I stumbled on this link via a twitter by The Girl With a One-track Mind. It’s an amazing article on erotica covers that made me go “Hmmmm…”
I would like to see more beefcake on my hetero erotica covers, now that I think about it (notwithstanding the craptastic Ellora’s Cave covers). It would be nice to see something similar to what you see below, but of a wonderfully detailed male torso.
What do you people think? Pretty interesting, isn’t it.
It’s not going to happen. This article–I don’t know how to do the link thing in a comment, sorry–http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2003/06/030613075252.htm explains why.
Basically, women are turned on by depictions of eroticism regardless of the genders involved–it’s the level of sensuality that gets a woman excited. Straight women can get aroused by sensual images of women, and lesbians can get aroused by sensual images of men.
But straight men do not get aroused by images of men–just the opposite, in fact. A picture of a naked woman might annoy women readers because it’s the umpteenth such cover they’ve seen, but it won’t make them go “Eeeeewww!” It won’t make them refuse to pick up the book
In romance and erotic romance, where the target readership is women, the man-titty cover is a big seller. But if the target readership is straight men and women, the cover is going to be geared toward images they both can find appealing, and that isn’t going to be a picture of a naked guy.
I read the article yesterday and am in total agreement. More men on covers would be a great idea! I alway quite enjoyed Karen Marie Moning’s covers, gorgeous!
As I read mainly m/m, there is guaranteed mens on the covers. :p
Huge thanks, Gwen!
And Kirsten, I’ve (hopefully) made that link for you: Men in white coats do study to prove their own sexual fantasies are objective reality and, like, you know, totally true and for real and stuff
And Sarah, do drop by the blog for this Monday’s Man Candy. We have a bit m/m in the pipeline!
*snrk* Kristina.
I find it kind of sad and unfair that straight guys can’t tolerate a hot guy the way women can a hot chick–oh sure, they’re okay with big, muscle-bound manly-man as an ideal to aspire to, but hot studly dude as sex object? Nuh-uh. If there’s even a chance a straight guy (or one who believes he’s straight, heh) might find a guy attractive, that’s the kiss of marketing death.
I mean, it’s straight men who made Ron Jeremy a porn star. ‘Nough said.
Kirsten, absolutely. This is something we’ve talked about quite a lot on ECW. But it doesn’t follow that man’s fear of man should be allowed to dictate the way we’re *all* being sold smut. It doesn’t justify the gender inequality.
It’s particularly galling to see the persistence of male-aimed covers when erotica has changed so massively in the last decade. More and more women are writing, reading and buying smut but to look at the covers, you’d think it was the same old same. As women, we’re very good at finding our way to enjoy stuff that’s traditionally marketed to men (when did you last see a beer ad targeting women?). We’re also very good at saying, hey, enough! Stop acting like we don’t exist!
And, yes, Ron Jeremy. Dearie me. But that was in the 70s. And while the bulk of mainstream porn is much the same now as then (but with fewer ‘taches), we do have more women in the industry working *behind* the camera, making movies that don’t insult women by ignoring them as consumers. My point is, things can change. Slowly, perhaps, but they can change. And that’s why I’m prepared to make some noise about this.
“My point is, things can change. Slowly, perhaps, but they can change. And that’s why I’m prepared to make some noise about this.”
That’s certainly true. But I honestly don’t think any publisher of pure smut (without the romantic bits in there, that is) is gonna make the jump from hot chick only covers to hot dude only covers. They may include a man with the woman on the cover (in fact, I think they could do that without losing their male readership), but I think that’s as far as they will probably feel safe to go.
As far as making noise goes, well, I’m all for it. But just because I (and a number of others) wish there were more hot, steamy, FEMALE-CENTERED, romantic f/f/m menage books out there, and am willing to holler about it all over the place, that doesn’t mean publishers will be putting out more of them. They’ll only do that when the money tells them it’s feasible.
Just think about the whole m/m thing years ago–epublishers were insisting no woman would ever want to read THAT. It took a few m/m books flying off the virtual shelves and into the stratosphere to change their attitudes.
I think it’s going to take a studmuffin covered erotica book selling signifcantly better than the norm to make them look at things differently. And it might happen–if the number of female readers they’re losing with male-aimed covers is greater than the number of men who purchase decent quality smut. But until it happens, they’d rather mildly irk half their readership than completely alienate the other.
That’s the price women pay for being easier to get along with than men, I guess…
More het couples is a significant part of our campaign. When we say ‘more men’ we don’t exclusively mean single men to replace the single women on covers (though some solo guys would obviously be super hot too and we want that as well – but, yes, that’s a tougher battle. I’m still damn-well fighting it though!).
This is a wonderful sexy couple cover. I would love to see more books like this. And I agree, I don’t think it would put the guys off. There doesn’t seem to be any reason for the dearth of couple covers – except that erotica packaging is stuck in the past (while its content surges ahead).
Yay to noise-makers!
Speaking strictly as a reader of erotica and as a woman, I’m more inclined to buy erotica, if solely based on the cover, that has a woman or a man and woman on it. If I see only a man, I’m automatically going to assume it’s purely m/m based erotica, or mainly a romance.
I like looking at men and of course a nice half or fully naked man is a real turn on to look at and gets me going. In itself, it’s erotic. However, if I think of the term erotic or eroticism, my mind immediately conjures up a semi or fully naked woman dressed or photographed in a provocative sensual way.
And it’s not because I find it visually appealing because a naked woman can get me going too, but it’s because the part of me that is erotic and feels sexual identifies with that woman. I want to be open like her, sexually provocative and it puts me in touch with that part of me.
So in a way, seeing a woman on the cover almost guarantees that I will get turned on by reading what’s inside because just by her being sexually provacative, open and exposed, I’m also allowed to be. Her being on the cover all open and exposed is telling me that what’s inside makes her feel hot and sexual, so of course what’s inside is going to make me feel hot also.
For some reason, even as a woman, I feel that women embody the concept and idea of eroticism far more than men. But that’s just me. Maybe I”ve just been brainwashed all this time because that’s how it’s always been presented.
It would be the same for me if it were a man and a woman because that would bring up feelings in me that I know from past personal experiences and want to feel again by reading what’s inside.
Just a hunky man on the cover would appeal to me, but I might not be as inclined to pick up the book other than to appreciate looking at a nice hunky guy.
MB (Leah), you’re not alone. Social conditioning is a powerful force and we’ve all been brought up to think naked woman means sexy for everyone, naked man means sexy for gay guys (or belongs to erotic romance ie two genres which most straight guys wouldn’t touch with a barge pole, making it ‘safe’ to eroticise men there). But meaning is not god-given; it doesn’t come from *outside* our culture. We create meaning. It isn’t set in stone and it can change.
Part of what we’re doing on ECW is trying to become part of that process of change. Once, m/m meant sex for a gay readership. Not any more! It’s meaning has changed. Woman have changed it. And this is why Mathilde and I feature hot guys on the blog on Man Candy Mondays. (Trust me, you’ll want to click that link!) Because it’s crucial to keep on proving that men can be sexy, that women find men sexy, that men (not just women) can signify erotica too. The more people who say this, the stronger that message gets. And maybe one day it will transfer over to erotica covers.
If anyone wants to join in, please do so! We’re actively encouraging this. Put a hot guy on your blog tomorrow, call it Man Candy Monday, and (ideally) let us know in the comments of our post. Hell, if nothing else, it’s a great way to start the week!