ladybox.JPG

We dearly love our romance heroines.
They’re strong. Steadfast. Capable. Good-hearted.
They’re generally beautiful, and even if their figures aren’t perfect, they turn out to be just what the hero wanted after all. They fall in love, and when it’s good they give their all—and when it’s bad they manage to survive, but the love still remains true in their hearts, never becoming bitterness, stalking rage, or set-his-Lexus-on-fire ire.
And just to spice things up occasionally, they’re endowed with a few extra pounds, rough childhood, bad previous relationship, clinging mother, pesky urge to suck blood, etc.

As long as she’s not TOO extreme, she’s still safely inside THE BOX. After all—we want to identify with her, don’t we?

But what if she were obese? A recovering druggie/alcoholic? A workoholic bitch? A woman who (gasp!) doesn’t want children? Intellectually challenged, a victim of incest, etc.? Don’t these people deserve love as much as the next person?
Or do we demand our ’shortcomings’ in very small doses, since it might interfere with the romantic fantasy, even if the result is still a HEA?

I’m not suggesting that graphic descriptions of dreary–even cruel–depictions of life should be a staple of romance. There’s no escapism in that.
But I’m wondering if a little more stretching of THE BOX might be in order more than occasionally.
Isn’t a large part of the appeal of the Cinderella story that the lowest of the low could find romance, riches, and a happily ever after? It wouldn’t have the same impact if her big problem was cellulite on the thighs, hammer-toes, or the occasional bad hair day.
Having a prince of a man fall in love with a beautiful woman makes a nice story. Having him fall for a penniless, parentless, dirt-poor, abused little waif is OH so much more interesting.
So why are so many heroines relegateded to THE BOX? And how much outside of THE BOX would you be willing to write/read?