The opening line of your post stated “Life isn’t rational.” I took that as your premise.

Fine. Life isn’t alway rational. There. Done. Not a premise. Now move on and address the rest of my commentary as it pertained to your commentary.

Actually, I’m not certain what you refer to with “courtship dance” occurring in romances. Do you refer to the standard recipe for romance?

Can you make an attempt to answer the questions based on your own personal understanding of the courtship rituals within your culture and apply them to what you observe in your reading of “romance?”

I’d rather you at least try to answer the questions I raise without tainting your perceptions; however, if you do not feel that you can attempt such an exercise without additional framework, then I’ll be happy to comply once you extend me the same courtesy and I’ll even narrow that courtesy request down to one tangent. Your commentary at #63 and my subsequent response in the first half of #64.

I don’t know what you refer to in post #67.

Skip it. I refuse to be drawn any further into something that is essentially inconsequential to the original commentary. I apologize for going there in the first place.

Actually, I’m not certain what you refer to with “courtship dance” occurring in romances. Do you refer to the standard recipe for romance?

I don’t know what you refer to in post #67.

I think anything written down in words is always more rational than emotional.

I completely disagree. I hold up the author meltdown this week as just one example of an emotional response written down in words.

Well, whether life has a more rational or a more emotional basis is debatable, I think. Were I to hazard a position though, I would think most people use reason more throughout a typical day than emotion. The alarm rings and reason says get up. The person decides to start the coffee, a reasonable thing to do. He showers, not wanting to be offensive to others or wanting to get further awake, both based on reasoning. And so it goes throughout the day.

What does this have to do with the discussion at hand?

In your last, are you suggesting that males don’t read romance as women do?

I’m suggesting that many people don’t view the courtship dance found in the romance genre the same way and how they view it might impact how they approach and interpret the text.

I’m asking YOU as a male to address how you perceive the courtship dance found within the romance genre via my stated line of inquiry in the 2nd half of comment #64.

I think anything written down in words is always more rational than emotional.

In your last, are you suggesting that males don’t read romance as women do?

Life isn’t rational. What you describe happening in the book, happens in real life. If the book had true emotional justice what would that look it in real life?

The really really messy stuff. The police inquiry where the victim is treated like a criminal, the friend / family verbal, physical or just body language and tone accusations. The court case. The ugliness of our societal whispers: she’s a whore, she’s out to ruin his life, she wanted it, did you see what she was wearing, she shouldn’t have done…, she trapped him, etc., etc.

People say that our society has moved beyond but I’ve just described what I see still going on around me.

Maybe the romance ending isn’t perfect, especially if the author hasn’t redeemed the hero’s behavior appropriately. Maybe it is a fantasy since real life has a tendency to tear females apart in the above situation and real life females are very much aware of that reality.

But what does is romance genre attempting to do with a storyline like that? It’s attempting to capture what emotional justice would feel like if the real life system worked rationally.

You may not see it that way because your role in society as a male is such that you’re not subjected to this same version of reality. But the rationality you’re asking for from romance isn’t a rationality that exists in real life either. Far from it.

—-
Dick, I mentioned the stages of intimacy and courtship rituals in another thread so I’d like to ask you:

Do you understand the body language cues that many women use to establish trust?

When you’re reading romance are you aware of these subtle clues within the text that female romance readers seek?

Not consciously. I very much doubt that readers consciously look for body language. But then women and men use body language very differently in real life. I suspect that the same thing is true with reading fiction. Do you see them and understand them from the female perspective? Are you swept away in the courtship or are you viewing it from a distance?

Do you understand why the heroine believes that the hero deserves her trust even if his actions seem not to support that judgment? Or more importantly why a female reader might read it that way?

Romances with their courtship rituals don’t appeal to all females. My neighbor certainly doesn’t subscribe to them in real life and also she doesn’t understand their appeal.

I’ve often wondered how men view the “dance” in real life and how they view the dance in romance fiction. Are you looking for cues that say a woman is trustworthy? Is that even a requirement in your version of the courtship dance?

I’m uncertain, when it comes down to it, that the romance genre and reason can walk in the same places.

That’s a provocative claim.

Whether a reader finds an ending emotionally satisfying and optimistic depends greatly on what the reader brings to the reading, as discussions about specific books makes plain.

True of every book that has ever book read by more than one individual.

I’m doubtful that authors want their readers to analyze closely while they read–to reason through the events and the emotions of the relationship depicted,i.e.–even though the background on which the story is hung requires it.

Your doubt presumes that you know authorial intent. Have you spoken to authors or read interviews given by them on the subject? Also presumes that there is no deeper meaning to be found within the text.

I’m uncertain, when it comes down to it, that the romance genre and reason can walk in the same places. Whether a reader finds an ending emotionally satisfying and optimistic depends greatly on what the reader brings to the reading, as discussions about specific books makes plain. I’m doubtful that authors want their readers to analyze closely while they read–to reason through the events and the emotions of the relationship depicted,i.e.–even though the background on which the story is hung requires it.

I’m straying from the subject.

You are?

Or have you quite possibly stumbled onto it?

Why shouldn’t these questions be asked about the individual books?