tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post3410128339042357219..comments2024-03-26T01:10:13.720+00:00Comments on Teach Me Tonight: Danger! Romance Novels!E. M. Selingerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00426524354823232002noreply@blogger.comBlogger26125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-60620823709097450182012-02-28T09:12:52.680+00:002012-02-28T09:12:52.680+00:00A critical analysis of gender roles in romance fic...A critical analysis of gender roles in romance fiction which I think is awesome and doesn’t have to be ultimately censorious.kamagrahttp://www.kamagracentre.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-27895924453273204242011-08-07T12:45:05.991+01:002011-08-07T12:45:05.991+01:00Jessica at Read React Review takes a look at Quill...Jessica at <i>Read React Review</i> <a href="http://www.readreactreview.com/2011/08/03/susan-quilliam-an-expert-in-what-exactly/" rel="nofollow">takes a look at Quilliam's qualifications</a> (or lack of them) and yet more commentary on Quilliam's comments, this time via <a href="http://www.theage.com.au/entertainment/books/feel-the-love-20110806-1igh2.html" rel="nofollow"><i>The Age</i></a>.Laura Vivancohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00906661869372622821noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-43587086757652142962011-08-02T10:07:28.880+01:002011-08-02T10:07:28.880+01:00And still more (entirely uncritical) reporting of ...And still more (entirely uncritical) reporting of Quilliam's comments, <a href="http://healthland.time.com/2011/08/02/passionate-sex-torrid-romance/" rel="nofollow">in <i>Time</i></a>.Laura Vivancohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00906661869372622821noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-587766744599535292011-07-16T09:19:35.300+01:002011-07-16T09:19:35.300+01:00In the circumstances, I was thinking that the conf...In the circumstances, I was thinking that the <a href="http://teachmetonight.blogspot.com/2011/05/update-cfp-for-popular-romance-in-new.html" rel="nofollow">conference at McDaniel</a> might be even more appropriate.Laura Vivancohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00906661869372622821noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-60301305200546962852011-07-15T23:41:54.222+01:002011-07-15T23:41:54.222+01:00I'm thinking that we need to send Quilliam an ...I'm thinking that we need to send Quilliam an invite to the next IASPR conference. <br /><br />And as for "as long as there is academic rigor involved"...well, I'm certain there is more rigor involved in any article in JPRS or conference paper at IASPR than is present in her opinion piece.Jonathanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09577417918428286900noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-65052465467720656492011-07-15T21:28:57.151+01:002011-07-15T21:28:57.151+01:00And as the controversy continues to attract media ...And as the controversy continues to attract media attention, this time <a href="http://abcnews.go.com/Health/romance-writers-seduce-women-unsafe-sex-infidelity-british/story?id=14078762" rel="nofollow">at ABC news</a>, Nora Roberts gives her opinion and Quilliam, somewhat ironically given the concerns raised about her methodology, <a href="http://abcnews.go.com/Health/romance-writers-seduce-women-unsafe-sex-infidelity-british/story?id=14078762&page=2" rel="nofollow">offers some advice to other academics</a>:<br /><br /><i>McDaniel College, which has accepted Roberts' gift, said it aims to raise the profile of romance novels and to reinforce Robert's reputation as a master of the craft. The college said it will also build a library collection of American romance literature, including all of her novels and it will hold an international conference on romance novels in November.<br /><br />Quilliam applauds Roberts' donation to McDaniel College, "as long as there is academic rigor involved."<br /><br />"I dearly hope that the university looks at the values in writing these novels and challenges the values the same way they would a historical novel," she said.</i>Laura Vivancohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00906661869372622821noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-74299739555321740772011-07-13T19:01:21.797+01:002011-07-13T19:01:21.797+01:00""Shorter Sunita: the science is not sci..."<i>"Shorter Sunita: the science is not science, and this is the scholarly article.</i>"<br /><br />According to Juliana Shatz, <a href="http://www.philly.com/philly/health_and_science/20110713_Romance_novels_promote_risky_behavior_-_or_they_don_t.html?viewAll=y" rel="nofollow">writing in today's edition of Philadelphia's <i>The Inquirer</i></a><br /><br /><i>In a telephone interview, Quilliam retreated a bit from her editorial, emphasizing that her piece was less a study than an opinionated view of the research.</i><br /><br />Shatz has obviously made an effort to research the topic, because she also tried to get in touch with the author of "One source cited in Quilliam's piece," <br /><br /><i>Gretchen Anderton, who received her Ph.D. from Widener University in Chester in 2009.<br /><br />Anderton, currently in the Peace Corps, was unavailable to discuss her work.<br /><br />But Betsy Crane, an adviser on Anderton's dissertation, says her student's paper does not support Quilliam's central thesis.<br /><br />"Going back to Gretchen's abstract, I was actually struck by the line that said women were able to differentiate between fantasy and reality," said Crane, whose program bills itself as the world's largest accredited graduate program in human sexuality.</i>Laura Vivancohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00906661869372622821noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-26378328178943693272011-07-12T00:59:38.301+01:002011-07-12T00:59:38.301+01:00"Shorter Sunita: the science is not science, ..."<i>Shorter Sunita: the science is not science, and this is the scholarly article.</i>"<br /><br />Thanks, Sunita. I noticed that over at Dear Author Jane's mentioned Quilliam's article in her <a href="http://dearauthor.com/features/industry-news/monday-midday-links-sex-is-dangerous/" rel="nofollow">Monday links round-up</a>. She concludes that<br /><br /><i>Honestly, I wish the academics in romance would be more swift to respond with this science based destruction of the supposed expert’s conclusions although Laura Vivanco did put together a response</i><br /><br />I have a feeling my reply ended up in the spam filter. What it boiled down to was that although I try to comment on research like this, my background's in literary criticism so although I do my best, I don't feel I can claim any expertise when it comes to analysing work on romance which isn't literary criticism. I'm really grateful when someone who <i>does</i> have the requisite training/expertise comes along to give their opinion.<br /><br />In the meantime, I was annoyed to see that in the 7 July issue of the <i>British Medical Journal</i> there's a summary of Quilliam's article, "<a href="http://www.bmj.com/content/343/bmj.d4329.extract" rel="nofollow">Romantic novels “negate” sexual health advice</a>" by Polly Stoker. It's a one-page "News" item and as far as I can see it doesn't offer any analysis of the content of Quilliam's article. It just quotes from it and then concludes that<br /><br /><i>The core of the problem then is the lack of sex education available to the public. As Ms Quilliam identified, romantic fiction can be “enjoyable and fun,” and coupled with “a large dollop of good continuing sex education . . . you have the perfect plan.”</i>Laura Vivancohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00906661869372622821noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-75877267949538705532011-07-12T00:25:38.288+01:002011-07-12T00:25:38.288+01:00I've been offline for most of the past two wee...I've been offline for most of the past two weeks so I haven't been able to track down the scholarly sources. Thanks, Laura, for the link to the article pdf. <br /><br />It would take me a full blog post and about 2 hours to document everything that is wrong with the article. Let me just emphasize that the author herself calls it a "correlational analysis" which means she is only looking for statistically significant relationships among dyads of variables. In such an analysis you cannot say anything about causation, and you do not control for other possible influences. In just skimming the article I came up with a more plausible explanation for the relationships she sees, none of which attribute the same causes she does. <br /><br />Shorter Sunita: the science is not science, and this is the scholarly article.Sunitahttp://vacuousminx.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-31678097718399772412011-07-10T18:37:04.407+01:002011-07-10T18:37:04.407+01:00Another day, another article on this controversy. ...Another day, another article on this controversy. This time <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/jul/10/catherine-benett-books-propaganda-libraries?CMP=twt_gu" rel="nofollow">Catherine Bennett in the <i>Observer</i></a> mocks Quilliam's comments and notes that<br /><br /><i>her paper coincided with another diagnosis, by a fellow psychologist, to the effect that fiction is actually good for you. Promoting his new book </i>Such Stuff as Dreams: The Psychology of Fiction<i> on Radio 4 last week, Professor Keith Oatley, said that reading fiction assisted people's "social understanding" and helps, in the manner of a flight simulator, with the development of empathy: "The more time you spend, the better you are at understanding other people".</i><br /><br />Bennett's conclusion, however, is that<br /><br /><i>To award literature a healthful, utilitarian value, as much as it might appeal to humanities departments eager to claim "impact" for this officially useless discipline, is as risky a proposition, surely, as to damn it for corrupting the female mind. Champion fiction because it is good for you, or ban it because it is bad for you and, either way, before long, you'll end up with a piece in a newspaper saying it makes you fat. As well as being a completely useless contraceptive.</i>Laura Vivancohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00906661869372622821noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-39989267450449854702011-07-09T19:03:04.786+01:002011-07-09T19:03:04.786+01:00Absolutely, that is the case. The generalised warn...Absolutely, that is the case. The generalised warnings about women's reading are interesting and problematic -- do we see this fear or concern with other groups of people? I will have to think about this further, but now I am wondering about the fear of reading in general -- the fear of a bible written in the vernacular, or the fear of certain books being shipped to the New World, etc. <br /><br />What is markedly different, of course, is that Quilliam's article appeared in an academic journal and moreover a medical journal.Jonathanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09577417918428286900noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-85637078908233550692011-07-09T18:45:14.962+01:002011-07-09T18:45:14.962+01:00As a medievalist, Don Quijote falls outside my are...As a medievalist, <i>Don Quijote</i> falls outside my area of expertise but I do think there are important differences between <i>Don Quijote</i> and generalised warnings about women's reading. For a start, <i>Don Quijote</i> is a work of fiction, whereas the warnings about women's reading are non fiction and, in Quilliam's case, were published in a journal for health professionals.<br /><br />Cervantes was writing something humorous/satirical, and I don't have the impression that his book was intended to be read as a serious warning of the dangers of reading chivalric romances.<br /><br />In addition, Don Quijote as a character is thought to be exceptional. When warnings are issued about the dangers of romance reading, however, the implication is that thousands and thousands of ordinary women are being placed at risk.Laura Vivancohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00906661869372622821noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-25716446439689642012011-07-09T17:23:17.871+01:002011-07-09T17:23:17.871+01:00I jokingly said to someone that I was recently in ...I jokingly said to someone that I was recently in Holland and had no desire to fight with the windmills, thus, Don Quijote must not have had the "right" effect on me. But, perhaps, Quijote is a place to begin in thinking about a "tradition of concern about men's reading."Jonathanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09577417918428286900noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-81528088758098954522011-07-09T17:10:05.871+01:002011-07-09T17:10:05.871+01:00There was another article about Quilliam's vie...There was another article about Quilliam's views, this time in today's <i><a href="http://www.canberratimes.com.au/news/opinion/editorial/general/romance-fiction-no-bed-of-roses/2221285.aspx?storypage=0" rel="nofollow">Canberra Times</a></i>. It's longer and, I think, more balanced than a lot of the other reports on this topic. It includes quotes from romance author Anna Campbell and from Kate Cuthbert, who makes a similar point to yours, K.A.:<br /><br /><i>Romance fiction reviewer and advocate Kate Cuthbert says she is constantly defending her reading habits. The happily married Bungendore mother takes issue with the fact that romance fiction critiques see women as ''so frail and fragile, as completely unable to distinguish between reality and fantasy''.<br /><br />Cuthbert reads about three romance novels a week among other reading, in part because it portrays the connections between people. ''It celebrates the positives in life.''<br /><br />She notes that stereotypically male genre fiction such as sci-fi, spy novels or thrillers are rarely (if ever) attacked for giving readers a bum steer about reality. Nobody ever worries that James Bond makes men think they are invincible. Or that their Aston Martin will drive itself.</i><br /><br />The thing is, there does seem to be <a href="http://teachmetonight.blogspot.com/2008/06/dangerous-reading.html" rel="nofollow">very, very long tradition of concern about women's reading</a>. As far as I'm aware, there hasn't tended to be a comparable level of concern about men reading equally escapist fiction. The horror comics example I included in my post was, of course, an example of concern for children's reading, not men's.Laura Vivancohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00906661869372622821noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-45990516070046727862011-07-08T01:14:03.552+01:002011-07-08T01:14:03.552+01:00I wrote about this today, too, and I'm really ...I <a href="http://authorsafterdark.blogspot.com/2011/07/warning-labels-for-romance.html" rel="nofollow">wrote about this today</a>, too, and I'm really struck be the equation of "escapism, perfectionism and idealisation" with problematic behaviour -- and no recognition that those same tropes appear in male romance, er, crime/thriller novels with their impulsive and "manly" heroes who hop into bed without much in the way of protection, too. But women are so infantalised in popular estimation, Quilliam and others assume we're so easily swayed by mere reading. Such children we are!C. Margery Kempehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15910282257993793334noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-30678011332887557792011-07-07T21:05:56.253+01:002011-07-07T21:05:56.253+01:00Sorry Jonathan, I didn't see your comment befo...Sorry Jonathan, I didn't see your comment before I posted mine. I was too busy typing a comment which is so long I've had to split it in two. Here's part two<br /><br />Quilliam concludes that<br /><br /><i>I may be a party-pooper, but I would argue that a huge number of the issues that we see in our clinics and therapy rooms are influenced by romantic fiction.<br />If a woman learns from her 100 novels a year that romantic feeling is the most important thing, then what follows from that might be to suspend her rationality in favour of romanticism.</i><br /><br />I'm not sure, though, that there are very many romance heroines who act as though "romantic feeling is the most important thing." Jo Beverley, for example, has written that<br /><br /><i>If [...] I believed that the search for true love overrides all other values, then Deirdre in </i>Deirdre and Don Juan<i> would not have had a problem. As soon as she realized she was in love with Lord Everdon, she would have kissed goodbye to the man she had promised to marry. However, she and Howard Dunstable had exchanged promises and her given word was more important to her than self-gratification.</i> (33)<br /><br />Even heroines who "suspend their rationality" often do so because they feel a duty to their wastrel father or undeserving sibling, don't want to break a promise they made to someone else, can't abandon an animal sanctuary etc. So I'm not convinced that romances teach "that romantic feeling is the most important thing."<br /><br /><i>And that might well mean not using protection with a new man because she wants to be swept up by the moment as a heroine would. It might also mean allowing that same man, a few months down the line, to persuade her to give up contraception because “we love each other”. It might mean terminating a pregnancy (or continuing with one) against all her moral codes because that same man asks her to.</i><br /><br />I've come across plenty of romance heroes who are horrified by the idea of their heroine getting an abortion; I can't remember any hero who instructs a heroine to get one. So by Quilliam's logic this should mean that any romance reader would instantly dump a man who makes this sort of request because it would prove he's not The One.<br /><br />Quilliam ends by stating that<br /><br /><i>taken with a good deal of self-understanding, the resources to keep one’s relationship on track, and solid support when the inevitable stresses and strains arise, these books can be enjoyable and fun. (If you were to add in a large dollop of good continuing sex education – cue the aforementioned Family Planning Association – you have the perfect plan.)<br />But I do think that if readers start to believe the story that romantic fiction offers, then they store up trouble for themselves – and then they bring that trouble into our consulting rooms. Sometimes the kindest and wisest thing we can do for our clients is to encourage them to put down the books – and pick up reality.</i> (181)<br /><br />Perhaps all of us who are not heading for a consulting room can now congratulate ourselves on having "a good deal of self-understanding, the resources to keep one’s relationship on track, and solid support"?<br /><br />---<br />Beverley, Jo. "An Honorable Profession: The Romance Writer and Her Characters." <i>North American Romance Writers</i>. Ed. Kay Mussell and Johanna Tuñón. Lanham, Maryland: Scarecrow, 1999. 32-36.Laura Vivancohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00906661869372622821noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-22777648062464915542011-07-07T20:53:49.699+01:002011-07-07T20:53:49.699+01:00Now Linda Holmes at NPR has posted an article whic...Now Linda Holmes at NPR has <a href="http://www.npr.org/blogs/monkeysee/2011/07/07/137675779/romance-fiction-and-womens-health-a-dose-of-skepticism" rel="nofollow">posted an article</a> which includes <a href="http://press.psprings.co.uk/JFPRH/july/JFPRH1100152.pdf" rel="nofollow">a link to a pdf of Quilliam's article</a>.<br /><br />Holmes's trenchant response includes the following:<br /><br /><b>you could <i>so easily</i> get some information about current novels — novels written in, let's say, the last five years — where every bit of anecdotal evidence I can provide and have heard from others indicates that condom use is much more common in contemporary novels than it was in, say, 1990.<br /><br />If that's the case, as my own reading suggests it is, then the conclusion from the same research about condom attitudes and condoms in books would be <i>the precise opposite</i> of what Quilliam says it is.</b><br /><br />and<br /><br /><b>The point is really that Quilliam as an advice columnist and relationship psychologist just thinks they're bad for women to read, because women can't tell the difference between fantasy and reality and therefore throw over their poor husbands and boyfriends because they expect perfect, idealized relationships. In spite of evidence she acknowledges that reading a lot of romance novels is correlated with <i>happy monogamous relationships</i>, and in spite of a complete failure to cite any actual statistical evidence that romance reading has any negative effect on anyone's ability to form or conduct happy relationships, Quilliam concludes her piece with a bunch of <i>may</i> statements.</b>Laura Vivancohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00906661869372622821noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-47199491301540448452011-07-07T20:02:39.741+01:002011-07-07T20:02:39.741+01:00And another great article in response to Quilliam:...And another great article in response to Quilliam:<br /><br />"Romance Fiction And Women's Health: A Dose Of Skepticism" from NPR<br />http://www.npr.org/blogs/monkeysee/2011/07/07/137675779/romance-fiction-and-womens-health-a-dose-of-skepticismJonathanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09577417918428286900noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-62254785823201679402011-07-07T17:56:09.533+01:002011-07-07T17:56:09.533+01:00Yes, and in 2007 Mcleans ran an article about sex ...Yes, and in 2007 <i>Mcleans</i> ran an article about sex in Harlequins:<br /><br /><i>Harlequin authors are increasingly devoting swaths of their books to upfront discussions of such serious sexual issues. Last month, Annie West's </i>For the Sheikh's Pleasure<i> focused on a woman struggling to be physically and emotionally intimate after being drugged and raped during a night out. And plots such as these are prominently displayed in the bestselling Harlequin Presents series, not tucked away in one of the publisher's more marginal lines.<br /><br />Though sexual problems have been in HP books for years, they were often "alluded to, talked about euphemistically," explains Tessa Shapcott, executive editor of HP for 13 years. "Now we're just reflecting the fact that people are freer to discuss such intimate things. People are far more honest and open about suffering." For Shapcott, the breakthrough sexual dysfunction book was Lucy Monroe's </i>Blackmailed into Marriage<i>. Its entire plot revolved around vaginismus, a condition that causes vaginal muscles to involuntarily contract shut. [...]<br /><br />"One of the reasons I believe in writing such graphic love scenes is that there are lots of women who are ignorant about their bodies," says Monroe, who, even after counselling others for nearly two decades, "can't believe the number of women who, still, in this day and age, are convinced they aren't capable of sexual satisfaction." The writer has also delved into themes of impotence -- in a novel about a wheelchair-bound hero -- and the female-centric sexual issue of endometriosis. She had no problem selling the vaginismus book to Harlequin, after another publisher rejected the book as too "risky." </i><br /><br />There's a lot of variety in the depiction of sex in M&B/Harlequins.<br />----<br />Treble, Patricia. "<a href="http://www.macleans.ca/article.jsp?content=20070924_109276_109276&source=srch" rel="nofollow">Harlequin thinks unsexy thoughts: Impotence is just the start: the new romance novels put the 'fun' back in sexual dysfunction</a>." <i>Macleans</i>, 24 September 2007.Laura Vivancohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00906661869372622821noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-11600202933630534372011-07-07T17:48:05.807+01:002011-07-07T17:48:05.807+01:00Joseph McAleer in his _Passion's Fortune: The ...Joseph McAleer in his _Passion's Fortune: The Story of Mills and Boon_ writes: "In the age of AIDS, condoms are now common, with the hero 'turning away to attend to certain matters' before resuming his conquest of the heroine."Jonathanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09577417918428286900noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-18716858017500268332011-07-07T16:56:35.021+01:002011-07-07T16:56:35.021+01:00A great post here about Quilliam's article: ht...A great post here about Quilliam's article: http://www.smartbitchestrashybooks.com/index.php/weblog/comments/romances-according-to-susan-quilliam-dont-have-enough-condoms/Jonathanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09577417918428286900noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-52804663051258883132011-07-07T16:14:56.110+01:002011-07-07T16:14:56.110+01:00The bulk of the article is speculative and the art...<i>The bulk of the article is speculative and the article is based on four sources, the two already mentioned, and then a website called "Getting to Know the Erotic Romance Field" and then an article, "Gender, romance novels, and plastic sexuality in the United States: a focus on female college students" that appeared in the Journal of International Women's Studies (2006).</i><br /><br />Thanks! The "Getting to Know the Erotic Romance Field" is a <a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20070211135434/http://www.writing-world.com/columns/romance/marble23.shtml" rel="nofollow">2005 article by Anne Marble</a> from AAR. It's an article for prospective romance authors, not a scientific study.<br /><br />That last one you mention <i>is</i> an academic study and it's available as a pdf from <a href="http://www.bridgew.edu/SoAS/jiws/Nov06/RomanceNovels.pdf" rel="nofollow">here</a>.<br /><br />Wu states that<br /><br /><i>Despite mounting scholarly interest in pornography, research on the association between reading romance novels and sexuality is inadequate. To date, empirical research using survey data in this area consists of only two studies. Muram et al’s (1992) empirical work on this issue found that pregnant high school girls (a palpable indicator of expressed sexuality) judged that the content of romantic novels epitomized their own sexual desires and behaviors more strongly than did never-pregnant high school girls (Muram, Rosenthal, Tolley & Peeler 1992). A recent empirical research conducted by Wu and Walsh (2006) found that romance novels may have some positive impact on the formation of female sexual fantasy but such a fantasy is not necessarily translated into female sexual behavior (e.g., age at first sexual intercourse).</i> (127)<br /><br />---<br />Wu, Huei-Hsia. "Gender, Romance Novels and Plastic Sexuality in the United States: A Focus on Female College Students." <i>Journal of International Women’s Studies</i> 8.1 (2006): 125-134.Laura Vivancohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00906661869372622821noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-60330437903769646322011-07-07T15:49:54.640+01:002011-07-07T15:49:54.640+01:00And I notice that reporting of Quilliam's arti...And I notice that reporting of Quilliam's article has gone global:<br /><br />There's an AFP item in <a href="http://www.news.com.au/weird-true-freaky/romance-novels-pose-threat-to-womens-sexual-and-emotional-health-medical-journal/story-e6frflri-1226089645154" rel="nofollow">news.com.au</a> and <a href="http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/leading-medical-journal-criticises-romance-novels-for-promoting-an-unhealthy-ideal-for-health-and-relationships/story-e6frg6so-1226089696212" rel="nofollow">The Australian</a>. Quilliam's article's also discussed in the <a href="http://www.latimes.com/health/boostershots/la-heb-romance-novels-women-health-20110707,0,5145137.story" rel="nofollow">Los Angeles Times</a>, mentioned in <a href="http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/life-style/relationships/man-woman/Mills-and-Boon-style-books-mislead-women/articleshow/9135726.cms" rel="nofollow">The Times of India</a> and in the UK the coverage has spread to <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2011/jul/07/mills-and-boon-sexual-health-problems" rel="nofollow">The Guardian</a> and <a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2012071/The-Mills--Boon-effect-Why-romantic-read-harm-love-lives.html?ito=feeds-newsxml" rel="nofollow">The Daily Mail</a>.Laura Vivancohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00906661869372622821noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-75116782836627780382011-07-07T15:41:48.153+01:002011-07-07T15:41:48.153+01:00The article begins: "Just 14 years of age, in...The article begins: "Just 14 years of age, innocent, if not ignorant of the facts of life, I went to stay with my older cousin. She seemed very worldly-wise, so when she offered me a romantic novel by Georgette Heyer...Reader, I devoured every page." The bulk of the article is speculative and the article is based on four sources, the two already mentioned, and then a website called "Getting to Know the Erotic Romance Field" and then an article, "Gender, romance novels, and plastic sexuality in the United States: a focus on female college students" that appeared in the Journal of International Women's Studies (2006). The majority of the article seems to be about the influence of romance novels on women and the space of therapy. The article was "commissioned" and "internally peer reviewed" (received May 16, 2011; accepted May 20, 2011).Jonathanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09577417918428286900noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-37590010054309924672011-07-07T15:27:27.722+01:002011-07-07T15:27:27.722+01:00Jonathan, did Quilliam do any research of her own?...Jonathan, did Quilliam do any research of her own? Or is her article more of a summary/meta-analysis of other people's? If it's the latter, who does she cite other than Anderton and Diekman et al?<br /><br />I'm curious, too, to know why she focuses in on Mills & Boons. I'm sure there are plenty of other sources of information which might encourage someone to have "unreal expectations" about "multiple orgasms," for example.Laura Vivancohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00906661869372622821noreply@blogger.com