It is that time of year again. Someone pops up and, under the guise of feminism, feels the need to degrade a large group of people. Perhaps it makes them feel better because “they’re not like the other girls”. Regardless, to quote Bo Burnham, “this sorta shit brings the movement down”.
I am, of course, talking about the Telegraph’s article written by Lara Brown published on June 7th 2026, who seems of the opinion that the organisers behind the MeToo movement all secretly want to be sexually harassed. If that sounds somewhat ludicrous, you are correct.
There is a lot to unpack in this article. From the deeply ingrained misogyny that so many women carry to, for some strange reason, attacking people with chronic illnesses. But since we all have limited time, I’ll try my best to focus on, what is in my opinion, the main issue.
Don’t you dare to be sexually bold!
“The generation that ushered in MeToo now proudly displays erotica filled with heavily-eroticised and dubiously consensual BDSM, assault, and coercion on their coffee tables”
Foregoing for a moment that a lot of romantasy doesn’t have a single page of explicit sex; Women have always been under fire for consuming erotica, but are especially under fire when this erotica ventures into kink. It’s a form of rhetoric closely related to “no “decent” woman would ever be a sex worker.” It does not empower women nor does it give women the freedom of choice they deserve. Instead, it simply introduces a new set of rules for the “liberated” woman to follow.
Kink is an incredibly interesting and complicated subject. If journals have been written full of articles on it, my small post is never going to do it justice. But I will try to somewhat succinctly summarise where the crutch of the matter lies. In simple words, so that Lara can also understand them.
Kink is always consensual. Rape is always non-consensual.
Easy, right?
To see kink as an act of inequality promotes the older idea that “to be penetrated is to abdicate power” (Bersani, 212), a school of thought that also promotes ingrained misogyny and homophobia (one man is the bottom or “the woman” in the relationship, and therefore, “lesser” because being a woman is “lesser”).
In kink both partners are willing and equal participants. Regardless of who plays the role of “assaulter”, the “assaultee” has, in advance, agreed with them the level of “assault” that they are consenting to. People who participate in kink will be familiar with the safety net of rules (from safewords to aftercare) that honours both partners as equals. Or, to put in blunt terms: if you are being fucked, and you command your partner to go faster, you are equally as powerful as “the penetrator”.”
Lara wrote “(...) it is hard to square this oft repeated feminist claim with their actual content: coercion, kidnap, and sometimes all-out romanticised rape.”
And I do understand where she comes from. Pornography has traditionally been created by men and for the male gaze, portraying women as passive objects of desire with little will of their own. However, since Lara proclaims to have read these books “so you don’t have to”, she should also know that this is far from the truth when it comes to romantasy books (or that perpetuating this idea as inherent truth comes with its own ingrained misogyny).
Unless you read books about women with strap-ons (which are absolutely out there!), women will often remain the penetrated. But that does not make them less powerful.
The one unrealistic luxury that these fictional women benefit from, is that they do not need to speak about consent beforehand. Both partners often magically know where the line is drawn. What the other does and doesn’t want.
Readers are not only aware of this, they are also in full control of how far they wish to take the relationship with the material they are reading. If a book becomes unpleasant, they can close it. They are given space to explore fantasies without real-world ramifications.
“In a fantasy, the subject usually has voluntary and intentional control over the occurrence and content of the fantasy” (Stephen Kershnar, 254).
That is without mentioning how there is a large group of readers who have experienced sexual assault of the worst kind, who can find reading non-consensual fantasies incredibly empowering. And that is not to speak of all the women who like kink, and see themselves in the position of the penetrator, rather than that of the penetrated. Fantasy "does not entail an identification with a single position within a fantasy; the identification is distributed among various elements in the scene" (Butler, 491).
So, Lara, let me rephrase what you were trying to say: the generation who brought you MeToo, who dared to stand up against sexual assault, now also dares to say that they enjoy erotica. They reject the notion that enjoying erotica is akin to violence against women, because they know that being a woman, being the penetrated, does not make you any less powerful.
Although I feel like that last paragraph was quite the banger of a conclusion, if I might be so bold, there are a few things that still need addressing. I will go through them quickly.
“This may be why so many of its protagonists, bizarrely, seem struck with chronic illnesses.”
I genuinely do not understand how this is “bizarre” when the simplest explanation of “women are badass and strong while also having a chronic illness, and it doesn’t stop them from finding true love” would explain this. In a world where women are told to “be less anxious” when they go to the GP, it’s not weird that being loved while being chronically ill is an empowering fantasy. Unlike your statement that their “incurable affliction drives them into the arms of”, the empowerment comes from being loved by someone (or something even more special than men) whilst having this affliction. Of being able to be a badass independent warrior with a chronic illness. They aren’t driven into arms because, they are strong enough to be their own person.
They are books “Without the world-building or plot”
I’ve seen a lot of anger about this, but honestly cannot take this allegation too seriously. It cannot be clearer that 1) either the books haven’t been read or 2) there’s a disturbing lack of literacy. When there are legions of women who felt empowered by the stories and have gotten quotes tattooed on their bodies, clearly there is something to those stories.
But even if these books were only sex (and there are also plenty that indeed are), there is nothing wrong with letting people enjoy that either. Get off your high horse and step away from your puritan values.
Romance has always sold well, and has always been the subject of scrutiny. How dare women enjoy something?
I, for one, am proud to be sex positive. To believe in sexual equality. And I am happy to see women have healthier relationships with their own sexual desires, rather than feeling the need to hide them.
And, shameless plug, if you want to read a story with plot (oh dear!) and on page sex (shock horror!), give The Druid’s Bindings a try. Our female protagonist feels empowered enough to take on the devil himself (and has a hell of a time doing it)!
Author’s note: Since my post is a response to Lara’s article, I have focused on the male/female relationship in kink and, by proxy, romantasy. There’s a whole world of wonderful (queer) diverse romantasy out there that Lara neglected to mention or look at. To keep this response to a somewhat manageable length, I’ve chosen not to include it either.
Sources cited:
Bersani, L, “Is the rectum a grave?” October Vol. 43, AIDS: Cultural Analysis/Cultural Activism (Winter, 1987), 197-222
Butler, J, “The Force of Fantasy: Feminism, Mapplethorpe, and Discursive Excess” differences (1990) 2 (2), 105–125.
Kershnar, S, “Rape Fantasies and Virtue”, Public Affairs Quarterly, Vol. 22, No. 3 (Jul., 2008), 253-268
Additional relevant literature:
Butler, J, Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity (Routledge 1990)
Lee, L, “Guilty Pleasures: Reading Romance Novels as Reworked Fairy Tales” Marvels & Tales, Vol. 22, No. 1, Erotic Tales (2008), 52-66