r/romanceunfiltered

Suppose an author decided to train an AI/Large Language Model on their own writing and asks it to help produce more work in their established voice.

Does that make the use of generative AI deserve a pass or it's still problematic.

So, I need help from (spicy) audiobook enjoyers because I don't use them.

I don't know if this is a personal perception of mine, but I noticed that straight romance books published in recent years with dual POV have the sex scenes either 50-50 —as if half are from the female POV and half from the male one— or are skewed toward the MMC's POV. At first, I thought that was because there are people who find pleasure in "seeing the desire" through the eyes of the MMC (cue the Margaret Atwood's quote about the male gaze).

But I just thought that (and I don't know) if the male POV's are narrated in audiobooks by actors, then it could be that authors, purposely or not, are writing more sex scenes from an MMC's POV to be narrated by actors. Because I don't read audiobooks, but I noticed that people tend to praise their works in romance more than the actresses', so I'm assuming they are more popular or readers find them hotter.

I feel like I invented a conspiracy, and I need people to tell me that I'm wrong and it's just my impression. Because it's a bit sad (in my opinion) to lose the female POV about their own desire in romance. So:

1. Do you think there are more sex scenes narrated from a male or a female POV? Do you think it has changed in the last few years?

2. Are dual POV books narrated by men too, or is it all a woman with dialogues interpreted by a man?

3. Are male voice actors more popular than female voice actors when it comes to spicy/erotic romance?

Am I the only one who doesn't love smut? I think it's okay when it's spread out, but sometimes it can be a bit excessive? I don't see a lot of people discussing this online (maybe I haven't found it). Is that just me?

Please share at least one unpopular/problematic opinion you have about the sub-genre known as contemporary romance.

https://preview.redd.it/yd5nqqdue58h1.jpg?width=735&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=5d211222e60bda37e2032521ce9eef6fd786fbe2

There is currently a best book vote between Harry Potter 1 and The Hobbit. Guess what? The Hobbit is currently losing!! Help me vote for it so that it can surpass Harry Potter.

**I’ve noticed a major double standard in how audiences react to unconditional loyalty in romance movies and shows.**
**Think about movies like** ***Dilwale*** **(SRK being completely devoted to Kajol even after betrayal/misunderstandings) or shows like** ***When Life Gives You Tangerines*** **(where the male lead worships the ground the female lead walks on despite her being rough around the edges or pushing him away). Audiences** ***adore*** **these shows. The male lead is praised as the ultimate green flag, and the story is seen as peak romance.** 
**However, the moment you flip the script and have a female lead who is endlessly patient, forgiving, and devoted to a flawed or messy male lead, the reaction flips completely:**
**1. People instantly rate it badly, calling the writing "weak" or "outdated."**
**2. Critics argue that "no self-respecting woman in real life would act like this."**
**3. It gets accused of being "offensive to women" or promoting female oppression by making her the emotional caretaker.**
**Why is a man giving his absolute everything and forgiving a woman's flaws seen as the highest form of romantic writing, but a woman doing the exact same thing for a man viewed as toxic or bad representation?**
**If unconditional devotion is romantic for one gender, shouldn't it be viewed as romantic for both? Or have we just decided that "simping" is only acceptable when the guy does it?**

Does anyone have book recommendations of rich/poor romances?

I was able to find three of them so far, but I’m interested in more of these.

I love Mina Le's new video about why romance book covers are so similar, with the same cartoon-ish style (particulary contemporary romance), and why it sells so well for now. It got me thinking what will be the future of romance covers.

There's this very popular article, "Everybody is beautiful and no one is horny", and I wonder is there's a relationship with romance as a genre and with the aesthetics. Will we go towards covers with more beautiful people, but less expressive? Will we adopt a more AI style of blank perfection?

Readers name a background you'd love to see, but we rarely get in the genre.

Which MMC Ethnicity have you rarely or never encountered in Romance, but would to see as a love interest in your next read ?

I have a very specific taste in what I like in romance books and their MMC’s and FMC’s. Because I read to relax my mind, and because I hate to invest emotionally and waste time with books I will DNF midway, I look up as much spoilers as available before I start reading. That way, I’m fairly certain the book will be according to my taste and I can concentrate on the plot and character development without being worried about the ending.

I’ve always done something like this by reading the blurb on the back of the book as well as the last chapter of the book. If I didn’t like the ending, I didn’t read the book. Served me well over the years as I’ve only DNF’ed about 20 books my entire life.

But right now, I’m so overwhelmed in my daily life, I need even more reassurance that the book will be according to my taste and I will be able to relax. Plus with digital books, you usually don’t have the last chapter available.

Interestingly enough, I don’t need spoilers for thrillers, but I do have my favourite thriller authors and rarely deviate from those. It’s usually my husband who suggests a new author because he’s a much more “adventurous” reader than me and he knows my taste.

TLDR: does anyone have the same issue as me, and where do you get your spoilers?

I can handle dark romance. I love bully romances, antiheroes, fucked up men, noncon, morally reprehensible characters, suffering….all of it. My problem with Corrupt isnt that it’s too dark. It’s that Rika feels like a plot device for the men in her own fucking book.

The Horsemen get everything, the trauma, the motivations, the revenge, the friendships all of it. They get to do horrible things and the book is so interested in why they’re horrible. Rika just gets to suffer because of it. And suffering isn’t the problem! Put your heroine through hell. I love that shit but her suffering should actually do something for HER character. Give her rage. Give her an arc. Give her some fucking agency. Make these men grovel. Instead they terrorize her and humiliate her and threaten her and somehow shes still asking how THEY’RE doing. Like are you kidding me?
Even the attempted rape scene with Damon doesn’t bother me because it’s “too dark.” I’ve read darker. It’s the way its written. It doesn’t feel like dark romance non-con fantasy. It feels way too realistic. Damon seems to genuinely hate this woman. He attacks her and the book gives me no reason to think he would’ve stopped himself. And apparently I’m eventually supposed to read his romance??? Fine. Give me a monster. I love a monster. 👹 But if you’re going there then fucking go there. Reckon with what he did. Don’t leave “would he actually have raped her?” hanging in the air and then expect me to move on because technically she stopped him. Thats not compelling ambiguity. Thats just a gigantic unanswered character question.

The whole book feels backwards. The men hurt Rika and somehow Rika’s pain becomes material for THEIR character development?! Dark romance can make me root for terrible people. Thats half the fun. But you have to convince me the heroine matters just as much and Corrupt just… doesn’t

TLDR🤘🏼🤍

Corrupt isn’t too dark for me. I just think its badly written. Rika feels like a plot device in her own book while all of her suffering is used to develop the men around her. The Horsemen get trauma, motivations and character arcs while she gets terrorized and somehow still worries about them. Even Damon’s attempted rape isn’t an issue because I can’t handle dark content. I’ve read worse. The issue is the book never answers whether he actually would’ve gone through with it and apparently I’m eventually supposed to root for this man as a romantic lead. Give me fucked up men all day but give your FMC some fucking agency too 💅

Drop whatever romance thought hit you this week: a recent read, new obsession, rave, rant, trope complaint, reader-culture take, or oddly specific ick.

Popular, unpopular, messy, petty, thoughtful, and still-forming opinions are all welcome.

watching him be good at his job gets me more than the kiss does most of the time, more than the confession even

think its cause it cant really be faked. a grand gesture is easy to write. actually being convincing at a specific skill means the author had to know the thing well enough to make it read true

adam in the love hypothesis is the one that actually got me thinking about this. hes shown handling an actual mess calmly instead of just getting called brilliant in chapter two and then never shown again

whats a scene where you actually believed he was good at what he does, not just told he was

feel like ive read like five books this year where "morally grey" just means the guy is kind of an asshole and has one tragic thing in his past to explain it

thats not morally grey thats just a jerk with a receipt

actual morally grey to me is when he makes a call and youre not sure it was the right one, and neither is he. not "hes secretly soft," not "misunderstood," an actual gray area you have to sit with for a second

feels like the trope got turned into a personality type instead of staying an actual question

whats a book where you legit couldnt tell if he was the good guy the whole way through

Mine: miscommunication 👀, pregnancy, and cocky/unreliable MCs, SLOOOOOOOOOOOOOOW burns and friends to lover/ lovers to enemies.

We are conducting a completely serious community survey to better understand what brings people to a subreddit built around unfiltered romance discussion. /s

Please select the answer that best describes you:

• I wanted a romance space where books, fandoms, tropes, authors, publishing trends, and reader culture could all be criticized.
• I enjoy debate, snark, unpopular opinions, and discussions that are not filtered through positivity-first rules.
• I support criticism in theory, but I become concerned when it reaches a book or fandom I personally like.
• I joined because I hoped to gradually replace the existing culture with the culture of every other romance subreddit.
• I assumed “unfiltered” meant unfiltered praise.
• I came to explain why negative opinions should be expressed more positively, quietly, and preferably somewhere else.
• I enjoy communities whose entire premise I dislike.
• I did not read the description before joining.
• Other: Please explain what you thought the word “unfiltered” meant.

For anyone who selected one of the first two options, welcome.

For everyone else, this may be a useful moment to clarify that Romance Unfiltered allows praise, criticism, snark, disagreement, fandom analysis, and unpopular opinions