"Always" is not the height of romance, y'all

Sistren, I'm taking a break from our typical topics to rant about something non-queer-lady-related (for the most part). I've finished my dissertation, so my brain has more time for random rants and you're all about to benefit from it! In this case, I'm talking people's weird, blind obsession with Snape's so-called love for Lily Evans Potter. If you don't know what I'm talking about, 1) stop reading this blog right now, and 2) go read some Harry Potter. Cause if you haven't read them by now (I'm looking at you, bro-in-law of mine), you seriously are lacking as a human being. How are you even functioning right now?

This obsession came up again on the social media after the sad passing of Alan Rickman, the actor who played Severus Snape (again, if you don't already know this, what is wrong with you?). My facebook page was inundated with the grossest of Snape quotes: 

“Dumbledore watched her fly away, and as her silvery glow faded he turned back to Snape, and his eyes were full of tears.
"After all this time?"
"Always," said Snape.” 
― J.K. Rowling, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows

If you can't remember what this is from, let me briefly explain. Snape has just done the Expecto Patronum spell, and his patronus is a doe. Lily's patronus was also a doe- this shows that Snape was deeply affected by her death, as magic folk's patronuses (patroni?) can change after a big emotional event. 

So, there are many fan art images, a video that supposedly makes people weep for the strength of this love, and etsy items that glorify and romanticize this quote as if it indicates some pure, deep love that we all should strive for. It does not. 

Instead, it indicates a life-long obsession. And, say it with me, OBSESSION IS NOT HEALTHY. Let me explain my strong feelings in list form, as I try to be more succinct: 

1. Just because Snape liked Lily, and James Potter (who she married, hence producing Harry Potter) was a jerk and a bully as a teenager, does not mean it's justified for Snape to hold a life-long, crippling hatred towards James and a romanticization of Lily.  She never dated Snape, she clearly didn't want to date him. So Snape thinking that James somehow stole her away from him takes away her agency, and allows him to ignore the fact that she was just not that into him. Move on, buddy.
2. Snape transferred this teenage hatred of James into hatred of Harry Potter. He's incredibly cruel to him throughout the book series, even when we know he's working on the side of "good" with Dumbledore. (Come on, we all knew that he was trying to teach Harry to cast spells in his mind so that he wouldn't have to block his spells in a fight, but Harry wasn't capable of this). Snape needed some wizard therapy, but mental health was apparently not a thing they cared about in this universe. I mean, Harry, Hermione and Ron could've also used some therapy after all their dealings with He Who Shall Not be Named, but Dumbledore was all "You're fine, see you next term. 10 points for Gryffindor."
3. I feel that people would not be so into Snape's obsession for Lily if their genders were reversed. Snape is basically a rotting wedding cake away from being Miss Havisham, and no one ever thinks her love is cute. It makes me think of things like boys pulling girls pigtails and people ooing instead of talking with the boys about consent. 

There are weird quirks of the wizarding world and the series that allowed this obsession to continue. 

1. Dating in the Harry Potter universe is very antiquated. (Rainbow Rowell parodied this with a small mention in Carry On, which you should read if you haven't. It makes me understand why people write Harry/Draco slashfic). Everyone seems to find their future spouse at Hogwarts and if you don't, you are bound to a life of singledom. The one exception I can think of is Tonks and Remus Lupin- way to break the mold, guys! So perhaps since Snape did not meet anyone whose feelings for him were mutual at Hogwarts, he was destined to be a sad, bitter man easily swept up by an evil dictator.
2. Dumbledore takes advantage of Snape's obsession in a very twisted way. One of the most interesting things about Dumbledore is that while he's Harry's hero he's not the best person, especially when it comes to Snape. He knows Snape will be tortured by looking after Harry, and he forces him to do it anyway. Bit of a shit move, Dumbledore. Maybe because he wasn't allowed to be with his love, he wanted Snape to suffer with him. That's a stretch, but how Dumbledore treats Snape is sick and twisted. 
3. Snape is weird and socially awkward, especially compared to James Potter. In the flashbacks we see him being bullied at Hogwarts (where are the teachers??) when he is not alone. Lily seems to be his only friend, and he wanted her to be everything for him. It's not healthy to have all your eggs in one basket, so to speak. She symbolized love, inclusion, friendship, and popularity- all things that were unattainable for him. When he was angry as a teenager he called Lily a "mudblood" (slur for muggle-born witches and wizards) and this was the end of their friendship. Lily already didn't approve of his involvement with the newly-formed Death Eaters. 
4. Perhaps most importantly, Snape felt extreme guilt over Lily's death. Snape overheard part of the prophecy (THE prophecy. Don't pretend you don't know) and relayed it to his boss The Dark Lord, which resulted in the murder of Lily and James Potter. Was he sad about James? Nah. Just Lily. Did his love for Lily make him love her son? Nope, just be angry at him when he resembled his dead father. 

So again, let me state that I don't think loving someone your whole life is necessarily romantic, especially when they never loved you and you had no hope of reciprocation. Snape should've let it go and got on with his life, but instead he lived a bitter and sad existence. Perhaps one of Rowling's triumphs with this character is to show the flipside of one of Harry Potter's largest recurring themes: that love is powerful. In this case, "love" was not triumphant. Yes it motivated Snape's actions, but this didn't do him any favors. Did it protect Harry? Kind of, but Harry had other forms of love (his own and those of his friends) that protected him. Maybe what everyone misses is that Rowling showed how love can be twisted and turn dark. I hope that she did not swoon when she wrote the "always" passage.

TL;DR- Snape is not cute y'all, stop with the "always" already!

Homestead- a review

Homestead, by Radclyffe, one of myfave authors, follows her typical romance novel format. And if it ain't broke, why fix it, right? Her usual pattern is a somewhat mysterious, super butch woman with dark hair, an awesome job/great wealth, and family issues meets another lady (not necessarily femme, but not as butch as the other one). After some conflict and angst, followed by processing, they have some amazing sexy times and live happily ever after. They declare no love is like their love, no one makes them feel as complete/soul bonded/ like a natural woman so much as the new love of their life. In this particular novel, Clay-- the super butch lady-- works for an oil company (NorthAm) and her love interest Tess is an organic dairy farmer, which is different from her typical surgeon/vet/romance novelist protagonists.

The plot flows along at a nice pace, and her sex scenes are pretty good with a lot of cheesiness, but no gross, cringe-worthy descriptions of lady parts. My favorite ridiculous quote is this: "The subtle rise of Clay's knuckles and the valleys between her tendons reminded Tess of the rolling countryside around her, enduring and endlessly beautiful." Oh man, can it get sillier than that? I think not. Try saying this to your lady friend and tell us how it goes!

But... there were some issues with this novel that made it less enjoyable than usual. And I'm now worrying about Radclyffe's political inclinations. For this reason, I'm giving it 3 ({})'s out of 5. (Hey, I do still love a Radclyffe romance- she was my first!)

Stop here if you don't like spoilers...the come back after you read to see if you agree with me. 

So issue #1: the main characters had a summer romance when they were 18 that was cut short by parental intervention. It is now FIFTEEN years later, and they have been apparently holding a slow-burning torch for each other all that time. For fif.teen.years. Um, sorry Radclyffe, but women in their mid-thirties who've never had a real relationship because they can't get over their teen summer love have serious issues. This is not cute or romantic, it's just sad. It'd be one thing if they had a thing in their youth, led separate healthy, happy, and fulfilled personal lives and THEN came back together, but this was not the case.

Issue 2: Is Radclyffe an environment-hating Republican? Cause it really seems that way, and it makes me sad when my sistren consort with the enemy. My reason for this question is Clay finds herself in Tess' community because her company (really her father's company) wants to start fracking on her land. Of course, Tess and neighbors are upset by this. Clay encourages them to hire an independent consultant to do tests assessing the risks. They seem to be down with this plan, but then no hiring of an independent consultant every occurs! Some super shallow plot devices happen to both bring Tess and Class together, and make Tess OK with fracking. 1) Clay tells her they'll be careful. Yep, that's pretty much it. Would that convince any of our readers? 2) A domineering male neighbor pretends to be against it, but is really holding out for more money. Once he signs a deal, the fracking can just occur on his land, and Tess's is free of wells! Hoo-rah! That will totally work to make her land toxin-free! 3) Another annoying male (see the pattern here?) who has a thing for Tess sabotages Clay's work site, bringing the two together. 4) Clay and Tess realize their evil dads are to blame for separating them as teens, and Clay's dad is the one pushing this drill site, not her, so she just gets to play the messenger. WTH, Radclyffe? It's clear you really think fracking is fine and dandy. Did you sign a deal with the real-life version of NorthAm?

This whole fracking thing is just so problematic. Tess, as described in the beginning of the novel, would not have given in like this without getting her own assessments of the situation. Instead, Clay just reassures her that she's a good person, Tess wants her hot body, forgets her concerns for her farm, and they decide to live happily ever after. This also doesn't make sense for Clay, as before she seemed chained to her dad's will (even though she's in her 30s- these ladies' maturity level is seriously lacking), but all of a sudden decides it will be fine to insta-marry Tess, the girl of her teenage dreams. Ick.

And that brings me to issue #3: Daddy issues. This is not  new trope for Radclyffe, but it's never bothered me as much. In another novel, whose title I am forgetting, a hot surgeon is slave to her Dad's will, as she's in residency and he's like the biggest hot-shot surgeon of them all. This kind of makes sense as med students are kinda slaves to the system until they're done with their residency (I think I'm using the right term- but you get what I mean.) But in this one, Clay never manages a successful relationship, and doesn't even try, all because her dad split up she and Tess as teens cause Tess' dad was being an ass about it. Um, I'm sorry, but since she's in her mid-thirties now this is just not going to fly. The dad character is also flatter than usual, because they only interact briefly on the phone, so he's kinda like The Claw in Inspector Gadget or something. And of course there are step-Daddy issues for Tess, but he's conveniently dead. And also a jerk. What we learn is that all dudes are terrible, controlling, manipulative assholes, so then you are left with no choice but to just accept what your less manipulative hot girlfriend says and live happily ever after.

Our advice for these ladies, or real-life ladies who want to follow their examples:

1. Don't pine for your teen love forever. I mean, there is no need to follow the child marriage proposing girl's lead from NC pride. So, so wrong.
2. If you and your lady disagree on moral and ethical issues, these should be sorted out BEFORE you decide to shack up. Enjoy each other's company as you will, but make sure you can compromise (the real kind of compromise- not like the current Republicans who shut down the government and claim it's cause the Dems won't play nice) on the important stuff before you try to make this soul bond last forever. 
3. Buck up and quit taking orders from Daddy. You're not a royal or a Huntsberger- choose your own destiny. Just not the one that makes you sound desperate/insane/emotionally stunted. 

Book Review: Aspen Meadows, by Mila Kerr

Sistren, we have an exciting announcement to make: we are going to start reviewing lesbian romance novels from time to time! YAY!!! This combines several of our favorite things: lesbian romance novels, judging things, and commenting on stupid relationship choices! Woohoo! Because some people think that their lives should be like a romance novel, and we're here to tell you that that is never going to happen. And now, on to the review! (This comes to you courtesy of Not Allured, but the review that follows is by Indigo Labrys).

IL: And I want to be very clear about the fact that I NEVER WANT MY LIFE TO BE LIKE THIS "ROMANCE NOVEL." My subtitle for Aspen Meadows is Aspen Meadows: From Kiss to Cult. I'm sorry this is so long, but on the bright side, now you never have to read this book.

Aspen Meadows - Mila Kerr

I received a copy of this book through NetGalley. Because it affected how I read this book, I think it is worthwhile to mention that it was categorized there as a lesbian romance, not as lesbian erotica, and heads-up – if you are looking for a lesbian romance, I might look elsewhere. If you are interested in f/f erotica with some D/s elements, welcome.

The premise of this book is really intriguing. Lesbian love in a planned community (::cough:: commune!) styled after 19th-century America and focused on family values? I’ll bite. Tell me more about the crazies who are building this town and why anyone who self-identifies as a lesbian would want to live in it, please! 

Unfortunately, this never really comes through in the book. The world building in Aspen Meadows could have been much stronger. It’s an interesting idea for a book that goes … absolutely nowhere. I mean, yes, they live in a crazy 19th-century style town, and it has the appropriate trappings (she has to learn how to start a fire! The word “dowry” is used, albeit incorrectly! Someone mentions bears!), but there’s nothing that really establishes why all these crazies want to relocate here, why *precisely* an open lesbian would be allowed to lead this rag-tag bunch of misfits, and what the actual realities or hardships of trying to turn back time are like. 

The same is true of the character development. We’re given seemingly contradictory information about Luna from the start; at the novel’s opening, she “told fortunes, possessed visions of the future, and swindled the average Joe. As scheming and dishonest as it may be, she convinced people she was gifted in a spiritual way.” So, she’s using people for her own financial gain and is relatively successful at it. Check. But then, a few pages later: “They wanted it [her spiritual advice] all for free, and Luna usually didn’t have it in her to push the hard sale. … Luna tried her best to give them their money’s worth. She didn’t see it as a con. She saw it as a way to give them hope.” So, I’m fine with either of these – (a) con artist with crystals or (b) soft-hearted hippie – as a basis for someone’s character, but I need to know which it is. 

Then there’s the problem of her relationship with Rylie. Even if (worst case scenario) Luna is a heartless con artist, I still wanted her to stay far away from Rylie. Here is a brief summary of the initial phases of their romance: they meet; Rylie tells Luna to stay away from her niece or else; Luna responsibly communicates this to Jade, Rylie’s niece, when she next appears at Luna’s shop; Rylie comes back, drags Luna into her truck, and starts the make-outs; heated passion ensues; Jade continues to see Luna; Rylie threatens to sue Luna and take away everything; Luna shows up at Rylie’s house, they make out, Rylie drops the law-suit and says, “Hey, so I need a caretaker for Jade, want to drop everything and move to this weird 19th-century community I’ve been planning? It’s not a cult (just an tiny little ranch without “television, media, corporations, technology, and all the things that muddle with today” that will “bring back the purity of long ago”), and I’m not going to kill you in the woods, but I need to explore this passion between us!” 

And Luna says “yes.” WTF, girl? Run away from the crazy, not towards it with open arms! (And yes, I get it’s that her passion for Luna makes her crazy, but I don’t want her to be an actual threat to Luna. That is unsexy to me.)

So their relationship really confused me. I think part of the reason for this is that hey, this isn’t actually a lesbian romance, it’s more about the sexytimes, so character development gets shortchanged. Fine. What the erotica wants to establish instead of character, I think, is a power dynamic between the two leads, and this is where the story very quickly goes. 

And let’s be clear, the power dynamic here is not in Luna’s favor. She has basically signed up for a D/s relationship without … any of the actual signing-up. I’m fine with Rylie and Luna engaging in a D/s relationship, but I want a clear articulation of both the rules and Luna’s consent to those rules. Instead, we get this:

Rylie: You read your welcome packet, right? This is old-timey America, and even though we don’t have corporations, you realize I’m technically your boss, right?

Luna: I understand that you want things “like the way they were.” (Again, a bad choice, but I get that she’s consenting to old-timey America. What is she NOT consenting to, though? See as follows).

Rylie: COOL. Welp, just so you know, you can never leave this house until I feel it’s safe. There are dangers. Like … poison ivy. And bears. 

Luna: WTFFFFFFFFFFFFFF, but I’m so turned on right now.

This very much sets the tone for their interactions. There’s a power dynamic at play! Rylie mentions she has demands and expectations, Luna’s all like, “Well, show me, girl!” and they make it. If the demands were just sexy-time demands, I’d be fine; Luna is pretty actively consenting to the sexin’. However, because their power dynamic is a quality of their relationship in general, I had serious issues with the fact that the rules aren’t clear for Luna from the beginning. And that sometimes, this means she gets unfairly punished. 

Let’s go to the tape, folks. For example, that time Luna rushes into a burning barn to save Rylie and maybe some animals who are there. Rylie is really upset about this – even though she does the same thing by rushing in to save Luna – and says, “It’s my job to protect you, care for you … it’s also my job to make sure you never do something so foolish again.” Rylie proceeds to berate Luna for rushing into a burning barn, but she’s also simultaneously initiating sexual intimacies with Luna, coupling a verbal punishment with a sexual one. (Luna is game for the sexy-times, but her sexual punishment is about being disciplined for breaking rules she didn’t know she was breaking at the time. Unfair.)

Also, Rylie says, “You’re lucky to be alive and not have any injuries. You could have been burned.” Buuuuuut then she begins introducing Luna to the pleasures of anal sex and says, “But after tonight, you’ll definitely feel a burn.” WHAT. THE. FUCK. The emphasis there is not even mine, let me be clear.

Let’s rephrase this.

Luna: I almost died in a fire!
Rylie: Did I hear you say “fire”? Just WAIT until I set your ASS ON FIRE.

And then Rylie proceeds to do just that. And again, let me be clear, I am not kink-shaming here, but I do want to question the use of language that recalls Luna’s near escape with death. Here is how that language functions for me as a reader as a result: it is the equivalent of watching Luna rush into that burning barn while seductively screaming, “Did somebody here order a pizza?” Because that is how that scene functions.

So those are my thoughts on Aspen Meadows. It is not a terribly good romance novel, but that is mostly because it isn’t a romance. As erotica goes, it was not for me, in that consent for me is dependent on knowing what precisely it is that I’m consenting to, and I don’t really think Luna does in the beginning. (She gets there at the end, though.) And here is another thing - while I was reading, I had two sneaking suspicions: one, that this had been originally written as a het novel, and two, that this het relationship was a clearer D/s. (Clearer because a male-protagonist’s desire for a 19th-century lifestyle complete with 19th-century morals is going to involve a desire for a different articulation of gender roles than a female-protagonist’s desire for a 19th-century lifestyle; it’s more clear what “old-fashioned” morals are going to look like for a heterosexual couple than a homosexual one.)

My suspicions that this was originally a het novel: there’s nothing about either Rylie or Luna that indicates any sort of established lesbian identity. (There’s one scene where they fight about it.) Not that this is a thing I need for a lesbian romance novel, but lesbian romance novels usually involve some focus on identity development, and that just wasn’t here. Rylie read (to me) as someone who had been written initially as a heterosexual dude and who was changed into a lesbian in a later draft. And, as it happens, I’m pretty sure this is actually what happened; the author’s alter ego (which she is very open about, so I don’t think this is a secret by any means) published a book earlier this year which is … basically the same as this book. (http://www.amazon.com/Of-Yesterday-eb...).

I found this out by reading through Alta Hensley’s (alter ego!) blog and seeing an excerpt that mentioned a character going for a night-time run (something that struck me as a particularly unlikely thing to do in Aspen Meadows, so I was surprised to see another character in a separate novel also go for a midnight run by shimmying out of her bedroom window on a sheet ladder). I’m posting a link to that here (http://altahensley.com/2013/02/love-s...). The scene is kinda the same thing, and from what I can tell, these books are remarkably similar. 

Again, not a problem, because people can do what they like, though it does strike me as slightly disingenuous. Using the word “pussy” a lot + scraping off the male pronouns from your het BDSM does not a lesbian romance novel make. But I do think that the comparison helps to articulate some of the problems I had with the book – mostly, why some of the work around consent in a D/s relationship is unclear to me & why it didn’t really feel like a lesbian romance & why the world-building really needed some work for me (like why the hell two lesbians would fantasize about a return to family values).

I didn’t really like the book, but people who like f/f erotica might.

In other news, I didn’t think the writing was particularly good (“the truck smelled like country charm, causing desire and arousal to build inside of Luna’s body;” “she wanted to feel and taste and bathe in Rylie’s sexual essence”), though, nor did I really understand Luna and Rylie’s relationship. I was also mildly creeped out by Jade’s sudden transformation from broken manic-pixie dream-girl to mature adult woman, but this was the least of my problems.