-Lator
Tags: This entry has not been tagged yet.




by Candy • Sunday, April 24, 2005 at 04:01 PM
Dude with much time on his hands reads a bunch of romance novels and analyzes the contents of the sex scenes within; presents results in hilarious fashion. He even breaks down the frequency of words used to describe breasts, penises and other body parts. Check it out.
Leave a comment •
Trackback •
Categories: The Link-O-Lator
Tags: This entry has not been tagged yet.








by Candy • Sunday, April 24, 2005 at 01:10 PM
MR. PINK: Let me tell ya what “Like a Virgin“‘s about. It’s about some cooze who’s a regular fuck machine. I mean all the time, morning, day, night, afternoon, dick, dick, dick, dick, dick, dick, dick, dick, dick, dick, dick.
MR. BLUE: How many dicks was that?
MR. WHITE: A lot.
MR. PINK: Then one day she meets a John Holmes motherfucker, and it’s like, whoa baby. This mother fucker’s like Charles Bronson in “The Great Escape.” He’s diggin tunnels. Now she’s gettin this serious dick action, she’s feelin something she ain’t felt since forever. Pain. (...) It hurts. It hurts her. It shouldn’t hurt. Her pussy should be Bubble-Yum by now. But when this cat fucks her, it hurts. It hurts like the first time. The pain is reminding a fuck machine what is was like to be a virgin. Hence, “Like a Virgin.”
- Quentin Tarantino, Reservoir Dogs
Among the many physical perfections conferred upon romance novel heroes, one that’s rarely discussed is dick size. And let’s face it: Most romance novel heroes are huge. I guess the impression is magnified when the heroines (especially in historicals) are often virgins, but even if the heroine has had some experience, the hero almost always turns out to have a much bigger schlong than the ex-husband or boyfriend. And sometimes the size becomes downright ludicrous, like Sinclair in MaryJanice Davidson’s Undead series, whose dick is apparently as big around as the bottom of a beerglass. Linda Howard has also written about heroes with massive members. Their dicks are so huge, that even in the relatively rare instances when the heroine isn’t a virgin, the colossal cock still causes the heroine pain. (This may not be true of all her books--I’ve read only ten or so Linda Howard novels and I haven’t picked up any new ones in about five years.) Even geek heroes like Simon of The Real Deal has a wang of monstrous proportions--it’s so big that it’s a source of concern for him, in fact, another aspect of the book that had me rolling my eyes and busily marking the book down yet another point.
Since romance novels primarily cater to female fantasies, are we ladies really such size queens? One researchers says yes, but has found that width seems to matter more than length. There are quite a few flaws with this study, including small sample size (only 50 women interviewed), sampling method (the subjects were all acquaintances of the interviewers’) and the fact that the sample is non-representative (the women were young, between 18 and 25, college-educated, and no word was said about their ethnicity) so I’m not sure how seriously to take it. Masters and Johnson pointed out that since the vagina is elastic, penis size in all likelihood shouldn’t matter--but then shouldn’t and doesn’t are two entirely different things, of course; sex involves psychology every bit as much as physiology, and while a bigger penis may in fact make no difference in performance, that won’t matter if most people believe that it does. A large survey conducted by Psychology Today magazine in 1993 found that women seem evenly divided: half want big schlongs, the other half don’t care about size or like smaller penises. It also seems that women are adaptable about their preferences and often adjust their ideals to match their current mates.
Given the conflicted data about preferences for penis size, the legion of massively be-wanged romance novel heroes may very well serve as some sort of sexual ideal for all us romance novel readers (most of whom are lonely, love-starved, bon-bon munching housewives, right? SNORT) but I also think there’s more to it than that. I think that the large penises serve pretty much the same purpose as put forward by Mr. Pink: to make the sexual experience with the hero stand out in stark relief for the heroine, even if she’s not a virgin. I talked briefly about the appeal of the untouched heroine in “A Pox on This Herd of Tiresome Virgins”, and I think the big dickery is yet another device (huh huh, device) used to indicate that the heroine has truly found The One. Not only is his sexual performance superlative, but his penis size usually is, too. Mr. Right is Mr. Enormous.
This is why I don’t think we’ll be seeing many heroes with small (or even average-sized) penises any time soon, just as we won’t see too many heroes with beer bellies, love handles, acne or backhair.
Above and beyond that, most romance novel heroes also serve as an archetype for manliness, virility and masculinity. Almost all of the earmarks for good providers, protectors and sexinators (is TOO a word, because I just made it up) are present in romance novel heroes. They’re often taller than average, more muscular than average, more wealthy than average (if not at the begining of the book, then almost certainly by the end), have over-developed protective instincts and are definitely better-than-average lovers, even the virgins. The peener is seen as THE symbol of masculinity and virility, what separates girls from boys, and it’s only natural that their size is inflated (huh huh, inflated) in romances.
What do you think? And I’m going to try and conduct and informal survey here: Do you like big dicks? Small dicks? Dicks that are neither big nor small? Or don’t you care? To be honest, I like them bigger than average. Not so big that I feel like I need a winch to help get it in position, because those just make me think “Ouch,” but I definitely like ‘em a bit large. Not that I’d ever reject somebody solely because of dick size, because it’s not that important to me, but I consider any extra inches a happy bonus. (Huh huh, bonus.)
BONUS: Some links on the Wonderful World of the Willy
Erection Photos - WARNING: NOT WORK SAFE. This is a pretty fascinating website documenting penis size, curve and angle from a clinical perspective. Check out the research section for some interesting figures on penis size and curvature.
Discovery Health Sex Center: The Penis
The Beefcaking of America





33 comments •
Trackback •
Categories: Random Musings
Tags: This entry has not been tagged yet.