|
Post by devogirl on Jul 19, 2011 22:46:48 GMT -5
Ok, I am starting this thread a bit early (it's almost midnight EST, so close enough). I don't have time to post much before the chat, but I know many of you have opinions you want to share about this month's book, Equal Opportunities by Mathilde Madden.
Warning, this thread WILL contain SPOILERS.
I won't have much time to post before the chat tomorrow, but I just want to say I really loved this book. Thanks to everyone who lobbied to have this as a selection! I had been avoiding reading it for months, but I'm so glad I picked it up.
I think the author is not a dev herself and there were some aspects of SCI I think she prettified for the sake of erotica, mainly the fact that David has a perfectly functioning wang. But she clearly did her research, I think she just made some artistic decisions.
However, I do think she gets the SM part down perfectly. I know that was a big turn-off for a lot of you, but as someone who is kinky that way, I think she nailed it. I found it very, uh, stimulating. Plus I liked the snappy writing and I thought the characters were very appealing.
Ok, see you all on chat, hopefully my internet problems have been fixed.
|
|
|
Post by dentelle on Jul 20, 2011 3:49:15 GMT -5
I liked the book. Umm, I thought it was going to start going down hill after the first few pages. Yeah, it got me going in some places, in a good way. Not sure I'd want to do half of what she did though. It upset me when she tried to introduce the other guy into their space. That did me in.
I thought it pretty bizarre too that he could feel everything. Oh well it was still good. I enjoyed reading it. I downloaded it to Kindle on my pc. I love the application hehe.
I hope to see everyone tonight. I may not be in right away, but who knows.
|
|
|
Post by Dee Dee on Jul 20, 2011 6:07:16 GMT -5
I have not finished reading the book but I do like it so far . I am not sure if I can make it to tonight´s chat, but I will try my best.
|
|
|
Post by sverige888 on Jul 20, 2011 13:32:12 GMT -5
Read the book... Hmmmm, liked it, but thought the kinky parts got a bit... boring (sorry). Just not really my taste. But liked the general intrigues between the 2. I'm unfortunately not going to make it for tonights chat ;(... No internet where I am at that time of the night .... So will read what is happening here over the next few days.
|
|
|
Post by BA on Jul 20, 2011 17:54:37 GMT -5
I read this book some time ago and re-read it in anticipation of the chat. I thought it was a great erotica story idea and clearly accomplished the tingle that it set out to give. I am not into what 'Mary' is into, but I still liked the read and the writing style a lot.
|
|
|
Post by Emma on Jul 20, 2011 18:39:41 GMT -5
I too enjoyed the book and figure I'll put some things I liked about it here before chat starts. I guess overall I loved that there were so many lines I identified with. I'm a dork and actually often was reading with a pen and underlining paragraphs I liked. I really feel like she got the dev aspect of Mary's character across well. One part that I think the author really nailed dev-wise is the scene where Mary keeps David up super late asking him all kinds of questions about the accident, how it felt and how he feels now. I do that quite a lot with my husband and really identified with her character there.
I found the social club portion of the book interesting since it seemed to focus around her devness more than other scenes. I think its funny Mary had a "mini-crisis" the first time David asked her to join him there thinking the people there would know about her attraction. While its sad the David's friend ultimately tells him the "Devos are not good news" I love that Davis stood up for her and disagreed with his friends assessment.
I found the SM part interesting since I knew hardly anything about it before but I guess I think it tainted the dev parts of the book. I'd hate for someone to read that book and assume that all devs are into SM.
|
|
|
Post by devogirl on Jul 21, 2011 21:57:20 GMT -5
Thanks to everyone who participated in the chat! We had a great turnout and some interesting discussion about the book.
I thought the issue of realism vs erotica in regards to the portrayal of SCI was particularly interesting. The author clearly did her research at least to some extent, and she chose to give the character David a relatively low-level SCI and an incomplete injury. It's clear she wanted him to have a normally functioning penis for the sake of writing an erotic story, but in real life it just doesn't work that way. Even a guy with an incomplete injury like David would not have feeling in his dick and his butt but not in his legs. And even more unrealistic, even if he could get hard and ejaculate, he would only get hard from direct stimulation, not from just thinking about sex like she describes.
I know as a dev I'm in the minority with the rest of the world on this but I would like to see more realism. As some of you pointed out last night, it is good that she portrays a para as super sexy and able to have sex. The author does hint that David is unusual in his discussion with other SCI guys. But I would like to see some acknowledgement that sex doesn't have to be all about the huge throbbing cock, and that with some creativity sex can be satisfying for both partners even with the realities of SCI (and Mary is nothing if not creative). But I guess that's just too much to ask, even from erotica that features some pretty kinky scenes.
I was also impressed by how well she got certain aspects of the devo mentality. The scene where David's support group confronts Mary about being a dev is pretty much my worst nightmare, although thankfully it never happened to me.
Oh and I forgot to mention before, I really enjoyed the British slang. What can I say, I'm a sucker for Brit-speak. I was impressed by how well written it was, definitely above average for trashy romances.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 22, 2011 3:46:38 GMT -5
Devogirl, I'm with you on that one, I really don't like it when an author ignores reality. However, I was very surprised by the writing, especially since I don't like 1st person stories. She clearly has a way with words and the story is complicated enough not to be considered a trashy romance novel. I didn't like the SM parts because I'm more into sweet and nice sex, but it didnt't bother me at all. However, I didn't like that the sex was all we saw from Mary and David's relationship. I wish. I wish they could've done something else, too, like go out to a cafe or a movie. I too wondered about the feeling part, especially since that would make cathing impossible because of the pain.But I guess I've got my answer now
|
|
|
Post by ruthmadison on Jul 22, 2011 7:36:09 GMT -5
I agree, Devogirl, I think there is a way to make the sex with a disabled character realistic. I think it can even be done without making it scary to a non-dev audience, but most don't want to try. I think this is where I have a big advantage, as I've actually had sex with several SCI guys! All in the name of research, I assure you As I write more stories, I do want to be careful about portraying the sex realistically and believably. I didn't do that in Home Country and I wasn't totally realistic in The Player. Shame on me. From now on, I will be aware of writing sex scenes that are both realistic and erotic. I'm excited to read the book now. I was so worried about it, but it sounds like it is well written and realistic to the feelings of being a dev. My curiosity is definitely peaked enough to read it now! I'll see what I can do about tracking down the author and asking for an interview.
|
|
|
Post by Dee Dee on Jul 22, 2011 18:22:48 GMT -5
I am very curious as to Mathilde Madden´s knowledge of devoteeism. She is being spot-on in so many places in the book! If she is not a devotee herself then she sure understands the concept! I must say that I don´t like excessive pain - the part where Mary puts nipple clamps on that guy Gavin made me cringe and when she started pulling on the chain between them - eeekkkkk . How did others feel about that?
|
|
|
Post by dentelle on Jul 22, 2011 19:04:32 GMT -5
DeeDee, comfort all the way. Not into excessive pain and all that.
|
|
|
Post by devogirl on Jul 23, 2011 18:32:36 GMT -5
I liked it, but that's me, ha ha. I think she also captured the essential truth about SM that many non-kinky people don't get, which is that for the "top" or dominating partner, it's only arousing and satisfying when it's with the right person. It always made me so angry that guys assumed I would attack them without warning. No! The guy has to WANT those things done to him. I think she shows that very well. In the book, even with her first boyfriend, she's not so into it because they're not that compatible, he wants things she's not that excited about doing.
Oh and nipple clamps were the best thing for a para I knew who was a true masochist (ie, he was aroused by pain). Extra sensitive para nipples + nipple clamps = awesome all around. But be careful, it hurts the most just after you take them off.
|
|
|
Post by Dee Dee on Jul 24, 2011 12:14:08 GMT -5
Thanks for sharing, Devogirl! The more I read of the book, the more intrigued I am as to Mathilde Madden´s own sexuality. I mean, how can she NOT be a devotee? Throughout the pages that I have read so far, I have found so many paragraphs that hit the nail on the head when it comes to devoteeism. Perhaps Mathilde (lovely name by the way) is reading our board? If she is, then HI Mathilde! Ruth, if you can get an interview that would be so great!
|
|
|
Post by Emma on Jul 24, 2011 13:05:32 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by devogirl on Jul 24, 2011 15:28:47 GMT -5
I'm pretty sure she's not a devotee. Looking at the other books she's written, it seems she likes exploring all kinds of unconventional pairings. At the back of the book, she thanks Mik Scarlet and his wife for answering all her questions. Here's his webpage if you're curious about him: www.mikscarlet.co.ukThe general consensus in the chat was that maybe his wife is a devotee, and shared her experiences with the author. It is possible she has looked at this website, but maybe not. After all, we were positive Ruth had been here too but she hadn't.
|
|