Natalie Wynn (Contrapoints) mentioned Pride and Prejudice by Jane Austen 3 times

I think that you could certainly make an egalitarian relationship exciting in fiction but the way that you do that would be to put other kinds of barriers in the way. I mean I guess you look at something like Romeo and Juliet was as an obvious example where Romeo and Juliet are, I guess, more or less socially equal although you know, as medieval man and woman not really... but still there's not quite the class element that there is in say Pride and Prejudice or in Twilight.

— Natalie Wynn (Contrapoints)

I'm drawing from a lot of different sources from the history of the romance novel or from the philosophy of Desire or from online debates about 50 shades of gray from a number of years ago right, so you know it's like a wide variety of stuff that I'm engaging with and I think that you know when I say past experience [...] I read Pride and Prejudice in the past so I know of this lineage and literature but I'll revisit it as research.

— Natalie Wynn (Contrapoints)

Whatever we think of its "morality," "Pamela" became the template for romance novels where a young, inexperienced, impoverished girl becomes an object of fascination for an older, richer man with a dangerous edge. In the 19th Century "Pride and Prejudice" and "Jane Eyre" both fit this description, though "Pride and Prejudice" is obviously much more agreeable to 21st century morality than "Pamela".

— Natalie Wynn (Contrapoints)