I am a chick lit reader and I'm still single in my late 30s, so take that as you will, but I think I'd have been picky about men regardless of my reading taste.

And, shameful confession here, but I don't actually like most of the heroes in romance or even chick lit novels. There are very, very few I'd want for myself, even if I can see that they go well with the heroines in those books. I tend to go for the "best friend" types (the non-gay ones) who get overlooked and don't get the girl even though they're pining for the heroine. That kind of reflects my real life, where I like the guys other women don't seem to notice, but those guys are so fixated on the women who aren't noticing them that they don't see me.

If, by chance, the best friend who's unattached at the end of a romance novel gets his own book later, I usually don't like him as much in that book. The guys I like are slightly more likely to get the girl in chick lit than in romance, which is part of why I more or less gave up on traditional romance and am more likely to read chick lit.

But, no, I don't think my reading choices have anything to do with my terminally single state, unless you count the fact that I have far more fun reading, in general, than I do going out, which makes it very hard to meet non-fictional men. Besides, most of what I'm reading these days falls more into the fantasy/urban fantasy realm, and I don't have any expectations about men knowing how to use a sword or having magical powers, so why would I expect anything else I see in books, other than perhaps things like intelligence, the ability to have a conversation, some degree of personal integrity and the ability to treat me like a person of worth? (My mom says my real problem stems from me being a writer, and I don't want men whose every action I can't script and control.)

Posted by: Shanna Swendson | December 31, 2007 5:57 PM

I thought about this and then I looked over at my honey who is currently in the kitchen making dinner because I am suffering from a migraine today. Not only that, he waited on me hand and foot this morning, drove me to work and picked me up all because I just wasn't feeling well. I wouldn't trade him for any other guy, fiction or non-fiction, in the world!!!

Posted by: Tracy | December 31, 2007 8:57 PM

Speaking as a writer, I strive to create heroes who are positive examples of man. In other words, I'm trying to show men in a positive light so that women don't believe that they're ALL scoundrels, cowards and horn-dogs. Perhaps the men in my life, starting from my dad to now my two year-old son, have spoiled me because they're all loyal, loving and honest. They're not perfect - which is why I've fought with my editors over whitewashing my male characters into pure good or pure evil - and neither are women.

Also, I believe that my readers are intelligent, discerning women who know that my books are fiction. If anything, I hope my male characters make them pickier so they don't settle with a less evolved man who isn't worth their time.

Best,
Mary C.

Posted by: Mary | December 31, 2007 9:19 PM

I admit to a major crush on Ranger (from Janet Evanovich's Plum series) and am sometimes disappointed that my husband of 25 years doesn't have broader shoulders and flatter abs, or refer to me as "Babe" rather than "Mom". However, then I look in the mirror and...well, you get the idea. I have known many women who are obcessed with romance. Woe to the husband who shows up empty handed at their house on Valentine's day! And they usually say something like "If I have to TELL him to do it (bring flowers, make the dinner reservation, etc.) it's not romantic." I discovered years ago that romace that has been prodded along a little is better than no romance at all. So while I don't expect Hubby to rescue me in his Porsche while never getting a wrinkle in his form-fitting t-shirt or mussing a hair of his "bad boy" pony tail, I'm not above mentioning that Valentine's day is next Tuesday and I would like him to plan an evening out, or explaining why it's a bit of a downer if he takes me to the New Year's Eve party but talks to his buddies in front of the tv all evening. Men don't read chick lit and they stink at mind-reading so my advice is to ask ask for what you want and be happy. And the occasional Ranger fantasy doesn't hurt a thing :) !

Posted by: Tami | January 1, 2008 1:04 AM

Maybe I'm misunderstanding Miss Cox, but this seems so silly! It's like coming out of a movie and saying, "I'm not going to marry unless I can find a man as perfect as George Clooney." Who does that? Of course as the author you're not going to have your hero (please excuse me) fart or snore during the course of your book, because that spoils the fantasy. But everyone knows all men (and women) do these things.

I do try to inject as much realism as I can into my characters, giving them flaws, but I still get girls who ask, "Where can I find a boy as 'perfect' as Michael Moscovitz?"

The thing is, that boy is sitting right behind them in math class! Maybe he's shy or has a few zits, but the girls aren't perfect either. None of us are!

We all just need to find the person who's right for us. And 99% of the time, that isn't going to be George Clooney (and to me, that's a relief. I couldn't handle the pressure).

But not being able to find a mate because you're comparing men to characters in romance novels or chick-lit books? Look, I can't believe anyone is this shallow, much less readers. We're too smart for that.

And I've been married 14 years.
--Meg

Posted by: Meg Cabot | January 2, 2008 3:37 PM

Maybe I'm misunderstanding Miss Cox, but this seems so silly! It's like coming out of a movie and saying, "I'm not going to marry unless I can find a man as perfect as George Clooney." Who does that? Of course as the author you're not going to have your hero (please excuse me) fart or snore during the course of your book, because that spoils the fantasy. But everyone knows all men (and women) do these things.

I do try to inject as much realism as I can into my characters, giving them flaws, but I still get girls who ask, "Where can I find a boy as 'perfect' as Michael Moscovitz?"

The thing is, that boy is sitting right behind them in math class! Maybe he's shy or has a few zits, but the girls aren't perfect either. None of us are!

We all just need to find the person who's right for us. And 99% of the time, that isn't going to be George Clooney (and to me, that's a relief. I couldn't handle the pressure).

But not being able to find a mate because you're comparing men to characters in romance novels or chick-lit books? Look, I can't believe anyone is this shallow, much less readers. We're too smart for that.

And I've been married nearly 15 years!
--Meg

Posted by: Meg Cabot | January 2, 2008 3:38 PM

Oh, crud, sorry, that printed twice, and in between I remembered how long I've been married (15 years April 1).

Posted by: meg Cabot | January 2, 2008 3:44 PM

Well, it's called fiction for a reason, isn't it? And I don't think all chick lit books feature perfect heroes. In fact, I think the term "hero" is rather outdated. Chick lit heroes don't come riding in on a white horses scooping up damsels in distress very often. And they're generally quite flawed, as are the heroines.

If you ask me, stating that romantic fiction or authors are to blame for a reader's lousy love life is just a bunch of garbage. Miss Cox isn't doing romance or women any favors by suggesting that reading about fictional heroes impairs a woman's judgment.

Posted by: Lucie Simone | January 2, 2008 4:55 PM

Miss Cox can't seem to understand why so many women remain single, even as they move into their (gasp!) late twenties. But, it's overly simplistic to say that novels and movies are to blame-- that these women are only single because they have unrealistic ideas about how men should act and look. What Miss Cox fails to take into account is how different our lives today are from other generations and how difficult dating can be (doesn't this woman have access to re-runs of Sex in the City?!?)

Readers love chick lit because it is funny, smart, and reflects the lives we live today. To suggest that is bad for women just adds fuel to the old "anti-chick-lit" fire.

Posted by: Brenda Janowitz | January 2, 2008 5:12 PM

I'm so happy you're all getting worked up about this!

"'I'm not going to marry unless I can find a man as perfect as George Clooney.' Who does that?" Um. Me. Well, I was already married by the time I saw Out Of Sight, but I do think I sulked all the way home because my husband (much as I love him) is no Clooney. ;)

Like Tami says, I get that my husband taping DIY SOS for me is romantic in its own way, but when I see Richard Gere on the fire escape or John Cusack with the boombox (?) over his head, I can't help feeling short-changed. Doesn't everyone?

Or am I really *that* shallow? :)

Posted by: Keris | January 2, 2008 5:29 PM

Oh, Keris, let's face it-- if your husband really *were* like Clooney, you never would have made it down the aisle since the real Clooney is a "confirmed bachelor" (read: commitment-phobe). So, I say, go give your hubby a hug!

Posted by: Brenda Janowitz | January 2, 2008 6:47 PM

LOL, Brenda. Funnily enough, I've just given my husband a hug for washing a pan I thought he'd ignore. It's not a villa on Lake Como, but it's something.

As for Clooney being a "confirmed bachelor", I'm not sure he's a commitment-phobe, I think he might be, you know, something else.

Posted by: Keris | January 2, 2008 7:51 PM

I think it's a slap in the face to women to imply that we can't separate fact from fiction and that we're holding out for the perfect man who remarkably resembles our favorite hero in a book. This is not the reason why some women are still single. A lot of us are single by choice because the alternative didn't work out and we decided that we could do it on our own, after all.

Something I think is interesting is that it's okay for men to hold unrealistic expectations about the "perfect" woman and it's okay - no one seems to blink an eye at the amount of cosmetic surgery that's performed on them to give them the look that men seem to want. But if a woman doesn't marry because she's holding out for the perfect guy (for her), it's because her mind has been poisoned by chick lit and chick flicks. Doesn't that seem a little sexist to anyone but me? I mean, really, when was the last time you heard anyone say that a man's mind was rotted by images in Playboy and even Sports Illustrated Swimsuit addition and that those things combined with the body image produced by Hollywood was responsible for him holding out for the "perfect" woman? Men are just as influenced by what they read/see as women are and it's time to stop bashing one genre of writing and blaming it for why so many women are single. It's not the genre, it's the age we live in. The age of Choice, where some of us like the single life.

Next thing you know, they will be blaming Chick Lit for global warming. Then again, some of the books can be pretty hot, so they might be on to something there.

An Unrepentant, Single-by-Choice (okay, and by divorce), Chick Lit Reader/Fan (and Phi Theta Kappa alum, so I learned somewhere to separate fact from fiction)

Posted by: Margay | January 4, 2008 6:10 PM

What a great comment, Margay, thanks!

Posted by: Keris | January 11, 2008 4:47 PM

Ok, here's my 2 cents:
Yes, Chick Flicks, Chick Lit, and Disney have all given me unrealistic expectations about men, but I DO live in the real world, and when my husband does the laundry, that's good enough for me. When you're single, it's probably different, but as a married woman, all the chick stuff just gets me in the "mood." So, my husband gets some action and I feel all happy inside because of the cute love story I just read or watched. Really, it's a win-win.

Posted by: Anne | February 18, 2008 8:05 PM