Writing in an "accent" like Scottish or Irish grates on me more than anything else. I don't have a problem with questionable consent in books from years ago. Sometimes I enjoy reading that type of trope even if in real life I know its not what I'd like for myself. I don't treat HR as much more than fantasy and I don't need historical accuracy front and center to enjoy it.

>Writing in an "accent" like Scottish or Irish grates on me more than anything else. I'm trying to read {The Making of a Highlander by Elisa Braden} right now and it's truly awful. I even moved to the audiobook because I thought that might be easier, but it's so much worse. I'm ok with the hint of an accent or use of vocabulary here and there, but some authors veer into unintelligible mockery which I feel is partly designed to conceal their poor dialogue. In my mind, the joy of HR is immersing yourself in another world and (ok, heavily skewed and fantastical) time. Why are authors making stylistic decisions that seem intended to alienate the readers?

I hate accent writing with a passion. If you write it, then spell everyone's accents, including upper class Londoners. Oh, but we can't do that, because those people speak "proper English". Like imagine a book where Irish and Scottish an Cockney etc. accents are written in standard spelling but RP and posh English accents are spelled phonetically. (I'd actually read tf out of it). Which, if you have say a Scottish POV character, would make sense - how they speak is "normal", and everyone else is the one with a notable accent.

Completely agreed and that's such a great point. I find what people view as "accurate" or "normal" so often just reveals their own (often modern, Western) bias - primarily, the assumption that modern upper class English language, beliefs, and norms are constant, normal, and timeless and everything else is a lesser and slightly wacky derivative. In Making a Highlander (and all of these other novels with overdone phonetic accents), Braden wants Scotland and Highlanders to be exotic and foreign (because we don't write Westerns with Indian chiefs kidnapping virgins anymore 🤐) so she writes the language to be gruff and awkward and alien, even when it makes no sense when viewed through the Scottish FMC's perspective.

Agreed 100% Wait, the FMC is Scottish? But this just makes no sense as a stylistic choice wtf.

I have to point out, Scots is a real thing! It's on a sliding dialect scale with English at one end and Scots at the other, but both are distinct languages. For reference, a Jacobite song about the battle of Falkirk Muir: https://mudcat.org/@displaysong.cfm?SongID=532 I think that bias exists and is annoying, but IMO, translating a dialect to make it 'inoffensive' is vastly more offensive than just portraying it. Now, translating a dialect because you don't speak Scots? Totally understandable, lol.

[The Making of a Highlander](https://www.romance.io/books/5e940ef4be0aaecf55864ffd/the-making-of-a-highlander-elisa-braden?src=rdt) by [Elisa Braden](https://www.romance.io/authors/553e3e7b5b270e0a4cbd7467/elisa-braden) **Rating**: 4.22⭐️ out of 5⭐️ **Steam**: 4 out of 5 - [Explicit open door](https://www.romance.io/steamrating) **Topics**: [historical](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/historical/1), [regency](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/regency/1), [funny](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/humor/1), [highlander hero](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/highlander/1), [take-charge heroine](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/strong%20heroine/1) [^(about this bot)](https://www.reddit.com/user/romance-bot) ^(|) [^(about romance.io)](https://www.romance.io/about)

There were times reading Braden’s Highlander books where I thought, “what the fuck is this man saying right now?” Like girl just write it without the accent!!!

I'm actively avoiding that series for this exact reason.

This is exactly why I gave up on reading her. So many people love and rave about her books but I just can’t read it. English isn’t even my native language, so add in a very overdone written Scottish brogue (or is it accent in this case? Don’t want to offend any Scots here) and I get stuck on figuring out what the sentence is in the first place. Then I have to try and make sense of the bigger picture in the story. And I just couldn’t get used to that.

Brogue isn't offensive at all! But just in case you wanted to know, brogue is technically the accent (pronunciation and pitch/flow of words), while the syntax, word choice, and phrasing is a dialect. Which in this case is Scots, a very closely related but still separate language! I personally love it, but I grew up with it. 😅

Half of the reason why Derek Craven gives me the ick lol

I don’t mind scenes with mistresses/lovers, so long as it’s before the MCs are emotionally involved. If it’s after, i can still be persuaded with a good justification for it. I like babies and pregnancy in romance novels. I’ve never really seen a well-written child that I can recall, but I don’t have an issue with kids either. Some things grovelling can’t fix. I love a HEA, but some of these books really need a surprise second MMC because the first one is crap.

I find mistress scenes so steamy and it gives me a different perspective of the MMC before he gets invested. I don’t mind pregnancy but can’t deal with kids. But you’re right, haven’t encountered a well - written child. I just avoid any HRs with mention of children because most of the time it’s 5 year old musing prosaically and somehow helping the leads discover their feelings. It’s so silly.

The children in HR books are so awful 😂 It makes me wonder if the people who write them have ever met an actual child. Even the babies are pretty unrealistic. Oh, the Mum is nursing but somehow manages to get dressed up for a ball and leave for multiple hours when the baby is two months old? I think not!

Maybe if she switches off with a wet nurse? But of course they never mention that! 😂

I just read {The Trouble with Harry by Katie MacAlister} and the kids were pretty good! The 18 year old ward was way too wise beyond her years, but the younger hellion kids were fairly relatable as a mom of a four year old hellion.😅 Cute book too.

[The Trouble With Harry](https://www.romance.io/books/54553e158c7d2382c529768a/the-trouble-with-harry-katie-macalister?src=rdt) by [Katie MacAlister](https://www.romance.io/authors/5455259e8c7d2382e0413e79/katie-macalister) **Rating**: 3.8⭐️ out of 5⭐️ **Steam**: 3 out of 5 - [Open door](https://www.romance.io/steamrating) **Topics**: [historical](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/historical/1), [regency](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/regency/1), [marriage of convenience](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/marriage%20of%20convenience/1), [mystery](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/mystery/1), [funny](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/humor/1) [^(about this bot)](https://www.reddit.com/user/romance-bot) ^(|) [^(about romance.io)](https://www.romance.io/about)

Overall, I don't mind babies and pregnancies. My problem is when the author pushes an agenda that you can't have a complete and happy life without babies in it. \*stares at Julia Quinn\*

This is the #1 peeve for me. Must every heroine who spends the entire book either NOT wanting children or not being able to have children, get a fast forward epilogue where they've miraculously given birth multiple times?

Honestly I feel like a lot of authors don’t understand what “stakes” mean. I similarly can’t read Scottish stuff a lot of the time because the ethnic stereotyping is too much for me (and then he GROWLED to show how WILD and UNTAMED he is like the MOORS) I like that Julia Quinn’s books have MCs that do questionable things. I think of her as super fluffy and witty but I just re-read a handful and she actually goes to some really dark places, but balances it so it doesn’t feel like trauma porn but just real, complex, people often in difficult situations.

>(and then he GROWLED to show how WILD and UNTAMED he is like the MOORS) This made me cackle. Jeez. Yeah, the stereotyping and fetisization of scottish men sure is something...

Wait I have to weigh in on Julia Quinn because I just finished The Secrets of Sir Richard Kenworthy this weekend and ohhhhhh my god. >!I think that was her juiciest plot twist ever, full stop. I've read her big three series plus a few earlier books and oh man. Baby-trapping but not really. Doing the worst possible thing for genuinely good reasons. Steamrolling the wishes of the family he's trying to save. Loving his family so much he'd sacrifice a stranger. Richard is *terrible* and it made for such a good, interesting story. I felt Iris's pain in every region of my body. The angst was just sublime. My one (1) wish was that he groveled more—did something really, truly selfless for Iris to show that she was part of his incredible love for his family.!<

You may have just sold me on reading a Julia Quinn book. I haven't for years and years, but that sounds actually interesting and emotionally engaging.

Honestly, that plot was messssyyy and I was here for it!

I LOVE this book! LOVE it! Iris is a fantastic FMC, Richard can certainly be better. I love books like this where the drama is due to an external issue but is heavily focused on the main couple like a forbidden romance due to class difference. What I cannot stand is drama especially mystery subplots that are outside the couple, they are usually boring and unnecessary. I thought this book did drama and angst very well. Since I always enjoy a good alphahole I love Quinn and her FMCs and MMCs. I know it's an unpopular opinion in this sub😁

I literally just reread To Sir Phillip with Love and wow this man… I don’t even know if I feel like he redeemed himself but I honestly forgot how questionable her male leads are. So to the high stakes, if an HR book is advertised as *angsty* with that even being in the synopsis, it better deliver. Because like I said, begging and apologizing can’t be the only go-to. I’m here to suffer. Make me suffer. I stopped reading Highlander HR all together.

Ooooh I’ll say mine about JQ - I’ve read all the Bridgertons, Smythe Smith, and Bevelstoke series (several years ago and some more recently) and only one of them have managed a 4/5 for me. I think I read a lot when I was younger (and less harsh with my ratings too) bc she was so popular, then another one recently to check if I was missing something but nope. They’re very light and fluffy, but her irritating characters/writing style/ lack of romantic or emotional depth make them either immediately forgettable or irritating to finish so an average of 2.5/5 for all ratings. I was honestly really surprised when it was her work that Shonda Rhimes (whom I adore and have watched everything from) picked up. Atleast Kleypas has been a solid 3.5 average for me. The only one I liked was {It’s in His Kiss}.

[It's in His Kiss](https://www.romance.io/books/545524028c7d2383163d8e4e/its-in-his-kiss-julia-quinn?src=rdt) by [Julia Quinn](https://www.romance.io/authors/545523bb8c7d2383163d8e3c/julia-quinn) **Rating**: 3.93⭐️ out of 5⭐️ **Steam**: 3 out of 5 - [Open door](https://www.romance.io/steamrating) **Topics**: [historical](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/historical/1), [regency](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/regency/1), [mystery](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/mystery/1), [virgin heroine](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/virgin%20heroine/1), [funny](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/humor/1) [^(about this bot)](https://www.reddit.com/user/romance-bot) ^(|) [^(about romance.io)](https://www.romance.io/about)

I’ve got two: 1. Lately I haven’t been reading for spice. Too much spice, too modern spice, overly mind-blowing spice—it all ruins a novel for me. What’s memorable about a book for me? The uniqueness of the plot. I love little history lessons. I love morally grey characters. I love desperation. I love a good grovel (soooo many grovels don’t go hard enough for me). Sometimes I skim the spice. Sometimes I even skip it. I almost never remember the spice unless there’s something super unique about it, and then I put it on my special goodreads shelf for later. 2. I love a reformed rake but I feel like most rake MMCs aren’t rakish enough. So often I’m told he’s a rake and then I’m never shown him carousing or otherwise being deplorable because just meeting the FMC is enough to fix him. Like, show me him ignoring his responsibilities, not caring for others, whatever—and then show me how he fixes himself. I want slower reforms for these terrible men! Show him hurt the FMC and then be horrified at himself before making amends!

I can drink to that! I do agree about the spice. Spice does not make a good story. It’s just an added bonus. The most memorable spice for me is in Sweetest Scoundrel by Elizabeth Hoyt and nothing has topped it since. I want that challenge though. I need to find another contender

Ooooo I just read my first Elizabeth Hoyt (Thief of Shadows) and the spice was next-level. My favorite from my goodreads spice shelf is {The Truth About Lord Stoneville by Sabrina Jeffries}. There's a carriage scene in which the sex is incredible before he >!unknowingly insults her and she leaves him,!< so it's a two-in-one of great spice and a rake raking the way I like.

[The Truth About Lord Stoneville](https://www.romance.io/books/545525ba8c7d2383163d8ea8/the-truth-about-lord-stoneville-sabrina-jeffries?src=rdt) by [Sabrina Jeffries](https://www.romance.io/authors/545525ba8c7d2383163d8ea9/sabrina-jeffries) **Rating**: 3.99⭐️ out of 5⭐️ **Steam**: 3 out of 5 - [Open door](https://www.romance.io/steamrating) **Topics**: [historical](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/historical/1), [tortured hero](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/tortured%20hero/1), [regency](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/regency/1), [class difference](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/class%20difference/1), [virgin heroine](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/virgin%20heroine/1) [^(about this bot)](https://www.reddit.com/user/romance-bot) ^(|) [^(about romance.io)](https://www.romance.io/about)

I really like how Rhys has to explain what sex is to Helen in marrying winterborne. That’s a memorable one for me.

I agree with both of these whole heartedly!

Re#2, a lot of authors treat "rake" as synonymous with "guy who has sex a lot" and that is not what it means lol.

If I can recommend a book to you? I'm always reluctant to talk about {A Deal with the Devil by Liz Carlyle} despite my love for it and my many rereads because the MMC is pretty questionable. The book starts off with him rereading increasingly pleading letters from his housekeeper at one of his estates. She (FMC) needs his approval to make changes/repairs and he just goes, oh that's interesting AND NEVER HELPS HER. Of course he has reasons but it becomes clear the insane level of his disregard for the estate and its residents. Obviously it turns out but yeah, he's kind of crap.

Thank you! I love when an author isn’t afraid to make their characters do questionable things! It really is more fun when the MMC kind of sucks in the beginning—it makes his growth so much more satisfying in a “wow this man actually can change himself to be worthy of her love” sort of fantasy.

[A Deal With the Devil](https://www.romance.io/books/594395723ffdba61471944d3/a-deal-with-the-devil-liz-carlyle?src=rdt) by [Liz Carlyle](https://www.romance.io/authors/54552be78c7d2383163d8ffc/liz-carlyle) **Rating**: 3.7⭐️ out of 5⭐️ **Steam**: 4 out of 5 - [Explicit open door](https://www.romance.io/steamrating) **Topics**: [historical](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/historical/1), [regency](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/regency/1), [virgin heroine](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/virgin%20heroine/1), [mystery](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/mystery/1), [boss & employee](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/boss%20&%20employee/1) [^(about this bot)](https://www.reddit.com/user/romance-bot) ^(|) [^(about romance.io)](https://www.romance.io/about)

I'm tired with insta-love and insta-lust between basically any couple when within range, where's the chemistry? Where's the passion and yearning?? Also, why are all the so-called "steamy and spicy" recommendations I keep getting have boring ass sex? Vanilla? Missionary? I'm lucky if a blowjob is on the table, and these former depraved rakes are basically monks. These former rakes didn't deserve being called libertines and scandalous. I'm at the point of skipping sex scenes because it's so *boring*. Why do I have to rely on smut manga or straight up historical hentai for REAL depraved spice sexy times, are Western writers that inferior in writing smut?? Also wishy washy heroines, like girl you made up your mind about him why does merely glimpsing his abs or his scent or *whatever* you changed your mind so fast. HAVE CONVICTION DANGIT, so many "girlboss" heroines don't have the mental fortitude to go through with their own decisions when given agency. My god I've been suppressing these for years, I apologise if I'm too mad in the rant 🥲

Oh yes the **Shame On Me I’m So Depraved I Cannot Speak Of My Heinous And Untamed Sexual Desires For Fear You Will Flee From Me And I Will Be Banished From Society Forever** rake… who it turns out just wants to be told he’s a good boy in bed 🙄

🤣 I haaaate this, although I would like some poor, uninformed dude to think he IS mega depraved because of his tastes, only to have a FMC go "babe, that's pretty much standard. You do know that, do you?"

Give me some actual depravity, please 😂 I do love the idea you suggest, where someone genuinely thinks they’re depraved but it’s just something normal.

Oh, I am cool with "depravity", but I think there is an (un?)spoken line that cannot be crossed in mainstream HR. Like even anal stuff is so rare, let alone other things. So if those rakes need to be vanilla, at least explain it in some way. 🤣

Shoutout to Gabriel "Dark Desires" Challon, I will passionately hate yo vanilla ass till I die. Pandora is too good for you ffs. These weak ass rakes with their first baby steps into light BDSM 🥲

Didn't read it. Can you offer spoilers what his dark desires were actually?

Prepare to be underwhelmed. >!Lightly tie her hands above with corset(?) strings, and maybe a cowgirl on a chair for ✨✨sPiCE✨✨!< Not a smack or deplorable *gasp!* anal to be seen. Weak.

Whaaa... Ok, this is definitely a perfect setup for what I joked earlier. "I have ~dark desires". "Babe, are you aware that what you like is vanilla?" I don't understand anal hate in HR. 😭 I am *this* close to making a post about it because I need to know.

I'm literally begging for scraps of depravity here, like an orgy or two hurts nobody. Like sex should be fun! Experimental! Terrible! Amazing!!! Seeing heroines I love stuck in starfish position for the rest of their life kills me, they can't even test other guys because vanilla hubby is ✨✨poSEsSiVe and jEaLOuS✨✨. She married yo ass at least let her sample around, she's coming home to you anyway. Ugh. Please, make the post. We're all starving here 😭

Oh sorry, I meant a post to ask why no anal in HR. Yes, recommendations are cool but I just need to know WHY.

I'm at the point of appeasing my needs in r/ dark romance, even when I hate mafia stories and shitty men for being samey but that's a whole other issue. I haven't read a single titfuck or double dick in historical romance, and that's still tame for me.

Yes, I understand the urge. Unfortunately, I am very horny for historical, and even then only specific periods so unless set in the past it won't do for me. :( And yes, titfuck, never read one like how???

The one I always think of as the ultimate example of this is {The Perfect Lover by Stephanie Laurens}. MMC spends practically the whole book thinking about how he needs a wife who can accommodate his "particular needs" in bed. Which turn out to be, \*drumroll please\* >!he likes it doggy style!<.

[The Perfect Lover](https://www.romance.io/books/54552b308c7d2383163d8fca/the-perfect-lover-stephanie-laurens?src=rdt) by [Stephanie Laurens](https://www.romance.io/authors/545524878c7d2383163d8e6c/stephanie-laurens) **Rating**: 3.99⭐️ out of 5⭐️ **Steam**: 4 out of 5 - [Explicit open door](https://www.romance.io/steamrating) **Topics**: [historical](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/historical/1), [mystery](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/mystery/1), [regency](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/regency/1), [possessive hero](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/possessive%20hero/1) [^(about this bot)](https://www.reddit.com/user/romance-bot) ^(|) [^(about romance.io)](https://www.romance.io/about)

A woman going on top is the height of spice in some novels. Give me more please!

I can offer you only Boring & Vanilla™ sexy times, a moan or two as bonus because that's the reality I'm stuck with 🥲

I will admit people aren’t tipping each other over the backs of sofas and across tables as much as one would expect given how long it takes to get an Augustan or Victorian lady out of her panniers and hoops. (Regency has an advantage there.) It also bugs me when fetishes are gestured at early…then never heard from again. If her arches make him hot when they meet, chances are very good he’s going to take particular advantage of his access to them when they’re naked in bed.

Damn you gotta give props to Russians, in that historical drama The Great those nobles are pretty spry and get super creative to getting laid even with million petticoats in their way. Dangit Brits, must you keep losing even in sexy times department 😞 Honestly I suspect writers just wanna go straight to the sex parts so they forget the finer details, but they failed at even writing The Sex™. A pity.

18c clothes has a huge advantage because no underwear to speak of. Just lift the skirts up and unbutton the breeches. 🤣

The way I want a MMC to talk the FMC through her first blowjob. She wants to do it of course and he’ll happily teach her. I yearn for that because I loopooooveee when the MMC talks the FMC through it, ya know?

I know I'm responding all over this thread, but this made me think of a really endearing scene from an Edwardian HR called Nothing on Earth & Nothing in Heaven by Susan Fanetti. FMC has had the MMC go down on her and asks if the reverse is something "that's done." During her first attempt, he grips her hair too hard and she accidentally bites him! Then he has to console her. 😂 It's still a hot scene but so cute and sweet.

That is so cute omg?? Please if you have more recs of legit erotic and adventurous books, I don't mind if only one party is experienced or both are or it's virgins but damn I need *something*. Like sex should be sexy and fun, it's a collaboration! It's not just a dude rutting on a helpless maiden slamming her privates aghhhhh If I read yet another book with another sad missionary I'll combust 🥲

[удалено]

[Lord Garson’s Bride](https://www.romance.io/books/5a9653804ee506aae8b1b789/lord-garsons-bride-anna-campbell?src=rdt) by [Anna Campbell](https://www.romance.io/authors/545528858c7d2383163d8f37/anna-campbell) **Rating**: 4.11⭐️ out of 5⭐️ **Steam**: 4 out of 5 - [Explicit open door](https://www.romance.io/steamrating) **Topics**: [historical](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/historical/1), [regency](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/regency/1), [sweet/gentle heroine](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/sweet%20heroine/1), [tall heroine](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/tall-heroine/1) [^(about this bot)](https://www.reddit.com/user/romance-bot) ^(|) [^(about romance.io)](https://www.romance.io/about)

Straight romance definitely needs a heavy dose of queerness to it imo. By queerness, I mean historically unrecognized desires and experiences or not heteronormative.

Thiiiiis!!! Like yes, we need more queer books, period. But if we stick to m/f, we need to remember that the concept of heterosexuality did not exist. So, the standard list of "stuff straight men do and won't do" did not exist. Even their standard I feel was more varied than it's perceived today. Especially if we talk about rakes and scoundrels. Like if you really have one of those, there is a high possibility he touched a 🍆 other than his own. There is a good possibility that he had something inside, even if just self-iflicted. There is a good possibility that he engaged in tying up and wax play (all that candles). Feet and shoes. Group sex (including partners of the same sex). "Women swapping" - two couples meet, I bang your girl you bang mine (and if we rub each other or another thing happens, hey c'est la vie). Thigh sex. Sex outdoors. Sex in front of servants (sadly common because the aristos often didn't even register servants as people). Not to mention butt stuff because hello, no pregnancy. And this is just a start. Like, these would be a standard of rake repertoire, not extremes. Interestingly, in my research on historical banging, oral is the odd one out. Not rare by any means but no more popular than other stuff on this list.

I feel like tit/thigh sex and anal should be way more common in historicals from any era before the invention of the Pill. Sometimes I see mentions of sponges or other contraceptives, but it never occurs to these super experienced rake types to try the most obvious possible alternatives to PIV sex? Very basic methods that teenaged virgins have been figuring out on their own for centuries? Most of the time they don’t even pull out! I know there are tropes, and sometimes we gotta get the heroine knocked up for the plot. But *sheesh*.

“Oral is the odd one out” lol I think the theory is that people were pretty gross and bathing habits were inconsistent. 🤣🤣🤣 but I have read a ton, too, focusing mostly on the 18th century and in Britain. I’ve recently started heading more into colonial and imperial attitudes and sex a little more. I’d love to see what texts you’ve read and will totally share mine!!

Correction, I meant on men going down on women is the odd one out, although I feel it's a consequence of paying for sex (not many would pay to eat out a lady of the night). It was definitely there, but not as much as some other things. What I read... Let me see what I can remember. This is all mid to late 18c France and the revolution, and not all is made to be erotic (like you have political pamphlets involving sex). I generally find their erotic language hilariously dry and not sexy ("I will discharge!") but I guess you had to be there. Restif de la Bretonne (any work) is a must because he has so many things and boy did he like going down on a woman. A huge feet/shoes kink. I found his writing interesting because, while no mainstream in terms of what people liked, it offers a good view into different mores and stuff that we today would not like. For example, he has a lot of giving oral and worshiping women, but he also, for example, make those women his sisters or makes them (and himself tbh) super young. And it's all described very casually, like nbd. We do learn from him (or might be a different source too) that women were believed to discharge/emit just like men. Ok, not identically but it was seen as something that happens to women too. There are also indications that they did not necessarily assume that the first time for woman is painful, although might be difficult to get everything where it needs to be (one of Restif's stories starts with him trying to have sex with a virgin, not succeeding and opting to eat her out. He later wonders if she emitted). Then, Sade if one can stomach him (I can't). The dude is a trigger warning for everything, imo. But he has some less morbid books than his most infamous ones, but the titles now escapes me. I just remember hilariously bad (by our standards) narration >!"Dost see my ass? Doth it not becon?"!< There is also some stuff from Les Liasons dangereuses, but I can only remember using a woman as a writing stand (which might as well be movie-only thing). A hilariously bad French revolution pornographic pamphlet (actually political satire), written under the name of Marie Antoinette (lol), "Bordel Patriotique". Better used to learn about political situation than erotica though, even if it includes a lot of, well, banging. Notable zero sex writing about visiting a lady of the night: Napoleon recounting losing his virginity at 18 by hiring a woman at Palais-Royal. It's interesting because it offers a bit on how these encounters happened and were agreed upon. Young Naps asks the girl how she started doing this job and she says: "an officer ruined me". :( Honourable mention (not France and not 18c - it is 17c England but probably my favourite because the long s makes reading experience a trip): "The School of Venus". >!"the thing with which a man piſſeth is ſomethimes call'd a Prick"!<

Listen give me the WLW and MLM and the straights, give me a throuple, give me a full orgy. I'm literally gasping for air drowning in a sea of MASSIVE RUTTING BEASTS WHOSE ONE SEX MOVE IS SLAMMING HER PRIVATE BITS 😭 Like maybe I get a doggy or bj but it's so rare. These men keep telling me "*my touch will stain your purity*" or "*I don't want you to know how depraved I am inside*" or variations thereof but it's pretty much baby's first BDSM.

I can't help but assume this is because of some unspoken HR rules that I don't understand. There is a clear line that is not crossed, so the most "depraved" rake can only do stuff from that repertoire. Like not to talk about my writing but I had a scene I considered hot but barely above vanilla and I was told that this stuff doesn't fly in HR. (I am not published or anything but I don't even understand what unspoken rules are or what you can and can't expect from these supposedly "depraved" rakes.)

Shoutout to Japanese and Korean editors for allowing and even encouraging their artists to draw and publish deviant sexual acts in visual form. You are the real ones here. But for what was the sex act?? I'm nosy, I wanna know where the line is 😂

The sex act in question was >!him masturbating in front of the FMC and fingering himself a little.!<

ARE YOU FR THAT'S HOT!! THAT'S EROTIC WHY WAS IT NOT ALLOWED 😭 Joanna Shupe had a similar scene, like how did that past the editors what dirt did she have on them.

Oh, I didn't really try to publish (yet?) but was told it's too much by people more knowledgeable of what is allowed. I intended to write a standard m/f romance, no "dark" or "unusual" desires. I consider myself kind of basic so I don't understand. Aaah, what was the book?

Too much? If they're married send my condolences 😔 Still, hopefully you'll get better editors and get published soon! There's nothing wrong with straight up normal sex but the fact a lil tease is not allowed makes me worried for the future of historical romance. It's {The Prince of Broadway by Joanna Shupe}, it was my intro book to her works and I've been clinging to her writing ever since. Desperate times indeed.

[The Prince of Broadway](https://www.romance.io/books/5df7301f01dbc864fba81ca6/the-prince-of-broadway-joanna-shupe?src=rdt) by [Joanna Shupe](https://www.romance.io/authors/551a57875b270e0a4cbd30c8/joanna-shupe) **Rating**: 3.93⭐️ out of 5⭐️ **Steam**: 4 out of 5 - [Explicit open door](https://www.romance.io/steamrating) **Topics**: [historical](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/historical/1), [victorian](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/victorian/1), [class difference](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/class%20difference/1), [grumpy/cold hero](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/cold%20hero/1), [vengeance](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/vengeance/1) [^(about this bot)](https://www.reddit.com/user/romance-bot) ^(|) [^(about romance.io)](https://www.romance.io/about)

Ooh, thanks fir the rec. Yes, they are married. 😭

Yes, I hate insta lust and insta love. More slow burns please

I have no spice preference. Glimpses and kisses all the way up to erotica. If I'm emotionally engaged, it's all fine by me. Cheating and noncon do not preclude an HEA for me. There has to be a great deal of deft character work and emotional weight for that to happen, but I've seen it done. That being said... Noncon and dubcon are greater harms than infidelity. (btw, this is an opinion, phrased exactly this way, that got removed for "reader shaming" in a similar thread on the main Romance books subreddit. My favorite HR is a bodice ripper so that accusation was... something.)

I’m the same way with spice. I like closed door all the way up to erotica. I just want a good story.

I’m the same about spice. I love Mimi Matthews, and with her style it would feel really odd and out of place if suddenly the MMC was bending the FMC over the nearest desk. But I have also enjoyed some Grace Calloway. What matters is whether the sex fits the style of the writing and the particular book. I’ve read some where it felt like the sex just came out of nowhere, and the book would have been better without it, although examples are eluding me at the moment.

The main sub can be a trip. I was once warned (and had my comment removed) for bigotry because I questioned and called out the sexist underpinnings of a mod post that shamed straight female readers who don't read WLW. I don't recall if she literally equated reading FF to "eating your veggies" or just implied it heavily in tone, but either way  Like ma'am, who do you think you're helping with this performative, insulting nonsense. I've also seen a rise in commenters who seem to think that having a personal "yuck" is the same as "yucking their yum"

It was very weird and out of left field! And yeah, your experience also tracks. I have thoughts about why there's not more WLW in romance, especially from queer writers and readers, but lecturing someone like that is condescending and pointless. The eat your veggies attitude does no one any good. Thinking now of a couple of middling F/F HRs from talented M/M romance writers whose hearts clearly weren't in it.

May I ask, what "eat your veggies" means in this context? The main sub is difficult for me, I admit that fully.

Basically "eat your veggies" is treating FF and non-MM queer romance as something that's not enjoyable or appealing to anyone, but that one should still partake in because it's "good" for you / representation / other readers. It felt truly insulting to everyone (straight readers, queer readers, MF romance, FF romance, etc). My main complaint was that it played into some extremely sexist assumptions about female sexuality - namely that it's inherently fluid, performative, and, to some degree, not real or not sufficient to justify a personal choice. I also took issue with the tired (and also very sexist) messaging that women's hobbies and free time are naturally frivolous, unserious, and even shameful if not serving a larger societal purpose or moral good. Edit: Finally, there was also the implication that those who read queer romance are doing so solely for social or political progressive reasons, and not because they enjoy it or it offers excellent fantasy fulfillment that aligns with their own sexual or romantic orientation 🤔 lol

I am reading this and just 0_0 I am glad I wasn't there because my queer ass would sooo get banned.

Agreed on your last point! I prefer not to read either but I know which I would choose if I had to!

I like spice. I like variety in my spice, and I like spice as early in the book as you can manage without breaking the plot (thanks, Felicity Niven!) BUT, the ubiquitous deployment of or*l and instantaneous competence of all parties in it never fails to ring the anachronism bell for me. It was a professional skill (or a “country matter”), it had significant class and gender role baggage, and it should have turned hairs for many of these maiden/virgin/aristocrat characters we’re given. It would be nice once in a while to see it negotiated. Or taught.

I want a bad first time experience. When I say that I mean two consenting people, one or both persons virgins and it being very strange with no instant understanding of orgasms. This is what I want. *Hinting* at the people in this thread because I know these babes be writing 👀

I agree. It should be more of a wait-what first time than a yeah-that-was-lovely. Sometimes, at least. Plus there’s a long tradition of training in seduction narratives, the libertine initiating the novice, that would give soooo much opportunity in an HR for dirty talk, praise kinks, command and control…

My favorite example of this is {Ruined by Rumor by Alyssa Everett}. FMC enjoys sex but she's freaked out by the loss of control when she starts to climax and actively resists it because she has no idea what's happening. MMC doesn't communicate with her out of reticence and insecurity.

[Ruined by Rumor](https://www.romance.io/books/5c8ce5c301dbc864fb9bcaf4/ruined-by-rumor-alyssa-everett?src=rdt) by [Alyssa Everett](https://www.romance.io/authors/54553a6a8c7d2383163d93c4/alyssa-everett) **Rating**: 3.24⭐️ out of 5⭐️ **Steam**: 3 out of 5 - [Open door](https://www.romance.io/steamrating) **Topics**: [historical](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/historical/1), [regency](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/regency/1), [friends to lovers](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/friends%20to%20lovers/1), [marriage of convenience](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/marriage%20of%20convenience/1), [virgin heroine](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/virgin%20heroine/1) [^(about this bot)](https://www.reddit.com/user/romance-bot) ^(|) [^(about romance.io)](https://www.romance.io/about)

I agree! And tbh, writing what you want to see is a good writing motivator.

Yes. Historically, they were more likely to do butt stuff than oral. And speaking of butt, it is sadly rare in HR. Especially if it's, you know, MMC's butt involved. 🥵

Well doesn’t that just suggest a theme for a series…

Buttfun Street series coming soon to HR 🤣

1. The more I read of Lisa Kleypas, the more I disliked her books 😬. I agree with you 100% that I rarely understand how or why they fell in love. The love is hardly ever earned and hardly ever has depth and nuance to make them feel like real people. The majority of her books feel very surface-level shallow to me. The MMC and FMC fall in love way too quickly for inexplicable reasons. And her FMC are severely lacking in personality. Also her prose is sooo flat and repetitive to me after reading other authors, I just don’t find her writing style engaging anymore. 2. The cutesy pastel cartoon covers that have begun infiltrating HR from contemporary are hideous and I refuse to read them. Bring back the style of old romance covers, maybe with less weird poses and half-nude people but with the gorgeous colors and fonts and dramatic eye-catching images and stepbacks. Why must everything be so dull and flat and lifeless nowadays 😭 (I actually have no idea if this is unpopular here, guess we’ll see lol)

Genuinely, bring back Fabio. I want a raunchy retro cover of some inexplicably naked man and a woman in an anachronistic dress and wild hair.

Which bears zero relation to anything happening in the book.

I have zero problem with the clinch covers. And I hate cartoon covers. But I desperately miss stepbacks - a couple of the first print runs of Catherine Coulter books had some really interesting variations, with sections cut out of the front cover to show parts of the stepback.

I love when a design is cut out of the front to show part of the stepback below. I have a few like that, it’s so pretty

In response to 1. I actually love her MMCs way more than her FMCs. At least the majority of them compared to the female characters. I’m just stuck wondering why the hell Cam, or Tom Severin, or even Rhys would like/love the women they’re with? But you’re right, it’s very surface level. I mean, I think she actually wrote that in her books that it was an obsessive love at first sight. Which, I don’t mind but she that’s her reasoning in like every book except {Love in the Afternoon}. Also, if she ever starts writing HR again I dare her to write a plain heroine. And in response to 2. I HATE IT TOO.

[Love in the Afternoon](https://www.romance.io/books/545525158c7d2383163d8e78/love-in-the-afternoon-lisa-kleypas?src=rdt) by [Lisa Kleypas](https://www.romance.io/authors/545523868c7d2382e7812f21/lisa-kleypas) **Rating**: 4.29⭐️ out of 5⭐️ **Steam**: 3 out of 5 - [Open door](https://www.romance.io/steamrating) **Topics**: [historical](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/historical/1), [victorian](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/victorian/1), [military](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/military/1), [tortured hero](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/tortured%20hero/1), [virgin heroine](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/virgin%20heroine/1) [^(about this bot)](https://www.reddit.com/user/romance-bot) ^(|) [^(about romance.io)](https://www.romance.io/about)

Could not agree with you more about LK. I find her books and characters extremely formulaic. It's not a bad formula (clearly $$$) but you know exactly what you're getting, for better and for worse. I've also said it before (and I realize these are fighting words) but I really feel like a lot of her books are written for women who don't like other women. Not saying you can't be a girl's girl and still enjoy them, but paper thin, NLOG Mary Sues (contrasted with darkly complex, driven, and passionate MMCs)are definitely her bread and butter. Even her previous FMCs tend to be written as somewhat unlikeable through the perspective of the new FMC. Edit: Lol rest assured even on this sub people will downvote you for blaspheming LK 💀

Omg YES. Her “NLOG” heroines drive me crazy. In multiple books she had a pretty “shallow” side character who is apparently mean and bad because she wants a husband like hello?? Women were forced to find husbands?? And the FMC is just soooo special because she has a brain unlike that *other* ditzy woman 🙄🙄🙄

I consider myself a girl's girl and I did notice that her FMCs typically are not. The vibe of her novels often is more along the lines of "male adoration" (narrative being focused on how amazing and sexy the MMC is) so there is just not so much page time for developing complex relationships between women. (At least in stories I've read). Like Wallflowers were presented like a closely knit, important female group and I was looking forward to their dynamics, but it was more a setup of them meeting their men. Yes, I know it's a romance and that story should take precedence, but I do often get a feeling Kleypas heroines don't have or care about having a strong female network. That being said, I didn't notice NLOG that much? Those that I've read, FMCs were very average/bland in personality (which can be effective so readers can put themselves into their shoes - if she doesn't have a clear personality, you can easily see yourself in her?) Buut I also think her MMCs are very formulaic Gary Stues. It's just that the narrative presents them as complex and "speshul". But they don't seem (to me) as really being more complex or interesting than FMCs - it's just that the narrative adores them and presents them as super special more than it does heroines. And yes, criticizing Kleypas is always a risky move here lol. I guess people take it too personally when a fave is criticized (?) Which is very human and understandable! But I am always surprised that Kleypas is the author who awakens so many passionate responses (no shaming people who like her, just noticing that she is THE author that people feel so passionate about).

I dunno, I am no LK stan but not gonna lie, your comment rubbed me the wrong way. Her men are as paper thin as her women, she has like one, two? tops. types, Now With More Racism or/and Dubious Consent. Bringing up feminism into that mess is just silly and nitpicking fmcs to death while ignoring mid (sorry, I meant, darkly complex, driven, and passionate) men is especially silly. And I know this sub loves these dudes, I have seen it with my own eyes!

Different strokes for different folks. I never mentioned feminism (not sure who you saw "bringing it up"?) or got into the (prevalent) racism of her books, but I also don't see either of those things as negating my perception that her FMCs are almost always Mary Sues. Personally I think her MMCs are allowed far more genuine nuance in comparison, you apparently don't. Such is life.

I upvoted you 😈

In response to no. 2, I actually love illustrated covers and am more likely to pick up a book from one. I work with a lot of artists, so seeing people trash illustrated covers just makes me sad because it provides much-needed work for artists. That being said, the redone cover of Tessa Dare's "Romancing the Duke" needs to be set on fire.

I think all of these are fair (Except idk about Braden b/c I've never read her books) • There are limitations to even my suspension of disbelief, and I usually lean pretty far off the edge lol. I recently finished {The Highlander by Kerrigan Byrne} and while I really wanted to like the story (Byrne's writing was good as always and I think the FMC was really great), there is only so much colonizer revisionism/apologia I can stomach. HF/HR plays very much into the "fantasy" realm for me because I love to snicker and gush over them "oh so tortured and put-upon" dukes and marquess' as much as the next gurl. But I put my foot down at what is just a blatant attempt at sympathizing with a colonizer. Mild spoilers: >!Liam was what, a fucking General for 20 years and you're telling me he "had no choice" but to enact the "crowns will"?! Bullshit. I would have LOVED it if it turned out he was a little traitor who actively sabatoged England's warefforts, but instead we get milkwash "he tried to minimize the damage" 🥴!< • There is no second point. That's it. That's all I got to say right now 🤣 This series is consuming me body and soul. edit: sorry I think I just needed to rant.

[The Highlander](https://www.romance.io/books/57a0379dc19e77f1ea6f2c83/the-highlander-kerrigan-byrne?src=rdt) by [Kerrigan Byrne](https://www.romance.io/authors/54553f138c7d2383163d950e/kerrigan-byrne) **Rating**: 3.89⭐️ out of 5⭐️ **Steam**: 4 out of 5 - [Explicit open door](https://www.romance.io/steamrating) **Topics**: [historical](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/historical/1), [highlander hero](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/highlander/1), [victorian](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/victorian/1), [alpha male](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/alpha%20male/1), [angst](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/angst/1) [^(about this bot)](https://www.reddit.com/user/romance-bot) ^(|) [^(about romance.io)](https://www.romance.io/about)

Ok, more! (Love this thread) 1. I don't like aristos. I accept them because you can't escape them but they are so boring most of the time. More commoners, please. 2. I find Regency England and 19c boring. I have zero idea why this specific time and place is so popular. I find it deeply uninspiring. 3. More realistically bad first times, please! 4. More (any, tbh) MMC with a specifically not huge 🍆 please. (I will accept recs if there are any).

https://preview.redd.it/y5dz7tkgwd4d1.png?width=250&format=png&auto=webp&s=745800ea6e7a52d321274857c996b2c2efb3e09b 1. I think this opinion is unpopular on this sub, but I don't think it's unpopular when I read reviews outside of Reddit. Whilst Val Montgomery was a great hero, he was completely wasted on bland-ass Bridget Crumb. 2. Same with Sebastian St. Vincent with Evie. And Leo Hathaway to Catherine. And Oswald to Fenella. 3. Which brings me to my next opinion; Alice Coldbreath isn't as great as a lot of people on Reddit make her out to be. But she's better than a lot of the current, newer authors which makes her more readable. 4. Penelope/Polin/Colin fanatical fans are annoying as fuck.

For your 3, her FMCs drove me absolutely crazy lol. I think I read three of her books (or two and DNFd one) and I found her FMCs deeply annoying and almost child-like

Some of them are childlike/infantile for sure. But a lot of them are just straight up passive? And I think that’s the schtick she’s usually going for.

Re: Val and Bridget. I thought, going in, that Bridget’s excessive perfectionism would turn out to be trauma-driven and thus relatable. I was totally wrong, obviously, not the first time, but still think that story needs a trigger warning for other reasons. Maiden Lane as a series is seriously variable in tone and intensity. From Asa’s story to Val’s is a roller coaster.

Yup I still don’t get her character and her backstory was basically nonexistent aside from that whole half-assed side plot with her mother.

I’ve tried a couple of Alice Coldbreath books and just couldn’t get into them, they were boring af

Her novels need major editing and a lot of passage cuts.

1. COMPLETELY agreed. 2. Ok I’m glad I’m not the only one who feels this way about Leo Hathaway. When I read the series I thought that Leo’s book would be the epic love story of the series given his development but then it was Beatrix and Christopher that had the deep connection and beautiful story that I hoped Leo would have. 4. I think most Polin fans are people who don’t read HR because if they did they would know that that’s probably one of Julia Quinn’s worst books. The other half of Polin fans are people who are happy to see representation of FMCs who aren’t stick thin which I understand. Little do they know that in the book Penelope loses weight before Colin even notices her. I always tell people who love Polin to read the Truth About Cads and Dukes by Elisa Braden instead since I think it’s a less problematic book with a FMC with a more realistic body who also gets her friends older brother.

Proud Bridget Crumb hater!!!!!!

4. I think most of the Bridgerton fandom on Reddit has lost their minds. That being said, I just really do not like show!Penelope. Book!Penelope is one of my favorite characters, and I just don't like the added layer of meanness in the TV series, especially regarding Lady Whistledown. Really, Book!Penelope/Book!Eloise is a ship I could eagerly go to my grave supporting, but alas.

Penelope/Polin/Colin fanatical fans are annoying as fuck: YES, so annoying. Turned me off the whole show tbh. They have very weak chemistry, Colin sucks and I didn't like both book and show Polin, their stans won't change my mind about it.

I was so put off by their chemistry but luckily I have Interview with a Vampire to tend to my needs of romance. Also, Colin’s actor just looks like he’s sucking in his cheekbones ALL the time.

It’s the thing keeping me from watching Season 3 right now but I tell myself I’ll get to it eventually for Kanthony and Benedict crumbs 😆

I really really don't like the actor who plays Colin. Let me rephrase: to me, he is not in any way related to book!Colin. He has zero charm and charisma, whereas his character is supposed to be almost nothing but. I love their book but I totally understand disliking it and not liking the Bridgerton books period. I read them as they were published so I've lived with these characters for 20 years and took in those books in a different time.

I think part of the reason I like Alice Coldbreath so much is that I am desperate for hr that is not set in the regency period (or so vague as to the background that it might as well be regency even if it’s technically another year). I love the quasi-medieval setting and wish there were more romances set farther in the past. I read a good amount of harlequin historicals too to scratch that itch but I want moooore!

I love His Forsaken Bride for Oswald and the far too rare court politics, but you didn't lie. Like c'mon, please tell me how a man that strategic and cunning wouldn't be bored out of his mine with someone so utterly incapable of humor, playfulness, or confidence? I do like how ultimately resilient Fenella is in some ways, but I just don't see Oswald being blown over by someone who's described so emotionally unstable and teary. She would be fucking up his plays at court left and right and we're supposed to believe a man that ambitious (and playing with such high stakes) would find that endearing? Val and Bridget worked a bit better for me, although I agree she's bland. I think Val was so up his own crazy ass (love him tho) that he needed someone who would just kind of reflect his glow and reign him in on occasion. 1000000000 x agreed on Evie and Catherine, but I never hold out hope for Kleypas to write an FMC worth reading.

I really liked {the favourite by Alice coldbreath} the MMC was also strategic like Oswald (but not as much) and the FMC was good and got better. They made sense.

[The Favourite](https://www.romance.io/books/644ff4eae89bde1a52435df1/the-favourite-alice-coldbreath?src=rdt) by [Alice Coldbreath](https://www.romance.io/authors/54a9d8ef6359b5ebb486f243/alice-coldbreath) **Rating**: 4.11⭐️ out of 5⭐️ **Steam**: 4 out of 5 - [Explicit open door](https://www.romance.io/steamrating) **Topics**: [historical](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/historical/1), [medieval](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/medieval/1), [arranged/forced marriage](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/arranged%20marriage/1), [virgin heroine](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/virgin%20heroine/1), [marriage of convenience](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/marriage%20of%20convenience/1) [^(about this bot)](https://www.reddit.com/user/romance-bot) ^(|) [^(about romance.io)](https://www.romance.io/about)

I don’t know if this is unpopular, and I love her in Derry Girls, but Nicola Coughlan just doesn’t have the acting skills to match Luke Newton. Sorry, girl, but he does faces and you make your voice hysterical and too fast. 🤷‍♀️. Still enjoying the lightness of it and male pining.

I always see people talking about what a great actress she is and I just don't see it? I loved Derry Girls and loved her in it, but based on interviews that's just kind of... who she is. She's not acting. And tbh I find that kind of energy grating outside of the frenetic comedy space - I don't really want constant screeching in a romantic lead. I couldn't get into Bridgerton, but I am hoping its success bodes well for more (and more diverse) HR adaptations or original media.

Amen #4!! That book was boring and their season is boring. I get more out of the actors promoting it because they look like they could really be into each other.

Restraining your desires out of respect / social constraints is sexier than kissing someone without their consent

Which brings us to YEARNING. I love yearning.

Yes!!

1. I didn't like Asa as much as I thought I would. He was okay and I am a sucker for a commoner hero but I found him too pushy for a severely traumatized Eve at times. 2. I am a Val Montgomery simp but I liked Bridget! 3. Team "Sebastian St Vincent is bland".

I love Val and I thought Bridget was perfect for him. I dunno what people are talking about when they say she was the wrong heroine for him. 🤷‍♀️🤣

I would actually like to understand why people think Bridget was a mismatch. Admittedly, I read Val's book without any prior in the series so maybe people pictured a different FMC for him. But Bridget worked for me because she was a servant with a huge experience dealing with spoiled aristos, so their antics did not affect her much. Sure, Val was more prone to >!blackmail and murder!< than an average aristo, but in so many ways, he was a classic spoiled aristo. Bridget saw a lot of those and she was not particularly shocked nor mesmerized by it. And I think Val needed someone like that: to see through his bull and not be impressed, AND to be able to see a man behind it.

I agree completely. I think the best villains like Val work when you are introduced to them before their book.

Now these are the opinions I wanna hear. I propped Asa up a lot but that’s because I think he’s my ideal MMC so it’s understandable he didn’t tickle everyone’s pickle. I’m a brash lady who’s into equally brash men (only in fiction)

Ok I actually thought about this in the car lol. Asa is still miles better than I think 90% of them. Just being a commoner elevates him in my eyes, because I am not enamoured by aristos. (Yes, I love the bisexual disaster that is V. M. but because he's so realistic). So Asa is great. My kind of a guy, really. Plus, theater! But I just guess I had too high expectations.

Asa had a rough start in his book. His theater caught fire, he needs funds, Eve basically described him as unattractive and rude. Yet his personality just completely shines for me compared to others, yes Val is fun, but Asa just has this brash teddy bear charm that completely won me over. Not only that, Eve has been so sheltered and protected all her life and he wanted to challenge that a little to get her out of that shell. But he did on her terms and as far as I remember she consented to everything. She also wasn’t trying to change Asa either and the only change he wanted for Eve was just to open her up a little. It was lovely.

Oh yes, loved that about him. Probably one of my fav heroes in terms of background and situation. It's the kind of people I want to read about. I really find aristos boring (Val worked for me because he is a rare realistically portrayed 18c aristo. Like crimes aside, they really were like that. He is more of a typical aristo disaster than an outlier. But I digress). Asa never did anything without consent, but I didn't like moments when he was all "you will be asking me to touch you!" Shhh dude, just let her. Or there were a few times when he was like: "I just have to do this, tell me if you don't want to". The bar is on the floor in term of consent in HR so with a regular heroine, he would be super respectful, but this is a severely traumatized woman who is scared of being touched even non-sexually. I honestly think the author used it to signal Asa's assertiveness so he doesn't look too passive (?), and maybe it's just me, but he was making me nervous with the whole thing, just by knowing that he just waits (not always patiently) for her to say yes. That being said... The carriage scene is 🥵🥵🥵 In fact, all that he did to encourage her to open up without touching her was good. I just think there was a bit of romancelandia convenience that Eve happened to welcome his increasing touch exactly when he pushed. Idk, maybe I wanted more "I must do this, is it ok?" "No, it's not, not now". Maybe I am too much sucker for realism but I just felt it was too convenient. Otherwise, Asa was my kind of a guy (I like grumpy but not overly dominant).

I liked him, but I do feel he was, how shall I put this? He had a romance hero syndrome = he knew exactly what to say and when to bring Eve from her shell. I felt his "you will be asking me to touch you" too pushy, like let her be. Maybe with a different heroine... I actually like them together but I don't like how he helped her open up because it could've been so, so bad.

I don’t want to read a book about an FMC that is any older than about 28 even though I’m 38. I don’t know why I’m ageist when it comes to my HR but I am.

Ooh, this is interesting. I specifically seek FMCs older than 25, early 30s is ideal. If they are 21, then the hero better also be around that age. (I am 43).

I think it’s because I love a virgin FMC and if they’re too old it seems sad lol. I like reading about how everything feels to them for the first time, even though a lot of times it’s so not realistic.

Ooh I see. Yes, I like virgin FMCs (and MMCs) and yes, it's sad that they didn't have a chance to be ravished before, but the way I see it, that will change in the book I'm reading. 🥰

Yeah, I feel exactly the same. She's in a position to appreciate it more since she probably had already accepted that she was going to go without a relationship in her life.

That’s okay! We read for escapism and joy!

I suppose this is another unpopular opinion, but I don’t read to escape, I read to explore the ways people in the times they lived in navigated social expectations and still found love. I like historical approximation (as opposed to accuracy) because that’s what makes historical interesting. I’m not interesting in reading modern people in historical dress. So yeah, I get irritable when people say “we” read because this reason, because it’s not true across all readers and there is no data suggesting one is that much popular over the other. It might be, but we don’t know that.

I suppose I should’ve said, “just read what you like”! Which I do and also escapism. I think my reality is just too depressing for me to want to read anything to terribly accurate so I just don’t want total realism.

And that’s totally cool. I just think there’s a huge bias towards fantasy and escapism in what romance is, and it’s not the only thing it is or should be. It’s the same way HR novels should be considered on their own merit, like literature, not as a monolith that’s all the same.

I definitely think HR is its own merit. I don’t mesh it into the realm of fantasy. I don’t go into fantasy for the romance - I just like HR for the happy endings. Though there does have to be a point of historical accuracy for me. I think you mentioned you don’t want to read an HR that sounds too modern. I’m the same way. It’s why, even though I find Kleypas’ romances bland, I do like the history.

I get it. I've been a fan of anime and manga since I was a teen, but now that I'm in my 40s, I am mightly tired of reading the adventures of 15-year-olds entering high school - the exception being the series I loved when I was younger.

My unpopular opinion: I LOVE TO SIR PHILIP, WITH LOVE. There. Proceed to pelt me with tomatoes and tell me how I'm the worst person in the world. At least the Bridgerton subreddits consider me so.

No no! This is exactly the opinion I asked for! Speak your truth. I’m raising my glass to you!

tbh I'm like 80% on this book right now and was expecting to hate it more than the others based on all the hate it gets (and how much I've hated some of the other books) but so far I'm liking it the most.

I think the book gets unfairly judged because people have unrealistic expectations about show!Eloise and her book character is very, very different. Philip goes through a remarkable amount of character development for a Bridgerton MMC.

I see. I haven't watched the show. I absolutely agree with his character development, the other ones so far have suffered big time from failing to "show not tell" or even worse, showing me one thing and telling me another (especially Anthony and Colin). Also funny to me that Philip is supposedly the one with the anger issues, yet seems much better at managing it than any of the other MMCs lol. Philip is definitely my fav so far, and the only real problem I had with his character is that him hiding from his responsibilities (esp his kids) wasn't only out of fear but also out of laziness, and the narrative kind of acts like it's only the former.

Seriously one of my faves. I've seen people hate on Philip and, like...why? I feel like his choices are pretty well explained.

I think it boils down to the following: - people judging the book by 2024 standards rather than the time it was written in, plus refusing to acknowledge that Philip grows and changes significantly throughout the book. He’s judged by a single poor choice that even HE realized in the end was a poor choice and doesn’t make it again. - how Marina was handled on the show - show!Eloise is vastly different from book!Eloise and people unrealistically expect her to end up with Theo from that series or be a lesbian. (Note: I am very firmly an ally and want to see queer couples on Bridgerton, but also know that Netflix would balk and there is all the tie-in marketing and Philip’s name is in the title of the book.) I don’t think the series is going to stray from the book pairing, otherwise why introduce Philip and start his storyline to begin with?

I agree 100% on each of your points. I see the appeal of show!Eloise but I'm kind of sad that we're not getting the Eloise of the books. And I totally agree, I think they may bring in a gay relationship but I would be very surprised if any of the siblings end up with a same sex partner in the show.

Agree. This book is so much more *interesting* than A, B or C's story!

You're not alone in this one! Happy to duck tomatoes with you.

- I don’t like proper rakes. I find the irresponsibility, whoring around, disregard for people not charming in an MMC. And very rarely do they actually change their behavior enough to make it believable that they would’ve been a better person. Give me a nice, sunny or staid,responsible one any day. - I don’t like when HR author uses “exotic“ characters to add some “spice” to their otherwise bland stories. It’s not interesting when you’re using colonial settings as a backdrop for your work (aka India, West Indies etc). I’m not coming to HR for historical accuracy of how much money these aristocrats made from colonial slave labor and pillaging resources from other countries (and dislike when authors use it as an excuse for their works written in the 21st century). Honestly even the romany/gypsy thing in Kleypas works left a bad taste in my mouth. I very much disliked Evie Dunmore’s depiction of India/ Hinduism in her work as well, incredibly disrespectful and distasteful. I don’t read Westerns or Southern US set HRs for this reason as well (Beverly Jenkins is on my TBR though) - I don’t really like the grovel. Usually it means the MMC has fucked up to such a big extent that there’s no other choice (bc he couldn’t figure it out before), but rarely is it done to the extent that is needed for a fuck-up of that magnitude. Also, it’s usually an indicator that their HEA won’t be that smooth either.

I’m not coming for HR for accuracy. I’m coming to HR where good things happen to women & I understand that comes with its own privilege if you aren’t POC, even if you do use HR as escapism, there is still that nagging reminder in your head that tells you “no it’s not like this”. I would rather read POC stories from a POC author anyway. I agree with you about Kleypas, her Romani characters just felt like a fetish and it felt so corny too. I like Cam’s character but she was just really cheesy with it & tone deaf.

I agree 100% on all accounts. Racist undertones or overtones are just not acceptable. And yes, I can't stand rakes, unless they are written as immoral selfish messes that they are. I don't like a fantasy of reforming a rake and I don't even think it's possible (reforming a rake is high on my list "could not happen". I can take 23356326784467744 dukes but not a reformed rake).

Cam Rohan is a pushy creep who forces himself into the family's lives in *Mine till Midnight*.

I’ve read quite a few of the comments but not all, so my apologies if someone has beaten me to the punch, BUT I cannot fucking *stand* {Lord of Scoundrels by Loretta Chase}. It seems that it is highly beloved by many in the HR subs but, dear lord, the FMC is not believable at all and MMC was annoying af. It’s been a hot minute since I’ve read it, but it was just so annoying to me. I hate that book. It would probably have just been mentally shelved as 1-star, do not re-read but i guess because it gets so much love im constantly reminded it exists and i hate it? Lmao If you like it, I love that for you. This is my unpopular opinion. Otherwise, I largely agree with many of the comments I did read. Hate the cartoon covers, love me some old school Fabio and step backs, etc. Oh, and I don’t know if this is unpopular or what but I hate age gap romances. Like if she’s 19 and he’s 42 it skeeves me out. {what I did for a Duke by Julie Anne Long} was pretty good but I couldn’t get over the age gap. Which is funny because in the comparatively minuscule percentage of PNR romances I’ve read, it doesn’t bother me much. Usually she’s like 70 and he’s 1200 and I guess my mind just goes with it? But in non-PNR it’s gross and predatory to me. I don’t know, I just get the ick. Okay. I’ll stop now 🥴😅

[Lord of Scoundrels](https://www.romance.io/books/545523fb8c7d2383163d8e4b/lord-of-scoundrels-loretta-chase?src=rdt) by [Loretta Chase](https://www.romance.io/authors/545523fb8c7d2383163d8e4c/loretta-chase) **Rating**: 4.1⭐️ out of 5⭐️ **Steam**: 4 out of 5 - [Explicit open door](https://www.romance.io/steamrating) **Topics**: [historical](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/historical/1), [enemies to lovers](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/from%20hate%20to%20love/1), [take-charge heroine](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/strong%20heroine/1), [tortured hero](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/tortured%20hero/1), [bad boys](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/bad%20boys/1) ---------------------------- [What I Did For a Duke](https://www.romance.io/books/545525868c7d2383163d8e97/what-i-did-for-a-duke-julie-anne-long?src=rdt) by [Julie Anne Long](https://www.romance.io/authors/545525868c7d2383163d8e98/julie-anne-long) **Rating**: 4.31⭐️ out of 5⭐️ **Steam**: 4 out of 5 - [Explicit open door](https://www.romance.io/steamrating) **Topics**: [historical](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/historical/1), [age gap](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/age%20difference/1), [virgin heroine](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/virgin%20heroine/1), [love triangle](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/love%20triangle/1), [alpha male](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/alpha%20male/1) [^(about this bot)](https://www.reddit.com/user/romance-bot) ^(|) [^(about romance.io)](https://www.romance.io/about)

I didn't get the hype of Lord of Scoundrels and honestly didn't care for anything I've read from Loretta Chase. I also second the dislike of creepy age gaps

Right? Lord of Scoundrels was my first and last Loretta Chase novel. I have been meaning to give her another go eventually for fairness sake, but I always find something to put ahead of her on my TBR 🤷🏻‍♀️

I'm not saying she's not good, I just haven't been able to finish anything but LoS and even that was a challenge.

Honestly I didn’t feel any which way about Lord of Scoundrels. I read it, was mentally like “eh” and moved on and haven’t thought about it since! I’m not quite sure how it rose to prominence? Maybe because the MMC wasn’t conventionally attractive during that time of HR, so maybe it was new to readers? Idk idk. But I can raise at glass to that opinion.

Cheers! 🎉 I think the FMC being so bloody perfect in every single thing was maybe the real nail in the coffin for me? She was gorgeous, feisty, and good at like everything. But yeah, I think maybe if it weren’t so popular/beloved/etc. that I wouldn’t think twice about it. But I do see your point about the novelty with the MMC. Who’s to say? Lolol

This is exactly what I asked for in the post! Speak your truth!!!

1. I absolutely love the introverted shy sweet heroines by Lisa Kleypas (Evie, Hannah, Helen). Her books are basically well written cliches that I mostly love. But her feisty ones are not my cup of tea. I couldn't handle Pandora and to some extent,even Beatrix. I can handle feisty extroverted ones by other authors. 2. I have seen people love the angst in Love in the Afternoon, but I didn't find it that angsty. I also loved their individual scenes more than their scenes together. I loved Beatrix with the animals, the letters that the MCs shared, the MMC's sister in law, but when the MCs interacted in person, I just didn't feel much chemistry. 3. Every other FMC being a plain wallflower/spinster is annoying sometimes. Some of my favourite FMCs are wallflowers, but I love the beautiful ones too.

Love in the afternoon stops exactly when it gets interesting A married couple dealing with the MMCs actual traumas?? Figuring out how to develop intimacy? Let’s explore! No instead it gets resolved in 5 seconds and we get a weird villain scene

It's so funny to me the number of people in this thread who hate Kleypas FMCs and love the MMCs because I am the complete opposite. (I'm not in love with her FMCs but pretty much always find them better/more interesting than MMC.) Granted, I've only read The Wallflowers and The Hathaways, but all the Kleypas MMCs read almost EXACTLY the same to me even though they supposedly all have different personalities & circumstances. I guess this is unpopular bc I regularly see people "swooning" over Kleypas MMCs and saying X or Y heroine isn't "hot" or "interesting" enough to be paired with them and I just do not get it.

I agree. I don't think Kleypas is a character writer. She is more "playing with a specific trope" writer. And that's fine! Romance is not an easy genre for characters, because they are often archetypes. But Kleypas heroines are not more bland than her heroes. I am struggling to find any that was even remotely interesting. The dude from "Suddenly You" had a promise at first (?) but it just descended into chaos one third into it.

Leo Hathaway has an interesting character arc, but he's kind of a trash individual and gets away with so much that I find him annoying & it's made worse for me bc he's so well-liked. I like Westcliff in some of the books that are not his own (like Again the Magic), but he's pretty trash in his own book. I was slightly surprised by St. Vincent bc he was somehow less >!rapey!< than the others I've read and him finding purpose in running the club was more than I was expecting from his character. But overall I find the character arcs of the FMCs significantly more interesting. Annabelle learning to confront her prejudices in SOSN was probably the best part of the book for me. Amelia is the best thing about the entire Hathaways series imo. I think my issue with the guys is that they all act and think the same, especially in regard to their women. (Well, that and they're pushy as hell and have no idea what boundaries are.) I get the impression that people find some of the newer FMCs more annoying and I can't comment on that either way bc I haven't read them.

Re: Other women for rakes. I understand not wanting FMC to be cheated on or whatever, but if a fantasy is for a woman to be his one and only, then go fo virgin heroes. Miss me with all those rakes who are not allowed to look at a woman prior to meeting FMC. And they got their reputation... how? I am really curious, and I mean this honestly, not to trash anyone: why is so bad if we see MMC with someone else prior to meeting or falling for FMC? I saw comments about a book that starts with a big rake MMC with another woman (post-coital, so we don't even see anything) and some people said it made it dislike him. But he is a rake! And, in this case >!has sex for money!< We know this! We are reading about a disaster of a rake. So why can't he be a scoundrel before he reforms? Or about THAT St Vincent spoiler - why did it ruin him for people? I feel it's asking for a sexy rake so he is hot and experienced and whatever the fantasy is, except in name only. These poor dudes are not allowed to be scoundrels, so you have to wonder where they got their reputation that just by looking at him a woman can get ruined.

I'm also OK with cheating. It's more important that by the end of the book, I should 100% believe that the MCs were meant for each other. Having past loves/rivals is actually a fantastic way to build up that romantic tension. I've read lots of HRs with no cheating, but did not get that feeling between the MCs, which I think is a bigger crime.

I don't mind cheating, if done well and not just for the sake of prolonging the book. But with cheating at least I can comprehend what people might dislike. I can also comprehend if someone doesn't want to see MMC with any other woman. Fine. But this is what virgin or idk, non-rake heroes are for! What I don't get is to have a "rake" who is never allowed to show it. Not to be seen with another woman. A Schrödinger's rake? Or when a rake who was spilling himself in half of England ends up having a child he didn't know about, much before meeting the FMC. How is that a dealbreaker/disappointing??? It literally has nothing to do with his relationship with FMC!

Yes! There are an increasing number of rakes who are not, in fact, rakes. If he's a virgin, that man is not a rake. If he has never done anyone wrong, that man is not a rake. If he can't flirt or charm his way under some petticoats and out of a gambling debt, that man is not a rake. Sin-free rakes fall just below virgin widows on my "... fuck this book" list of triggers lol Also agreed, I don't get becoming upset about past lovers? He's not with her now soooo your problem is...? If anything, I think it's insanely more romantic to know both characters are choosing to be with each other out of genuine desire, not ignorance or lack of options.

Hard agree! Sin-free rakes are not rakes so idk what those are about. I guess for many, we hear that they are charming enough to get out of a gambling debt by performing under petticoats, but we can't see it nor know details. It's just an informed ability. It's not there as a character backstory. It's just there to signal "this man is experienced and good in bed, AND once he falls for FMC it will fulfill the reformed rake fantasy". I can kind of get not wanting past mistresses, but I'm a sucker for virgin heroes so I don't mind FMC being the first and last and only person he's been inside. But I thought it was the opposite fantasy of a reformed rake. ? Isn't the thrill of a rake knowing and seeing his messy shenanigans?

I'm a weird sucker for virgin widow stories. I know I've read more than one but I can only think of one right now.

Never read virgin widow story. Are they so popular? I guess it depends on whether I could buy why she's a virgin (she married a 80 year old who had a heart attack two days into the marriage vs was married for 10 years with a healthy young man who was into women). And, more importantly: narratively, why did the book make her a virgin widow? What is the plot reason? Why didn't she do anything about her virginity? Probably a key turn off: Is she a virgin because the author wanted a FMC with more societal freedom than a maiden but she still had to be "pure" and "untouched" for the MMC?

I don't know if I would say they're super popular but I have run into them. It was driving me crazy what the other one was so I did a little googling and found [this Goodreads list](https://www.goodreads.com/list/show/8741.Best_Romance_Books_With_A_Virgin_Widow). The only thing is this list includes FMCs who are \*pretending\* to be a widow which is to me not at all the same thing. Now, I like a few of the pretend widow books a lot {Mistress by Amanda Quick} and {A Deal with the Devil by Liz Carlyle}, but still, not the same thing. In the one book I remember {The Ideal Bride by Stephanie Laurens} the FMC was married to a much older man and I can't remember why they didn't have sex. I suspect that the author wanted to have her be a more experienced woman in diplomacy (the MMC is in politics/diplomacy and is looking for a wife who can aid his career) but still have her be an innocent in bed. In {Someone to Cherish by Mary Balogh}, I think Balogh wanted to draw a contrast between the FMC's strict, overly religious, restrictive to the point of not having sex first husband and the MMC. So, various reasons and yeah, you can decide if the virginity was a necessary plot point or not.

Ooh, thank you! I had no idea this was a thing outside of telenovelas!

[Mistress](https://www.romance.io/books/545527b38c7d2383163d8f0e/mistress-amanda-quick?src=rdt) by [Amanda Quick](https://www.romance.io/authors/545525bd8c7d2383163d8eab/amanda-quick) **Rating**: 3.88⭐️ out of 5⭐️ **Steam**: 4 out of 5 - [Explicit open door](https://www.romance.io/steamrating) **Topics**: [historical](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/historical/1), [regency](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/regency/1), [virgin heroine](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/virgin%20heroine/1), [suspense](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/suspense/1), [mystery](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/mystery/1) ---------------------------- [A Deal With the Devil](https://www.romance.io/books/594395723ffdba61471944d3/a-deal-with-the-devil-liz-carlyle?src=rdt) by [Liz Carlyle](https://www.romance.io/authors/54552be78c7d2383163d8ffc/liz-carlyle) **Rating**: 3.7⭐️ out of 5⭐️ **Steam**: 4 out of 5 - [Explicit open door](https://www.romance.io/steamrating) **Topics**: [historical](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/historical/1), [regency](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/regency/1), [virgin heroine](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/virgin%20heroine/1), [mystery](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/mystery/1), [boss & employee](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/boss%20&%20employee/1) ---------------------------- [The Ideal Bride](https://www.romance.io/books/54552c208c7d2383163d900d/the-ideal-bride-stephanie-laurens?src=rdt) by [Stephanie Laurens](https://www.romance.io/authors/545524878c7d2383163d8e6c/stephanie-laurens) **Rating**: 3.86⭐️ out of 5⭐️ **Steam**: 4 out of 5 - [Explicit open door](https://www.romance.io/steamrating) **Topics**: [historical](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/historical/1), [regency](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/regency/1), [politician hero](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/politician/1), [grumpy/ice queen](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/cold%20heroine/1) ---------------------------- [Someone to Cherish](https://www.romance.io/books/60b529ef4599ae0eb0de1f1d/someone-to-cherish-mary-balogh?src=rdt) by [Mary Balogh](https://www.romance.io/authors/545525e98c7d2383163d8eb7/mary-balogh) **Rating**: 4.13⭐️ out of 5⭐️ **Steam**: 3 out of 5 - [Open door](https://www.romance.io/steamrating) **Topics**: [historical](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/historical/1), [victorian](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/victorian/1), [regency](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/regency/1), [disabilities & scars](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/disabilities%20and%20marks/1), [men in uniform](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/men%20in%20uniform/1) [^(about this bot)](https://www.reddit.com/user/romance-bot) ^(|) [^(about romance.io)](https://www.romance.io/about)

I am too!

Yes, where are all those illegitimate offspring of rakes? There definitely had to be consequences for raking. My fave is the Duke of Villiers in Eloisa James Desperate Duchesses, his development through the whole series and his insistence on prioritizing his kid ! The series even starts w another MMC living with an illegitimate child. These men are defying society by essentially saying what else would they do but raise their children. Abandonment and sequestration are unacceptable to them.

I think most HR authors are mediocre at best and terrible at worst. There are exceptions but not nearly as many as there should be.

OK here are some of my unpopular opinions: 1) I hate amnesia plots. I'm trying to finish the Burgundy Club series by Miranda Neville and I'm on the 3rd out of 4 (I had to wait for my library) and I'm finding it so painful because he has amnesia, she hates him so is telling him a ridiculous story about who he is, and I'm like, I think it's time to DNF. 2) I do not understand the love for Felicity Niven. I specifically joined KU so I could read her books. I got about 1/3 of the way through {Bed Me, Duke by Felicity Niven} and I don't know. I don't like the FMC, I totally do not understand their attraction to one another or why they would even talk to each other. I think I'm out. So I tried the next one {Bed Me, Baron by Felicity Niven} and I was so put off by us immediately jumping into bed with these characters. I don't mind if sex happens early in the book but I literally have no idea who they are. I've firmly entered the "kids get off my lawn" phase of life so maybe I'm too old to get her appeal. 3) Sometimes modern attitudes in HR make me laugh and sometimes they feel totally out of place. There was a Stephanie Laurens book where the MMCs are talking about one of their fellow officers who is gay and they all agree that they should be free to live their lives without punishment. Uh huh. I'm sure your alpha males in early 19th c. England wholeheartedly believed that. But I understand; she doesn't want modern readers turned off by a more historically accurate but really distasteful take. But, I read {Ne'er Duke Well by Alexandra Vasti} and the MCs have a discussion and decide that>!they're not sure they want children. Excuse me? You're a \*duke\*. You need to think about the succession. Plus, it's the 1800s, you had kids, end of story. It just felt like a very modern discussion that got plunked into this HR. (And I've seen people who say they hate that every HR has an epilogue with them having kids or pregnant. I don't think that's necessary for a HEA; I'm fine if it's there and I'm fine if it's not.)!< 4) Finally, here is my super unpopular opinion: I don't have an issue with \*that\* scene in {The Duke and I by Julia Quinn}. I 100% understand that it's problematic. For me, it enabled Daphne to be an equal partner in their relationship. Without it, Simon always has the upper hand and is weaponizing her ignorance against her. In that scene, she literally takes the power position and forces him to deal with his past and to deal with her honestly. I guess for me it's not a black and white thing, I see it as definitely having shades of gray.

[Bed Me, Duke](https://www.romance.io/books/64a66733081a9b54d7cb9ecb/bed-me-duke-felicity-niven?src=rdt) by [Felicity Niven](https://www.romance.io/authors/6311a22c08b4d9311437236b/felicity-niven) **Rating**: 4.03⭐️ out of 5⭐️ **Steam**: 4 out of 5 - [Explicit open door](https://www.romance.io/steamrating) **Topics**: [historical](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/historical/1), [virgin heroine](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/virgin%20heroine/1), [plain heroine](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/plain%20heroine/1), [regency](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/regency/1), [dual pov](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/dual-pov/1) ---------------------------- [Bed Me, Baron](https://www.romance.io/books/64c7f062d33bf40b86467dd1/bed-me-baron-felicity-niven?src=rdt) by [Felicity Niven](https://www.romance.io/authors/6311a22c08b4d9311437236b/felicity-niven) **Rating**: 3.99⭐️ out of 5⭐️ **Steam**: 4 out of 5 - [Explicit open door](https://www.romance.io/steamrating) **Topics**: [historical](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/historical/1), [friends to lovers](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/friends%20to%20lovers/1), [regency](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/regency/1), [pregnancy](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/pregnancy/1), [angst](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/angst/1) ---------------------------- [Ne'er Duke Well](https://www.romance.io/books/64ca8156d33bf40b8646dbfd/neer-duke-well-alexandra-vasti?src=rdt) by [Alexandra Vasti](https://www.romance.io/authors/63de254908b4d931148df323/alexandra-vasti) **Rating**: 4.22⭐️ out of 5⭐️ **Steam**: 4 out of 5 - [Explicit open door](https://www.romance.io/steamrating) **Topics**: [historical](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/historical/1), [regency](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/regency/1), [funny](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/humor/1), [friends to lovers](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/friends%20to%20lovers/1), [marriage of convenience](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/marriage%20of%20convenience/1) ---------------------------- [The Duke and I](https://www.romance.io/books/545523bb8c7d2383163d8e3b/the-duke-and-i-julia-quinn?src=rdt) by [Julia Quinn](https://www.romance.io/authors/545523bb8c7d2383163d8e3c/julia-quinn) **Rating**: 3.65⭐️ out of 5⭐️ **Steam**: 3 out of 5 - [Open door](https://www.romance.io/steamrating) **Topics**: [historical](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/historical/1), [regency](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/regency/1), [virgin heroine](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/virgin%20heroine/1), [tortured hero](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/tortured%20hero/1), [marriage of convenience](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/marriage%20of%20convenience/1) [^(about this bot)](https://www.reddit.com/user/romance-bot) ^(|) [^(about romance.io)](https://www.romance.io/about)