T/F: 'Most authors don't actually know how to write romance'

kyupol 2025-03-01 22:45:27 UTC #7

I'd just listen to true to life romance stories on the radio (barangay love stories... but unfortunately it's Tagalog only)

They're based on real stories except names, places, any identifying information changed.

DokiDokiTsuna 2025-03-02 05:56:50 UTC #8

I'm genuinely shocked that False is beating True...this is really interesting. ^^; 2 years ago I would not have gotten this response on this forum; I can tell you that...it's surprisingly heartwarming seeing people finally stepping up to defend the romance genre, even if I don't necessarily agree with their points. 20-year-old me would be proud~

I don't know how good this analogy is for your point, tbh. ^^; Like, I agree that it's apt, but I have a different takeaway from that observation.

Generally, fast food is designed to fill you up and taste good...usually without providing sufficient quantities of the nutrients that your body actually needs. It's only fulfilling part of the purpose of food-- there's an essential aspect that's missing.
And even if people don't care and want to eat their McNuggets anyway...I feel a responsibility to point out what's missing regardless. People should know that a cardboard box of fried slaughterhouse scraps is not the only way to enjoy eating chicken, or to prepare it for others to enjoy. Sure, a lot of them might not care...but some might. Some might decide to care in some instances and not care in others...but they won't even get that choice if no one ever points out a problem.

To exit the analogy: Popular does not equal quality, and it certainly doesn't render the idea of quality irrelevant. The argument that "well, it doesn't matter if it's good or bad because the audience doesn't care, so why should the creators?" is something I fundamentally cannot agree with, as a media critic. I can understand the thought process, but my job is to ignore it and think critically about the quality of the work anyway. Because it still matters. Someone somewhere is gonna see it eventually.

One day there will be someone in that 'different kind of audience' who suddenly feels dissatisfied with a romance book they thought they would love, and wonders why --> that is what critics are for.
One day there will be someone who usually writes tons of cheap, easy romance successfully and has a fun time doing it, but suddenly decides they want to write a romance with a little more depth that can reach a different audience --> that is also what critics are for. Someone has to be able to tell them something other than "the audience doesn't care, so why bother"; to allow them to diversify their skillset.

Basically, I don't think this response is much of a counter-argument. ^^; It kinda glosses over the fact that well-written romances exist and also have an audience that cares about how they're written...just because a lot of romance fans like slop doesn't mean that's all the genre needs to be.

Hot take, but I do. ^^; I've made dozens of posts complaining about boring/offensive shonen tropes; and I actively avoid the genre because of how lazily it's usually written on top of that. I don't look down on people who enjoy it; but I know I would ABSOLUTELY NOT enjoy it so I stay out of it. Most of what I know about it is what I get secondhand from similar tropes in RPGs...which is painful enough for me, thanks...

...I understand that a lot of complaints about romance and romance writing are just thinly veiled misogyny, so I can't blame you for drawing this comparison, but I wanted to make it clear that that's not what's going on here. I don't dislike romance, and I don't dislike genres aimed at girls and women. I just dislike bad writing.

...I feel like we may just have different perspectives on media as a whole, or at least a different way of putting things. Nevertheless, I feel a sort of disclaimer is in order here:

I'll admit that I'm naturally a harsh critic; my feelings about media that disappoints me are very acute, and most of the time they come out that way. Personally, as long as I'm not trying to attack, disparage, and humiliate an actual person, I don't think there's anything wrong with that-- you can disagree, but that is the reason I write the way I do.

Because at the end of the day, these things are just my opinions and that's how I view them. If I say something is "pathetic" it's because that's how I feel about the content of the writing, not because I think the writer is a pathetic human being.
Similarly, when I say that "most writers can't write" I don't mean that most writers should be discouraged from writing, or should somehow not be allowed to write. I just mean that most writers don't write well. =/

In my eyes, that's a neutral statement...particularly because writing doesn't actually have to be good to be enjoyable. I've enjoyed and loved many things that weren't written well, or just weren't written well enough for what they were trying to accomplish. Sure, maybe I'd like them more if they were better...but I will unabashedly admit that they aren't written well while still rating them highly or recommending them to others, based solely on how much fun I had. So while you saw that as a grave insult and a condemnation...I just saw it as a simple truth.

I know expressing negative opinions and emotions without dissolving into toxicity is difficult and rare on the internet...but some of us still do it, just FYI. What I wrote wasn't meant to hurt anyone, "talk down to them", or make them want to quit writing. Not once in that whole rant did I say that poorly-written romances should not exist, or that people who write them and read them should not exist. I was just dissatisfied with a thing and explained why.

Azifri 2025-03-02 06:20:13 UTC #9

Aww

NickRowler 2025-03-02 13:48:57 UTC #10

I picked false mostly because what people find romantic is subjective. And I feel authors are just writing what they personally are attracted to. Yes this can run into toxic relationship and weird fetishes. I don't think this means they don't know romance, it's just they have a different view on it. You might not agree with it but I think a lot of romance stories are superficial and sometimes boarder on pure fantasy. That is why people like it, I guess.

Sorry I can't comment on the rest of your writing. My bad vision makes it hard to read walls of text.

TheSequence 2025-03-02 14:29:23 UTC #11

I would say the type of romance someone prefers to read also plays a role here. It is not as simple as not knowing to write one, it maybe the creator's preference of romance and even other genre.
It's my personal experience: [I suck at writing ] but the type of characters I prefer in novels and comics have always reflected in my story . I would say reading and preference plays as much significant role as the creators capability .

giamarvelousunime 2025-03-02 14:47:26 UTC #12

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.

cherrystark 2025-03-02 15:43:51 UTC #13

100% true. Part of the reason why I stopped liking online romance novels is because they all quickly felt inorganic. Enemies to lovers always turns into "two people have a bad first impression of each other when they meet and are competing for something". Not really a true "enemy". Every female lead's ex is always abusive. The male lead's ex is always psychotic trying to get him back. The girl is always responsible for getting her family out of financial straights and has to sell herself. The rich love interests are always stalkers forcing themselves into every aspect of the female lead's life. The male lead could torture the female lead and hold her prisoner, but all has to be forgiven when the "feels" start. The female leads are always sassy and danger-prone. The male leads are always giants and brutish. You get the point. The stories are all the same after a while.

In my opinion, "romance" should complement the main storyline. For example, there are a million and one versions of Cinderella out there. Don't give me a story about a girl abused by her family who gets rescued by a rich guy. Tell me a story about two girls trying to improve their lives, one by marrying the "prince" and the other by starting a business. Or be silly and tell me a story where Cinderella is living in a romcom and Prince Charming is living in a spy thriller.

The good romances that I've liked were always more about two people falling in love while living their life. The plot was always character driven, rather than plot driven. The characters were written to be people, rather than stereotypes.

DasIstWunderblyat 2025-03-03 00:07:13 UTC #14

(post withdrawn by author, will be automatically deleted in 24 hours unless flagged)

jwabeasley 2025-03-03 00:17:23 UTC #15

It seems a lot of romance tropiness problems stem from the authors not having a lot of experience with good relationships to draw from and are instead writing what they imagine a good one to be. It's very hard to write an emotional journey you yourself have not been on!

remiquise 2025-03-03 07:15:19 UTC #16

Allow me to paraphrase something I once read about being a good critic, though I can’t recall where:
"The point of a critique is not to try and shape things into something that suits your liking, it is to help the creator to reach their potential with what they want to make."

If you want to believe calling something someone wrote "pathetic" because that's what you feel about the work and looking at a whole genre with a hand wave and saying "most writers can't write" because you "just saw it as a simple truth" is neutral and not discouraging or talking down to folks who like it then I don't know what to tell you. Not executing something flawlessly, heck, not executing something particularly well is vastly different from “not being able to write” in my opinion. If they can tell a story and write it out, they can write— just as they can improve. Your arbitrary scale of "good or bad" doesn't factor into it, more so given you're willing to dismiss professionals almost as flippantly as amateurs. The work and effort they poured into their projects is not pathetic. I want to be a helpful voice instead of a negative— oh, sorry, "neutral" one. That is not to say I do not critic things myself. I can do so quite harshly, if it is asked of me (poor girl from writer's group getting 52 suggestions/comments on 2 pages worth of writing could probably attest to that, same goes for the guy who got back a report longer than his piece) but never once had I ever had to utter "pathetic" or anything of the like-- nor would something like that ever cross my mind-- in my critics regardless if the genre/tropes/style/humour/whatever were to my interests or not. Just as my writing (gothic horror, about abuse and fawning as a reaction to such.) doesn't tickle many of my writing group's/friend circle's fancies, yet they somehow avoid rude language and disparaging remarks about my plot, tropes, and ideas. Critiques are about suggestions on how one can improve what they want to write, probing questions about the specific characters/narrative, compliments & encouragements, and most importantly trying to help people improve in the way they want to; not telling them their ideas are boring or bad and that they cannot write. We're just going to have to disagree where critique ends and insult/unhelpful comments begins, I suppose.

All this really takes me back to when those "cringe deviantart" pages were popular years ago. I remember it scared plenty of folks away from posting and/or drawing in general, even if those posts were not directed at them personally. Since yes, being told you're bad at something/don't have taste/have boring ideas/are pathetic/can't draw, even tangentially, might be pretty discouraging. Dissatisfaction or not, tact is something I'd recommend more. More so when posting on a forum mostly made up of amateurs, younger people, beginners, and people mostly writing for free for their own enjoyment. It isn't all going to be for you--- in fact, most will not be. That doesn't make it bad or mean they cannot write.

Though I believe I've gotten quite lost in the sauce about shortcomings in critiques instead of the topic at hand. To wrap up: Writing is an art, and art is very subjective, but dismissing whole sections of it is reductive and hardly seeing past one's own interests. Just as one might not see value or skill in modern art, it doesn't mean the artist "can't make art". Same goes for someone who might look at simple anime drawings from a teenager and not see value or skill in it, that doesn’t mean they “can’t make art”. I believe it is similar for writing. That is something we are also just going to have to agree to disagree on, I suppose.

Let me leave with a quote from my last professional editor, one they said in the first email I got from them, since I think it's sage advice to keep in mind for all creatives when dealing with feedback— particularly feedback they believe might ruin their vision:
"All of these, and any future notes you ever get from an editor, are almost always just suggestions and you can choose to implement them or not. In the end, it's your story and you have final say."

Lensing 2025-03-03 07:28:32 UTC #17

It´s hard for me to judge if most authors know how to write romance or if they don´t have a clue
or are bad writers. I´m a bad writer myself. I guess most writers are really bad and there are
a few who are really good at it

DokiDokiTsuna 2025-03-04 13:13:06 UTC #18

Yeah, it definitely looks that way...

I will say that when I'm giving feedback to specific people, I do try to follow the quote you laid out in your first paragraph...hell, there's a non-zero chance you may have heard it from me; because I've said that very same thing on this forum. ^^; Awkward to think about...

Also, bite doesn't always equal complete dismissal-- I'm just as harsh when I do design critiques, despite knowing that design is highly variable and always taking multiple solution routes into account when I try to give corrections. I really think this whole disagreement really boils down to tact alone; I agree with 90% of what you said.

However, tact is also highly variable, maybe more so than you realize. Believe it or not, every single time I've had someone actually get angry at me for a criticism I gave, it's been an instance when I tried to be as polite as possible. ^^; No harsh words, no attitude, just "this could work better with X, Y, and Z". It does sometimes feel like you can't win as a critic, even when people explicitly come to you for advice...some people don't care if you go full Gordon Ramsay; some people only want compliment sandwiches decorated with heart and smiley-face emojis, and will accept nothing less. I just try to find a balance, like everyone else...and I always say that if you don't like my criticism, that's perfectly fine; there's always someone out there who will meet your needs better.

That's honestly something worth its own topic; something I saw being discussed in the thread where I found the title quote...I don't have time to go into it right now, but let's just say I agree AND disagree. ^^;

DiegoPalacios 2025-03-05 22:25:08 UTC #19

@DokiDokiTsuna

plot twist.....again

DiegoPalacios 2025-03-05 22:30:30 UTC #20

Personally i agree, but i think it's mostly because some authors feel obligated to spark some romance in a story that doesn't need it to fill gaps or they go too far on pandering shippers and it ruins the pacing of what the story is actually about.

jwabeasley 2025-03-06 01:57:27 UTC #21

That has damaged a few series!

Zhengo 2025-03-06 17:38:42 UTC #22

True, but actually I have a very hot take rant on this. The problem isn't that people don't know how to write romance, it's that society sucks and brainwashes people into thinking that romantic relationships (and to a lesser extent, having kids) are the end-all be-all. Now, this may be a chicken or egg problem - is the oversaturation of romance in media influencing society? OR is society over-emphasizing marriage and kids influencing media? Well, I will say considering some historical traditions that rely on the marriage aspect, I'm going to guess the latter, but feel free to argue the former.

Maybe it's because lately I have been hounded by a good chunk of people in my life about why I am still single and not looking for a relationship at my age, so I probably have a special hatred for most romance writing currently born of my annoying circumstances.

There are people who aren't suited for a romantic relationship at their stage of life, but due to societal pressures are led to believe they need one to solve their life's problems. How many instances do we see the bad joke about a man hating his wife? Or a woman complaining about their lazy incompetent husband? It makes me think if society never elevated romantic relationships to these people, these kinds of people would probably be living happier lives fulfilling the goals they need to fulfill. On the flip side, you would have people proclaiming they will do anything for their best friend, "Bros before hoes" kind of stuff. In fact, complaining about their partner is something most people do with their friends.

Why do I bring up this real-life issue in relation to romance in fiction? Because I believe that because society paints romantic relationships as "important task to fulfill" in life, most writers end up just having a rigid view of how people behave in romance. It should have the typical kissing, loud proclamations of "I love you", physical intimacy. But they never get into the nitty gritty dynamics of the relationship. How the two characters in a relationship will behave around each other, other than your typical lovey-dovey behaviors like kissing, nicknames, saying I will die for you or something, or, if you want to get a little spicy, maybe add some snark in there (which doesn't matter because they are also snarky around everyone else). If you want to push the spicy envelope a bit more, we can get borderline abusive to full on abusive I feel that most romantic couples in stories end up turning into this in the endgame. Is this reflective of real life romance? Well, I can't say, I've never been in one, but it's definitely quite boring to read for me.

Now why do I bring up the friends angle in my real life issue? It's because ironically, you'll find often in shipping culture that the fans end up not shipping the main (heterenormative) canon couple, but the MC and his best friend. Other than the desire for more lgbt representation, I think there is more to it than that that this tendency happens. I find that in most stories, the dynamic between the (male) MC and his friend a lot more interesting than the dynamic he has with his love interest.

Unbound by the expected normal behavior of romance, writers can explore behaviors and interactions beyond your typical blushing and kissing. Differences end up causing more high-stakes conflicts, because you're not saddled with the expectation that things will magically work out in the end. (A tendency I find in a lot of romance stories is that no matter how toxic, conflict-ridden a relationship will be, it will almost always end up becoming magically resolved at the end, supposedly seen as a "triumph" of overcoming troubles as a couple). Differences in philosophy can end up becoming a big breaking point between friends, and you become invested in how the writer will carry out this conflict, if it will be resolved or be broken beyond repair. How many times have you seen a romantic couple seriously tackling conflicting life philosophies to the point that it might break their relationship?

You brought up your issue with the "Enemies to Lovers" trope, but I think an even more glaring issue is that usually when this trope is used, the two characters aren't truly "Enemies" on a mutual level philosophical level. It's usually in a one-sided way where one character is "convinced" to another character's side. Oh how I would love to read an actual "Enemies to Lovers" story where two characters are in a constant fight to the death over their differing views, but slowly start to reconcile to something in the middle in their stream of never-ending conflicts, or even that the conflict twists their views to start to see the other POV. It sounds like a good challenge for a writer that I'd like to see someone pull off.

Another trope to rant about that I think is caused by society's over-emphasis on romance. Is the use of romantic relationships as a measuring stick of a character's growth. I'm looking at YOU, Jobless Reincarnation. So many stories focusing on the "redemption" of the character end up falling to a romantic relationship the MC cultivates as a way to say "look! MC has a girlfriend! He's healthy now!" While this could be an indication of character growth, I HATE the type of message these stories imply. That your journey to self-improvement is ultimately all a goal for you to "get the girl". Why do you think we get so many instances these days about incels whining about how they can't get a girlfriend despite going to the gym all day and building up their muscles?

All this to say, the failing of romance in stories is not just a writing issue, but also an issue that most people don't know what a romantic relationship even is and only parrot the pressures and media they consume around them about romance being about kissing and that it's super important. Even in this day and age, there are people who don't know the difference between romantic and sexual attraction and often conflate the two. And most people can't get it into their heads that a romantic relationships doesn't have to be the most important thing in their lives, that the harsh reality is that their "romantic partner" isn't so much a partner more than a person you used to fulfill a life checkbox, if you're just going to go behind their back and talk smack about them to your friends, friends that you seem to care more about but will never admit it because society has made you downplay platonic relationships.

jwabeasley 2025-03-06 20:39:22 UTC #23

@Zhengo, I think we are in broad agreement but I have to disagree on some of your points.

Now, I'm likely in a different stage of life - being 10 years married with a bunch of kids - but I do not think marriage and having children are especially glamorized by today's media. At least for the past 20 years, most media glamorizes casual sex and one night stands, serial relationships, and general licentiousness. For men, try and think about a male lead who would wait for marriage to sleep with a woman. The only examples I can think of are media where the romance is tertiary so it doesn't come up. For women, the propaganda push has been for career-only, anti-relationship, effectively sexless 'empowered' drones. This might just be down to us consuming different media, though.

I will say that promoting marriage and children is a good way for a culture to continue to exist, so it makes sense that it would be the norm in any functional culture. Celibate cultures tend not to last past one generation, and in general people who don't want to reproduce-- don't. So those elements will tend not to become common in any society over time. Likewise, if media reflects the culture that it comes from, we would expect that media in general would depict the kinds of relationships that result in children much more than other kinds.

I'm sorry it's difficult for you! I hope your relations learn to respect that you'll do things on your own time, if you do them at all!

Agreed. Though in my experience, when people are of the right age to marry (early 20's for most), society pushes hard for them to NOT get married and instead focus on career and casual hookups. It's not until your late 20's or mid 30's, depending on gender, that the marriage pressure ramps up. My wife and I went to a 'newlyweds' group at our local church back when we qualified for that, only to discover that everyone else there were 10-15 years older than us and had been married for far less time. We used to get all kinds of nasty looks for being married and having children in our mid 20's. This is heavily dependent on culture and location, though.

I find it easier to remember that there is no such thing as a "society," that is to say, a being called society that has opinions or can be satisfied by some behavior. There's only people, every person has their own opinions and ideas, and nobody can please everybody or even most people. Not even Jesus could do that. Even individual people often have contradictory opinions within themselves! It is up to each of us to decide which people's opinions matter to us and in what ways they matter.

I hate those jokes, too. I would never talk that way about my wife, and I don't understand why other people talk like that about their spouses. I advise distancing yourself from those that do, as that behavior is toxic and contagious.

It is not reflective! I hate it too, and I'm a huge fan of some romances! I wish more authors would think about how their chosen couple would operate as a pair.

This has done so much damage to men's platonic relationships both in and out of media. But I agree, it can be more interesting. There's no good reason why romantic pairings can't have the same level of thought put into them in media.

Maybe one day I'll do that. I like the "enemies to lovers" trope in old swashbucklers like "Captain Blood" and "The Seahawk." The trouble with that is, most authors are not only incapable of writing good romantic relationships, they are also incapable of writing effective antagonists, too. The bad guys must be evilly evil for evil's sake where the heroes are noble and pure and all agree with the author on every political and cultural issue. Actual differences in personality leading to radically different interpretations of the same event is much more challenging to write.

Agreed. It is really very difficult to explain to adolescent men that getting a woman to like you will not solve all your problems. This is a basic human thing though - it's in the same category as "if I just lost that weight" or "if I just made $X more money," then I'll be happy. But you're right that media shouldn't cater to that - but hey, there's plenty of bottom-feeder trash anime, that stuff isn't going anywhere as long as people buy it.

Agreed. Though as I said, I think it's casual sex and serial situationships rather than family building that media is pushing. If that kind of behavior is what you see from couples most often, it's no wonder that you're not interested in it! I don't want anything to do with that, either!

Zhengo 2025-03-06 21:20:05 UTC #24

To be honest, I used marriage as it was something that is pushed on my specifically by traditionalist people older than me, so I may have overemphasized society's push for marriage. But even disregarding marriage, I do think romance in general is just put on a pedestal above other relationship types. To be clear, I don't have a problem if an individual views their romantic relationship as the most important. But I've seen how people's desperation for a romantic partner ends up keeping them tied to toxic relationships just because they think they have to fulfill this requirement in life.

Regarding your experience in media, I think the portrayal of stuff like the serial relationships is still indicative of an unhealthy view of romance as a "requirement" in the general culture. For one, the behavior on a physical level is generally the same as with a relationship, and the characters within the serial relationship still somehow come out feeling like they have romantic feelings for the male lead, even though none of them have an incentive to be invested in the first place. It's a fantasy for some men by using people's romantic attraction to them as a measuring stick for self worth. For the media aimed at women, I actually haven't run into a lot of the examples you showed. In fact, the annoying thing I've found is the portrayal of hypercompetent women who somehow only have their personality centered around a man (Mikasa from AoT)

I guess this is a generational or community difference. While people my age aren't pushing each other to marriage specifically, many are trying to seek long term relationships and aren't interested in casual hookups much, unless you mean the dating scene, which is more of a process of trying to find a long term partner. The thing that I have been pushed on by people my age, is to go on dates and try to find a partner (mostly from people who are currently in a relationship...). Like I said, I have no issue with individuals thinking their romantic relationship makes them happiest, but as I said, the general expectation that everyone should be in a relationship and that it will 100% guaranteed make them happy feels like it ends up giving some people a rigid view of romance. And as I said, I've seen plenty of people end up being tied to failing relationships or bad partners just because of this expectation. I've seen a few of my friends become completely wrecked in codependency with their partner that when the inevitable breakup happens, they end up falling into unhealthy behavior like stalking.

To be honest, I think the other examples you listed aren't much better, but "get the girl" is definitely the trope I've seen the most in these self improvement stories. I haven't seen any trash power fantasy anime that revolved solely around becoming a corrupt ultra rich businessman without the "get the girl" part.

As said, I personally haven't seen serial relationships from most couples in my life. It's a bit of a meme on the Internet, I suppose, but those things don't shape my opinion as much as personal experiences. And the things I see from personal experience are long term relationships that should've ended in the short term if not for people desperately holding on to the fact that their view of romance is them trying to fulfill a task in life

cherrystark 2025-03-06 22:46:03 UTC #25

I disagree. One of humanity's basic needs is love. Everyone at some level wants to be loved and loved in return. The downside to "love" is that people only understand romantic love. They don't understand that the other types of love are just as valid, or they oversexualize human connection to point people act entitled to it. "Romance:" is also so oversaturated is because the women wanting to be desired, while still being a wife and mom is still considered taboo and shameful.

So a lot of your points, for me, really go back to the idea that I've held for a long time that people should write "people" not tropes. The trope about the idiot husband and the smart wife isn't really a "romance" trope. It was an early feminist, comedy trope that became popular in the 60s as a way to show much a woman keeps her household going, while still being "traditional".

The romances become poorly written because they only look to the tropes on how to pattern the relationship. Alpha romances are written this way. Billionaire romances end that way, etc. The "friendships" often only become shippable is because readers have been trained to view any time of intimate/close relationship as romantic.

This. The only time(s) I've ever seen marriage and family pushed as an "endgame" are those stories where the writer doesn't know how to finish the series so they just pair everyone up. I think stories normalizing healthy marriages, raising children, and pregnancy would make things far more interesting. Like I personally love the uptick of pregnancies shown on TV nowadays, thanks to the actresses protesting for their inclusion. The characters get far more dimension because they have loved ones to fight for.

Zhengo 2025-03-07 00:18:17 UTC #26

I'm not sure if you thought my paragraph mentioning the idiot husband was referring to a trope, I'm actually referring to real life occurrences. Same thing with the husbands saying they hate their wife.

And anyways, I acquiesce on the marriage part specifically, but it doesn't detract from my larger point that, as you said yourself, people want to be loved but only see "romantic" love as important because of how much it has been pushed in society. To me, you said you disagree, but I'm not sure how what you said disagreed with my point other than the "having kids" part. People not understanding other types of love being valid, oversexualizing human connections, etc all contribute in people believing romance is the ultimate goal in life.

For me, the specifics of marriage in the "endgame" is not as important to my point as that the "endgame" in most romance is a "resolved relationship", whether that be marriage or just the two being together with no indication that they will experience trouble that would bring their relationship to jeopardy. Because this is an established endgame, it makes it so any stakes in character conflicts becomes lower by default. At best, there are some stories where a couple breaks up, but a lot of times, the main character still ends up finding a different partner by the end of the story (sometimes suddenly).

I generally agree that writers should write people and not tropes. Except romance as a trope has become quite insidious as to twist characterizations. This, in my point of view, is the big flaw in the pushing of romantic love above all and the required endgame in couples to "Be together"

Take for example Arcane Season 2's depiction of CaitVi. Caitlyn does some horrible things in season 2 that would've gone against a lot of Vi's ideals in Season 1. They have a little "break up", but it gets resolved easily after around three interactions where Caitlyn helps Vi a few times. After that, they immediately get back together without much conflict. Caitlyn's previous actions are just brushed aside, as if it wasn't that important to begin with. The worst thing is, the show being hellbent on keeping this couple together seems to have neutered Vi's character in Season 2, as she apparently just does not have any opinions anymore about Piltover's treatment of the undercity.