shakna
Really Really Experienced
- Joined
- Feb 9, 2021
- Posts
- 491
I think what is missing here is the separation of inner and outer lives.
It may appear easy to write a male character on the surface, because generally speaking, in most cultures, men do tend to be more reserved. The things they talk about tend to be less deep and more shallow.
However, if you were to actually describe your male character that way, you'd probably be insulting half the human race.
Men aren't more shallow, and they aren't less emotional. They're internalised.
For example, in the half-second between getting the question, "How was your day?" and responding with "It was alright", you can expect they could have quite easily had enough thoughts to fill a five thousand word essay. Half of which might have been spent examining what the expected response might be. They also might have also ignored the question, because it's just part of the daily ritual. However, there's little on the surface to tell you which. They might have spent a good long while cussing out their boss in their head. But it was all internal.
That's where the complexity comes from. The gruffer and more stereotypical a guy looks on the outside, the more you can guarantee that he's a thinker. The tradie who only laughs, drinks and ribs on people on the outside? He's a freaking Aristotle on the inside. Everything that happens throughout his day continues to impact him for most of the day because he spends most of his life inside his skull.
"Letting go" of an insult or an accident is hard - because his entire day is a conversation with himself. If something happens, it builds and builds. That's why it can come across as being pissy. You can't let go of a slight when you are in a constant state of reliving everything.
But... There's always exceptions. There are those that actually have no inner life despite being the same on the outside. How do you tell the difference? You don't. Most of the tough steretypes will never, ever, open up to another human being. Not unless they're forced to by circumstances, like a crisis.
It may appear easy to write a male character on the surface, because generally speaking, in most cultures, men do tend to be more reserved. The things they talk about tend to be less deep and more shallow.
However, if you were to actually describe your male character that way, you'd probably be insulting half the human race.
Men aren't more shallow, and they aren't less emotional. They're internalised.
For example, in the half-second between getting the question, "How was your day?" and responding with "It was alright", you can expect they could have quite easily had enough thoughts to fill a five thousand word essay. Half of which might have been spent examining what the expected response might be. They also might have also ignored the question, because it's just part of the daily ritual. However, there's little on the surface to tell you which. They might have spent a good long while cussing out their boss in their head. But it was all internal.
That's where the complexity comes from. The gruffer and more stereotypical a guy looks on the outside, the more you can guarantee that he's a thinker. The tradie who only laughs, drinks and ribs on people on the outside? He's a freaking Aristotle on the inside. Everything that happens throughout his day continues to impact him for most of the day because he spends most of his life inside his skull.
"Letting go" of an insult or an accident is hard - because his entire day is a conversation with himself. If something happens, it builds and builds. That's why it can come across as being pissy. You can't let go of a slight when you are in a constant state of reliving everything.
But... There's always exceptions. There are those that actually have no inner life despite being the same on the outside. How do you tell the difference? You don't. Most of the tough steretypes will never, ever, open up to another human being. Not unless they're forced to by circumstances, like a crisis.
