#but idk i find more nuanced approaches to characters like this feel much more engaging to me and its lame when it seems like ppl go out

[ourhouseishaunted]

people acting as if laios can Do No Wrong and infantilizing him because he is autistic are annoying as hell. especially because laios belongs to my favorite genre of character: "person who desperately wants friends and deep relationships because they're lonely, and while part of their problems stem from people not wanting to understand them and refusing to meet them where they are, they also genuinely come across in a way where you Completely Understand why others can get turned off from them"

[sminny-wew]

I had a long discussion with friends earlier about the gender bias in how YA books are marketed and it somehow evolved into me saying "We need more fiction that questions the concept of attraction itself"

We got into how easily romance can be latched onto other genres (romantic comedy, romantic drama, fantasy romance, historical romance, etc.) and I started asking myself what an arocom (aromantic comedy) would look like. I decided, based on an old Tumblr post I can't find that joked about some comedy movie being aro representation b/c it had no romance, that it can't just be "a comedy with no romance at all", because then that's just a regular old comedy. By that logic, SpongeBob would be an arocom, which doesn't make sense b/c it largely focuses on non-romantic plots (SpongeBob working at his job, failing to get his license, the general shenanigans he and his friends get into) and only addresses romance sparingly, depending on the plot of an episode.

It sucks to admit but at least from my perspective, in order for a piece of media to qualify as "aromantic/asexual media" in the heavily sex- and romance-catered media landscape, it kinda needs to address sex and romance in the first place. As wonderful as it would be to escape for a few hours to a book or show or game where romance isn't addressed at all and think of that as aro rep, you can't really call attention to a character's lack of romantic or sexual attraction without acknowledging, even indirectly, that those exact things exist within the text.

I'm not saying sex and romance are inherently bad either. There are aces who engage in sexual activities, aros who date, folks on both spectrums who engage in kink because kink is not inherently sexual and just approach relationships in so many incredibly nuanced ways. It's not just about aspecs also having parents and siblings and pets either, we have friends and coworkers and neighbors. We have interests and skills and hobbies. But it's not just the cishets who place sex and romance on such a high pedestal as "fundamental aspects of what makes people human", I see it within the LGBT community too. There are more than a few openly queer folks out there who don't know or have forgotten that because asexuality and aromanticism are a lack or absence of attraction (and thus a lack/absence of conformist heterosexuality), that we are, to varying degrees, queer as well. And thus media with aroace subtext (or just text for that matter) tends to get excluded from discussions of queer subtext.

I feel like I got a little off-topic and rambly but Idk I just think we need more aspec fiction where people are free to explore all spectrums of attraction as much as they want, ask questions about what defines a relationship, and just generally bear in mind relationship anarchy when they create. I'd like to see it in mainstream media but I'd also like to see it in fanfic too

(Btw everything I just said also extends to people who are poly)

[thedreadvampy]

Hey Ruth! I noticed you've talked in the past about asexuality in quite a negative manner. As an ace-person (who has received backlash for it) I was wondering: do you still uphold these opinions?

Hey! I have in the past said I don’t really...like people popping up in my ask box asking me My Opinion On Asexuality, but I do appreciate you asking me as someone I kinda know and with your face turned on, so I’m gonna aim to answer in the macro. Though I mean it depends on what the opinions...are? I have had a lot of opinions over the time I’ve had this blog and I don’t necessarily know what all of them were or which ones have concerned you. I can give you a top-level view of how I see my views, though (however, since I have been largely holding off on answering this kind of ask for Literally A Year Now this is less an answer to your specific question and more an answer to the last year of asks)

(also if I get dogpiled in my inbox for Having Bad Asexuality Opinions which I do every time I talk about asexuality regardless of what I actually say then. my phone is broken I won’t know about it :) so I feel untouchable)

I don’t think I hold a negative opinion of asexuality as an identity (I say I don’t think bc we all have blind spots)? I have a lot of very important people in my life who are asexual, aromantic or aroace and. I mean it feels pretty condescending to say ~uwu it’s valid~ bc like. ace and aro people don’t really need my input to validate their identity. but a) it seems like a pretty accurate way to describe their experience and b) I know a lot of them have had a really huge boost from finding a name and community to fit their experience and have found that really helpful, and I’ve seen that make a huge difference in people’s lives and I’m really happy to watch my friends come to understand themselves and feel comfortable and accepted in a part of themselves they had felt really alienated or stigmatised by. In a broader sense, I think there’s huge value in decentralising romance and sex in our assumptions of What Human Happiness Means and for some people that’s not the most important thing, and for some it’s just not interesting. 

So like. I find it difficult to really express these opinions in any meaningful way because my opinion on asexuals and aromantics is much like my opinion on trans people or idk like people of colour. like very obviously those people exist and very obviously those people don’t deserve to be marginalised or stigmatised but it would feel. weird and performative to just make a post saying like “Asexuality Is Good And Valid, I Am Pro It” bc again like. who needs my permission or cares about my opinion. it’s not a Good Thing To Do it’s just. a thing you are that shouldn’t be treated as a bad thing.

however. and I suspect that this is what you’re referring to. while I love and appreciate ace and aro people, I think building communities and active support for ace and aro people is valuable and needed and, as above, I think Asexuality Is Good And Valid I Am Pro It, I do take some issue with elements of how discussions around asexuality are framed online (pretty much only online, I really haven’t run into the kind of black-and-white thinking in in-person queer spaces) 

and I also. think there are some issues with people extrapolating their experience of their own sexuality onto the world in a way which. I’m just going to say a lot of the time when I talk about The Ace Discourse in a negative way it’s around people assuming that the world is split into a binary between ace and allo people, or assuming that only aspec people experience a nuanced or complex or fluid relationship to their sexuality while pigeonholing allosexuality into a pretty flat image of sex and romance focus. and I have always felt like this does a massive disservice not just to people who don’t identify with aspec labels, but also to the general hope that we could work against the expectation that there’s a Standard Amount To Value Sex/Romance - I think that the assumption that there are aspec people and then Everyone Else Has The Normal Type and Level of Attraction just. reinforces the idea that there’s a “Normal” type and level of attraction. which is ultimately pretty self-defeating and also just. observably untrue. 

and this division of the world into Aspec People and Allo People also has some other weird knockon effects - I don’t think there’s anything intrinsically wrong with identities like gray ace or demi or other aspec labels beyond asexual and aromantic, but I do think that the way those labels are used is often. unhelpful. and they’re defined in such personal, subjective ways that you get weirdnesses sometimes like people Diagnosing Each Other With Demisexual or people saying ‘you can’t talk about this experience you share because it’s an Aspec Experience’ and again. there isn’t a concrete material experience there because the whole experience of romantic and sexual attraction, what that feels like and how sharply divisible it is is very, very personal and subjective. and everyone has different experiences of those and will name those experiences differently.

there’s also. historically a minority of Big Ace Blogs that kind of sneer at allosexuality or who would hijack posts about other issues to derail them to asexuality. but I don’t think they were ever representative of the community as a whole and I certainly think that inasmuch as those blogs remain around they’re a legacy of the Long-Ago (and a lot of them are trolls imo)

but there is. an issue I take that does seem to be more currently live which is the question of allo privilege. I think personally that framing all allosexuals/alloromantics as privileged over all aspec people on the basis of feeling sexual/romantic attraction is provably untrue in a world where people, particularly queer people, are actively oppressed and marginalised for expressing non-normative sexuality. it isn’t that I don’t think asexuality and aromanticism isn’t marginalised and stigmatised, because it visibly is, but it seems pretty reductive to boil it down to a binary yes/no privilege when both sexualisation and desexualisation are so actively tied into other forms of marginalisation (this is what I was trying to express in the argument about Martin a while ago - sex and sexuality are so often disincentivised for fat, queer, disabled and neuroatypical people that it doesn’t...feel like a reclamation that those tend to be the characters that get fanonised as ace where slim, straight, able-bodied and neurotypical characters aren’t. like it’s more complex than a binary privilege equation; sex and romance are incentivised and stigmatised differently at the intersection of oppressions and. for example. in a world where gay conversion therapy and religious oppression of gay and SGA people is so often focused specifically on celibacy and on punishing the act of sexual attraction, I don’t think it’s a reasonable framing to say that a gay allosexual man has privilege over an aroace man on the basis of his attraction) 

so those are like. things I would consider myself to feel actively negative about in online discourse (and again. in online discourse. not in how I relate to asexuality or aromanticism or aspec identities in general but in the framing and approaches people take towards discussing it in a very specific bubble).

but also. um. the main criticism I have of the online discourse culture of asexuality is that there are things I don’t have experience of that I have mentioned, when asked, that I don’t personally understand the meaning of but I don’t need to understand them to appreciate that they’re useful/meaningful to others. things like 

the difference between QPRs, asexual romantic relationships and close friendships

how you know the difference between romantic attraction and friendship

the distinction between sexual attraction and a desire to have sex with someone for another reason

and I hope I’ve generally been clear that this is. honest lack of understanding and not condemnation. I personally have a very muddled sense of attraction and often have difficulty identifying the specifics of any of my own emotional needs so like. it’s a closed book for me at the moment, how you would identify the fine distinctions between types of want when I’m still at step 1: identify That You Want Something Of Some Sort, Eventually, Through Trial And Error. but I think I’ve always been explicit that this isn’t a value judgement it’s just a gap in my own knowledge and yet. every single time I’ve said anything other than enthusiastic “yes I understand this and I love it and it’s good and valid” (and again. I have not gone out of my way to talk about it I have mostly only mentioned it because people keep asking me to talk about it) I have got a massive rush of anger and accusations of aphobia and “just shut up if you don’t know what you’re talking about but also answer my 30 questions to prove you think Correct Things about asexuality” and. I understand that this comes from a place of really unpleasant and aggressive backlash towards the ace community so it’s a sensitivity with a lot of people but like. it doesn’t seem proportional.

also I feel like ever since I hit like 700 followers my Tumblr life has been a constant cycle of people asking me Are You An Ace Inclusionist Are You An Exclus Are You An Aphobe Justify Your Opinion On Asexuality which. eventually yeah I’ve got pretty snippy about the whole thing. but you know. fuck it I’m just gonna lay it out and if you or anyone else is uncomfortable following me based on those opinions then I’m sorry to hear that and I will be sad to see you not want to engage with me any more but I also think that’s absolutely your prerogative. however I will not be taking questions at this time (and not just bc my phone’s broken) - demands for an argument about this Are Going To Be Ignored so if you want to go then go.

so like the big question I reckon is Do You Think Asexuality Is Queer and

yes. no. maybe. I don’t understand the question what does it mean for an identity to be queer? 

there are spaces and conversations where any form of aromanticism or asexuality makes sense as a relevant identity. talking about hegemonic expectations of normative romance. building community. combatting the idea that heterosexual missionary married sex between a man and a woman is the only rewarding or valuable form of relationship or intimacy.

there are spaces where I think heterosexual aros/heteromantic cis aces don’t. have a more meaningful or direct experience of the issues than allo cishets. because while being aro or ace or aspec has a direct impact on those people on a personal and relational level, disclosure is largely a choice, and the world at large sees them as straight. they don’t have the lived experience of being visibly nonconforming that SGA people and aroace people do. they may still be queer but there’s a lot of conversations where they bring a lot of the baggage of being Straight People (because. even if you’re ace or aro you can still be straight in your romantic or sexual attraction and if your relationships are all outwardly straight then you don’t necessarily have an intimate personal understanding of being marginalised from mainstream society by dint of your sexuality). this doesn’t make you Not Queer in the same way that being a bi person who’s only ever been in m/f relationships is still queer, but in both cases a) you don’t magically have a personal experience of societal oppression through the transitive properties of Being Queer and b) it’s really obnoxious to talk as if you’re The Most Oppressed when other people are trying to have a conversation about their lived experience of societal oppression. and they’re within their rights to say ‘we’re talking about the experience of being marginalised for same gender/non-heterosexual attraction and you’re straight, could you butt out?’)

(I very much object to the assumption coming from a lot of exclus that “cishet ace” is a term that can reasonably be applied to non-orientated aroace people though. het is not a default it really extremely doesn’t make sense to treat people who feel no attraction as Straight By Default. when I were a lad I feel like we mostly understood “asexual” to mean that identity - non-orientated aroace - and while I think it’s obvious that a lot of people do find value in using a more split-model because. well. some people are both gay/straight/bi and aro/ace, and it’s good that language reflects that. but I do think it’s left a gap in the language to simply refer to non-attracted people. this isn’t a criticism of anything in particular - there’s a constant balancing act in language between specificity and adaptability and sometimes a gain for one is a loss for the other)

some queer conversations and spaces just. aren’t built with aces in mind. and that isn’t a flaw. some spaces aren’t built with men in mind, but that doesn’t mean men can’t be queer. some conversations are about Black experiences of queerness but that doesn’t mean non-Black people can’t be queer. not all queer spaces will focus on ace needs but that doesn’t mean asexuality isn’t queer, or that queerness is opposed to aceness - sex, sexuality, romance and dating are all really important things to a lot of queer people, especially those whose sexuality and romantic relationships are often stigmatised or violently suppressed in wider society. there should be gay bars, hookup apps, gay and trans friendly sex education, making out at Pride, leather parades and topless dyke marches and porn made by and for queer people, romantic representation in media of young and old gay, bi and trans couples kissing and snuggling and getting married and saying sloppy romantic things. and there should be non-sexual queer spaces, there should be discussions around queerness that don’t suppose that a monogamous romantic relationship is what everyone’s fighting for, sex ed should be ace inclusive, etc. 

I think the whole question of inclusionism vs exclusionism is based on a weird underlying assumption that If An Identity Is Queer All Queer Spaces Should Directly Cater To That. like. aspec identities can be queer and it can be totally reasonable for there to be queer spaces that revolve around being sexual and romantic and there can be conversations it’s not appropriate or productive to centre asexuality and aspec experiences in and we can recognise that not all queer people do prioritise or have any interest in sex or romance. in the same way that there’s value in centring binary trans experiences sometimes and nonbinary experiences at other times but both of those conversations should recognise that neither binary or nonbinary gender identity is a Universal Queer Experience.

anyway that one probably isn’t one of the opinions you were asking about but I have been wanting to find a way to express it for a while so you’re getting it: the Ruth Thedreadvampy Inclusionism Take.

uh. it’s 1:30 on a work night so I have been typing too long. if there was an opinion you were specifically thinking of that I haven’t mentioned, chuck me another ask specifically pointing to what you want me to clarify my thinking on. sometimes I gotta be honest I’ve just been kind of careless in my framing (thinking of the Martin Fucks debacle where I spent ages insisting I didn’t say Martin couldn’t be aroace then read back like two days later and realised that I had said “he’s not aroace” bc I had written the post at 2am without proofreading and had meant to say “unless you think he’s aroace”) so I May Well Not Stand By Some Posts or might Stand By Them With Clarification

[yikesola]

I’m hoping this comes across as a good faith question bc I mean it that way - what are you seeing in dan that to you screams dripping in gender? like what should I be perceiving? Bc I look at the pictures and just see dan- is there something I’m missing? between your post and cal’s post from earlier I’m just quite confused , like what is a gender ? I’ve done research but don’t really feel like I have an answer , thx

Thanks anon for being real thoughtful here, it made me 8000% more willing to engage!✨ I do wanna point out that my feelings on this are influenced by the fact that I am cis, that I find comfort and delight in my womanhood esp how it intersects with my lesbianism, and that someone who is not cis very well might feel differently than me about this but that doesn’t diminish their validity in any way!

I don’t think you’re missing anything by looking at the pics and just seeing dan, I think that’s lovely actually and definitely what i see too, like “there’s my boy🥰 there he is! Look at him go!” And I don’t know if it’s something you really have to worry too much about grasping what /I’m/ seeing bc what also matters is what /you/ see, y’know? Like gender is a social construct AND it’s also something that resonates very personally to people, both things are true, it’s just..... not something clear cut. We have to sit with the nuance and find comfort in the discomfort💞

I think part of the confusion between me and cal spiraling and you understanding said spiral is that a lot of it is difficult to put into words so we pick an aspect of a photo and say

as a form of like...... shorthand for what we Mean. There’s such a difference between gender presentation and gender identity even tho the two obviously interact with each other in a very necessary way. Regarding dan specifically I’ll look at things like his discussion of gender in BIG and how he says yes he’s comfortable with being a man even if the concept of whats “”””manly””” escapes him and he wouldn’t turn down a sickening pair of heels and feels fine viewing himself as a formless blob. Maybe what I mean is when I see dan embodying something outside of Manhood™️ even in the subtlest ways my brain goes “huh.... like me :) like me in my womanhood and dykery”

Like I will frequently tag on main in gifsets of Gilbert Blythe and Rick O’Connel and Jack Dawson and Luke Danes that “I love this lesbian” when the character is a presumably straight cis man played by a presumably straight cis man (and white men now that i list them out like that.... hmm is that a me problem or a casting problem? Maybe a little of both🤔) and those four specific men are written in their stories to be like Manly Men™️ — when I see them onscreen displaying tenderness, yearning, gentleness, hesitation, intentionality, my brain goes into a very old dusty file labeled “strict gender roles society taught you” and sees those filed under Girly Shit

Or just like ,, character traits I admire and vibe with. As a woman. As a dyke. Therefore.... “I love this lesbian🤪” she tags under this photo

Is it me leaning into those bad gender categorizations? Is it me finding freedom in inverting them? 🤷🏻‍♀️🤷🏻‍♀️ idk! I don’t think there’s a clean and clear answer. But I know it makes me feel better about my gender and sexuality to see a picture of dan with straightened fringe and shaved sides in a form-fitting black long sleeve looking approachable and tender, and thinking “oh yeah.... I’d date her :’))”

[mautadite]

january book round up

27 books this month! the most i’ve read in a month in quite some time, and a good start to the year. a couple days late because i’ve been feeling a bit meh. i doubt i’ll be able to read this much at any point this year. but it’s nice to get a good strong head-start on my yearly goal. a mix of audiobooks and e-books so far.

a land so wild - elyssa warkentin ⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️ a really lovely epistolary/found media m/m romance story, set during the 1840s, about a ship captain and a naturalist trying to chart a northwest passage in the arctic, and find a ship that was lost five years ago trying to do the same thing. very beautifully told, with lots of emotion that you’d think would be lost because of the mode of storytelling.

how to bang a billionaire - alexis hall ⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️ a re-read. i remember being very sceptical of this when i first read it, but now that i’ve finished the entire series there’s so much i appreciate about it.

trade me - courtney milan ⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️ my first courtney milan book, after hearing a lot of good things about her. the hype was deserved! i like her writing a lot and this book (a romance between a poor chinese-am daughter of immigrants, and a billionaire heir with an eating disorder) touched on a lot of stuff that you don’t typically see in romance novels. particular what it mean and what it feels like to be poor. this was probably my favourite treatment of billionaires in a novel (at least, ones where they don’t get beheaded).

hold me - courtney milan ⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️ the second in the series, equally enjoyable. the hero of this novel has to confront and own up to his sexism in ways that a lot of romance novels would simply let men get away with! if i’d known that that’s part of what the book covered i might not have been enthused to read it, because while i genuinely believe bigoted people can change for the better, i’m not super interested in reading about it. but i really enjoyed how milan wrote it, and the romance was lovely. (also the heroine is trans, nice.)

my lady’s lover - nicola davidson ⭐️⭐️⭐️ not a lot of substance, but it’s historical lesbian romance, which is my eternal catnip. a lady’s maid who’s the member of a society for sexual freedom falls in love with her mistress, and happily discovers that the feelings are returned. there’s sex, some angst, and a happy ending,

a lady’s desire - lily maxton ⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️ another historical f/f romance. pretty low stakes, without much external conflict, but it had good writing and great characters, and i’ll always have a soft spot for childhood friends to lovers. and let’s be real: i mostly picked this up because of the cover. a woman with her head in another lady’s lap, gazing gayly at her? yes, thanks.

rebound remedy - christine d’abo ⭐️⭐️ eh! m/m holiday romance, about a guy who gets dumped before christmas, has a whirlwind rebound romance with his bartender, and then starts falling deeper for him. nothing bad about it, but i just wasn’t feeling the romance. i’ve read shorter stories that had more chemistry and character interaction.

don’t let go - cynthia dane ⭐️ another f/f romance that i got mostly because of the cover, but this one let me down hard. i liked that it was set in taiwan; had a lot of cultural nuance and tidbits that i enjoyed, but everything else, the writing, the editing, and characters, the chemistry... it was a bust. it also had a weird and baffling approach to mental illness, and managed to be yet another book that makes me hate rich people. also... the two authors credited are the pseudonyms of the same person skfjhdfkj ihni why she’s crediting herself twice.

alone - e.j. noyes ⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️ LOVED THIS. f/f mystery/thriller-ish romance, though the mystery aspect is admittedly light. noyes has lovely prose and a good sense of storytelling, but the romance is where this really shone for me. which... idk, i’m aware that it might not be for others who read this book. but something about the way olivia fell so helplessly in love with celeste, everything celeste does to hold on to olivia... it appealed to me on a visceral level.

boystown book 1 - marshall thornton ⭐️⭐️⭐️ three short stories about a gay private eye solving mysteries in the community in the early 1980s. it reminded me of how much i love short form mysteries; there’s just something about stories being told that way that i can’t resist. i was also kind of charmed by the way our main character tripped into bed with a cute twink like every 10 pages. :3

poems i sleep next to - shelby eileen ⭐️⭐️⭐️ a collection of contemporary poems. really enjoyable. nothing wowed me, but several poems moved me.

how to talk to nice english girls - gretchen evans ⭐️⭐️⭐️ early 20th century f/f romance between a spirited american heiress and a nice proper english girl. low stakes, character driven. not really character driven enough actually; i felt like they didn’t get to spend enough time knowing each other. and some more external conflict wouldn’t have hurt. but it was hot and fun and well-written.

by his rules - j.a. rock ⭐️⭐️⭐️ an m/m romance that looks at abuse in bdsm communities, and spends a good long time on recovery, survival, and healthy relationships that involve kink. i really could not get into the discipline stuff, but i really liked that the main characters worked for their HEA; nothing clicked magically into placed for them, and aiden was given space and resources to work out his trauma.

the wolf and the girl - aster glenn gray ⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️ a retelling of little red riding hood set in early 20th century russia and france that focuses on the friendship between two young women. simple story, very beautifully told.

the secret diaries of anne lister - anne lister ⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️ i started reading this in the middle of last year, after i finished gentleman jack, and i was basically reading snippets at a time until december, and then by january i was eating it all up. i LOVED this. i loved the diary of this at times manipulative, haughty, but kind-hearted and tender and clever woman, and all of her loves and struggles and observations. there’s just something... very good about knowing and seeing that lesbians have always existed, and hearing her first hand accounts is just... GREAT. really looking forward to the next volume.

oh, earthman! - berlynn wohl ⭐️⭐️⭐️ an anthology of short stories. weird, fun, scifi-flavoured m/m erotica.

emma - jane austen ⭐️⭐️⭐️ took me long enough, i know! but i really really thoroughly enjoyed my time with this book, especially the audiobook, whose narrator i loved. i loved emma: her cleverness and wit and finesse and all her terrible blunders. though i could tell where the story was going, the getting there was really fun, and i super duper enjoyed the romance (though at one point i got seriously squicked out haha). and fight me: i adored miss bates, i thought she was the best character in the book. LOVE a spinster who don’t know when to shut her trap but is earnest and kind and gentle-hearted and GOOD.

«légendaire.» - kai ashante wilson ⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️ kaw, i’m begging you, PLEASE write another fell length novel. or novella. please! i love his writing and world-building so so so much, i flip out thinking about it. until he does, these short stories will have to suffice. this was great: everything i love about his writing, revisiting the world and concepts that we’ve seen in his other books, with mesmerising characters and a tragic, but soulful tale.

a conspiracy of truths - alexandra rowland ⭐️⭐️⭐️ i love stories about stories, and as far as that goes, this a pretty good one! the one way it failed to grasp me was on the character front; i just didn’t enjoy the main character as much as i could, or as much as i was meant to, and i felt at times he was too far removed from the plot. basically, chant is a master storyteller travelling in a foreign land, when he’s falsely accused of witchcraft and spying. the novel details how he uses storytelling to get himself out of the pickle, and all the consequences that follow. there are some amazing side characters in this (esp. his apprentice, who i will definitely read the nest book for).

animal farm - george orwell ⭐️⭐️⭐️ felt like rereading this, so i did. and i mean, it’s animal farm! it holds up.

the overdue life of any byler - kelly harms ⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️ like i said above, i like books about books, and i got this thinking it would be something like that? but it’s more about a single mother who gets the chance to take some time off from her kids and her life, have fun, find romance, and how she deals with managing that, and the guilt, and all the elements that are introduced/reintroduced to her life. i don’t think this is an amazing book, but it’s a lovely one, and i know there are middle aged mothers out there who would benefit from reading it. it’s not about romance (though there’s a cute romance in it); it’s about motherhood and being there for yourself as much as your kids.

the subs club 1&2 - j.a. rock ⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️ the first two books in an m/m romance series. a group of friends is still reeling after one of them dies at the hands of an irresponsible dom. they decide to form the subs club; a website to review and rate doms, with an eye towards making the community safer for subs, though it doesn’t really work out that way. the first book follows dave, who ends up getting involved with a guy who’s eerily like ron swanson from parks and rec, and the second follows miles, a masochist who gets involved with a guy who likes to pretend to be a vampire (lmao??). i have to tip my hat to j.a. rock, who seems to have a knack for getting me to read things i’d be otherwise sure i wouldn’t be interested in. and i mean, even after reading, i’m pretty sure i don’t want to read other books about domestic discipline or s&m or pretend draculas, but her characters and plots are well written and engaging and i had a really good time. although, i have to mention: the second book dealt with internalised racism in a way that... while well meaning, was definitely not very deftly done.

alice & jean - lily hammond ⭐️⭐️⭐️ post wwii f/f romance set in new zealand. a young widowed mother falls for the dashing woman who delivers her milk every morning. they have to contend with community scrutiny, an old friend of alice’s husband, and her bitter old mother to fight their way to happiness. i enjoyed it; it was simple and the romance was incredibly sweet, though the writing did drag at times.

american dreamer - adriana herrera ⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️ DELIGHTFUL. the very definition of feel good romance! a young dominican-american man moves to the outskirts of new york to start his food truck, and almost immediately meets a cute librarian who turns his head. i flipping love queer romances with characters from the caribbean; it just feels so good when slang is part of the language of love.

minotaur - j.a. rock ⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️ i read four books by this author this month, and this is hands down my favourite. i don’t know man, combine girls and monsters and lesbian romance and i”M THERE. thera is a teen orphan sent to a home for girls at the edge of town. there, she makes friends, raises hell, falls in love with the mysterious new girl, and also becomes obsessed with stories of the minotaur, half woman half monster, locked the labyrinth in a cliff not far away. this story appealed to me in so many ways, and i really hope the author writes more f/f in the future.

two dads and three girls - nick (yu) he ⭐️⭐️⭐️ the autobiography of a gay man growing up in china, and the story of how he finds himself, finds love, and becomes a father. very sweet.

whew. that took me a while lol. that’s it for january. i probably (hopefully) will be too busy to read as much this month, but i have some interesting books on my plate. currently listening to an audiobook of beneath a scarlet sky, which is unfortunately underwhelming, and i’ll probably move on with some fun YA.