dekedangle_rpf_mod: Hanson Bro from Slapshot (pic#7957183)
dekedangle_rpf_mod ([personal profile] dekedangle_rpf_mod) wrote in [community profile] dekedangle_rpfanon2017-04-06 05:59 pm

#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.

Re: Discussion Thread

(Anonymous) 2017-04-28 11:38 pm (UTC)(link)
a) not from Minneapolis but originally from northwestern Wisconsin which is not that different. and no, we probably *don't* care who the fuck anybody on the wild/fictional analogue is sleeping with unless it's rpf-useful or actually illegal.

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)
Thanks for confirming my reaction to the former, from what I can tell who players date is only gossip relevant here if their gf is a TV news person.

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)
ayrt

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)
ayrt

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)
ayrt

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)
AYRT, finally found this book out in the wild. No pun intended. I opened it and the first page I open, I find that it's alternating first person POV, my least favorite form of romance POV, and that the author knows nothing about how the NHL, the minor leagues, or the draft work. So, this is definitely a no.

Re: Discussion Thread

(Anonymous) 2017-05-10 03:03 am (UTC)(link)
apologies for reccing something that REALLY didn't work for you. (pretty sure at the time i read it *i* didn't know enough about any of the business side details to notice even really enormous fail on the author's, and i've read so many romances that i almost *expect* pro stuff to be alternating first person POV.)

*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)
Oh, no, it was the original book I was grousing about that didn't work, not your rec! I haven't read your rec yet because I'm up to my neck in research materials for the fic I'm writing.

Re: Discussion Thread

(Anonymous) 2017-05-10 03:51 am (UTC)(link)
ayrt

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)
Aw, I love alternating first person POV — assuming it's really alternating (such as on a chapter by chapter basis) and not doing that thing where POV just jumps around to whomever's convenient with no rhyme or reason from paragraph to paragaph.

Re: Discussion Thread

(Anonymous) 2017-05-10 06:39 pm (UTC)(link)
It's a genre signal for me rather than a craft one; the signal is "this is New Adult." New Adult does not work for me at all. A lot of the self-pubbed NA, especially in sports romance, reads as mental children in adult bodies to me.

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.