Now THIS is dark romance

Rape romanticized is not dark romance .

You should really look up the definition of dark romanc dear. It's not for everyone to enjoy and that's okay. At the end of the day, you have the power to choose what to read and walk away from all these morally grey characters and noncon elements.

That 's not a morally gray character; that's a rapist, and there is noncon here; it's pure rape. Dark romance write rape as crime not as fetish rape corn ,booktok is ruining the genre And I can call rapist a rapist , call it out when it's romanticized.

Bro called Leon morally grey

Tgif you're so right, ignore the person who cant differentiate fiction from reality. Preach dark romance

They shouldn't be reading these kind of stories in the first place if they can't handle it. There are thousands of stories out there and they choose this one to stress themselves

Rightt they just love labeling hate as 'criticism.' It's as if they think that authors who intentionally write plots like this don't know whats right from wrong. Not every romance needs to be a giant ball of consent and sweetness, but they just can't understand that. :sob:

Ah come on at least agree that dark romance it’s interesting but if it’s constant rape after rape it gets boring and repetitive

Uhmm I've never said that reading "constant rapes" was entertaining? My point is literally just agreeing w OP about how people hate on dark romance when it's a genre catered to certain people.

The definition of dark romance describes the genre, not the morality of every scene within it. Saying "it's dark romance" only tells me what kind of story it is; it doesn't address my criticism. If a scene depicts rape, it's still rape. If someone argues that it's romanticised or poorly handled, the correct response is to explain why you disagree not to point back to the genre label. A genre is a description, not a rebuttal.

When it comes to morality it's hard to make oppositions budge. Rape in the story is rape, and I don't know see any case or reasoning that can morally "justify" it. Most of the time there's no point trying to argue because the genre itself is irrational. Not everything needs or has a reason, especially when we're talking about creative works.

I think you're mixing up two different things. Nobody is saying fiction can't have dark or disturbing themes, or that every bad action in a story needs to be morally justified. The point is that people can still criticise how those themes are written and portrayed.

Saying "it's fiction" or "it's dark romance" doesn't automatically end the discussion. A story can include something terrible without endorsing it, but if someone feels the story is romanticising or glorifying it, they're allowed to talk about that. Criticism of a fictional work doesn't mean demanding that the work shouldn't exist it just means discussing how it handles its themes.

Yeah no that kind of criticism is completely allowed and understandable. I was irked at the comment saying "rape romanticized is not dark romance" because it's as if pushing your own definition to what dark romance should be like.

They can freely voice out their thoughts on such, but that ends when people who enjoy that certain theme is berated. Saying that it's dark romance obviously won't counter everything, but then again it's one of the most irrational genres. I wouldn't really want to engage in a discussion that won't even change anything about the story, but y'all can discuss what ever y'all want.

Oh and there's no correct response. That would be a satisfying response to receive, but no one is obligated to respond in a specific manner.

Sure, no one is obligated to respond in a specific way. My point wasn't that there's a mandatory response it was that saying "it's dark romance" doesn't actually engage with the criticism being made.

If someone wants to disagree, that's completely fine. But if the only response is it's the genre then they're not addressing the argument they're just restating the premise. Whether the story handles rape, consent, or abuse well is still a separate discussion.

Fair enough, but that's not the point I was making. I was saying the genre isn't a shield from criticism. People can enjoy it, and others can criticise how it portrays consent or abuse. Those two things can coexist.