Characterizing your male character

[NotWise]

Do you?

As a male writer, writing for a mostly male audience, I find it really easy to let characterization of my male characters slip by. They're guys. They care about guy things. What's to say?

Last year, I published a story (Love is Enough) that was a little emotionally complicated, and I had it extensively beta-read. A repeated comment from the readers was that they didn't know my male character well enough, especially when it came to one of the later scenes.

I didn't really have the energy to respond to the comments before I published the story, but since then I've come to agree, and I've come to think that it's a pattern.

There are exceptions, but I put more effort into female characters than I give male characters. The guys are just the guy. They aren't usually just a cock, but they're often pretty two-dimensional.

I find it hard to characterize male characters -- especially if they're much different from me. Am I alone in this, or do other male writers do the same thing?

 

[KeithD]

Nearly all my characters are male and my target audience is GM, so, yes, I distinction my male characters from each other.

 

[SimonDoom]

To some extent, yes. I've written stories from both the male and female perspective, but I find the female perspective more interesting, and I think I pay more attention to developing female characters. My male characters tend to be a projection of me in one form or another, but often somewhat underdeveloped.

 

[HHHawkeye]

I'm weird in that despite being male, and straight, I generally prefer writing from the female POV. I write a lot of stuff involving submissive women, and I generally prefer getting into the heads of these women rather than the men dominating them. I'm not sure why. Whenever I write a male character in a bdsm or mind control story, I always find it a constant struggle to write them in a way where I don't feel cringey at how wish-fulfillment-y what's happening to the guy feels. And even when I don't cringe, it's rare that I find what's going through the guy's head interesting in these scenarios, especially compared to the female characters.

That actually got me into trouble recently; one of my female characters has been orchestrating their life in service of living out a huge, submissive, masochistic fantasy of hers, but by the time I actually came around to writing the guy, and especially writing from his POV, I hated his guts due to what he needed to be like to fit all of the criteria of what his wife needed him to be for the sake of the story. I'm still not quite sure how to sort that out.

 

[SimonDoom]

Nearly all my characters are male and my target audience is GM, so, yes, I distinction my male characters from each other.

KeithD, I'm curious about your approach to writing gay male stories. Do you identify primarily with the dominant partner, or the more submissive partner? Do you switch off from story to story? My impression from the stories of yours that I've read is that you identify with the more dominant/masculine partner, and your stories tend to be written from that perspective. Do you see it that way?

 

[KeithD]

KeithD, I'm curious about your approach to writing gay male stories. Do you identify primarily with the dominant partner, or the more submissive partner? Do you switch off from story to story? My impression from the stories of yours that I've read is that you identify with the more dominant/masculine partner, and your stories tend to be written from that perspective. Do you see it that way?

I write from the perspective of the protagonist, even if he's a real stinker, regardless of the dominant/submissive element. I think most of my stories are written from the seeking submissive perspective, though (not a limp-wristed submissive, though). Not intentionally, I don't think. That's just what most of my plotlines are doing.

 

[ElectricBlue]

To some extent, yes. I've written stories from both the male and female perspective, but I find the female perspective more interesting, and I think I pay more attention to developing female characters. My male characters tend to be a projection of me in one form or another, but often somewhat underdeveloped.

Me too - I'm far more interested in my female characters, because they're the ones I know nothing about at the start of a story, whereas my males are all variants of me (meshing reality and fantasy together).

I don't know how my men are read - I think they come across okay, if my unreliable correspondents are to be believed. It's difficult to step back and read them impartially (or critically) because that would be stepping back from myself. And if I don't write them all naked and exposed, with their heart on their sleeve, they not going to be credible at all.

 

[Vix_Giovanni]

Interesting question. I’m a female writer and writing for an even-mixed audience. It’s a series, and I wrote an entire novella (this) to give my male protagonist a clear voice, backstory, goals etc. It was much harder to write from his POV; sentences and paragraphs had to be tighter, more active tense, more specifics in sex scenes, far less emoting and lots of bad grammar to reflect his natural speech patterns/thoughts. It made me a better writer, and I think he’s far more interesting, but readers—both male and female— only ever ask me about the female protagonist.

 

[CoffeeWithMonkeys]

Well I'm female and my MC is usually female and my main male is usually very one or two dimensional...sadly.

I don't know if it's because I'm writing from a female pov or if it's because I don't write main male characters.

I have been told I can write a wonderful glimpse into a young woman's head, and I take that as a compliment!

 

[ChuckWolf]

To some extent, yes. I've written stories from both the male and female perspective, but I find the female perspective more interesting, and I think I pay more attention to developing female characters. My male characters tend to be a projection of me in one form or another, but often somewhat underdeveloped.

Exactly the same for me.

 

[8letters]

Do you?

As a male writer, writing for a mostly male audience, I find it really easy to let characterization of my male characters slip by. They're guys. They care about guy things. What's to say?

Last year, I published a story (Love is Enough) that was a little emotionally complicated, and I had it extensively beta-read. A repeated comment from the readers was that they didn't know my male character well enough, especially when it came to one of the later scenes.

I didn't really have the energy to respond to the comments before I published the story, but since then I've come to agree, and I've come to think that it's a pattern.

There are exceptions, but I put more effort into female characters than I give male characters. The guys are just the guy. They aren't usually just a cock, but they're often pretty two-dimensional.

I find it hard to characterize male characters -- especially if they're much different from me. Am I alone in this, or do other male writers do the same thing?

In most of my stories, the story is driven by the female main character. She has the interesting personality. The male main character is for the most part a straight man, reacting to the FMC's latest antic. Consequently, it's hard to give my MMC's much of a personality. The more the MMC drives the story, the easier it is to give him a personality.

 

[Polyacrylate]

I try to. I like for stories to be about growth and decisions in some way, and so try to give my characters, a bit of backstory and personality, even if it is implicit rather than spelled out on the page. I like to think through decisions and events a few layers out (why did he say this? Why did she do that? Why did that happen?) to build some consistency for the characters, events, and world.

I think a fault of mine is that most of my characters, male or female, share my own trait of introspection, second guessing their decisions, and living in their own heads. I struggle with writing extroverts, especially neurotypical ones. The story I almost submitted for the summer loving contest featured an extroverted main character. It didn't work out. I liked the individual parts, but when rereading the story as a whole... Yeesh. No need to dump that garbage into the community. Maybe I will fix it some day.

Beyond my own minimal work, there's an archetype of underdeveloped male character seen throughout Lit that I don't care for. You know the type:
-Upper twenties to mid 40s
-Horse-cocked
-Affluent (though money, class, and occasionally power are never what gets him laid, no, no)
-Alone/lonely with little explanation or exploration of it or its impact on the character
-Inexplicably beloved and desired by his female colleagues/neighbors/years-long platonic friends/other bar patrons.
Little to no effort is required in this character's seducing women (despite having had seemingly no luck prior to the start of the story), little to no sacrifice is required in his securing their love, and little to no change (other than fucking constantly) is experienced in anyone's lives. Occasionally, because he's a Nice Guy, this character will put up token resistance when the female lead first throws herself at him, but she's a Strong, Independent Woman, and she's going to have him no matter what he has to say about it, so he naturally takes charge of the fuckfest as soon as she's asserted herself.

Wow, I hadn't meant to rant quite like that. This really is just a statement of my own taste, so don't put too much stock into my opinion. I get that this site is just fantasy for a lot of people, and these stories are well received often because many readers see that character as themselves at their best possible. I get that, and I'm not judging or denigrating anybody for writing, reading, or enjoying this sort of character. But the trope wore thin for me early, and when I encounter a story with this loose archetype, I rarely bother finishing it.

 

[NoJo]

I'm not sure what "caring about guy things" actually means, to be honest. I'd need an example of a guy thing. Sports? Tools?

Unless a character is a main protagonist, it's not a problem to leave him or her sketchy. But if they are meant to be main characters, then I'd expect to be able to recognize their personalty, or, in the case of a male character, identify with them.

My main male protagonist is based largely on myself. The female antagonists (yes, they usually are antagonists, I write conflict) are based on women I've had sexual relationships or at least sexually-charged encounters with. I knew them less well, but try to give them as much depth as possible. Other male characters I write are often based on close male friends or relations, and they serve various roles in the story (as expositors of motivation, mentors, messengers, as contrasts to the main protagonist, etc). I try to make them believable without falling into too many cliche traps.

 

[Athalia]

Well I'm female and my MC is usually female and my main male is usually very one or two dimensional...sadly.

I don't know if it's because I'm writing from a female pov or if it's because I don't write main male characters.

I have been told I can write a wonderful glimpse into a young woman's head, and I take that as a compliment!

My situation as well. I think it's because most of my female characters are based on myself or women that I actually know well, whereas most of my male characters are based on my fantasies of what these characters could be. That is to say, when I think I know a man well enough to presume to know what's on his mind, I have to admit that it may just be my imagination running wild and giving me ideas that really don't have a basis in fact.

And the fantasies are, almost by definition, less realistic than the actual relationships.

I've talked about this with my friend Jehoram, who's on this forum, and he's told me that he has the same situation regarding his writing female characters, so I guess it's just a part of that great gulf between the sexes.

 

[Hypoxia]

People, even pr0n players and other toonish characters, are more-or-less people, fairly interchangeable at some levels. Not quite "Smart as a horse and hung like Einstein" -- well, why not? So long as it's a talking horse, any orientation. And general centaur vs human personalities might be gender-flipped. Give them any personalities we want, based on whatever.

How do I structure characters? Slap stuff together Frankenstein-style and see what works. What, you brought me an ABNORMAL brain?!? Groovy.

The 'protagonist' issue needn't arise. I may yet brew tales told by narrators nonhuman (what does a cat see?) and nonliving (what does a motel mirror see?). For an unreliable human or robotic narrator, model a political figure.

The characters we create and mutate can be whatever we want.

 

[NotWise]

I think I've broken a little bit of the mold from a year ago. I realize now that if I want the male character to be emotionally significant, then I need to make an effort to make him real. Sometimes it's sufficient to say "You know him through his actions," which may be true, but without explanation you don't know why.

Maybe sometimes the guy just doesn't need to be significant. He just needs to be a foil for the woman.

 

[Hypoxia]

I realize now that if I want the male character to be emotionally significant, then I need to make an effort to make him real. <snip> Maybe sometimes the guy just doesn't need to be significant. He just needs to be a foil for the woman.

TvTropes: Flat Character

A flat character is one that has only the bare minimum of characteristics necessary to play their role in the story... Being flat is not automatically bad. Character depth should be proportional to the character's importance to the story... Indeed, adding details to the character indicates to the audience that the character is to be important.​

We don't need Too Much Information about spear-carriers.

 

[NotWise]

We don't need Too Much Information about spear-carriers.

Where "spear-carrier" means anyone with a penis?

 

[UsuallyPresent]

While creating a detailed protagonist can be useful, so can the opposite. Leaving your protag undescribed let's every reader paint whoever they want in the role.

A great example of this is Tefler's Three Square Meals. Say what you will about the rest of it (personally I enjoy it), he has yet to describe the protag other than his genitalia, ears, handedness, and general sense of height after ~125 multipage chapters.

 

[NotWise]

A great example of this is Tefler's Three Square Meals. Say what you will about the rest of it (personally I enjoy it), he has yet to describe the protag other than his genitalia, ears, handedness, and general sense of height after ~125 multipage chapters.

Characterization doesn't necessarily require a physical description.

 

[UsuallyPresent]

Characterization doesn't necessarily require a physical description.

True, but often the physical is specified along with nonphysical attributes. Excluding one or the other can do wonders for setting up a cognitive judo flip on the audience.

 

[Hypoxia]

Where "spear-carrier" means anyone with a penis?

Real, imagined, or attributed, and targeted and disposable. Not Amazonish, but like an administration official or generic streetwalker.

IMHO many minor gods and goddesses are but spear-carriers in their divine pantheons. Oh, the indignity! Even for the hermaphrodites and shapeshifters.

..often the physical is specified along with nonphysical attributes. Excluding one or the other can do wonders for setting up a cognitive judo flip on the audience.

TvTropes again:

Characters who start out flat can be fleshed out into Rounded Characters with Character Development, Hidden Depths and/or being Rescued from the Scrappy Heap. Or some characters can look flat until the Red Herring Shirt reveal shows that they are truly full characters. They can also become a Static Character trapped in amber with repeat uses of a Reset Button or Snap Back, negating what little growth they manage; and they may mutate into another sort of Flat Character with Flanderization. Some writers intentionally make characters flat to display their unhealthy psyche.​

Building and twisting players -- ah, the fun! I like them when they're unlikey.

 

[HectorBidon]

There's an archetype of underdeveloped male character seen throughout Lit that I don't care for. You know the type:
-Upper twenties to mid 40s
-Horse-cocked
-Affluent (though money, class, and occasionally power are never what gets him laid, no, no)
-Alone/lonely with little explanation or exploration of it or its impact on the character
-Inexplicably beloved and desired by his female colleagues/neighbors/years-long platonic friends/other bar patrons.
-Little to no effort is required in this character's seducing women (despite having had seemingly no luck prior to the start of the story), little to no sacrifice is required in his securing their love, and little to no change (other than fucking constantly) is experienced in anyone's lives.

Exactly. And he knows more about the female orgasm than any woman on the planet. God's gift to warthogs. I rarely bother finishing those stories either.

Many authors have remarked that a character that they've imagined takes on a life of his or her own as they write, and ends up behaving in ways that they didn't originally anticipate. To me this seems like a stamp of authenticity—such characters reflects something real and human that resonates in the author's mind, either with other real people he knows, other non-cliched characters he's read or seen in movies, or latent personality traits he has within himself.

At the other extreme are the completely inauthentic characters that are made up just to advance plot points or to serve as receptacles for an author's particular kink. An author fantasizes doing X and so he makes up a character who has no other inner life than wanting to have X done to her. I know that there are people who like to read and write such stories, and I know that this site is a place for them. I just find them distasteful and not ultimately interesting.

 

[Hypoxia]

Many authors have remarked that a character that they've imagined takes on a life of his or her own as they write, and ends up behaving in ways that they didn't originally anticipate. To me this seems like a stamp of authenticity—such characters reflects something real and human that resonates in the author's mind, either with other real people he knows, other non-cliched characters he's read or seen in movies, or latent personality traits he has within himself.

We let the voices in our heads direct our writing, and there we are! Works okay for our amateur authorship; if getting paid, we might want to plot and plan a bit more. We can channel those wild players if we're careful. Or kill them for tears and votes. Oh, the tragedy, the pathos!

I find events escape me more than do people. Lead-ups and/or endings head in unexpected directions. At a junction, I may follow the least likely fork -- not, "She went thataway" but, "The hurtling puma barely missed her." Right.

At the other extreme are the completely inauthentic characters that are made up just to advance plot points or to serve as receptacles for an author's particular kink. An author fantasizes doing X and so he makes up a character who has no other inner life than wanting to have X done to her.

That's self-masturbatory material and/or cynically rewarded Fanservice. Customers want crud? Feed-em the crud they want. "Eat shit! 50 trillion flies can't be wrong!" (Cf. 50 Shades of Crud.) Okay, I've pandered to readers too, as well as prodded, provoked, and perturbed. That's my job.

I like inauthentic players in parodies. A formulaic series here provoked Randy Randy (The Pornomancer); old over-the-top underground comix inspired Randy's Revenge (The Pharmacist). Different Randys BTW. Reality, authenticity? Absolutely none. Unplanned actions or aspects? Nope; all plotted. The fuckers are cartoon cutouts on stereotyped backdrops, as staged as a puppet or minstrel show, as depraved as politics. That's entertainment!

That's why we're here, to entertain others as well as ourselves. Maybe try to characterize our players enough that readers notice and give a shit. I killed off a barely-mentioned guy and response was Feh. Elsewhere, I tragically crushed a sympathetic leading gal -- tears and votes flowed. Yes, pandering. That's entertainment too.

As mentioned above, use more words to make a character more important. "How much to portray a player?" is like asking "How long should a story be?" Answer: only as much as necessary, give or take a little. And then spinoffs...

 

[Etaski]

Interesting question. I’m a female writer and writing for an even-mixed audience. It’s a series, and I wrote an entire novella (this) to give my male protagonist a clear voice, backstory, goals etc. It was much harder to write from his POV; sentences and paragraphs had to be tighter, more active tense, more specifics in sex scenes, far less emoting and lots of bad grammar to reflect his natural speech patterns/thoughts. It made me a better writer, and I think he’s far more interesting, but readers—both male and female— only ever ask me about the female protagonist.

I like this very much. Interesting to think about.

I do similar for my male characters in a long series. I have a mixed audience and write from male POV frequently to keep things fresh and share more plot, information, and setting detail than they'd see from one POV.

Readers have their favorites of both sexes for various reasons (sometimes view them very differently from how I see them while I was writing) and ask questions about male and female characters, so, over time (in trying to become a better writer), I think that's a good sign at the characterization is good enough to relate to for someone and be curious about in others.