What men get wrong

[Miss_Pixie]

What? lol doesn't it basically sum up both side of the arguement?

 

[ghost101]

What? lol doesn't it basically sum up both side of the arguement?

That about does it.

Dont get us wrong, as weird and insane as you girls are, we love you. Despite you dragging us out to take us clothes shopping.

 

[djserani]

Dont get us wrong, as weird and insane as you girls are, we love you. Despite you dragging us out to take us clothes shopping.

I find that offensive!

I hate clothes shopping. I hate shopping of everything except gift-buying and even that gets old after a while.

Despise it.

Loathe it with great loathing.

Srsly.

 

[swordandsandle]

Both sides have gender sterotypes. We'll give up ours when you give up yours

 

[Rubithen]

I find that offensive!

I hate clothes shopping. I hate shopping of everything except gift-buying and even that gets old after a while.

Despise it.

Loathe it with great loathing.

Srsly.

Most assuredly, she does. She'll do it willingly for others, but NEVER try to convince her to shop for herself. Being one of the most unselfish people on this planet has its drawbacks.

Oh and hi. I'm that guy she talks about sometimes on whom she insists, for whatever reason, on basing her male protagonists.

Me? I'm just thrilled that she loves me

 

[Bebeslut]

Way too many men write up height/weight/size charts that don't make any sense.

"She was 6'-0" tall, athletically built weighing in at 60 pounds, had 44 dd cups with 2" long nipples and 18" diameter areola (spelling please?), and a butt that stuck out a foot from her back."

Whether you like the laundry list of details or not, that just doesn't add up! It's nonsensical, and written by someone that has no idea what the measurements they are using really mean (all of those are from various stories combined into one horrid description).

Gee, and I thought you were writing about me!

 

[Bebeslut]

Gosh!

Way too many men write up height/weight/size charts that don't make any sense.

"She was 6'-0" tall, athletically built weighing in at 60 pounds, had 44 dd cups with 2" long nipples and 18" diameter areola (spelling please?), and a butt that stuck out a foot from her back."

Whether you like the laundry list of details or not, that just doesn't add up! It's nonsensical, and written by someone that has no idea what the measurements they are using really mean (all of those are from various stories combined into one horrid description).

Gee, and I thought you were writing about me!

 

[driphoney]

Most assuredly, she does. She'll do it willingly for others, but NEVER try to convince her to shop for herself. Being one of the most unselfish people on this planet has its drawbacks.

Oh and hi. I'm that guy she talks about sometimes on whom she insists, for whatever reason, on basing her male protagonists.

Me? I'm just thrilled that she loves me

Are these the ones with the 12 inch members?

And welcome.

 

[Rubithen]

Are these the ones with the 12 inch members?

And welcome.

12-inch members... If that isn't the name for a midget, neuvo-punk band, I'll be shocked out of my briefs.

No, thankfully, my Lady has rather more... reasonable expectations. I will defer to her when it comes to, well, evaluating my expertise and fittings but suffice it to say that based on her previous experience, I am the most qualified individual she has ever bedded (her words, not mine And no, despite inevitable, initial evaluations, I usually am not quite so... self-complimentary, but she has a way of bringing out the best in people ).

In any case, having intelligence, sentience and a healthy respect (aw hell, women are amazing creatures - *drool*) for the human female helps, too

Thank you for the welcome I hope to contribute meaningfully, if only some art (just thinking about breaking into erotic art, actually ), a few laughs and a furry thing for Sera to lean up against

 

[driphoney]

Thank you for the welcome I hope to contribute meaningfully, if only some art (just thinking about breaking into erotic art, actually ), a few laughs and a furry thing for Sera to lean up against

Why should you start a trend? What will the rest of us do?

Seriously, I was just teasing. Though a nice knees to waist nude shot is required of all new male, er, members as soon as the 100 post count is reached. Begging hasn't been working for me too well, so I'm going with subterfuge now.

All those things you hope to contribute sound great, and I look forward to seeing your art and getting to know you.

 

[ghost101]

Both sides have gender sterotypes. We'll give up ours when you give up yours

NEVER!!!

 

[Noira]

Are these the ones with the 12 inch members?

That's pretty short; how do they reach the keyboard to post?


In all seriousness, though... for me, if a story has awful stereotyping or bad writing, I can't get into it. Laundry lists, implausable descriptions, the "made to appeal to men" OR "made to appeal to women" writing both make me cringe. It's awful hard for me to find erotica I do really like. Not only does it require spotless grammar and writing, a good literary style, biological feasability, realistic characters...

I'm a dreadfully picky reader. I can't read "they meet, they describe measurements, they fuck." (written for/by men) or "they meet, they romance amidst frolicking vocabulary words and spiral in a circular dance in which nothing happens but teasing and oh yes, did we mention he only has eyes for her and is terribly in tune with her emotions? Yeah." Then I lean towards GBLT fiction instead but if it's guy/guy written by a woman it tends to just be the same thing but with more anal... etc...

For me, the writing can absolutely break a story. Give me one 90 pound 6 foot tall athlete with 32 perky DDs and his ten foot pole of masculinity as thick as a coke bottle penetrating her cervix/clit/womb pleasurably and I'm out of there.

Now, I might be argued with (and probably will) but erotica seems like it's aimed more toward women.

I have to repeat this point and underline it several times. Erotical is aimed towards women. Doesn't mean men don't read and write it, but men are generally more visual. Porn is a male market. Erotica is porn for women because it approaches the 'build your own fantasy' deal women seem to prefer. When men write erotica, being GENERALLY more visual they tend to approach with the laundry list style. Then drop someone in there who reads erotica to form a fantasy, and well, if the descriptions are broken those break our (or at least my) ability to get really into that scene.

That sort of anatomical misshap ruins the scene for me because I mentally build a visual up for the scene I'm reading. Once I was reading a segment for someone I was editing and he described her vagina apparently expanding midscene to fit the character's penis. It completely shattered my focus and I had to google to find out if this was physically possible at all. It completely ruined my involvement with the scene.

Erotica might be about crafting a sexy scene, but for SOME people, myself included, when something unrealistic occurs it jars our focus and ability to get into that scene, and no matter how beautiful the literary craft... it's no longer sexy.

 

[BSlade]

I think the things each sex most often get wrong, say some very important things about what each sex in general would like in a partner.

Women tend to write men with too much talk, too many emotions, preturnaturally aware of their partner's needs, monogamous.

Men tend to write women without enough talk, emotions, or thought processes, and tend to make them far more poly than most women actually are.
..

Spot on!

 

[BSlade]

..
I have to repeat this point and underline it several times. Erotical is aimed towards women. Doesn't mean men don't read and write it, but men are generally more visual. Porn is a male market. Erotica is porn for women because it approaches the 'build your own fantasy' deal women seem to prefer. When men write erotica, being GENERALLY more visual they tend to approach with the laundry list style..
..

Agreed totally

 

[BSlade]

I guess I have similar thoughts to others when reading erotica when I come across a sequence describing people fucking where I can tell that the author has little or no real world experience.

Things like large dildos being inserted up someone's bottom with no lube quick as you please. Guys orgasming and then going again a minute later. And again. And again. And again.

At the risk of repeating a previous effort, female authors whose male characters spend a lot of time and effort in internal dialogue trying to puzzle out a woman's real intentions, emotions, thoughts, feelings. ladies: we're just not like that.

Also it bears thinking about; they say every book reveals deep truths about the author, despite wild denials to the contrary!

 

[driphoney]

I have to repeat this point and underline it several times. Erotical is aimed towards women. Doesn't mean men don't read and write it, but men are generally more visual. Porn is a male market. Erotica is porn for women because it approaches the 'build your own fantasy' deal women seem to prefer.

I agree men are more visual, and I used to agree with this whole thing. Now, I'm not so sure. A lot of men are reading it. Most male writers here seem to start out by reading it first themselves. And there are a lot of male writers.

I loved Stella's comment. So true. And it might explain why men seem to just be able to more easily plunk down a sex scene and I struggle with constructing one. Or not. Stereotyping is a rough business.

 

[Athalia]

I have to repeat this point and underline it several times. Erotical is aimed towards women. Doesn't mean men don't read and write it, but men are generally more visual. Porn is a male market.

Which brings me to a confession. I misquoted my SO. What he really said was "Most porn was written for men." It was I who substituted "erotica" for "porn." Since I'm new to the business, I sometimes get confused with the terminology. The usual references (dictionary, Internet, thesaurus) haven't been very helpful, and the best my research can suggest is that it's a sort of sliding scale, from "pornography" (male-oriented, visual, visceral) at one end to "romantic" (female-oriented, emotional, introspective) at the other, with "erotica" somewhere in between, containing elements of both. Am I far "off base" here?

I realize, of course, that sweeping generalizations like this one leave out a lot of women who like porn, and men who like romances.

My SO is no help. When I asked him the difference between erotica and porn, he said that if he can remember anything about the story after his orgasm, it's erotica. You see what I have to work with here.

 

[bronzeage]

I agree men are more visual, and I used to agree with this whole thing. Now, I'm not so sure. A lot of men are reading it. Most male writers here seem to start out by reading it first themselves. And there are a lot of male writers.

I loved Stella's comment. So true. And it might explain why men seem to just be able to more easily plunk down a sex scene and I struggle with constructing one. Or not. Stereotyping is a rough business.

All writers start out by reading, first.

From my experience as a volunteer editor, I can say there is not a big difference between inexperienced male and female writers. As a writer matures, they find an audience and their style changes to please that audience.

 

[Stella_Omega]

Which brings me to a confession. I misquoted my SO. What he really said was "Most porn was written for men." It was I who substituted "erotica" for "porn." Since I'm new to the business, I sometimes get confused with the terminology. The usual references (dictionary, Internet, thesaurus) haven't been very helpful, and the best my research can suggest is that it's a sort of sliding scale, from "pornography" (male-oriented, visual, visceral) at one end to "romantic" (female-oriented, emotional, introspective) at the other, with "erotica" somewhere in between, containing elements of both. Am I far "off base" here?

I realize, of course, that sweeping generalizations like this one leave out a lot of women who like porn, and men who like romances.

That's one very good scale there. Of course, it doesn't include the incredibly hard-core written (and visual as well) porn that women also create for themselves. And some of the soppiest of romance comes from male writers under female nom de plumes. But as a general rule, yeppers!

My SO is no help. When I asked him the difference between erotica and porn, he said that if he can remember anything about the story after his orgasm, it's erotica. You see what I have to work with here.

Actually? That's about the best definition I've ever heard!

 

[Noira]

All writers start out by reading, first.

From my experience as a volunteer editor, I can say there is not a big difference between inexperienced male and female writers. As a writer matures, they find an audience and their style changes to please that audience.

You make a good point; bad female writers and bad male writers do both write similarly. It's once they learn to work out the kinks in the writing hose, that differences start to come through. And a truly good writer you'll never know the difference... because it's all just the writing. Though I have noticed things that younger male writers tend towards and younger female writers tend towards. I have been sent "this is my first story" many times... and I've found amidst the men it becomes a laundry list sex scene and amidst the women it becomes a nervous, passive voice romance leading to a very careful sex scene.

I agree men are more visual, and I used to agree with this whole thing. Now, I'm not so sure. A lot of men are reading it. Most male writers here seem to start out by reading it first themselves. And there are a lot of male writers.

Okay, let me change my statement. Erotica is porn MARKETED towards women. Doesn't mean that they're the only ones who write it. Or even read it. But go on, search "romance book cover" in Google. They're all the same thing. Macho man with torn open shirt holding onto swooning smaller woman. It's made to appeal to women's fantasies.

Which brings me to a confession. I misquoted my SO. What he really said was "Most porn was written for men." It was I who substituted "erotica" for "porn." Since I'm new to the business, I sometimes get confused with the terminology. The usual references (dictionary, Internet, thesaurus) haven't been very helpful, and the best my research can suggest is that it's a sort of sliding scale, from "pornography" (male-oriented, visual, visceral) at one end to "romantic" (female-oriented, emotional, introspective) at the other, with "erotica" somewhere in between, containing elements of both. Am I far "off base" here?

I realize, of course, that sweeping generalizations like this one leave out a lot of women who like porn, and men who like romances.

My SO is no help. When I asked him the difference between erotica and porn, he said that if he can remember anything about the story after his orgasm, it's erotica. You see what I have to work with here.

I don't think you're off base. I would define it as...

Porn = sex with just enough story to get to the sex.
Erotica = sexually charged story.
Romance = story that happens to include sex.

Romance is just porn wrapped up in enough roses, emotions, and candles that women don't realize it's actually just porn. Erotica is a story intended to be sexually stimulating; erotica is a story about sex. Porn is sex; the story exists to get it to the sex, mentioned story may only be a few paragraphs long.

In fact, your SO probably has a spot on definition. If you can remember the story after the sex, it was erotica. Spot on! (I see I was ninjaed by someone saying the same thing too. ^_^)

And well, I'm a womam who hates romance novels, so whatever. I'm just making sweeping generalizations for the sake of comprehension.

 

[nerk]

"So, clearly, members of one sex are living in a sad, unrealistic fantasy world, trying in vain to compensate for the drabness of their day-to-day lives. Members of the other are living a rich life of the imagination, at peace with their self-image and excited by what the future might hold. Which is which goes without saying."

(from http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/31/ar...n/31sexes.html)

 

[xssve]

What? lol doesn't it basically sum up both side of the arguement?

Men are taught that they have to be pushy to get what they want - you stand around being polite, somebody else is going to grab it out from under you:

Me: "anybody want that last piece of bacon?"

My sisters boyfriend (jock): grabs last piece of bacon and stuffs it in his mouth.

Silly me.

Women, by contrast, tend towards passive aggressive behaviors to get what they want, the vagueness is a ploy to make you think the whole thing was your idea - being grabby isn't "ladylike" - unless it's a White Sale, when there aren't any men around, I've noticed that women are as direct, often moreso than men.

Part of it, I think has to do with the fact that women do most of the childrearing, training comes naturally, and training is, in many respects, different than applied discipline, training a method of instilling self discipline, the reward accomplishment, whereas applied training is a more direct form of reward/punishment - both forms of operant conditioning, but training is a bit subtler, and uses indirect punishment.

You're supposed to feel bad for forgetting her birthday, if you don't she's going to pout until you do feel bad, bad enough that you'll avoid such foolishness in the future, and just to make sure, she'll remind you about it for the next Thirty years.

I do think this behavior was more common when women were more dependent on men, and thus, more inclined to manipulate them emotionally, which is really just the flip side of the fact that they were being manipulated socially and economically, if not physically - they were supposed to fall in love, and become devoted wives, and so they did, but love isn't a one way street, and the price of this particular form of manipulation is that the man has to love back, and of course, the ways and means of demonstrating love are themselves often culturally defined, typically, cliches amplified by Madison Avenue.

The problem, of course, is that people fall into routines, they expect routines, and once a pattern is established as routine, it's often very difficult to change it - you either get used to it, or spend the next 20 years fighting.

I think the main reason for this contention between the sexes is the differing expectations of men and women - when they become unrealistic, they aren't going to mesh, and we don't really have a lot of ways in this culture of dealing with any sort of cognitive dissonance, other than arguing about who is to blame - that's really the pattern to watch for, because if you can avoid that, there's a chance you can talk you way out it.

Otherwise, it typically turns into a vicious cycle, a freezeout deathmatch that makes both of you miserable, and at some point, there's just to much water under the bridge to ever resolve it satisfactorily.

So anyway, I've been looking for a female writer, or writing partner, based on my theory that this whole expectations thing is fertile ground for conflict, and possibly at least one key for turning wank fodder into semi meaningful literature via some internal and external conflict.

Oddly, one typically only encounters this sort of conflict in D/S stories, i.e., non-consent reluctance, which represents conflicting expectations, albeit in exaggerated form, whereas D/S in praxis is often an effective means of avoid such conflict to begin with by establish clear and explicit roles and limits - Vanilla relationships tend to be rife with this sort of conflict, but one seldom encounters it in stories - Jim Chee's relationship with Mary Langdon in Tony Hillerman's series is the only example that pops into my head immediately, a fairly common conflict over career paths and lifestyles.

One reason, perhaps, is that resolution usually means one character is going to have to back down, given the usual "winner take all" approach to conflict resolution in Western Culture, and thus the result if often bittersweet at best, if the character being forced to compromise has any hopes or dreams of their own.

The other solution is to simply leave the conflict unresolved, ad common plot device particularly in any ongoing series - in fact, it's practically axiomatic that if the main characters ever resolve their differences, the story jumps the shark, and it's over.

I dunno, seems to me that most women's erotica is still pretty much about getting swept off their feet, preferably by a guy who is a consummate lover with a lot of money - I doubt you can go wrong with that formula.

 

[driphoney]

My SO is no help. When I asked him the difference between erotica and porn, he said that if he can remember anything about the story after his orgasm, it's erotica. You see what I have to work with here.

That's fantastic! There's a thread over on the SDC regarding this very topic.

and amidst the women it becomes a nervous, passive voice romance leading to a very careful sex scene.

Damn. And I worked so hard to keep it active.

Porn = sex with just enough story to get to the sex.
Erotica = sexually charged story.
Romance = story that happens to include sex.

Romance is just porn wrapped up in enough roses, emotions, and candles that women don't realize it's actually just porn. Erotica is a story intended to be sexually stimulating; erotica is a story about sex. Porn is sex; the story exists to get it to the sex, mentioned story may only be a few paragraphs long.

In fact, your SO probably has a spot on definition. If you can remember the story after the sex, it was erotica. Spot on! (I see I was ninjaed by someone saying the same thing too. ^_^)

And well, I'm a womam who hates romance novels, so whatever. I'm just making sweeping generalizations for the sake of comprehension.

As I said, this has really been debated long and hard over on the SDC. You might find it interesting. Or not.

I love sappy romances, myself. And as someone, I think Stella, mentioned, some of the most romantic pieces I've read here on Lit have been done by men. It made me have to do a re-think on my writer stereotypes. And men in general.

As for writing for the audience, which Bronzeage mentioned, many do that, but I don't know if I'll ever be able to. I have to like what I'm writing. I have to get into the story, like the characters (whether they are likable or not-though I have a serious problem turning then all into nice-guys) and be curious about the story. I just have to hope others might find it interesting too. Maybe that's the difference between a pro and a rank-amateur? *shrug*

Now, I have to read xxve's comment. My brain can only keep so many POV's going at once!

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Dear Reader,

XSSVE makes the 2-Headed Snake Fallacy. He saw a 2 headed snake one time and concluded that all snakes have 2 heads.

Feminists make the same error; some gal they know got a break from Uncle Sambo one time or some gal, somewhere, went thru life beautiful, thin, and prosperous, so every gal everywhere can do the same...or is owed beauty and prosperity as a birthright.

 

[Stella_Omega]

I dunno, seems to me that most women's erotica is still pretty much about getting swept off their feet, preferably by a guy who is a consummate lover with a lot of money - I doubt you can go wrong with that formula.

Well, the "consummate lover" part, anyway, since we are talking about erotica.