Writing Male Characters

[Kumquatqueen]

But one area where this question does come up is in slashfic, where there are a lot of straight cis women writing gay male pairings. There's a tendency there to write those male characters as very soft and sensitive, often more so than the canon characters or real people that they're based on.

I think there's a number of things going on with slash and fic (I have read a lot of it, partly because it's readily available and continues a number of my favourite series).
1. Inexperienced writers or just ones wanting to dive into action without having to worry about establishing characters - just take them off the shelf.

2. There's two characters in the canon where there might be more going on that ever made it into the book/on screen. They're characters that people want to see more of anyway, but there's a potential aspect that's not been explored. Possibly for good reason...
When you didn't have many TV characters at all and Kirk and Spock were the only ones in TOS where we really learned much about their motivations, it made sense that they were the ones written about. Cut to a modern series like The Expanse where there's a number of characters we get to really know well, and fic pairs almost any of them.

3. There's usually someone being cared for, protected, by the other competent person - which is the core of the fantasy. The filthy sex is an optional extra.
Hence Amos featuring in most Expanse fic.

4. Pairings have already done the smouldering looks and expressions of care so you're not pushing them very far (Kirk/Spock, for example, Mulder/Skinner, Amos/Naomi, Whishaw-Q/James Bond...)

5. Playing with characters to see if you can plausibly get them together. The motivation may be as basic as X and Y are each people I'd like to imagine with their clothes off, let's extrapolate. With a universe with as much implausible stuff as Harry Potter, say, it's not surprising so many authors start there.
6. Many of those authors not being totally straight, not having had role models, and looking for potential inspiration. Say, Lord Peter Wimsey, Mary Renault fic, Holmes/Watson (especially after the BBC series Sherlock where 5 definitely applies), Spike/Xander from Buffy (3 and 5...)

There's a lot of excellent fanfic out there, usually matching how erudite the source is. Anthony Bourdain visiting Narnia, anything involving Narnia, Dorothy Sayers, Shakespeare... And even some in other fandoms, just harder to find among the outpourings of giggling teenage girls.

Almost anything can be written to sound plausible (eg Bond/Whishaw!Q getting drunk and having sex), but too often isn't ('Are we dating now?' is not a phrase Bond would ever say to Q on the morning after...)

 

[Kumquatqueen]

Addendum: But Alpha/Beta/Omega dynamics? Why and what the hell??

 

[TheRedChamber]

Interesting discussion, I've been turning this topic over in my mind all day. Replying to everyone and no-one specifically...

Firstly, the female character thread got derailed by a discussion about Star Wars (yes, partially my fault). This one is in danger of getting derailed by gay slash fiction. I'm sure that's significant, but have no idea what it signifies.

Secondly, I'm not sure I like this idea of saying men are inherently less complicated than women. Isn't that essentially the same as saying men don't/shouldn't have emotions? Men usually like to pretend to be straight-forward, but I wonder if there's actually as much difference in what's going on behind the eyes as is often made out.

I think we also have to distinguish between real men and fantasy men (and the same for women). A woman writing an erotic story is going to fill it with the type of man she would like to have a relationship (of whatever kind) with, and the same for male writers. The complaint that started the female thread was that the fantasy doesn't always match the reality - the accusation is that men who write for men write hot women and aren't bothered to flesh out the character properly and the assertion is that the story would be improved by being more realistic. So what sins do female writers commit when writing men?

I'm sure there are a few. One that I was thinking about recently as it came up in a story I was reading is the plain Jane self-insert character meets the high-status male - the Christian Grey type - succesful, millionaire, highly intelligent, sensitive, have their own jet-plane/helicopter, probably even plays a musical instrument to concert level and so on. The male character falls wildly in love with our Jane despite her having no clear traits that would distinguish her from the thousands of other women who would be beating down his door. He makes it clear that he doesn't want them, he just wants her. It's just never obvious why, except that that's the fantasy.

 

[JuanaSalsa]

Honestly, I have about the same difficulty writing *other* women as men. All other people in the world are foreign and unknowable.

I feel like, when I write in first person, my characters inevitably turn out to be some version of me (male or female). The other characters whose thoughts we are not privy to are generally some version of people I've known and behavior I've observed. Or, they are based on people I've read either in autobiographies or other fiction. In my field, I am surrounded (often exclusively) by men all the time, and can easily write how they behave with each other. What I've struggled with, writing first person erotica from the male point of view, is the actual sensations of a having penis, but I figure it probably feels a lot like having a ginormous clit and so far no one's complained about it.

In general, there are two driving factors to what defines people: socialization and biology (nature vs. nurture). There are *general* gender differences between how these affect men and women that can be taken into account and applied. Here's my high-level summary of what I see as particularly male:

• Men typically don't ask for, or expect, help.
• Men tend to strive to solve external problems, physical and tangible problems that have identifiable and executable solutions.
• Men are more likely to say that "respect has to be earned" rather than that respect is a right.
• Men tend to less empathetic.
• Men tend to be more easily visually aroused.
• Men are usually more competitive.

Of course, #notallmen. Similarly, although I am a woman, I identify with the first two, and the last, bullet points strongly. And that's the real point of writing any character, is that no person encompasses all the stereotypes. Many times, it's where the character diverges from expectation that makes them the most interesting.

One might say that an external focus and reduced empathy make a person "simpler", but that just comes from a certain point of view. A lot of times, less empathy means that more decisions are based on strong moral philosophy and rationalization. It may seem cold to more empathetic people, but it's not less complex, imo.

Anyway, there's my two cents thrown in.

 

[Bramblethorn]

Addendum: But Alpha/Beta/Omega dynamics? Why and what the hell??

Poor David Mech. The Dr. Frankenstein of our times, forever trying to destroy his runaway creation.

 

[TadOverdon]

Interesting that at least two female writers here pretty much dismiss men, yet still want their women written well. Bit one eyed, one dimensional, don't you think?

Not particularly. But I only speak for myself. I'm getting more careful about that, of late.

All the sex stories we've written are, to be blunt, lengthy stroke fantasies. I assume that the readership is at least ninety percent male. I'm not sure what a female reader would get out of most of them. The last one does stray from time to time into a more popular romance style ala Harlequin.

The guys tend to be placeholders. They're blank spots into which the reader can, um, er, insert himself. You've got studs, you've got losers, you've got minor villains who are usually men and one or two antagonists who are sexually powerful because that's a different male fantasy all its own.

And here's the "gotcha" if there is one: some of the female characters may have more of interior lives, but the more attention I pay to what I'm doing the more I think that all of them are men, anyway.

The formulas seem to work well enough (trying not to go all pedantic with "formulae").

I'll admit that I was pleased when someone put up an analytical app here a couple of months ago that was meant to analyze prose and determine it to be feminine or masculine, and when I pasted excerpts from most of "Tad's" books in it the most recent ones were judged to be more feminine.

 

[TheRedChamber]

I'm definitely guilty of this to a degree. I base all of my male characters on friends of mine or men I know. Sometimes it's an amalgamation of different ones, so there is a bit of my own fantasy in there. I don't take only the best parts of them, though. I might take the best parts of one friend and the worst parts of another and combine them.

I don't have any stories about millionaires (at least none I've posted.) Two that come closest both involve sons who come from wealthy families and both stories are based on the same guy. One is based on actual events and plays into the "Wealthy playboy falls for plain Jane for no discernible reason" because I am a plain Jane, he was a wealthy playboy and I don't understand what he ever saw in me. If it were a fantasy, it would've had a happy ending and I wouldn't have been such a self-sabotaging fuck-up.

It's difficult to comment on real-life. I guess if I'd been an independent observer, I'd have been able to hazard some kind of guess about why he liked you. You write erotic stores (the only thing I know about you), so that suggests some kind of talent or uniqueness apart from, well, I probably shouldn't have said plain, because it's not always about pure attractiveness. Let's say milquetoast Jane instead. Come to think of it, the only thing worse in fiction is 'self-sabotaging fuck-up Jane' who still gets Mr 0.01% because he really, really loves her.

I think the point is that, even when an author is writing from first perspective, they need to offer some kind of clue about what's going on in the relationship from both sides.

 

[Lifestyle66]

"She spread her legs and beckoned him to enter, but he stepped back, hesitating to fall into her trap."

Why? Why is she doing it? Who is she to him? Why is he reluctant? What relationship have they had in the past ...

I wrote six thousand words of a sex club chapter mainly to show the husband as an insecure, overcontrolling, jealous type. His sex craving wife was far easier to place in the story by just saying she likes sex, and she stays with him to slow her down. But both are just there building secondary characters to my main story.

I'm now focusing on developing a detailed background on my main female character to show why she's overcontrolling, assertive, and manipulative due to growing up almost alone with a mother incapacitated by depression.

Whether you're writing male or female characters, the difficulty of writing either depends on your story and what you are trying to achieve. A male character can be as complex or as simple as you choose, just as the females can. When you choose to describe either a male as merely a stiff cock looking to get off or a woman as easily spreading her legs, you're just resorting to a caricature of a human as just another object in the story. They could as easily be a piece of animated furniture.

 

[ElectricBlue]

Not particularly. But I only speak for myself. I'm getting more careful about that, of late.

All the sex stories we've written are, to be blunt, lengthy stroke fantasies. I assume that the readership is at least ninety percent male. I'm not sure what a female reader would get out of most of them. The last one does stray from time to time into a more popular romance style ala Harlequin.

The guys tend to be placeholders. They're blank spots into which the reader can, um, er, insert himself. You've got studs, you've got losers, you've got minor villains who are usually men and one or two antagonists who are sexually powerful because that's a different male fantasy all its own.

And here's the "gotcha" if there is one: some of the female characters may have more of interior lives, but the more attention I pay to what I'm doing the more I think that all of them are men, anyway.

The formulas seem to work well enough (trying not to go all pedantic with "formulae").

I'll admit that I was pleased when someone put up an analytical app here a couple of months ago that was meant to analyze prose and determine it to be feminine or masculine, and when I pasted excerpts from most of "Tad's" books in it the most recent ones were judged to be more feminine.

That's a fair defence. If your genre is basically stroke, pure porn, where your male audience is there for one thing and one thing only, I'm guessing they don't care much for complex characterisation in your women, either.

 

[TadOverdon]

I hope some of them are eccentric enough to be entertaining. But the things they do and why they do them can only be plausible within the constraints of the genre, like Batman or Superman.

I've been surprised to have a couple of them stick in my mind long after their stories are finished. The guys? Not so much..

 

[SimonDoom]

I think we also have to distinguish between real men and fantasy men (and the same for women). A woman writing an erotic story is going to fill it with the type of man she would like to have a relationship (of whatever kind) with, and the same for male writers. The complaint that started the female thread was that the fantasy doesn't always match the reality - the accusation is that men who write for men write hot women and aren't bothered to flesh out the character properly and the assertion is that the story would be improved by being more realistic. So what sins do female writers commit when writing men?

I think this is an important point. Many people here want to write stories that turn them on. That's as important a goal as, or perhaps a more important goal than, writing a story that is "good" from a literary point of view. So, with that goal in mind, the characters only have to be whatever makes the story turn on the author, or the story's readers. There's no need for the characters to be any deeper or more interesting than that. Some readers find that character depth increases the degree of eroticism. Many don't feel that way.

I don't think it's a "sin" for a woman author to write a male character in a simplified, fantasy way, if doing so fulfills the intent of the story. But I'm curious what women authors think about that.

 

[8letters]

To me, what men generally want has changed very little over the last several hundred years:
* To be financially successful
* To marry an attractive wife
* To be respected. Generally a part of that is to get a college degree
The male characters in "Pride and Prejudice" could be dropped into a modern setting and fit quite well.

For women, it used to be the mirror image of that:
* To marry someone who is financially successful
* To be and remain attractive
* To be respected, but this has a different meaning for women as it usually involves holding up the social standards of the community

But now for women, a marriage to a financially successful man is not the major goal it once was. Even women who become stay-at-home moms are expected to significantly financially contribute during the early years of the marriage. To me, women today face mutually conflicting goals and are pressed to try to have it all - have a successful career, marry someone who makes more than them, work out regularly to keep physically attractive and be a great mom. In terms of when they have sex, women face the conflict of agreeing too soon means they are "easy" and agreeing too late means they are "a prude", with no guidelines for when is too soon or too late. I think female characters are more interesting than men because of their constant struggle with the ambiguity of what modern life expects of them.

 

[TadOverdon]

To me, what men generally want has changed very little over the last several hundred years:
* To be financially successful
* To marry an attractive wife
* To be respected. Generally a part of that is to get a college degree
The male characters in "Pride and Prejudice" could be dropped into a modern setting and fit quite well.

For women, it used to be the mirror image of that:
* To marry someone who is financially successful
* To be and remain attractive
* To be respected, but this has a different meaning for women as it usually involves holding up the social standards of the community

But now for women, a marriage to a financially successful man is not the major goal it once was. Even women who become stay-at-home moms are expected to significantly financially contribute during the early years of the marriage. To me, women today face mutually conflicting goals and are pressed to try to have it all - have a successful career, marry someone who makes more than them, work out regularly to keep physically attractive and be a great mom. In terms of when they have sex, women face the conflict of agreeing too soon means they are "easy" and agreeing too late means they are "a prude", with no guidelines for when is too soon or too late. I think female characters are more interesting than men because of their constant struggle with the ambiguity of what modern life expects of them.

Much of this is generally true.

I don't feel much need to delve into the motives of a married man who has sex with an attractive woman other than his wife. I'm free to dwell on means and opportunity.

Unless describing his thinking is part of the turn-on.

 

[Bramblethorn]

Interesting that at least two female writers here pretty much dismiss men, yet still want their women written well. Bit one eyed, one dimensional, don't you think?

I'll duck now, shall I?

I'd never dismiss men! I write male characters when the story calls for it, and when it wouldn't stretch disbelief for a given character to be male.

 

[ElectricBlue]

I'd never dismiss men! I write male characters when the story calls for it, and when it wouldn't stretch disbelief for a given character to be male.

But then, you write intelligent, three dimensional characters as a given; and I wouldn't categorise you as a stroke writer.

This is a variation of the classic " porn versus erotica" discussion, where we have some self-proclaimed porn writers who openly declare their purpose, and a bunch of erotica writers who openly declare their's. Nothing wrong with either approach (despite those who see pretentiousness in everything they read but their own).

 

[Bramblethorn]

But then, you write intelligent, three dimensional characters as a given; and I wouldn't categorise you as a stroke writer.

Readers have died of old age waiting for me to get to the sex scene, it's true.

 

[TheRedChamber]

I don't think it's a "sin" for a woman author to write a male character in a simplified, fantasy way, if doing so fulfills the intent of the story. But I'm curious what women authors think about that.

Maybe sins the wrong word. There was an element of 'must do better' in the original female thread - just being hot and available wasn't enough - but, yes, that is what some people are after.

To me, what men generally want has changed very little over the last several hundred years:
* To be financially successful
* To marry an attractive wife
* To be respected. Generally a part of that is to get a college degree
The male characters in "Pride and Prejudice" could be dropped into a modern setting and fit quite well.

For women, it used to be the mirror image of that:
* To marry someone who is financially successful
* To be and remain attractive
* To be respected, but this has a different meaning for women as it usually involves holding up the social standards of the community

But now for women, a marriage to a financially successful man is not the major goal it once was. Even women who become stay-at-home moms are expected to significantly financially contribute during the early years of the marriage. To me, women today face mutually conflicting goals and are pressed to try to have it all - have a successful career, marry someone who makes more than them, work out regularly to keep physically attractive and be a great mom. In terms of when they have sex, women face the conflict of agreeing too soon means they are "easy" and agreeing too late means they are "a prude", with no guidelines for when is too soon or too late. I think female characters are more interesting than men because of their constant struggle with the ambiguity of what modern life expects of them.

Obviously women's lives have changed a lot over the last hundred years and there are a lot of pressures on them that make for good literature. I think it's fair if someone finds them interesting or even more interesting to write about.

I'd argue though that each one of your points has a mirror in how society is changing for men and how masculinity is in flux. If being financially successful is not enough to attract a nice young lady any more, how do you do it and are you a failure if you can't? It maybe logically shouldn't be an issue if a couple loves each other enough, but you mention yourself that women are still expected to marry someone who makes more than them - what if they don't. Fathers are increasing expected to be involved in housework and childcare, but are often depicted as being lazy and incompetent at these things. Men are, in most cases, still expected to approach a women and thus face rejection or being branded a creep. Courts tend to favour women in more divorces or child-custody battles. Men still do most of the dangerous jobs (I read recently that men account for 93% of work place deaths).

Of course the mythical fantasy male will still sail above this all in his personal yacht being completely perfect even as women swoon as a result of his potent old-school slightly-toxic masculinity. Maybe, I dunno. I guess I'm saying there's plenty of drama in both sexes.

 

[Kumquatqueen]

I don't think it's a "sin" for a woman author to write a male character in a simplified, fantasy way, if doing so fulfills the intent of the story. But I'm curious what women authors think about that.

It's fine for characters to be simple and/or fantasy. It is a truth universally acknowledged that a woman possessed of some heterosexuality and a functioning vagina must be in want of a fulfilling cock, etc.

When you get to having developed characters, but only the men are developed characters but the women are interchangeable cutouts who do nothing but get done to, that could be part of the fantasy, in which case go for it, but own it - admit that's your fantasy. Too often it's just coincidence - the author doesn't realise. An example - I reread one of my favourite books from childhood a while back, before passing it on to the kids. I recalled correctly that there are three boys and two girls, who end up trapped in a cave in the Andes and find a valley with dinosaurs. The youngest boy is the main character but the older teenage boys are well-developed personalities too. I couldn't remember much about the girls. Turns out this is because one of them (Sue) asks a question once, otherwise there's lots of following the boys, sitting down and making camp, etc. The only time Carol says anything is one moment when "Carol screamed." In 100,000 words, that's all the dialogue the girls get. The caveman they meet gets more and he can only say 'Ug'!

It's that purporting to be equal - the characters are there! - but not being, that gets on my wick. A fantasy of interchangeable hot&cold running slave girls? Bring it on.

I've tried writing a generic bland guy - one of the two protagonists in my I Say Ass stories. Simple plot: guy wants to try anal sex, a girl gets dumped by her boyfriend because she wants more interesting sex, guy is temporarily working with girl, they get it on. No real characterisation of him needed. Add a "anal first time" tag and there's 20,000 viewers for the taking.

But in sequels, he needed a bit more character because "he liked fucking her and vice versa, so when they were in the same city they did" isn't much of a plot.

So in the next couple episodes he's had to acquire some hopes and fears, some areas of confidence vs insecurity, and a fetish for women in respectable suits who can be persuaded out of them. He's still intended to be a generic guy from the Midwest with very generic dialogue, partly because I write him then remove all the phrases which sound too English, so he's not capable of any clever wordplay or phrasing! The lass he fucks was supposed to be pretty generic too, but she's ended up with more character as well.

 

[ElectricBlue]

He's still intended to be a generic guy from the Midwest with very generic dialogue, partly because I write him then remove all the phrases which sound too English, so he's not capable of any clever wordplay or phrasing! The lass he fucks was supposed to be pretty generic too, but she's ended up with more character as well.

Lol.

Dialogue by subtraction = male, dumb as a box of hammers. Neat approach, but not one I've come across before .

 

[AlinaX]

"Do it," she begged. "Put that big cock in my ass and make me scream."
"Oh, I say," he said, his enthusiasm clear. "Rather! I must say, Mary, you are a spiffing girl."

 

[ElectricBlue]

"Do it," she begged. "Put that big cock in my ass and make me scream."
"Oh, I say," he said, his enthusiasm clear. "Rather! I must say, Mary, you are a spiffing girl."

I think I'm changing my mind about you ladies with your attitudes to men. Two lols in as many minutes!

 

[Kumquatqueen]

Lol.

Dialogue by subtraction = male, dumb as a box of hammers. Neat approach, but not one I've come across before .

More like 'normal conversation minus wit and wordplay = American' ! Sorry, Americans. Any volunteers to check my Americans' dialogue are always appreciated. This guy is completing a PhD so hardly dumb (nothing like the science conference circuit for getting people into new cities, in hotels, with plenty of alcohol, looking for hookups... I felt it was a sadly underutilised trope for erotic fiction!) .

 

[8letters]

Obviously women's lives have changed a lot over the last hundred years and there are a lot of pressures on them that make for good literature. I think it's fair if someone finds them interesting or even more interesting to write about.

I'd argue though that each one of your points has a mirror in how society is changing for men and how masculinity is in flux. If being financially successful is not enough to attract a nice young lady any more, how do you do it and are you a failure if you can't? It maybe logically shouldn't be an issue if a couple loves each other enough, but you mention yourself that women are still expected to marry someone who makes more than them - what if they don't. Fathers are increasing expected to be involved in housework and childcare, but are often depicted as being lazy and incompetent at these things. Men are, in most cases, still expected to approach a women and thus face rejection or being branded a creep. Courts tend to favour women in more divorces or child-custody battles. Men still do most of the dangerous jobs (I read recently that men account for 93% of work place deaths).

* In the US, guys tend to look for women their age or younger. On average, the groom is two years older than the bride and has been for years and years. If they have similar education and career paths, then the guy should make about as much as her if they are the same age or more than her if he's older
* Poor people in the US are more likely to substitute cohabitation for marriage
* The expectation that men do more housework and childcare doesn't really effect the three goals of wanting to be financially successful, marry an attractive wife and be respected. It really kicks once they have kids, which is typically long after they become a couple. The disparity between the amount of housework and childcare men and women do is still quite large
* I can't find any statistics to back this up, but I think women who are financially successful struggle to find husbands. The best I can find is a speed-dating study mentioned in the WSJ in 2013. That study "found that while women prefer men to be intelligent and ambitious, men have these preferences for women only to the point where women threaten to earn more than they do."
* I can't think of many financially successful celebrity women who are happily married, and a lot of those are married to men who are even more financially successful than they are. P!nk is really the only woman that comes to mind who is a financially successful celebrity woman with a happy marriage to someone who earns far less than her, and her marriage was rocky for many years

 

[NotWise]

Generalizations and statistics be damned. I want the readers to know about the characters' challenges and conflicts, and how they deal with them. Characters are defined by the choices they make.

 

[SimonDoom]

* I can't find any statistics to back this up, but I think women who are financially successful struggle to find husbands. The best I can find is a speed-dating study mentioned in the WSJ in 2013. That study "found that while women prefer men to be intelligent and ambitious, men have these preferences for women only to the point where women threaten to earn more than they do."

I am not so sure about this. I have known couples that seemed to be quite happy and that stayed together where the wife made a lot more money than the husband.

There is some truth to the stereotype. Some men want to earn more than their wives, and some wives want their husbands to make more than they do. But's it's much less true than it used to be, as a matter of necessity, because of how many women work now in prestigious, high-paying jobs.

Whatever the statistics are, they shouldn't stop authors from writing male characters who vary greatly from perceived norms and are in relationships perceived as unusual.