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.

Musicians (and painters, etc.) were thought to be too cerebral

You don't even want to know what I just typed three times and decided to erase without posting.

Really not.

I can't imagine a tattoo requiring that much backstory. I've had many explained to me entirely with variations on three words: young, stupid and drunk. (Not that I have any objection to tattoos in general.)

You don't even want to know what I just typed three times and decided to erase without posting.

Really not.

And that's why a lot of people have a hard time writing for Harlouette, as we shorthanded it at my old office. Their new lines have a bit more breadth, but some of the old taboos were hard to break.

Also, by cerebral I believe the thinking was not hat musicians were necessarily cerebral, but that writing about a guy, say, playing second chair sax for the orchestra was not going to offer as much of a sexy factor as a cowboy roping steers out on the ranch, or a corporate raider...doing whatever it is that corporate raiders do.

Edited for one too many "necessarily"s than was needed.

Corporate raiders unemploy working people. Sexy thought.(/lefty bias) (Oh, go on, pretend it closes!) But I know what she means. Power, authority, expensive sweaters...wondering what's under the Armani. Mr. Big. Absofuckinglutely.

I can honestly say that I have never for one second found a corporate type sexy. UGH.

All about the musicians, dude. Have you LOOKED at their fingers...?

I can honestly say that I have never for one second found a corporate type sexy. UGH.

Which is probably one of a meeeeeeelion reasons you aren't the target audience for the imprint.

Yep. My only inclination toward corporate raiders of either genre is to turn the crossbow on them and do a Bill Hicks: "He was a moron! He's dead! I just felt the world get lighter - fucking CELEBRATE!"

Definitely not their target audience, nope.

Harlouette (at least the original lines) are still really heavy on:

cowboys
sheiks (?!)
office romances with virgin heroines
billionaires

I don't think I'm their target audience either.

What still makes me fume is that I was *there* when we started Brava for Kensington. And we discussed the fact that some of our personal sexual squicks were going to have to be ignored, because we couldn't censor everything we didn't like (or encourage only what we did). And whether my editor realizes it or not, a lot of the readers buying the sexier stuff, which is what Brava is supposed to be, find stuff like slash sexy, and love guys with tattoos, and so on. Not all of them, but then there's that pesky "can't please everyone" adage to remember.

I have never for one second found a corporate type sexy. UGH.

Depends on your definition of "Corporate." For example, the satellite company my Brother works for has a bunch of guys who wear suits every day and work in an office, but I met them all and they are, almost to man, chamring British and Australian and Dutch guys who are multilingual, world-traveled, funny and really interested in the culture. If that's not sexy, I don't know what is. You really can't judge a person by his outfit, you know?