jpny01:

I totally agree that a woman can write good gay fiction and have every right to.  This current idea about appropriatioon is ridiculous. If people are only allowed to write about their own experiences of identity, you might as well abolish all genres of fiction, and you're also reducing the opportunities for people to develop empathy and understanding.

I don't think you should approach writing without any knowlege of the subject you're writing about, though. 

Bingo.   I teach literature and most authors write about other identities.   Perhaps they use some of their own life for material, but they also observe others and research other modes of living to write about those other identities too.  My issue with women writing BL's is that they don't research.  If they simply interviewed gay men they would find out about anal sex and, hence, write about it more realistically.   My fave BL novel by a woman is My Beautiful Man.  The sex scenes in that book make sex actually feel appealing, whereas the sex scenes in the most other BL's are as  E_Maya said,  so violently painful as to be upsetting.   It's not only offensive to equate gay male sex with pain, ie, reducing it to negativity, but it's also just plain bad writing.  A good writer should research and get it right. 

E_Maya makes an astute point by discussing how the painful sex scenes are tonally jarring.  There we are reading  a love story wherein characters are being kind and attentive to each other, and all the soft, delicate feelings of love are rising, when -- bam! -- we get a sex scene of violent pain. It's such a radical shift that, as she says, it's upsetting.  BL writers really need to get this right. 

One of the earlier BLs I watched was Make it Right - I was really confused about why Book had to go seek medical attention afterwards - I thought I missed something and checked back to earlier episodes to see where he got sick or was injured. I actually had to be told why because it didn't occur to me at all - I thought maybe they were going to get tested for STDs or something,

I think the worst I've felt was after a particulary rough (totally consensual) round was a soreness similar to hemorrhoids - not pleasant, but stil totally worth it. I did feel it for a few days, but nothing serious. That's just me, but I think you'll find that many people have had that experience.

 jpny01:

One of the earlier BLs I watched was Make it Right - I was really confused about why Book had to go seek medical attention afterwards - I thought I missed something and checked back to earlier episodes to see where he got sick or was injured. I actually had to be told why because it didn't occur to me at all - I thought maybe they were going to get tested for STDs or something,

I think the worst I've felt was after a particulary rough (totally consensual) round was a soreness similar to hemorrhoids - not pleasant, but stil totally worth it. I did feel it for a few days, but nothing serious. That's just me, but I think you'll find that many people have had that experience.

I also wondered why Book had to go to a doctor.   It depicted gay sex as a sickness requiring immediate medical attention.   Now, Frame did  tell the nurse at the clinic that he had been "too rough" with his partner.  Perhaps rough sex would result in tearing some tissue, but even that would not be a big deal.  Yet they made it a very big deal in the show.   Frame not only took Book to the doctor, but also kept asking Book about his "condition" for days afterward. 

This is the truly funny part of this conversation. ? As ridiculous as some of the depictions of sex are, I think it’s important to bring it back to the fact that BL is largely written by women, for women, and about men (unlike LGBTQ+ content). 

First, women are writing what they think other women would find entertaining and perhaps humorous. Second, as women do not have a prostate, naturally they would relate to AS as being just painful (when in fact men can and do find it extremely pleasurable - even straight men). And third, is there perhaps some satisfying retribution for a history of painful mental and sexual abuse heaped on women by men? 

Of course gay men are going to respond, “it’s not like that!” However, do the female authors writing for women care? Or should they?

 yonghwa7:

This is the truly funny part of this conversation. ? As ridiculous as some of the depictions of sex are, I think it’s important to bring it back to the fact that BL is largely written by women, for women, and about men (unlike LGBTQ+ content). 

First, women are writing what they think other women would find entertaining and perhaps humorous. Second, as women do not have a prostate, naturally they would relate to AS as being just painful (when in fact men can and do find it extremely pleasurable - even straight men). And third, is there perhaps some satisfying retribution for a history of painful mental and sexual abuse heaped on women by men? 

Of course gay men are going to respond, “it’s not like that!” However, do the female authors writing for women care? Or should they?

To an extent, they should. Gay men are an extremely oppressed minority, and depicting the gay sex act as immoral and physically dangerous is not OK. As if there aren't enough damaging misconceptions.

If there were a popular genre that denigrated women, would that be OK? Because there are such genres, and there are strong objections to them.

Personally, I wonder why female characters in BL are so awful - if BL authors are lashing out at anyone, it's fellow women. I suspect that is what is retribution for a history of painful abuse heaped on some BL writers by other women. 

But beyond that, effeminate characteristics in men are portrayed as degenerate - flaming men and trans characters are often depicted as both ridiculous and predatory, screeching and pawing at every half attractive man.

Totally agree with Jpny on this.  First, for the reason he gives, which is that such depictions of gay sex equate it with sickness and negativity.  But a second reason is that it's just plain bad writing to depict something so unrealistically.   A writer's job is to observe reality and create plausible characters.  Whenever I see this unrealistic depiction of gay sex, it pulls me out of the story.  I'm suddenly reminded, oh yea, there was some woman at a keyboard making this shit up.  And some woman who's clearly never had anal sex. 

To be clear, a woman does not need to actually have anal sex to write about it.  But she should at least  interview some gay men and/or do research with sexology institutes such as Masters & Johnson or Kinsey.   However, they get away with false depictions because most women don't have anal sex and, hence, don't know that it's a false depiction.  I've only had it 2-3 times in my life because, as explained above, it's not pleasurable for women since we don't have a prostate. But those mere 2-3 times were enough to tell me that the scenes I was reading and seeing in these BL's were  nonsense.  In Chai Jidan's case, the depictions would be comical if they weren't so offensive. 

I just don't understand why there is a shocking lack of lube in BLs  (History 4 excluded) but a huge use of fever reducing patches the next morning. Like seriously. this trope HAS to stop! Yes I get a lot of the sex is virginal / first time but we are in the internet age. Google!

 jpny01:
I think you're right, but I think there's a related aspect - a  man must not seek or enjoy being penetrated, so he has to be forced and/or suffer consequences for doing so.  It is not unmanly or unseemly for a man to do the penetrating, so you never see a seme resisting sex. It's the same for women - a woman should not seek to or enjoy "giving up her virtue", and so she's forced. In the US, traditionally in a horror movie, a woman is safe as long as she doesn't have sex. The moment she does that, you know she's going to get a chainsaw to the head. That's starting to go away, but you still see it.

These tropes are the result of systemic homophobia and misogyny - contempt for the receptive participant in the sex act. 

The stereotypical misogynist is proud of all the penetrating they do, but at the same time despises the recipient. So, in their mind nobody should actually desire them. I've always thought it's a tragicomic and pitiful way to see the world. I know the same principle applies to gay dynamics. 

yonghwa7  asked if the authors should care about the drivel they write, I think the above is one reason to care. Misogyny and homophobia are related, so much so that I don't even remember to mention it, it's such a given. Why needlessly jump on the bandwagon with a shared enemy.

 Chelsea Black:

I just don't understand why there is a shocking lack of lube in BLs  (History 4 excluded) but a huge use of fever reducing patches the next morning. Like seriously. this trope HAS to stop! Yes I get a lot of the sex is virginal / first time but we are in the internet age. Google!

Exactly!  They could just google.  The fact that they always get this wrong indicates lazy writing.   I mentioned before how My Beautiful Man got it right, and it's telling that this novelist has written award winning novels even outside of the BL genre.  And unlike most BL novels, hers are not self-published things  that she slaps up online but, rather, novels that had been vetted and edited by a professional publishing house.  A novelist like this does her homework.  As a result, Kioyi never writhes in agony during sex,  and never needs a doctor or fever reducing patches the next morning.  And Hira uses lube -- baby oil to be precise. 

 Chelsea Black:

I just don't understand why there is a shocking lack of lube in BLs  (History 4 excluded) but a huge use of fever reducing patches the next morning. Like seriously. this trope HAS to stop! Yes I get a lot of the sex is virginal / first time but we are in the internet age. Google!


 Maggi64:
Exactly!  They could just google.  The fact that they always get this wrong indicates lazy writing.   I mentioned before how My Beautiful Man got it right, and it's telling that this novelist has written award winning novels even outside of the BL genre.

Okay, I have to say, I always thought the authors didn't actually think they were being realistic, I thought it was some sort of weird Yaoi related obsession they have, it was so outlandish. I guess I was wrong.

WOW! This thread has completely gone off topic! 

I've been reading these very interesting posts and they have gone from legit discussion about reasons to differences between BLs and reality! I file BLs under fantasy! Because not one of these series is really  grounded in reality! It is mostly wishful thinking! Unfortunately, the world is still a highly bigoted and prejudiced place and gaining acceptance in certain cultures is very very hard! Even in our western liberal and open societies(just see what's going on in Hungary with Heartstopper!)! Be frank: people are all for equality but NIMBY!

I see these BLs as fairy tales, a piece of fiction made for entertainment and escapism. As far as I know BL originated in Japan as mangas before they transitioned to TV. I guess the popularity of these series has to be viewed from the point of asian cultures: why have they originated there and what do they bring to people consuming these genre of media? If these series manage to change mentalities, to make people more open and accepting, that's an added bonus! 

But behind the sweet love stories hides the ugly face of production companies, star agents and rabid fans! And a lot of money!

I do not consider BL dramas and LGBTQ films the same. One of the first ones was, of course the UK's Queer As Folk which is definitely NOT a BL. 

I am from Europe, with classical education based on the principle: live and let live! I have always been a huge fan of romances with a mandatory happy ending. I discovered asian dramas three years ago (a treasure trove for a romance lover) and then BLs a year later with Where Your Eyes Linger which trended heavily on this site and I had to google the abbreviation BL! I've come a long way! I like it for that romance fluffy side (an incurable romantic, can't help it!). Very quickly I figured out the formulaic thai bls with pretty boys, banshee like female characters and comic relief trans (I hate those tropes!). 

Now days what I look for in a BL (but it goes for any drama/movie) is a tightly woven plot which makes sense and is logical: even if it has fantasy elements in it. (Sorry I am still mad about La Pluie!) Thailand is churning out an obscene amount of series each new one worse than the previous: lazy plot and more and more NC content does not make for a good drama. But maybe that is what those young girls, the rabid fans,  who are the main target audience, are looking for: a couple of hot hunks making out!

It's still  sort of related to the topic because we are discussing BL's vis-a-vis women as the creators and consumers.  Originally, the topic was "Why do women like BL?"  and then it veered into the question of "Are women disqualified from writing BL's by nature of their gender?"  Most of us thought, no, and that it was fine for women to write BL's, it's just that they could do a bit of research to get things such as anal sex right.  It all falls within the realm of women and how we relate to the BL phenomena. 

And man, I 100% agree about Thai BLs!   I won't even watch them anymore. With other country's BL's I will at least check out 1 or 2 eps to see if it's good or not.  With a Thai, I already know it's bad even before turning it on.   They produce over 100 a year, which comes out to 2 new BL every  week.  It's a veritable factory assembly line and you can tell that they only care about the factory's profit (eg, all that product placement, which no other country's BL's have).  The do not care about the quality of acting, directing and writing.  It's as if they just go to the local high school, pull some cute kid out of class, and plop him in front of a teleprompter to read his lines.   Then they are chock-a-block with cliches such as the old Slip-And-Catch (SAC).   Wow, can you tell that I hate Thai BL's?  LOL.  When it comes to Thai BL's, I can really go off topic!  lol.

Kinda related to your first reason: I like watching romance but find most heterosexual romances intolerable. They tend to leave me with feelings ranging from "ick" to "I never want to be involved with a man/male person again." Some BLs (a number which seems to be decreasing, yay!) shoehorn nominally gay characters into heterosexual roles, and I find those shows nearly as intolerable.

Now, I might not be quite who you intended to address this question to. I'm female, but agender and queer. At almost 40, I'm pretty done with being shoved into the "woman" box. A lot of heterosexual romances seem to involve pushing the female lead into that box (I mean that no matter how her character starts out, she explicitly or covertly has to become more woman-like/meet expectations specific to women in order for the romance to progress). This is exasperating, whether I'm identifying with the character or just observing a process I'm sick of encountering. I can put up with this a little better in BLs where one man is being coded as "the woman" because it's so obviously some kind of fantasy element that I can either ignore it or laugh at it.

To further speculate a little, and I hope this doesn't land me in hot water because I know it's problematic... When I was young, I thought of myself as a queer man in a female body (yes, I understand the problems with that and why it would not be cool to go around insisting that's me these days). Grew up in a conservative rural town before the internet, so I didn't have access to the LGBTQ+ terminology and discussions going on these days. Since it's always been obvious to me that I am not a girl/woman, for a long time I thought I must be a man. And since where I'm from men are regarded as people and women are lowkey regarded as something less, I've invested quite a lot of time into cultivating masculinity, trying to be seen as a man. Consequently, it's often easier for me to understand and identify with men characters. To be clear, I'm not a man, gay or otherwise, but I spent a ridiculous amount of energy in my teens and early twenties trying. 

This leads me to a question for those who do identify as women on this thread: It seems like man = person, woman /= person (to some degree at least) shows up in a lot of cultures and a lot of media. I've heard that a lot of women get used to identifying with men characters because those characters are often the people in the movie or show (rather than decoration, prize, etc.). So, do any women watching BL just find it easier or more pleasant to identify with men characters?  The thought is a little similar to @AthenaTheStorierX's comment on escapism, only instead of increasing psychic distance because the character is a man, you can escape into the unmitigated experience of a person through the character?

I don't watch BL to identify with anyone, I watch it to see lots of hot Asian boys. I feel like we've become way too preoccupied with identity - not everything is about that.  Straight men have lesbian fantasies, women consume m/m romance. 

When I'm watching a straight romance, I don't identify with the woman or the man - I'm just enjoying the story and characters.

I've been told I'm a bigot because I wouldn't want to be with a man with a vagina, which is not a sentence I ever thought I'd need to write. I'm attracted to what I'm attracted to - I can't control it or change it.  I don't think we need to overthink it. It's interesting to discuss, but in the end, women get a rise out of two attractive men romancing each other.