rae2nerdy
left site
I know this was directed at Panda as they seemed to be wondering at the motivation behind people loving those kinds pairings. And I wanted to give them a perspective they might not have thought about it.
Other Why? Just why?
- Thread starter Dontforgettograbastick
- Start date
I know this was directed at Panda as they seemed to be wondering at the motivation behind people loving those kinds pairings. And I wanted to give them a perspective they might not have thought about it.
PandorasBox101
A cold hearted bastard
True, but my problem is they're talking about wanting such a relationship even when there is nothing redeeming about it. In the comics (at least from what I've heard), their relationship is considerably worse, and in the animated Batman the Joker was downright abusive. There was little to no even remotely tender moments between Harley and the Joker, and to think that people out there view their relationship as admirable is just...kind of heart-wrenching, to be honest. They actually would go so far to say that the Joker and Harley have a good relationship of any kind. The problem is, the Joker doesn't treat Harley like she's the most important person in the world, or even show much affection towards her (besides Suicide Squad). Most of the time, he's yelling at her, beating her, and pointing out her flaws and mess-ups.
I understand being insecure, but I find it so hard to think that there are people out there who view relationships like these as healthy.
While I suppose the Joker and Harley Quinn's relationship was kind of better in SS, it was the animated series where Harley debuted and that's really when people started to take their relationship and turn it into some sort of fantasy.
rae2nerdy
left site
And again this isn't a deep analysis of the relationship. They aren't focused on the actual actions of the characters in canon. If you were to ask these people to explain the relationship they probably would describe something that bore very little to no resemblance of the relationship as it is objectively written in canon.
It's why I called it the Fifty Shades of Grey phenomena. If you read the series with a critical eye Anna and Christian are both objectively terrible people each with their own mental disorders. And their relationships is outright abusive. But people don't look at the relationship objectively or literally. They take an idealized and romanticized view of the relationship. They see it as Christian being a rich man who loves a shy nobody like them. And that shy nobody can help him get through his issues.
That is at best a very shallow interpretation of what actually happens in the story. Now I don't know if there can be a romanticized interpretation of comics Harley and Joker but I can guarantee you the interpretation these people are talking about is indeed that romanticized ideal that feeds into their insecurities and want for wish fullfillment.
PandorasBox101
A cold hearted bastard
And I'd have to agree with you.
PandorasBox101
A cold hearted bastard
Just adding, I like the nickname Panda.
Just wanted to say I thought it was cool.
Scarlett Wyverne
Fiery Little Thing
Wellllllllll friend, I'm with you in principle, but. If you happen to be familiar with BDSM and why it really appeals to some people, that kind of explains why people sensationalize abuse. It's basically just....edgier, riskier, more dangerous/exciting/actually bad BDSM and some people are just into that. A surprising number of girls.
Not tryna #1 myself here or anything...
rae2nerdy
left site
Actually I would say it’s not actually the people who are into BDSM that are the problem. I have run across them and they tend to be much more articulate about what they want and why.
It is simply a matter of people mimicking romance writing tropes, no more in-depth than that. And because we are taught to read those tropes as romantic that is how we perceive them.
We perceive the man being foreceful as being ~overcome with desire for our womanly bodies~.
We perceive a man who obsesses over a woman and stalks her as romantic because that is how those stories frame the behavior
~he loves you so much he can’t be away from you~
If many of these people where in these situations in real life they would be terrified not turned on.
But as I mention above this isn’t literal real world writing. It’s overlt romanticized fantasy that play on women’s real life insecurities.
They feel unloved, overlooked, etc. So they fantasize about someone being overcome with passion for them. Or dedicated to them to obsessive degrees. Because it makes them feel special.
There might be people who are into the physical aspects of it sure, but they mostly articulate just that. I would say going on experience of the writers on this site (and just by what is allowed in terms of writing by the rules) we’re dealing less with people into pseudo-violence and more people into romance just from a more trope-y standpoint.
Which is fine, as long as you don’t treat roleplay like it’s real life than we’re good. And I would argue that specifically (the people who treat romance roleplay like it’s dating) is a maturity issue not a romance issue.
Scarlett Wyverne
Fiery Little Thing
Mm, these are also good points! This makes sense too
ZxGracexZ
New Member
I personally will not judge based on amateur fiction alone. Go watch some first-hand accounts on YouTube about it.
PhoenixMire
ᛚᚨᚦᚢ:ᚹᛁᛞᚢᛉ:ᛖᚱᚦᛟ
Lol this is basically how I wanted to respond to Scarlett
I think these types of romance tropes are particularly harmful to young girls, since they’re going to see creepy behavior as being romantic, and that might land them in some sketchy relationships when they’re older. I dunno... I just don’t like it
Also, a boyfriend being extremely “”protective”” to the point of being controlling is not BDSM, that’s a bad relationship. And yet I see that kind of behavior romanticized all the time.
rae2nerdy
left site
The thing is I don’t think romance as a genre is to blame for that as much as society as a whole. And that ties more into toxic masculinity and internalized misogyny. The whole men pulling pigtails because they like you thing.
That’s not romance genres fault that’s societies fault. Romance like any genre runs the gamut from enjoyable Schlock, to in-depth stories of realistic relationships.
Romance doesn’t exist in a vacuum and it only reinforces the stories we want to read. So if young girls enjoy reading about a guy who treats them special what’s the harm in it?
Yeah the immature ones might take it literally but that is an maturity and emotional issue that romance censorship wouldn’t change. Like that is something the people in their life need to look out for not strangers on the internet.
If they are easily susceptible than it’s the job of their parents to point them to better written stories and explain what is real and what is fantasy
Idea
The Pun Tyrant
I don't quite agree with a good part of what you said there, but that last part is stellar.
rae2nerdy
left site
Which part do you disagree with specifically? I’m curious to see the other side perspective on romance actually.
Idea
The Pun Tyrant
Mostly this part and what's directly out of it:
It is my stance that these concepts are just not credible, much less anything that would result in girls having the kind of fantasies described in the kind of romance in question. I would go more in depth, but that'll have to be in a PM as it is besides the point of this one.
rae2nerdy
left site
DISCLAIMER : You don't have to respond to me
Idea
but as your statement is something I think would be beneficial to be explained to the thread at large I will be answering it here. If you have further questions you would like to ask me you are welcome to do so in PMs.
DISCLAIMER 2: So I want to make it clear that I am specifically discussing the kind of romance stories that are being talked about in this thread. By no means do I think all romance stories/movies/roleplays include depictions of toxic masculinity OR internalized misogyny. Nor do I think the presence of either of those things automatically make your story/movie/roleplay bad, as long as you do not let them bleed into your every day life.
So these two concepts, Internalized Misogyny & Toxic Masculinity, have a lot of different interpretations so I wanted to explain why I brought them up previously in relation to Romance in general and as it relates to the topic of this thread specifically.
Internalized misogyny as it relates to romance is actually a pretty deeply ingrained trope. It basically centers around the archetype of the "Not Like Other Girls" protagonist. In that the only way to make the female protagonist stand out and be desirable to male love interests is to pit her against other women. And by the nature of the plot these other women must always come out the lesser to the protagonist female. That is internalized misogyny in that it perpetrates a idea that women must constantly be fighting one another in order to garner the attention of men. And moreover it usually ties into the idea that there is a "good" way to be a woman and a "bad" way to be a woman and that the "bad" women deserve to be treated terribly because they aren't being "good."
How this ties into the relationships being mentioned is that in a lot of them the protagonist definately follows this trope. For canon examples look to Anastasia Steele, Isabella Swan, etc. It's a seductive kind of protagonist especially among those who are insecure. Now I'm not saying that ever woman who is insecure and likes Anastasia Steele is a misogynist who hates other woman. Of course not, any more than I would say everyone who likes Anastasia Steele likes BDSM and wants a controlling partner. I am merely saying that the trope can definitely be problematic and it is something that the romance community itself is addressing.
Toxic Masculinity is a tricky topic because so many people take it to mean "Masculinity is Toxic / Being A Traditional Man is Bad." when in reality it is merely saying "A Certain Type of Masculinity Is Bad." It references behaviors like : Men being unable to show emotions because emotions are a feminine. Men having to be violent because if they aren't they're sissies and wimps. Men must treat women with disrespect because a man who treats a woman like an equal is henpecked. Etc.
Now in romantic fiction these traits are often a core characteristic of the men in the problematic relationships that the thread is discussing. They're violent, they treat women like disposable objects (except the protagonist because she's Not Like Other Girls), he rarely shows emotions or if he does it is ONLY around the protagonist as an expression of his love. But the thing is that's not a healthy way to live. You shouldn't need the excuse of a girlfriend to have emotions.
So in this way toxic masculinity, showing men as only desirable if they act like jerks, is a bad thing for men and women. Now granted the romance market is not aimed at men and we've already gone over that most women aren't reading their novels with a critical eye but looking for some innocent escapism.
But still that's what I meant earlier when I said the romance market is plagued by toxic masculinity and internalized misogyny. Not necessarily in the sense that the romance genre IS internally misogynistic or believes in toxic masculinity. But that this is a genre written primarily by women and for women. And thus it has to work around these ideas. Some books embrace these tropes and some make a concentrated effort to avoid them. But even if the book is chalk full of toxic internalized misogyny it doesn't make it a bad book that shouldn't be read. Because it can actually be a teachable moment.
I learned a lot about internalized misogyny specifically by following a romance author who reviewed romance books and would point out the problematic traits within. Not to be mean and tear down the other authors (at least not for their writing, if they were just in general shitty people to other IRL then she would get snarky). And it got me looking at romance from a different perspective. Both good and bad (for instance she also made a point to always say it's okay if you like XYZ pairing/storyline but just know that here are some of the ways it could be problematic).
I think that's a good way to look at the "abusive romance" genre in roleplay as well. If someone enjoys a problematic pairing that's fine. They don't owe anyone an explanation as long as they don't treat other people like jerks OOC. It can be beneficial to let people know - hey so this is kind of a problematic trope and here is why. But if they don't want to think about it that deeply that's also fine. We're all here to have fun in the end and I think that should be the main take away from all this.
Don't take it too seriously and just have fun.
Idea
but as your statement is something I think would be beneficial to be explained to the thread at large I will be answering it here. If you have further questions you would like to ask me you are welcome to do so in PMs.DISCLAIMER 2: So I want to make it clear that I am specifically discussing the kind of romance stories that are being talked about in this thread. By no means do I think all romance stories/movies/roleplays include depictions of toxic masculinity OR internalized misogyny. Nor do I think the presence of either of those things automatically make your story/movie/roleplay bad, as long as you do not let them bleed into your every day life.
So these two concepts, Internalized Misogyny & Toxic Masculinity, have a lot of different interpretations so I wanted to explain why I brought them up previously in relation to Romance in general and as it relates to the topic of this thread specifically.
Internalized misogyny as it relates to romance is actually a pretty deeply ingrained trope. It basically centers around the archetype of the "Not Like Other Girls" protagonist. In that the only way to make the female protagonist stand out and be desirable to male love interests is to pit her against other women. And by the nature of the plot these other women must always come out the lesser to the protagonist female. That is internalized misogyny in that it perpetrates a idea that women must constantly be fighting one another in order to garner the attention of men. And moreover it usually ties into the idea that there is a "good" way to be a woman and a "bad" way to be a woman and that the "bad" women deserve to be treated terribly because they aren't being "good."
How this ties into the relationships being mentioned is that in a lot of them the protagonist definately follows this trope. For canon examples look to Anastasia Steele, Isabella Swan, etc. It's a seductive kind of protagonist especially among those who are insecure. Now I'm not saying that ever woman who is insecure and likes Anastasia Steele is a misogynist who hates other woman. Of course not, any more than I would say everyone who likes Anastasia Steele likes BDSM and wants a controlling partner. I am merely saying that the trope can definitely be problematic and it is something that the romance community itself is addressing.
Toxic Masculinity is a tricky topic because so many people take it to mean "Masculinity is Toxic / Being A Traditional Man is Bad." when in reality it is merely saying "A Certain Type of Masculinity Is Bad." It references behaviors like : Men being unable to show emotions because emotions are a feminine. Men having to be violent because if they aren't they're sissies and wimps. Men must treat women with disrespect because a man who treats a woman like an equal is henpecked. Etc.
Now in romantic fiction these traits are often a core characteristic of the men in the problematic relationships that the thread is discussing. They're violent, they treat women like disposable objects (except the protagonist because she's Not Like Other Girls), he rarely shows emotions or if he does it is ONLY around the protagonist as an expression of his love. But the thing is that's not a healthy way to live. You shouldn't need the excuse of a girlfriend to have emotions.
So in this way toxic masculinity, showing men as only desirable if they act like jerks, is a bad thing for men and women. Now granted the romance market is not aimed at men and we've already gone over that most women aren't reading their novels with a critical eye but looking for some innocent escapism.
But still that's what I meant earlier when I said the romance market is plagued by toxic masculinity and internalized misogyny. Not necessarily in the sense that the romance genre IS internally misogynistic or believes in toxic masculinity. But that this is a genre written primarily by women and for women. And thus it has to work around these ideas. Some books embrace these tropes and some make a concentrated effort to avoid them. But even if the book is chalk full of toxic internalized misogyny it doesn't make it a bad book that shouldn't be read. Because it can actually be a teachable moment.
I learned a lot about internalized misogyny specifically by following a romance author who reviewed romance books and would point out the problematic traits within. Not to be mean and tear down the other authors (at least not for their writing, if they were just in general shitty people to other IRL then she would get snarky). And it got me looking at romance from a different perspective. Both good and bad (for instance she also made a point to always say it's okay if you like XYZ pairing/storyline but just know that here are some of the ways it could be problematic).
I think that's a good way to look at the "abusive romance" genre in roleplay as well. If someone enjoys a problematic pairing that's fine. They don't owe anyone an explanation as long as they don't treat other people like jerks OOC. It can be beneficial to let people know - hey so this is kind of a problematic trope and here is why. But if they don't want to think about it that deeply that's also fine. We're all here to have fun in the end and I think that should be the main take away from all this.
Don't take it too seriously and just have fun.
Last edited:
Idea
The Pun Tyrant
First, thanks for the explanation. These buzzwords get tossed around a lot, and I think I have a slightly better understanding of why people use them after reading your explanation. It was informative and fair, so thank you.
I guess you do have a point in regards to the topic at hand maybe having internalized mysoginy and toxic masculinity as technically verifiable elements, though I still struggle to see see them as "problematic" in this case- Even you yourself came to discover these elements because someone pointed them out to you, it was framed as internalized mysoginy and toxic masculinity. So I don't see this really doing any "normalizing" or anything of the like, no more than I did before certainly.
rae2nerdy
left site
Well you can know a thing exists and not know the words to describe it. I absolutely noticed the "good girl vs. bad girl" trope in books and media. But it was so common I didn't really think about it overly critically I just read the books at surface level and went on my way. Certainly that's not a bad way of doing things but it does mean that you miss a lot of hidden themes.
And that is sort of what normalizing means to me. It means that there are these super common tropes that you just shrug off and take for granted. It's just fiction so why should you worry about it affecting every day life? But fiction can often be the means by which we become aware of issues that people outside of our own little bubbles are facing.
Maybe you'll never have to be pitted against other girls in order to secure yourself a man in real life. I think you yourself are a man so that would probably be kind of awkward on your part. But that doesn't mean that millions of girls aren't taught that in order to get a man they have to behave in a very narrow and specific manner and if they deviate from that they are automatically one of the "bad" girls. And that can absolutely affect their self-esteem if nothing else.
Personally as an aromantic I never took the plights of romance characters seriously because I didn't honestly see myself in any of them anyway. Honestly probably even less than you (at least you are somewhat romantically inclined so can empathize with them through that). But that's sort of why I started following romance authors in the first place. Like okay this isn't my wheelhouse but that doesn't mean I can't learn.
And it wasn't like I suddenly discovered brand new information just learned how other people had always processed information that I just sort of breezed over as being a frivolous part of the story.
