I would love to say the following but no power on earth can get their visual verification key to show for me.
-----------------------------
I think that it is an error to think there is a single motivation behind female-authored M/M. There are mutliple academic explanations offered by the likes of Constance Penley & Mark McLelland, each applied well to the specific context they know (early zine slash and yaoi, respectively). Other academics have offered evolutionary or feminist explanations. Other authors I know offer even more explanations to do with stepping outside typical gender/power assumptions or even just "If one cock is good, two is better". (excuse language).
I think that although some kind of female authored M/M can be tracked back through the centuries the apparent similarity of expression doesn't imply a unitary motivation even within a narrow genre like erotic romanceebooks. Some of the motivations my fellow authors claim do not apply to me in the slightest.
no subject
-----------------------------
I think that it is an error to think there is a single motivation behind female-authored M/M. There are mutliple academic explanations offered by the likes of Constance Penley & Mark McLelland, each applied well to the specific context they know (early zine slash and yaoi, respectively). Other academics have offered evolutionary or feminist explanations. Other authors I know offer even more explanations to do with stepping outside typical gender/power assumptions or even just "If one cock is good, two is better". (excuse language).
I think that although some kind of female authored M/M can be tracked back through the centuries the apparent similarity of expression doesn't imply a unitary motivation even within a narrow genre like erotic romanceebooks. Some of the motivations my fellow authors claim do not apply to me in the slightest.