Can we talk about what's up with the standard fare ro no recipe?
(sexyhottie + beautiful-but-available damsel) x high-drama situation possibly involving threat to damsel's life -> BONING = BABY
I get it. Ro Nos are written by women for women, and women want babies. Thus, a clever ro no author will craft a hero "whose cock hardened at the thought of her belly swollen with his child" etc., etc. ad nauseum. To this formula, I say "what the WHAT?!" It is sooooo common that when I see that plot line arise (conflicted couple must stay together for the sake of the bebe!!) I yawn and want to toss it over - even if I actually really like the story. I know that men and women make babies together and I know that for most women the idea of a happy ending can only exist when the couple's true love leads to fetuses. BUT I feel like it's an overly contrived plot gimmick that dumbs down the ro no genre. [And as someone who struggled quite a bit to make the bebe in her love match, this was a hard pill to swallow]
Of course I'm dying to make a list of the most offending books taking advantage of this approach, but I don't dare risk spoilers. I'll just say this: so far I don't believe these authors have ever pulled the baby blanket over my eyes mid-read:
Anne Stuart
Kresley Cole
Loretta Chase
Fellow readers, I think you are safe with the above list, but I strongly caution you when reading other ro no authors. And, rest assured, love is not the only ingredient in the baby making recipe (and it's not even necessary - see "Teen Mom," Kevin Federline, etc.). It's just a silly ro no gimmick and try not to let it interfere with your enjoyment of a sexy read OR your escapism
No comments:
Post a Comment