the ask@AAR: What should AAR’s sensuality ratings look like in 2020?
For as long as AAR’s been reviewing, we’ve rated romances for how spicy/sexy/hot or not a love story is. (Our current sensuality ratings may be found here.) Currently, our standards are:
Kisses: Kisses only. Many of these books are quite simply “sweet.
Subtle: No explicit sensuality. Kissing and touching, but physical romance is described in general terms or implied. The emphasis is on how lovemaking made the characters feel emotionally, and not on graphic description.
Warm: Moderately explicit sensuality. Physical details are described, but are not graphically depicted. Much is left to the reader’s imagination.
Hot: More explicit sensuality. Sex is described in more graphic terms. Hot books typically have more sex scenes and are more likely to depict acts beyond intercourse.
Burning: Extremely explicit sensuality – these books are often erotic romances or flatout erotica.
It’s time to update them. Interactions that used to be rarer in books–anal sex, threesomes, and alien encounters–are more common and romances have more explicit sex scenes than they did in the past.
We will not be abandoning these five descriptors. They are part of our Power Search database and changing that is currently out of our possibilities.
So, give us your definitions for these descriptors. Feel free to be graphic. And, if possible, give us examples of books that meet your definitions. We’ll collate your responses and present new definitions later this summer.
Thanks!
I use the sensuality ratings all the time. If it’s not at least warm, I probably won’t read it. I’m happy for them to stay the same.
Seriously, I get the rating. It works for me. It’s clear enough. I don’t need it spoon fed to me.
Dabney are you getting what you want/need here? Just curious.
I am enjoying all the feedback.
There’s a lot of input and I think I can distill it to improve the definitions of our ratings.
What I usually use to differentiate “warm” from “hot” is the explicitness of the language (frequent profanity nearly always moves us to “hot”) and the percentage of the relationship/book that is about their sex life. For most “warm” books, you could edit it down to “subtle” without dramatic changes to plot or page count. A “hot” book would easily migrate up to “burning” but could not so easily become milder.
Another thing I use is the common-ness of the acts depicted. Among straight Americans, at least, less than half the population has had threesomes or anal sex. (for male relationships, data is less clear, but I’d focus more on how it was described than the fact that it happened). By contrast, more than half of sexually active Americans engage in oral sex and own/use sex toys. My purpose in this is to tell the readers that book contains something that is statistically likely to fall outside their comfort zone.
It’s the explicitness of the language for me as well that defines the difference between warm and hot. Books with lots of graphic descriptive language about body parts and sexual acts and profanity to describe them belong for me in the “hot’ category. I would agree too that uncommon sex acts fit a “hot” category better. I remember a blog post not long ago where readers were complaining about the trendy cartoon images being used disingenuously to mask “hot” books, and I consider Tessa Bailey and Talia Hibbert as recent examples. So even without direct labeling, signifiers still exist to try to target consumers or possibly to mask content.
Very well stated, Blackjack. You also brought up a point I didn’t think about: cartoon covers hiding “hot” content.
I LOVE the ratings and think they are extremely useful – I won’t read a book if its less than warm. At this point I don’t read YA anymore for this reason. But if I came across a YA book with a warm/hot rating, I might give it a second look. One thought would be that there seems to be the widest range between warm and hot – I’ve wondered if an additional rating could be between them (steamy? feverish? sweltering?). Sometimes a book may rate warm overall but the first 60% of the book is a slow burn “subtle”. When the review adds extra context about how frequent or when a sex scene is first introduced in the story or something that can’t be gleaned from the rating alone, I really appreciate that!
I think the current tags are good, I personally don’t like reading sex scenes in my romances so if on the review or a tag it says it’s a “clean” romance or “don’t have sex scenes” it’s much easier for me to find books to read.
Interesting topic. My thoughts are that, in coming here for 20 years, the rating system is great and I see no need for drastic change. I am more likely to filter my reading by sub-genre so, for example, won’t bother doing more than glance at fantasy or YA reviews as these are not my persanal catnip. I will note the sensuality rating but ultimately it’s the content of the review itself and the care and depth the reviewer goes to with it that guides my reading. This is where AAR excels as the reviews are consistently top class. And thanks for that!!
I am with Dabney saying that the current ratings are very important to me as a reader. “Warm” is the highest sex rating I will read and so I don’t want to be that there is sex in the book and discover that there is kink and ménage in it. In fact, I have unpopular opinion that “warm” should be sub-divided because Harlequin Historical sex scenes and Talia Hibbert (sp?) sex scenes, as Blackjack stated, are vastly different.
I second the suggestion for subcategories of “Warm.”
Changing the Power Search is, at this point, not an option. Unless someone wants to give me the big bucks. ;)
Yes, Hibbert’s new book is a “hot” read, in my opinion, and fits the definition of a hot romance listed above, but labeling it warm is an instance of allowing “warm” to serve as a catch-all for all books. If everything is “warm,” then nothing is, and the label loses its meaning. Hibbert’s book has lots of sex in it, and lots of time is spent detailing body parts and graphic sex acts, and even some alternative depictions of sex acts. If that’s a “warm” book, then I think you’re right to ask why it’s in the same category as a Harlequin Historical. That’s at least my confusion on the labeling system and why I don’t pay attention to the labels. I don’t know if “warm” necessarily needs more categories because “hot” and “subtle” could work; “hot” just needs to be used, and it rarely is.
I do find the “subtle” label generally works well though. Mhairi McFarlane’s new book, _If I Never Met You_, has sex but it’s mostly closed-door and discussed in emotional rather than physical ways.
All excellent points, Blackjack. I definitely agree the “hot” label could be used a little more at AAR.
Haha… I have four of our last ten Hot ratings!
I agree with everything you’ve said here, Blackjack. If Harlequin Historical is warm, then Hibbert is hot, according to me. Warm is too broad a category, but it serves to let me know that I definitely do not want to read hot or burning, so in that sense, the ratings help.
Yes, same for me!
I definitely agree with these points! I don´t like to read hot romances. Than the new Hibbert is not for me although I just got it. :-(
I never look at these ratings either. I’m curious to see what others think and to help. But now that you’ve called my attention to it, I need data!
For example, there are two reviews of Julie Anne Long’s What I Did For A Duke in the AAR db. Both reviewed in 2018, both with A- grades. One is rated warm, the other hot. A quick search of authors with extensive series are also a mixed bag. JD Robb’s In Death series is about half warm and half hot – including two reviews of the first title in the series (Naked) with both warm (2009) and hot (2018) ratings.
Maybe it would be worth choosing a handful of titles like these, and rereading them with this particular ask in mind?
In lieu of that: I just reread (so the details are top of mind) The Undefiant Hero by Suzanne Brockmann. It was rated hot by the AAR reviewer in 2001.
It includes secondary characters Sam and Alyssa’s first sexual encounter (they work for different orgs, she is trying to physically keep track of Sam, they’ve both been drinking, she handcuffs him to herself to keep him from getting away while they sleep, hijinks ensue). Was it the handcuffs that pushed the review to hot? The chocolate syrup? No condom in the shower? The combination of all three? And should it still be considered hot? The handcuffs weren’t intended by the characters as sexual foreplay, so does that count? Was it the blowjob? And if a bj pushes things to hot, what about all those oral orgasms that are now standard acts before p in v orgasms in more contemporary titles? A pretty graphic description of same in Lisa Kleypas’ Suddenly You (involving a rasberry) was rated burning (2001).
The main characters in Undefiant also have on page vanilla sex at the very end of the book after everyone is saved and the bad guys are routed. Based on current AAR standards, it would seem this book should be rated warm: two people, pretty vanilla acts, that all take place within “one encounter”, but described on page. Yes?
As some AAR reviewers have mentioned, things have changed in the past 20 years in regard to what would be considered hot then and relatively tame today. Probably 20 years ago, an oral sex scene would have been considered shocking whereas today, it’s just standard foreplay in romance.
I admit the Warm to Burning range can get pretty subjective. Of all the ratings, I think “Warm” has the largest range, which can be confusing.
What do you think of my proposed rating clarifications above, or how would you define each category? When Dabney posted this question, I thought there would be more bullet point answers to this. I’d be curious how other users would define each category.
“Probably 20 years ago, an oral sex scene would have been considered shocking whereas today, it’s just standard foreplay in romance.” You’re right, Nan. The (very briefly described) oral sex in Rosemary Rogers’ Sweet Savage Love was really unexpected for me because I’d never read anything like it before. Now, of course, it wouldn’t be so much as a ripple in the pond.
It changed my life. Prior to that scene I had no idea I could expect that in sex. (I was 13 when I read it and just considering the whole shebang.) I give thanks to RR for that understanding every day!
The first scene like that I specifically remember reading was in the last Laurie McBain book she published. She hadn’t included anything akin to that before and I remember thinking “Oh my”. It was news to me back then.
It sounds like most people who care about heat ratings who’ve posted so far are ok with the kisses, subtle, and burning categories. I think we need those same people who care about warm and hot to weigh in with some specifics here.
Clearly warm has some on page descriptions of something; and hot must have quite a few. But what are people’s limits? If there is consensus about what readers limits are, we might be able to reasonably parse warm and hot into warm, “warmer” and hot.
Is it the language used to describe what is happening on the page (“making love” and breasts and erections vs. cocks and sucking and f*ing)?
Is it the length of scenes (warm is one page to orgasm, hot is multiple pages to orgasms?)
Is it the quantity/number of times characters are described on page (one major encounter per couple is warm, multiple encounters is hot)?
Is it specific acts? (intercourse is warm but oral is hot?)
If we know the answer to some of these questions, we might be able to propose some specifics. In the absence of such, here is a first stab. I don’t have titles to go with these. That will take me some researching (again, I don’t pay attention to the details about the sex when I read).
Kisses: Characters really aren’t even thinking about sex, at all.
Subtle: Characters admit they feel attraction
but aren’t thinking about it in graphic terms; they perhaps kiss and fondle “above
the waist”, clothed, on page, but any contact or thoughts of contact below the
waist or skin to skin is all off page.
Warm: Two consenting characters, engage in
common (?) acts of physical intimacy that may or may not result in an orgasm on
the page, but only one time (one encounter could be several acts over a
weekend?), but without graphic descriptions of genitalia/sounds/fluids/toys/???
ala The Defiant Hero by Brockmann
Warmer???? : Two consenting characters, engage in common (?) acts of physical intimacy on the page, multiple times over the course of a book; OR two consenting characters, engage in common (?) acts of physical intimacy on the page, with increasing levels of contact (heavy petting but no orgasms, heavy petting/oral sex with orgasms but no penetration, penetration) with “some” description of genitalia/talk/fluids/toys/???
Hot: Two consenting characters engage in a variety of acts of physical intimacy on the page, multiple times over the course of a book with graphic descriptions of genitalia/talk/fluids/toys/??? for each encounter.
Burning: Two or more consenting characters engage in a variety of acts of physical intimacy on the page, with lots of orgasms throughout the book, graphically portrayed on the page. Much of the text of the book is about sex.
Those are all excellent points and clarifications, nblibgirl.
I like your “Warmer” category as an in-between for “Warm” and “Hot” and thought of posting something similar except that AAR reviewers have made it clear they can’t mess with the old system for programming reasons. Although I agree the addition of a “Sizzling” or “Simmering” category would be extremely helpful.
My one hang-up with your examples is that threesomes (or more-somes) don’t get included until the “Burning” category. I agree it’s still a bit of a taboo in Romancelandia, but I think interactions with multiples can potentially be expressed Warmly. Anyway, it’s a nitpick. I don’t imagine there are a ton of polyamorous romances that don’t dive head-deep into erotica territory anyhow.
“But what are people’s limits?” The ultimate question right there. It reminds me of how the MPAA ratings constantly catch fire for their judgments too.
Sorry – I missed that part about not adding any additional categories. We’re just changing the definitions. So perhaps kisses become n/a, and everything else moves down (up?) a notch?
Re: threesomes. You are correct. I can easily envision a “subtle” portrayal of polyamory, too. Maybe the rating should be based on the “graphic-ness” and number of acts in a book, and not who is committing said acts? That solves the problem for sci/fi/fantasy characters as well. The content of reviews would clearly identify any and all main characters.
“Sorry – I missed that part about not adding any additional categories.” Hey, no problem brainstorming! :)
“So perhaps kisses become n/a, and everything else moves down (up?) a notch?” Caz wrote somewhere on here that some “warm” could be bumped down to “subtle,” which I agree with.
“Maybe the rating should be based on the ‘graphic-ness’ and number of acts in a book, and not who is committing said acts?” That’s how I’m leaning. It was always a bit of a headscratcher for me that multiples, according to Caz, make for a “hot” rating when I think it’s what the members of the ménage are doing (or not doing) on-page that should be the determining factor.
Keep the ideas rolling, everyone!
I think N/A and Kisses are fine – N/A is (and I’m guessing simply because of the fact that I’m the one who inputs the reviews) almost entirely used for mysteries and thrillers where there is no romantic content, so N/A and Kisses need to stay the same. Subtle has usually been “readers know sex is going on but it’s not described” – but perhaps we could expand that to include open-bedroom-door but not anatomically descriptive or something! Which would take some out of the warm spectrum.
I agree that some of the “Warm” books could be re-rated as “Subtle,” especially given the state of romance today. As long as “N/A” and “Kisses” keep the bedroom door closed, “Subtle” makes a good in-between category for open-door but not explicitly described.
Excellent summation nblibgirl!! I feel myself breaking into a sweat reading it. I do wonder, though, if your “burning” category might be named as plain old porn? Porn always seens a bit “masculine” because ????? Do women not want to admit they are probably reading and enjoying it but shy away from calling it that? Does “erotica” sound more refined, feminine and acceptable? These questions floating around in my mind are ones I can’t answer answer for myself. I like in-depth reviews and confess I don’t mind spoilers as a last-page-first reader anyway. So, to a reviewer, don’t make me guess about where to stick a book in a rating system, just tell me that the MCs have a very busy and varied repertoire.
Ah, the great erotica vs porn debate. I don’t think it’s any closer to being resolved, even in the erotica industry, but I will say this: Erotica tends to be written while pornography tends to be visual. That’s the most basic and not 100% accurate dividing line, but there you go. You could make an argument that erotica explores character emotions vs pure action, as I did in my AAR guest article that time, but not everyone in the industry is going to agree.
“Do women not want to admit they are probably reading and enjoying it but shy away from calling it that? Does “erotica” sound more refined, feminine and acceptable?” I’d say that’s quite possible. Conversely, there are also men who prefer erotica to pornography for various reasons, and consider the art forms to be vastly different. I am particularly fond of this quote by Dayv Caraway on the subject, “It’s more socially acceptable for men to have casual sex but it’s not so usual for men to be encouraged to explore the emotional aspects of sex. The reverse tends to be true for women. Erotica gives men ‘permission’ to have an inner dialogue with themselves, and with their partner. This is something that porn does not; it doesn’t offer sexual language for dialogue. It doesn’t aid communication with a partner. If anything, porn can create barriers, as women especially sometimes feel ‘betrayed’ by their partner watching (and masturbating to) pornography.” Additional quotes on this topic are available on this fascinating NSFW article here: https://emmanuelledemaupassant.com/2016/06/21/men-reading-the-erotic/.
As for AAR replacing the “Burning” rating with “Porn,” I would strongly advise against that suggestion for a couple of reasons. 1) Like I said, porn has a visual connotation rather than a literary one, so it could be misleading and 2) Most important, labeling an erotic novel as “porn” could get an author into serious trouble. KDP, for example, does not permit the publishing of “pornography” but permits, and in some ways encourages, the publishing of “erotica.” For a prominent review site to label an erotic novel, anthology, or short, as “pornography” could therefore create a bad situation for the author(s).
WE ARE NOT CHANGING THE POWER SEARCH TERMS. Just to be clear!
Oh, good. I kind of figured as much. :) But I still stand by my assertion that describing “erotica” as “porn” wouldn’t be advisable, even if tucked under the “Burning” tag.
agree.
not “porn”.
strictly as a reader, no extra knowledge, my delineation goes like that:
i read erotica because there is some relationship, too. it may be slight, but it is not just rolling from arms to arms, no relation at all.
i do nor read porn because of above – reading a long (or short) continuity of sex acts is boring to me.
I do not care which label is used, burning is fine.
i would think of it in terms of % myself, as a part of the rating. A book that has a lot of sexy page time would go up the scale, a short even explicit scene would not make a book so hot.
i would not put aliens and threesomes in burning unless they happen to engage in a lot of sex on the page, but would mention them in a review.
i read anything, on the romance scale, choosing by mood, so a kisses only book can work just as well for me. Example: I found Heyer’s Devil’s Cub very satisfying and felt the heat so well, though nothing happened, erotically speaking.
Warm is most confusing to me, so expanding subtle to cover more would certainly make sense to me.
thank you for raising the topic, I understand your approach better and so get more value from the site!
“I read erotica because there is some relationship, too. It may be slight, but it is not just rolling from arms to arms, no relation at all.”
I like this definition!
Thanks! Dabney said to go for it! :-) It is a little weird to think about ticking off check boxes.
The second of those JAL reviews is mine, and I wrote it fairly recently, which accounts for the warm sensuality rating. The original review was, I imagine, written when the book was first published in 2011 (I don’t know why it is showing 2018 – I suspect that’s because it’s one of the reviews carried over from the “old” AAR.). That perfectly illustrates the subject of this post actually – how times have changed!
I read pretty much everything, for example: there is a Susanna Kearsley novel where I think the “couple” don’t even kiss, they hold hands at the end. That would be the mildest of the categories and I will read all the way up to the most “burning” if it is well written (well written is pretty much my criteria across the board) -so I don’t exclude any categories.
However, I do like having the option to search and know what level of “heat” is in a book. I see, based on a number of reviews and comments on Amazon etc. that how explicit a book is- is a really big deal for a lot of people. Some are mad because a book is too explicit and some are mad because it wasn’t explicit enough. So I think it’s very valuable for AAR to have this search option.
I think the categories do as good a job as possible breaking down the content of the books short of starting spreadsheets for each novel that say: 3 instances of X, one scene with Y…
Wow! Great topic to revisit. And I love all the responses on this thread so far.
Since the question was to give our own definitions of the five ratings, here goes:
Kisses: Largely chaste romance, may be an inspirational or “sweet” romance. Kissing is the most graphic sexual act depicted in the story.
Subtle: Closed-door sex scenes, higher sexual tension than “Kisses,” making out/heavy petting at the most.
Warm: On-page sex acts are depicted euphemistically, which may include “purple prose.” Much is left to the imagination, like a sex scene in a mainstream Rated R movie. May include light kink in some cases.
Hot: On-page sex acts are described graphically with frank language and plenty of sensory details. Scenes are more explicit than “Warm” and tend to last longer. May or may not be kinky. Level of sex may be comparable to an arthouse film or a Rated R movie that just barely avoided an NC-17.
Burning: Sex is the focus of the story and is described explicitly in great detail. Kink may or may not be involved, but there is heavy emphasis on genitalia and the fluids they produce. Typically erotica or erotic romance, designed to get readers off. Think “porn on the page.”
So those would be my definitions. I agree with Dabney that it’s helpful to know in advance a steam level of a story because I don’t particularly want to read “Kisses” or “Subtle” romance. Under the current rating system, “Warm” is my minimum.
I also agree with KesterGayle about the importance of pointing out issues regarding consent, possible BDSM content, and the roughness of the sex. Maybe these topics could be mentioned at the beginning of the review or a subcategory could be created. Think how the MPAA film rating system says something like “Rated R for strong language, violence throughout, and nudity.” Likewise, maybe an AAR rating could say “Warm; contains light BDSM (spanking)” or “Hot; contains rough sex.” Or something like that.
As for Caz’s rating interpretations, I get that nothing shocks you, but I don’t think a sex scene must require BDSM or multiples in order to be “Hot.” I haven’t read any ménage romances (this seems to be way more common in erotica), but I’m certain a “Warm” author could write gentle, euphemistic sex scenes involving a threesome. Conversely, a non-kinky sex scene involving a couple could be “Hot” if their lovemaking is rendered graphically enough. The Harlequins I’ve read generally hang around the “Warm” territory, but I would say Harper St. George’s A Marriage Deal with the Outlaw approaches “Hot” territory just because of the time and detail she put into the sex scenes.
“Burning” is a tough one for me, maybe because it hits a little too close to home. That is, if the erotica I produce isn’t “Burning,” then I’m probably not doing it right. :) Although my non-kinky scenes would probably get a “Warm” rating from Caz under the current definitions.
All jokes aside, this is why I like to make a distinction between “Hot” and “Burning” as the latter type of story having an emphasis on explicit sex scenes- complete with fluids- designed to get readers off versus detailed sex that isn’t too detailed. It’s like the difference between an arthouse film and Rated X. I don’t think something that’s “Burning” has to include kink, although it can.
Incidentally, if Erato: Flash Fiction from The New Smut Project comes your way this Fall, I’d be curious to see how you rate it. It is that 50-story flash fiction anthology I’ve been hyping that will include a diverse cast of characters and practices. My guess is, based on the anthology call, that it would earn an automatic “Burning.”
Oh, and something I forgot to address. Under the “Warm” category, your current guidelines state, “The emphasis is on how lovemaking made the characters feel emotionally”
I would argue that feelings during sex have a place in every heat level.
The thing is… and I might be explaining this poorly – the ratings are kind of a “technical” guide to what you can expect. So a warm book won’t include the things I mentioned, for example, whereas a hot one can. What the rating CAN’T do is gauge a reader’s reaction – you might find something hot that I won’t and vice-versa. Someone here said that they didn’t want a list of “3 instances of X”, “4 instances of Y” (which I see some reviewers on Goodreaders do) – so our subtle, warm, hot etc. are a kind of shorthand I suppose. I do agree that the warm rating is very broad – maybe some of the lower heat ones need to go down to “subtle”.
“I do agree that the warm rating is very broad- maybe some of the lower heat ones need to go down to ‘subtle.'”
That sounds like a good compromise considering “Kisses” basically means “sweet” (no on-page sex) from what I have seen. And I have noticed stories with absolutely no sex sometimes get a N/A rating, so there’s definitely room to bump some stories around as needed. I have encountered quite a few Harlequin romances where the sex scenes are so brief and lightly described that “Subtle” would be a good way to describe them.
As far as “technical” guides regarding what to expect, my big difference for how I would define “warm” vs “hot” isn’t necessarily what I would find subjectively appealing so much as how graphically the sex is depicted. Harlequins in the “Warm” range, for example, tend to have more purple prose and details left out for the reader to use her imagination. “Hot-” whether sexy to the individual reader or not- is explicitly sexual in its language and tone, as in no euphemisms.
But I definitely see your reasoning on “Warm” vs “Hot” provided there can be some way to trim down the range for “Warm.”
Regarding Chrisreader’s note about not wanting “3 instances of X, one scene with Y,” it’s a good point. Because a lot of that info moves into spoiler territory, and AAR is primarily a romance rather than an erotica reviewing website. On something marked “Burning,” I definitely wouldn’t mind an explanation for the rating.
I find that the label of “hot” is misleading in its application based on the above list of definitions. If you use the definition above that a hot book is “explicit” and “graphic” and includes lots of sex, then too many books that fit that definition are mislabeled “warm.” For instance, if an author spends significant time describing genitalia and sex acts in graphic language, it’s most likely a hot book. But then again, maybe the “hot” and “warm” definitions both need to be rewritten and graphic sex and lots of it is now considered warm. In that case, then maybe rewrite hot and warm definitions and start pushing lower heat books into the subtle category. I read more subtle-lukewarm books and am surprised by how many smoking hot books and really mild ones are all in the same category. I definitely agree too though that subjectivity plays a big role in how one perceives a rating and so it’s always going to be somewhat of a flawed system from the start.
I’m also happy with Caroline’s tagging system and prefer it to sensuality labels.
Dabney posted that she disagreed with those who want to do away with sensuality ratings. She mentioned that she does still rely on them.
I’m confused why 3 people (so far) down-voted (frowny face) Dabney’s comment. Does a down-vote mean you disagree? Does it mean that the post has no value with respect to the topic?
Seriously, guys–please help me understand what up-voting and down-voting signify.
I down-vote when I feel a post does not address the topic at hand or when I feel a post violates what I consider to be the minimum rules of civil discourse. Like, if you bash other posters for not agreeing with you, I may down-vote you.
I don’t down-vote you just because you don’t want sensuality ratings, but I do.
Thanks for clarifying this.
I think they’re exceedingly idiosyncratic.
That’s why I’m glad you kept separate happy and sad faces for comments rather than just one sliding scale. Having both scores visible makes differing opinions visible. :)
FYI – Just noticed that I clicked on a like/smiley face up above and *both* faces incremented, creating -1 frowny. I’m a Windows/Edge user . . .
I, too, stl-reader, find it baffling the way smiles and frowns are used and I agree with the way you use them. Topic for further discussion?
I prefer sex in my romance books, but I’m more interested in knowing about things like consent, rough sex, multiple partners, BDSM, etc., than I am about heat level. If it goes beyond the bedroom door is all I need to know in that regard, ‘clean’ romance generally does not interest me.
I do have a few tags for sex content. They’re not finished, but you could try them!
BDSM: https://allaboutromance.com/review-tag/bdsm/
Menage: https://allaboutromance.com/review-tag/menage/
Mild d/s: https://allaboutromance.com/review-tag/mild-ds/
If this is of interest to readers, I can work on developing these tags in the future.
Oh, and dominant heroines:
https://allaboutromance.com/review-tag/domme/
But I’m avoiding those things, not seeking them out. I’m sure others will find such tags helpful, however.
I like the idea of “consent” as a tag because it’s such a big topic today in romances. So many books are taking the issue on directly.
I don’t know if “consent” would work as a tag on the grounds it would (thankfully!) be so huge. I’ve found most romance novels today to be brimming with consent, sometimes to the point where it stops being sexy.
Don’t get me wrong, consent is fantastic in romance, but I think more authors would benefit from varying the depiction of such consent through erotic talk, placing the partner’s hands upon him/herself, giving come hither looks, etc. rather than constant inquiries of “Is this okay?… How about this?… And this?” I definitely make exceptions for first time scenes or if the hero/heroine needs some extra TLC at the moment, but I don’t think “Can I touch you here?” needs to be explicitly asked every other sentence during every sex scene- especially if the characters have already done it five times!
Sorry, went on a tangent there. :)
I think that maybe instead of adding “consent” to books (that would be most of them, no?), we could use “dubcon”, as in dubious consent, for the ones that are not conventional.
Great idea, Stellina! A dubcon tag could serve as a warning for readers who like consent to stay away, and fans of rougher fare can find stories they like too.
I don’t think “consent” is an issue explicitly centered in all romances the way it is since the MeToo Movement and therefore would be a helpful tag. I did though also wonder about non consensual moments in romances and how that could be labeled but think some authors, esp in older books would be upset to see their book labeled as a rape narrative. If we used racial consciousness in a similar way, we currently have people of color and authors of color as tags but there aren’t tags warning us that racism is present. Instead readers tend to call it all out on social media platforms!
It gets complicated, doesn’t it? But overall, I think most romances published today are pretty clear about consent to the point where a separate label would be redundant for recently released titles.
As for tags warning of racism, wouldn’t that be better suited to a content warning and/or trigger warning within the review itself rather than an actual tag? The way I understand it, tags are for helping readers find things they want to read. Why bring attention to things readers don’t want to read through the tag system? Wouldn’t that make problematic content too visible? Otherwise, I can see an issue with readers specifically seeking racist content the same way someone might look for dubcon.
I don’t look at ratings when I’m making book choices. That being said, the bulk of my romance reading is contemporary, which tends to include some fairly explicit scenes. To me, a book’s sexuality/sensuality is less about the level of explicitly in the text and more about what is going on in the characters’ minds as things are happening. I think I’ve previously mentioned Caitlin Crews’s TAKE ME as a recent example of a romance with (imho) smoking-hot sexy-times, even though the sex is simply two people exploring a relatively mild D/s dynamic. Crews does such a great job of showing that what goes on in a woman’s mind during sex is just as important as what is being done to her body. However, because the sex is limited to two people and, iirc, not even sex toys are involved, my guess is the AAR rating level for TAKE ME would not approach “Burning,” even though I think it has the hottest sex scenes I’ve read this year. Conversely, I thought Kate Canterbary’s THE MAGNOLIA CHRONICLES had some really hot scenes—but, after I finished the book, I realized those scenes all involved foreplay: actual p-in-v sex was completely “closed door.” I’m not sure how a book like that would be classified in AAR’s ratings.
That’s an interesting question. Personally, I might rate it “technically” subtle – sex happens, isn’t described on the page but there’s no doubt it happens. You found it hot, but the ratings can’t take into account our reactions to something. It’s why – and I stress again, this is my personal opinion, and I’m not wearing my AAR hat – I think we should just drop them and have Sex/No Sex ratings! (Although,as Dabney says, our software doesn’t allow for such a major change.)
Well…
Being controversial – and I’m giving my personal opinion here and not speaking on behalf of AAR – I’d get rid of sensuality ratings entirely. It’s so subjective; one person’s warm is another’s hot, and I’m not sure how valuable they are other than to warn someone who doesn’t like to read sex scenes that they’re present. (My definition of warm = 2 people regardless of gender or orientation, no kink, toys or goats (!) and any and all terminology, whether slang or anatomical, goes.)
I would think that most romance readers know (and expect?) sex scenes of some degree and it would be easier to label the books where they’re absent or “just kisses”. And we categorise erotica and erotic romance, which signals a higher heat level.
I feel the exact opposite. When I started reading reviews at AAR, the one thing I relied upon the most was the sensuality ratings. I like my books sexy and rarely read romances with any rating less than warm.
I still use them to pick my romances this day. They are, for me, so helpful!
That’s why I said I’d indicate which books DON’T have sex scenes, because let’s face it, they in the minority of the books we review. I prefer books at the warmer end of the market, too, but the degree of heat (i.e, Warm or Hot) doesn’t bother me. I WOULD, however, like to know in advance if the story is kisses only/closed door.
As part of the Power Search, it’s invaluable to me.
Agreed, Dabney.
“nods”
I think for the more voracious or omnivorous readers here who regularly post, it doesn’t affect our book selections. I do think there are a number of readers who likely come to AAR, probably don’t post, but use the site, read reviews etc. for whom it matters a lot.
I base this off of reviews and comments on other sites and Amazon. Some people have very definite parameters of what they want to read and I think the sensuality level search tool, while imperfect, is probably very helpful to them or readers like them.
I don’t disagree, but I DO suspect that you’re talking about those who don’t want to read sex scenes – in which case I still maintain that it’s actually easier to indicate those books that don’t have sex scenes than to try to “quantify” the heat level of those that do include them. It doesn’t make a lot of difference to me if it’s warm or hot; I do want to know if it’s kisses only though. And we have categories for Erotica and Erotic Romance, so they’re easy to identify.
It’s not something we can do anyway, as Dabney says in her post; I just think sensuality ratings are SO subjective, it’s hard to get them right for everyone.
I’ve also seen the opposite where people were angry because there wasn’t enough sex scenes or racy enough scenes.
It is difficult because people’s tastes are so varied and authors have such different styles. I was thinking of this re-reading some of Hoyt’s Maiden Lane series. You could put her sensuality level based on “acts” performed the same as another author, but style wise she is very earthy and direct, much less dreamy or romantic about what the couples are doing than other authors who technically write about the “same” things. If readers prefer things hazier or more sugar coated then her bluntness may not work for them. But they would be at the same “level”.
Hoyt is an example I often think of – as you say her sexy scenes are pretty earthy and she doesn’t stint on the language. But again, it just illustrates how difficult it is to get these things right and, as AAR’s editor, consistent across our group of reviewers. Do we say “okay, if the sex scenes include certain words beginning with f, c, p, you rate it as hot”? Do we say oral and anal automatically rate a hot? All of those things occur pretty regularly in a large number of romances these days – which perhaps accounts for the broad range of the “warm” rating. I’ve rated books warm where penetrative sex doesn’t occur, but there is manual/oral gratification and body parts are mentioned using commonly accepted terminology.
All this is basically why I think we should just dispense with them! Keep N/A (no sexual content at all) and kisses only; like you, I’ve seen people complaining about books not being raunchy enough, but I think that’s more to do with personal expectations and not someting a review site can really predict.
We are not dispensing with them!
I agree with you, even if it’s not a 100 percent perfect system for everyone it’s still much better to have them.
I know we’re not, I’m just talking about what would be an ideal situation as far as I’m concerned!
I too don’t consider the sensuality rating when choosing a book. The rating alone does not tell me if the sensuality or chemistry between a couple is compelling.
As far as a possible update, I do find the “warm” category too broad, and too much gets swept up in it. Two recent books come to mind as examples. Emily Henry’s _Beach Read_ is a “warm” rating here and I think that could work fine as most of the sensuality is abstract. On the other hand, Talia Hibbert writes pretty smoking hot books but they too are categorized as “warm.” Her most recent, _Take a Hint, Dani Brown_, has vividly depicted sex with lots of attention to genitalia and specific slang for body parts. These two books are night and day for me on the sensuality scale but share the same rating.
This is probably not the response you are looking for but I never consider the hotness rating when choosing a book.
In my view it’s not about the act itself, but how the author writes it.
I’ve read very sensual scenes when all one character has done is undo a glove button and kiss a wrist and others where the author has described the MCs going at like bunnies, but in such a perfunctory manner that it lacks any heat whatsoever………………….
I care too about how a scene is written but I love the guidance to say this book has sexy times in it or this one does not.
Yes, sometimes you are in the mood to read a certain type of book at a certain time. And while I won’t exclude a book based on how explicit it is I also like knowing what to expect at times so I’m not expecting one thing and getting something else.
“shifts in chair”
I do exclude romances almost all the time based on our sensuality ratings. If it’s not warm, it’s probably not for me. And burning is usually not for me either. I’d say 99% of my romance reading is warm/hot.
“I’d say 99% of my romance reading is warm/hot.” Same here. AAR ratings definitely help me make decisions in that regard. If I see a cool looking Harlequin Historical reviewed, but the rating isn’t at least a “Warm,” I don’t bother. For me, anything less than a “Warm” for a romance is like having build up with no payoff.
So, I totally agree that it would be a shame to get rid of the rating system.
The majority of my reading probably falls under there as well (you certainly know my reading lists) but I am also a fan of older Susanna Kearsley and romantic suspense novels (some of those are older ones too) so I can run the gamut. As I mentioned elsewhere here there is an older Susanna Kearsley where the books ends with the couple finally holding hands.
Yep – I’ve said in reviews that some authors can create as much heat with longing looks and accidental touches as others can with a full-blown sex scene.
There’s a famous line in the erotica industry, though I don’t know who originally said it, that goes something like, “A good erotica writer can depict a scene of someone smoking a cigarette, and you close the book thinking about sex.”
I know I’m bungling that quote, but I think it encapsulates a lot of what you’re saying.
That made me think of the famous Astaire-Rogers dance to “Night and Day” where he slyly offers her a cigarette after their dance ends.