Romance has all kinds of "rules". No sports guys, for one. Yet Susan Elizabeth Phillips wrote a couple of bestsellers with football players.

Musicians and actors are another no-no.

That's whack. My fantasy guy would be a tattooed musician (and, in fact, my husband is one, though he also has a boring corporate job.)

This is probably why I don't read romance novels.

My ex-husband is a public artist [link]

This means he gets to be all artist-y with drawing and making models and stuff, then all professional with appearing before city boards, then all buildy with climbing on structures and welding shit up with jeans and a t-shirt on. It was lots of fun hanging out in that world plus he was brilliant and fun (also fucked up, hence the no longer being married). It might give you more scope than the average architect or artist you would be stuck with.

Roamnce has all kinds of "rules". No sports guys, for one. Yet Susan Elizabeth Phillips wrote a couple of bestsellers with football players.

I remember Betsy lending me one in which the hero was a professional hockey goalie with a horseshoe tattooed right above his pubic hair. I don't remember much else about the book, but the tat and the hockey descriptions made me happy as hell.

Musicians and actors are another no-no.

What the FUCKING fuck....?!??!?!?

Roamnce has all kinds of "rules". No sports guys, for one. Yet Susan Elizabeth Phillips wrote a couple of bestsellers with football players.

Musicians and actors are another no-no.

Talk about your untapped markets.

Dude, I don't know one artsy woman that doesn't want at least one of those...to be in an artistic couple(cough) VictorNThessaly (cough) (except they are both poets, but, otherwise, you feel me on this, right?) And Victor is going to think I've abandoned writing to embarrass him full-time or something, but they are a good example, in this instance, because, to my knowledge they are not all TedNSyllviaforevah!1!

I find the prohibition on tatoos in romance novels intriguing. We've seen a gradual change in attitude about them on TV and in movies, from actors getting visible tatoos to an entire show about the lives of tatoo artists. So while the visual media is embracing this "counter culture" where the tatoos are actually seen, the non-graphic print media is still holding out despite the fact that no one would even see the tatoo! Even the military hasn't gone so far as banning all tatoos, you just can't have them visible on certain areas of the body.

I think visual media is still treating it as "counter," and as long as it does, a genre as conservative as romance seems to be -- well, I'm not surprised they'll have no part of it.

Tattoos might be more common, but I don't think they're properly acceptable yet.

with a horseshoe tattooed right above his pubic hair.

Yes, but was it pointed up, so the luck wouldn't spill?

Even the military hasn't gone so far as banning all tatoos, you just can't have them visible on certain areas of the body.

Which I guess is part of the whole "Military: we're trying to be professionals, here" image they like to project these days. My stepmother's father, who was a Navy man in WWII, had tattoos all over his forearms, which I believe would be disallowed these days.

(There's a rumor that the Yankees have similar rules, no tattoos that a short-sleeved shirt and trousers can't hide, but I don't know exactly what they would do if they traded for some hot young thing who already has an eagle crest on his wrist tendons, which is why it's just as well Tim Hudson is pitching in Atlanta.)

Tattoos might be more common, but I don't think they're properly acceptable yet

I think you're right there. We see a lot of things within the realm of "art" that still aren't acceptable on the street, like nudity!

I'm wondering, too, is some of the restriction on tattoos is that tattoos have their own story. When someone gets one, there is often a long history involved in it and the editors may be worried that the backstory of the tattoo could take over the story of the "romance." Not totally, but it might interfere in some way, in their minds. Personally, I think it would be a very easy way to toss in some backstory that is more pertinent to the person than fainting at the sight of blond-haired men with green eyes who walk a certain way and look just. like. my. dead. husband. SOB!

To be fair, this whole "no tattoos" thing is just one woman's bias, namely my editor's. I have no idea if other editors would care about them or not.

Musicians and actors are another no-no.

What the FUCKING fuck....?!??!?!?

Again, to be fair, this was an old Harlequin/Silhouette stand, and it might be a thing of the past now. Musicians (and painters, etc.) were thought to be too cerebral, I believe, and actors not particularly trustworthy, because of ... acting, I guess. Kissing other women, maybe? Playing a role? Whatever. Rolls eyes.

My ex-husband is a public artist

Very cool idea, Robin. Thanks! Although maybe the next hero -- I've already changed my mind and decided to make him a carpenter/builder, just to be contrary.