dekedangle_rpf_mod (
dekedangle_rpf_mod) wrote in
dekedangle_rpfanon2017-04-06 05:59 pm
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png)
#29 – Lay, Lie, or Laine?
This is the twenty-ninth post of Deke Dangle RPF Anon, a community for all your ice hockey anon meme needs.
THE RULES
1. Mods retain the right to delete, freeze, and/or screen threads and comments.
2. Meme rules do not require warnings.
3. Respect flock. Do not repost or share information from private tumblrs, locked twitter accounts, flocked LJ posts, etc.
4. No linking fans to their real life identities.
5. No looks bashing or body shaming. This applies to players and people associated with those players and their clubs, as well as fellow fans.
6. No embedded music.
7. No embedded images.
8. No spamming the meme, whether through repeated comments or other means.
9. No discussing trolling, individual trolls, or their efforts.
Meme rules do not require spoiler cuts. However, this layout does allow for them. Any of the following tags will create a spoiler cut when closed: <div cut>, <span cut>, <font color="white">
If you have any questions or concerns, please direct them to The Mod Post.
Threaded View
Flat View
Top-Level Comment View
Next post opens at 5,000 comments.
THE RULES
1. Mods retain the right to delete, freeze, and/or screen threads and comments.
2. Meme rules do not require warnings.
3. Respect flock. Do not repost or share information from private tumblrs, locked twitter accounts, flocked LJ posts, etc.
4. No linking fans to their real life identities.
5. No looks bashing or body shaming. This applies to players and people associated with those players and their clubs, as well as fellow fans.
6. No embedded music.
7. No embedded images.
8. No spamming the meme, whether through repeated comments or other means.
9. No discussing trolling, individual trolls, or their efforts.
Meme rules do not require spoiler cuts. However, this layout does allow for them. Any of the following tags will create a spoiler cut when closed: <div cut>, <span cut>, <font color="white">
If you have any questions or concerns, please direct them to The Mod Post.
Threaded View
Flat View
Top-Level Comment View
Next post opens at 5,000 comments.
Re: Discussion Thread
(Anonymous) 2017-04-28 11:38 pm (UTC)(link)b) i'd anti-rec just on the basis of another book she wrote ("unravelled". i read for Domme/male sub reasons, and pretty much was "okay, never again" after a) she called her part-Japanese/part white heroine "exotic" and used "flawless ivory and rose-colored skin" and had her noping out on a potential sub hookup because he was bi.)
Re: Discussion Thread
(Anonymous) 2017-04-29 12:41 am (UTC)(link)The second point sucks even more, it's hard to find F/m written for women, and so much of it is apparently disappointing :(
Re: Discussion Thread
(Anonymous) 2017-04-29 04:30 am (UTC)(link)i cannot remember which meme post it was in (it *may* have even been lj version) but we had the "hockey in profic" thing come up once before when i'd just read lynda aicher's "bonds of courage" which is F/m.
http://www.lyndaaicher.com/bonds-of-courage.html
one of the first hard limits she sets as his Domme is "no you are not LITERALLY kneeling for me basically ever" (i think dude either had pre-existing knee stuff or just general precautions). it was actually readable and i do not remember it having anything that made past me go "uh, NO". it *is* part of a series, but i read it without reading the prior books and it made sense and it's not one of those with a surprise cliffhanger ending either. so at least tentative rec.
Re: Discussion Thread
(Anonymous) 2017-04-29 12:23 pm (UTC)(link)Thanks for the rec; the library has this as an ebook so I'll check it out as soon as I'm done with the 25 other books I currently have out.
Re: Discussion Thread
(Anonymous) 2017-04-29 04:43 pm (UTC)(link)Hopefully it's at least worth being a library checkout for you. (It's been a while since I read it, and *my* backlog is extensive enough that I don't feel up to trying to figure out where the ebook copy I bought is hiding to skim for possible DNWs.)
Re: Discussion Thread
(Anonymous) 2017-05-10 02:16 am (UTC)(link)Re: Discussion Thread
(Anonymous) 2017-05-10 03:03 am (UTC)(link)*makes sad face, hopes you at least didn't PAY for the displeasure other than the "support your local library" kind*
Re: Discussion Thread
(Anonymous) 2017-05-10 03:13 am (UTC)(link)Re: Discussion Thread
(Anonymous) 2017-05-10 03:51 am (UTC)(link)best of luck with the research/writing, and i'll cross my fingers that the rec's closer to your tastes :).
Re: Discussion Thread
(Anonymous) 2017-05-10 06:30 pm (UTC)(link)Re: Discussion Thread
(Anonymous) 2017-05-10 06:39 pm (UTC)(link)Headhopping/badly crafted 3rd person omniscient is far less common in 21st century romance novels than it was in previous decades. I almost never come across it.