Usually they just raid whatever place they think is suspicious and be done with it.

That’s the impression I’ve gotten from my own research. Hell, when you don’t need a warrant to raid a place, and you can hold any suspects indefinitely, why would you go through half the machinations used in the Western world? Wiretaps, undercover operations, stings, and whatnot are all tools created when the bulk of the law is designed to protect against authoritarian abuses by officers of private citizens. They’re unnecessary in a culture that is effectively authoritarian and thus sees little to no risk of abuse in the police-citizen dynamic.

It’s not just an indication of some pretty bare-bones research; it’s also an indication that the author doesn’t get, on a fundamental level, the culture itself. Our attitudes towards — and prevention of, and protection against — criminals and crime stem in great part from our culture’s notions of citizenship, ethics, civic duties, and civic rights.

The review’s description of Miki’s skills as a Dom sound a lot like what a (stereotypical, if such there be) Japanese man might think is perfectly acceptable for a dominant/master, but as Pai’s comment highlights, it sounds like that might be purely an fortunate accident. I doubt it’s actually the result of any significant research, given how many other major (and easy to research!) details are so terribly wrong.

These details may seem secondary to some, or nit-picky, but trivializing the little things becomes a baby-and-the-bath-water situation, I think: dismissing this tiny law makes it easier to dismiss the cultural attitude that created and perpetrated that law. But that kind of dismissal is a fast road to exploitation, because if you don’t even realize there’s a chasm between your assumptions and the concrete daily details of the culture you’re writing, then how much more are you getting wrong about the much greater unspoken depths of your characters’ cultural fabric?

I’m no expert on how BDSM is practiced, but I thought this was a brilliant book albeit very hard for me to read. Sadly it seems to be out of print, either the contract expired or something? It was available through Torquere Press. If you’re interested then maybe contact the publisher and see what they say. To be honest she was still listed as an author, cause she had a short story at the publisher, but it seems she’s been removed completely. Shame she was a talented writer.

And not only does he go undercover, he does so in perfect, passing drag, where he’s so good that everyone is convinced he’s a beautiful female dominant.

I’ve seen some really effeminate Japanese men, so I’m not THAT surprised that he can pull it off…although not sure if Japanese cops would go that far. Usually they just raid whatever place they think is suspicious and be done with it.

No, it’s not particularly realistic, but then I’m not sure it was intended to be. It’s just sexy and fun.

My feelings on the title are pretty neutral. I’ve seen worse.

Every now and then I dip my toe back in the genre in the hope of finding something shiny then I recoil away and have another dent in my wall.

I spluttered on my drink when I read that. Such an awesome line. If you spot this line in one of my future postings you’ll know I stole it from you, so apologies and thanks in advance.

(Sorry for going off-topic. Excuse me.)

For what it’s worth, I’m firmly in the ‘not keen on the title’ camp.

I’m on the lookout for romances with non-white protagonists, so I’m sad to hear this book’s so flawed. Thanks for taking one for the team, Sarah F.

On a side note, I find extremely off-putting the title of the series the book reviewed in this thread belongs to.

But just wow on undercover work being illegal. Wow. What a mistake to make.

I could probably find more if I’d dive in, but I don’t have enough time to dedicate to reading to get through the slosh

You name 7 good BDSM romances among so many – and it’s the so many that I am tired of slogging through

I do have a TBR list though from recommendations here and last time I complained at the utter lack of good BDSM novels

LOL. Well, now that I read it back, it does make me sound rather sarcastic…

=-) I didn’t take it as sarcasm.

I agree the review is well reasoned, but that’s never stopped some authors from trashing the reviewer (either in public or privately). I think that’s why it made me chuckle as in my reaction was “I wouldn’t be so sure.”

ETA: Not meaning to imply that this author has or hasn’t done this. I don’t know as I don’t follow her. I just know I see a lot of it within the genre.

Maybe it’s my own hang up, who can say.

I’m sure the author won’t think of it as a mean girl review.

I don’t know why, but this made me chuckle.

LOL. Well, now that I read it back, it does make me sound rather sarcastic…

I wasn’t trying to be. Just wanted to say the review was well thought out.

Anah Crow’s Uneven. I so have to read this. So many people rec it.

I really liked it. You should move it to the top of your list.

Anah Crow’s Uneven.

I so have to read this. So many people rec it.

Interestingly, reading this review, the title apparently isn’t the only concern to be had. Bad understanding of BDSM, questionable and possible othering of Japanese people and lack of knowledge of Japanese culture let alone police procedures both domestic and not.

Choosing a “controversial” title or making a controversial statement I have found is often nothing more than derailment. In conversations about othering, it’s derailment to stay away from the real issues. In fiction, I’ve found it generally is derailment to hide the flaws and, in some cases, massive ones by creating a “controversy.”

In the end, the author’s works are not for me. The publisher’s works are not for me. My choice and that’s OK. If I really felt I was missing something from either, I’d be the first to sample them. I just highly doubt I’m missing anything.

I’m sure the author won’t think of it as a mean girl review.

I don’t know why, but this made me chuckle.

The hardest thing for me to believe re. BC 1 was when Jill Noble insisted that the title was not chosen for sensational or provocative impact, but was chosen because it was just the ‘perfect’ title for the book. That it’s been used again after so much controversy and a good deal of opposition simply sustains my inability to believe her. In terms of book one, I can believe they did not expect people to be offended, but since they’ve done it again, all I can say is it smacks of rubbing that offense in people’s faces (people who articulated extremely sound reasons for being offended), which is, itself, outrageously offensive, IMO.

And am I the only one to find that cover a rather creepy case of Fetishizing the Other?

This topic was discussed extensively in one of the links Joan/Sarah provided. I will not even try to represent the discussion, although I will say that I walked away extremely frustrated and disappointed. And as I said above, the insistence on using a title that was viewed by some as extremely insensitive the first time around, doesn’t make me inclined to give anyone involved in the production of this book the benefit of the doubt.