Erastes had a family emergency so author E.N. Holland stepped in with a guest blog today. Enjoy!
I was reading a book recently and Character A and Character B were about to tumble into bed for the first time. The author used the word “lover” to describe the relationship of one man to the other. It pulled me completely out of the story-how could they be lovers? They had not yet been intimate and were barely friends. Given that this was a romance, there was the expectation that they would move to a place of affection, but inserting the word at that point in the story and their acquaintance was jarring to me. The narrative recovered but I have been musing on this usage of language for a few days now.
Think about the way relationships are described in m/m romances. Generally the characters start out as men together, then move to being lovers; publicly, boyfriend is often used as a declaration of a relationship that has moved beyond the friendship stage. In fact, it may be a declaration for the character himself to be more out. Such was the case in All’s Fair in Love and Advertising by Lenore Black (a book I enjoyed, by the way). Max, who was in this thirties but had only been out as a gay man for 10 months finally found the courage to say to his co-workers what they had all suspected for ages: Joe Bennett was not just a friend or potential client; he was his boyfriend.
In my story, Taming Groomzilla, Joel was very deliberate about what he called Luke. First boyfriend, then fiancé, and in the last blazing moments of happiness near the end of the book, husband. In the story we don’t get as much from Luke’s point of view but in reality, he has always been a bit more reticent, usually calling Joel his partner. A few readers pointed out to me that Luke does have one toe still in the closet. Although he has come a long way over the dozen years he has been out, traces of what he went through still shows in his language. Contrast that with Joel who came out as a teen and has always been very comfortable in his sexuality. He uses his words very deliberately to describe his relationship and to make a point to others around him about who he is.
Back to my original example, I realized that we don’t really have a good word to describe the person who is a one night stand. As I said, lover seems premature. Friend with benefits? That usually implies some sort of friendship, as opposed to the pure lust that often draws people together in a passionate sexual pairing. Fuck-buddy? Can be crude. I thought of making up a new word, “sexer,” but somehow I don’t think it is going to catch on. Musing on this, I wonder if the absence of a word harkens back to our Puritan sensibility, reminding us that we really shouldn’t be having sex on a first date or after a first encounter. But, as Dan Savage has said many times, the man he has been with for fifteen-plus years started out as a one-night stand. You never know when you are going to meet the love of your life. I have read plenty of stories based on that premise and they often work out very well, with lots of hot sex thrown in along the way. But we still lack a word for the person/relationship!
Lover and partner have been the common words for long-standing relationships; husband is making its way into the vernacular (and writing) as same-sex marriage becomes more widespread. I will admit, the first time I heard a man refer to his husband, I was startled. Now I have become comfortable with the usage and only wish it could be more widespread. Perhaps more people should take a lead from Wayne Courtois, author of A Report From Winter, who calls Ralph his “husband in-everyway-but-legal,” which is a mouthful, but it gets his point across. I had hoped we would have an outbreak of husbands in California, Maine, and New York, but unfortunately, not yet. At least we have Massachusetts, Vermont, NH, Iowa, and DC–plus Canada, Belgium, Spain and more. Interestingly, in the fight over same-sex marriage, “marriage” seems to be the word that people object to, but I have heard much less dissension over the spousal words, wife and husband. Maybe they’re just too far off the radar for the people with an issue about marriage to care about.
This is the sort of stuff I spend time pondering–when I probably could be doing something more productive, like writing. Oh well, I’ll throw it out for comments.When is someone a lover? What is a couple after a night of sex? In the old days, a good lay was a pretty high compliment. Maybe we need to go back to that. 🙂
My understanding of the gay scene (yeah, like straight girl knows much but I have inside sources) is a guy you pick up is a “trick”. Not as in a prositute trick which is something else altogether but I assume it stems from the flesh trade where you have two people who get together for one pupose – sex. Whether it’s paid for or for free.
*
Although to me it sounds kind of crass and if I was reading a romance story and one of the guys (of which you know down the line they’ll be madly in love) called the other guy his trick it would seem kind of sleazy. I think. I don’t know. But I don’t think you call him that to his face. And really, it doesn’t sound very romantic “He sank to the bed in the arms of his trick.” Umm. No. More like “How the hell did one get a trick out of the house the morning after when you couldn’t remember his name?” Yes.
*
So I have no clue how you would refer to said person without implying a closer relationship (lover, even fuck-buddy) or something not totally anonymous and crude (trick). Hot monkey love-bunny? Stud? The hot-guy-I-picked-up-in-a-bar?
I am sure that for a writer, there are ways to avoid this naming problem?
To me a lover sounds like something more substantial than a one night stand.
Tam, I have seen the word trick used too in stories. But it always implied something not very positive
I think a lot of the terms for a quick roll in the hay…one night stand, trick, etc., are all sort of perjorative, which reinforces the notion that maybe this isn’t really something we shouldn’t be doing. But the simple fact of the matter is that people get together for quick hook ups–which may or may not progress to something else–and it would be nice to have non-judgmental word to describe the relationship.
–
Something about “sexer” appeals…LOL
–
L
The casual use of the word “lover” in that situation always throws me out of the story, too.
*
I’m not sure what else could be used, apart from “pick-up” or “trick”. Does sound a bit off, though.
*
A good writer could probably get around it by using the bloke’s name, or avoiding having to use anything at all. ;D
Leslie A fuck buddy implies an ongoing relationship, although something that’s not expected to go anywhere. A one night stand is just that, unless it turns out to be a 2 or 3 night stand. A lover to me is more substantial and implies an ongoing relationship where the characters see it becoming serious.
I’m not sure that “sexer” will ever catch on.
*
Most of the books I read never seem to give it a name because the authors probably have the same problems we do. I call them a hook up for want of a better word, because it could be more than a one night stand but not necessarily anything serious.
It’s definitely a writerly opportunity to figure out how your character’s going to refer to that guy he’s in bed with! I love the notion of the progression of “tags” in Taming Groomzilla.
Oh, interesting. To me, lover implies that 1) sex has actually happened (although I suppose you could add the word ‘potential’ *grin*) and 2) that the relationship is, as Wave said, ongoing and developing..
Erastes – I hope everything is OK.
See, I don’t mind it all that much. For me the word has different ramifications depending on the context. If you’re shagging someone, technically they’re ‘loving’ (in the physical sense) you and vice versa, so therefore they’re your lover. However I can also see it from the other side, where lover = partner. If the author has set up the context well enough, it doesn’t bother me. If the author uses the word 20 times in the love scene and they really have just met, then it would annoy me.
*
And tbh, I’d rather read ‘his lover’ as an epithet rather than ‘the man’. As Gaycrow says, what’s wrong with using the guy’s name? *g*
On the one hand you have the literary tradition and the purpose of the story, I guess. What a character calls his lover of the moment, tells something about the character itself. That is of course, of the authors has thought the story through. It is the power of the author and the purpose of the story. As many say, the devil is in the details!
*
Then there is the side of the writer. Lover is a very common word and even though it is very common it is very personal as well and people will have different meanings of the word lover. Some may indeed think like you do. Lover is someone you’ve made love to repeatly and not a first time lover. Other will see it as a partner.
Misusing “lover” is a pet peeve of mine (insta-love! yuck!). There’s almost no way to use it early on in a relationship (let alone the first time the protags have sex!) that won’t make me roll my eyes. Inventing a word’s as bad as misusing a normal one, IMHO…unless it’s invented BY THAT CHARACTER and is just used by him/her (and maybe, jokingly, by friends).
–
“Lover” is analogous to “spouse” for me and other GLBT folk I know. (IMHO it’s too intimate/explicit for public use, so I’ve never used it.)
–
“Fuck buddy” is like a regular/repeat one-night stand. It’s different from my understanding of “friends with benefits” (but maybe I don’t understand the latter phrase).
–
Tam: THANK YOU! My first thought was “trick.” And hey, you can use it as a verb–“I went tricking last night and picked up this cute guy!”—so versatile! As Dan Savage would say, do the kids still say “trick”? But “trick” might confuse someone who didn’t know the lingo (but that’s why we have footnotes).
–
Wave: I like “hook-up” and feel it’s clear. Or “one-night stand” (though that’s really the encounter, not the person, I guess). More than once or twice and I think they moved on to fuck buddies or started dating (however casually, and whether or not they’re actually “boyfriends”).
–
A lot of times there’s no need to use a special word/phrase, esp. (a) during the steamy encounter or (b) later on. Esp. if the protag hopes it’s more than a one-time thing (and don’t they always? ;-). “Fred” or “that guy I met” or “that guy I slept with” or…? In the moment, when I was single, if I picked someone up–I’d never have thought of him as a trick as in “where’d my trick go? oh there he is”…I’d think “where’s Fred? oh there he is.” I feel like sometimes authors go overboard looking for words/phrases to use instead of just names and “he.”
–
Leslie: Words aren’t judgmental, but people…. 😉 “Trick” may have a slightly negative connotation and/or could be misunderstood without explanation, sure. But if someone really has a problem with ALL the phrases we have besides that one…then maybe the problem’s not the language, but the concept? Darned sex-negative society warping our minds.
P.S. Sorry, I had a lot to say but didn’t mean to ramble so much or so incoherently. I plead the lateness of the hour!
Don’t apologize, Kendall. I think this is a great comment (the long one, that is). Thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts.
–
L
Thanks!