[mairdie]

There’s a massive difference between 50 shades (which I only read about and never read), and bodice rippers (which I actually also don’t enjoy, but have read). The first seems to get off on degradation. The second on passionate encounters. Bodice rippers were fascinating when I was of babysitting age. Then you grow up and don’t need them. But I have no memory of their plots humiliating the characters.

[Jim Noble]

The first seems to get off on degradation. The second on passionate encounters.

The Venn diagram of that one is very interesting.

[mewzilla]

Bodice ripper is both a pejorative and generic term. It can be used to include/exclude a lot. There is a lot of great romance fiction which can be classed as a bodice ripper. I'd call E.M. Hull's, The Sheik, probably the grandaddy of the all, as a bodice ripper. And I don't mean that pejoratively. That said, would I want to date the hero in that one? No, but that book was written decades ago. Still a great piece of fiction, though.

[Yaelle]

I head that 50 shades was about s&m and very poorly written. I’d be more likely to read racing forms all day than pick it up. I hate rape and s&m, not sexy at all, and more than that I hate poorly written dreck.