“Realism” in writing sexual relations

[P4sT0rCox75]

If you write together, shouldn’t 50/50 be a confirmation of the “validity” of the idea?

The "validity" of the question feels like a laughable statement on your part. From what I can see, you've found your answer. Men don't understand women. We are not capable of writing them. Women, being the superior mediums foe emotion and empathy can write men. The "question" lacks validity because you're not seeking insight. You are waiting for us to agree with you.

 

[Bramblethorn]

No shit. Or as my bio says, yes I'm a bisexual kinky poly slut, but I'm still not going to fuck randoms off the internet.

But consensual open relationships are much more common than people think, just that the people in them tend to stay very quiet about it, especially until any children are grown up.

If I had a dollar for every time I've been in some variation of this conversation:

"I don't know anybody who's in an open/poly relationship."
"Actually you know two people just at this table."

It's just not something most of us are in a hurry to advertise unless somebody brings it up.

 

[TarnishedPenny]

WRT this site in particular, there are of course a couple of landmines lying ahead of any discussion of this subject.

First off, this is a porn site. I’m not saying that in any disparaging way, but erotic tends to trump well-written. No? Consider that just about everything here is erotic to some degree. Now consider what proportion are well-done. Maybe one in ten gets the famous red H for reader happiness (story hotness) and even half of those are pretty sad. There are some very fine writers here, ones I hope someday to come close to emulating. But it is sex that distinguishes and drives 95% of the work here and that cannot fail to have a distorting influence.

It follows from that that realism and reality are going to take a hit. Somebody here (and I wish I could remember who to credit) stated that if he wanted to see fat, old, wrinkled people having sex, he’d mount a mirror on his ceiling. ‘Real’ is a third of the people being obese, ‘real’ is semiliterate, rude and ill-mannered. Real isn’t particularly sexy, not unless you’re a genius-level writer.

There is therefore a huge dose of fantasy in the stories here. Our audience wants to read about things and people and acts that ring their individual chimes. That in turn means that our characters, generally speaking, are young, fit and attractive, more so than average. STDs and pregnancy are not a concern. People aren’t living with extreme poverty or in fear of their lives unless that’s a plot device. Thus, men all have iron willies and no hint of ED; women are rapidly aroused and polyorgasmic. It’s what sells and distortion is almost central.

Yes, it’s a generalization, but it’s close enough. I’ll stand by it.

Last point. We can say with certainty that JK Rowling is a woman and that Sam Clemens was a man. Here? Not a chance. People don’t have to self-identify. Many say ‘boy’ or ‘girl’ and most of them are probably what they claim. But we cannot know. Indeed, one prolific writer here is clear about submitting works under both male and female pen names. He’s almost certainly not alone. My point is that judging one gender’s ability to portray the other by what we see here is dubious. Lit’s fun, but it’s hardly a peer-reviewed study.

 

[LdyHoneybee]

The "validity" of the question feels like a laughable statement on your part. From what I can see, you've found your answer. Men don't understand women. We are not capable of writing them. Women, being the superior mediums foe emotion and empathy can write men. The "question" lacks validity because you're not seeking insight. You are waiting for us to agree with you.

I am sorry you do not agree with my estimation of my own thought. I did say that i do agree it is EASIER for women generally (not specifically) to “understand“ men because of generations of formerly survival oriented instruction and experience, not that “men do not understand women.” In fact, since writing often involves significant and actual control of the psyche of both male and female characters by an author who identifies as one or the other, I am also wondering if many female authors understand males enough to actually represent their internal thoughts and reactions. I observe among my friends and family a general non prejudicial tendency of my female friends to gravitate to female authors and my male friends to be likely to favor male authors although I am NOT saying that the women never read male authors or that the guys have NEVER read a book by a woman.

 

[MsNatalie99]

The "validity" of the question feels like a laughable statement on your part. From what I can see, you've found your answer. Men don't understand women. We are not capable of writing them. Women, being the superior mediums foe emotion and empathy can write men. The "question" lacks validity because you're not seeking insight. You are waiting for us to agree with you.

This Thread is beginning to feel like taking a right turn on a Merry-Go-Round. How can a woman really know she's good at writing under the male gaze, other than by the opinions of her readers. The same goes in reverse. Honestly, the entire question is based on opinion. There are too many people, from too many walks of life, living immensely different lives. So, I can't say all, or even most of one side or the other can or can't do anything. Without the credible numbers to prove it, that would be an arrogant assumption. It's equally "laughable" as telling someone else what or how they think or feel. People vary... Being what it is, I don't believe any question lacks validity. How are people supposed to grow and understand one another if there is no dialogue?

 

[TxRad]

Dialogue! That is the key to making characters come alive.

 

[LdyHoneybee]

WRT this site in particular, there are of course a couple of landmines in a discussion of this subject.

First off, this is a porn site. I’m not saying that in any disparaging way, but erotic tends to trump well-written. No? Consider that just about everything here is erotic to some degree. Now consider what proportion are well-done. Maybe one in ten gets the famous red H for reader happiness (story hotness)? There are some very fine writers here, ones I hope someday to come close to emulating. But it is sex that distinguishes and drives 95% of the work here and that cannot fail to have a distorting influence.

It follows from that that realism and reality are going to take a hit. Somebody here (and I wish I could remember who to credit) stated that if he wanted to see fat, old, wrinkled people having sex, he’d mount a mirror on his ceiling. ‘Real’ is a third of the people being obese, ‘real’ is semiliterate, rude and ill-mannered. Real isn’t particularly sexy, not unless you’re a genius-level writer.

There is therefore a huge dose of fantasy in the stories here. Our audience wants to read about things and people and acts that ring their individual chimes. That in turn means that our characters, generally speaking, are young, fit and attractive, more so than average. STDs and pregnancy are not a concern. People aren’t living with extreme poverty or in fear of their lives unless that’s a plot device. Thus, men all have iron willies and no hint of ED; women are rapidly aroused and polyorgasmic. It’s what sells and distortion is almost central.

Yes, it’s a generalization, but it’s close enough. I’ll stand by it.

Last point. We can say with certainty that JK Rowling is a woman and that Sam Clemens was a man. Here? Not a chance. People don’t have to self-identify. Many say ‘boy’ or ‘girl’ and most of them are probably what they claim. But we cannot know. Indeed, one prolific writer here is clear about submitting works under both male and female pen names. He’s almost certainly not alone. My point is that judging one gender’s ability to portray the other by what we see here is dubious. Lit’s fun, but it’s hardly a peer-reviewed study.

I guess all that is true. My own thinking has morphed, though, while we have been discussing, into a concern that I have had for a long time about my own perceptions in my writing offline. It does include a sexual element as an aspect of a ”realistic” depiction of life and the elements of characterization.
Do you all read _Outlander_? I read the first 2 and stopped because I thought that Jaime was just too perfect, kind of “wish fulfillment for lonely mommies.” I have picked it up again in the netflix version and am finding that his character has become more interesting as he has gotten older. But my protagonist is a POV character which Jaime is not And I do not want him to be a stereotype for what ”a woman” thinks that “a male hero” is.

 

[MsNatalie99]

10,000,000,000 edits on one post. Good job Natalie.

 

[MsNatalie99]

I guess all that is true. My own thinking has morphed, though, while we have been discussing, into a concern that I have had for a long time about my own perceptions in my writing offline. It does include a sexual element as an aspect of a ”realistic” depiction of life and the elements of characterization.
Do you all read _Outlander_? I read the first 2 and stopped because I thought that Jaime was just too perfect, kind of “wish fulfillment for lonely mommies.” I have picked it up again in the netflix version and am finding that his character has become more interesting as he has gotten older. But my protagonist is a POV character which Jaime is not And I do not want him to be a stereotype for what ”a woman” thinks that “a male hero” is.

My all time favorite character in a movie was Ellen Ripley. She was strong, compitent, and an excellent example of a female protagonist. I've heard that none of the character's genders were written in until after casting. Not sure of how true that is. I've read books that have done well, others not so much. No point here, just saying.

 

[LdyHoneybee]

10,000,000,000 edits on one post. Good job Natalie.

I do that too.

 

[LdyHoneybee]

My all time favorite character in a movie was Ellen Ripley. She was strong, compitent, and an excellent example of a female protagonist. I've heard that none of the character's genders were written in until after casting. Not sure of how true that is. I've read books that have done well, others not so much. No point here, just saying.

She was…..although I never went back to that series after the first movie, The cat lived, but the movie creeped me out.

 

[TarnishedPenny]

I guess all that is true. My own thinking has morphed, though, while we have been discussing, into a concern that I have had for a long time about my own perceptions in my writing offline. It does include a sexual element as an aspect of a ”realistic” depiction of life and the elements of characterization.
Do you all read _Outlander_? I read the first 2 and stopped because I thought that Jaime was just too perfect, kind of “wish fulfillment for lonely mommies.” I have picked it up again in the netflix version and am finding that his character has become more interesting as he has gotten older. But my protagonist is a POV character which Jaime is not And I do not want him to be a stereotype for what ”a woman” thinks that “a male hero” is.

Smiles in equally-confused sympathy.

I guess in the end it comes down to good writers, ones wanting to always improve, to follow Polonius’ advice and be true to themselves, in this case write to please themselves.

Men will never know the exultant pain of childbirth or the pleasing awkwardness of boobs any more than women will ever understand the pressing undeniability of an erection. We can at best witness the other’s experiences and do our best to mirror them in our turn.

 

[MsNatalie99]

She was…..although I never went back to that series after the first movie, The cat lived, but the movie creeped me out.

It's effects still impress today. If only the sequals could say the same. Referring to #3 on. I liked Ellen in the first, loved her in the second.

 

[LdyHoneybee]

Thank you all for the amazing discussion and for taking the question seriously. I guess you will have to wait a couple of months to see anything I have written, if that. . Have a nice rest of the day and thank you for your thoughts and for your time! Bee (one edit )

 

[TarnishedPenny]

Thank you all for the amazing discussion and for taking the question seriously. I guess you will have to wait a couple of months to see anything I have written, if that. . Have a nice rest of the day and thank you for your thoughts and for your time! Bee (one edit )

The worst sin is to fail to dare. Bonne chance.

 

[SimonDoom]

A few random, probably not-well-connected and possibly inconsistent thoughts on this thread:

1. Holy cow, 4 pages already in one day. LdyHoneybee you got a rise out of people, and that's a good thing.

2. It's a legitimate and endlessly interesting subject.

3. My short answer: I don't know. I tend to believe that anybody, anywhere, of any background, can, with a little effort, write a character of a completely different background who will seem plausible and convincing to a person of that same background. But I can't tell you that you should believe that. I believe your beliefs are as legitimate as anyone's.

4. I think it's always more helpful to answer questions like this in the concrete than in the abstract. I think there are plenty of examples throughout the history of literature of strong, interesting, persuasive female characters written by male authors: Anna Karenina by Leo Tolstoy, Lisbeth Salmander by Stieg Larssen, Madame Bovary by Gustave Flaubert, etc. Ask yourself: what are the very best examples of female characters written by male authors, and what do you think of them? I'm a man, and I can hardly argue against your judgment if you find the characters wanting.

5. I think there are plenty of examples of "great" writers whose female characters tend to be wanting: Hemingway, Philip Roth, John Updike are a few who come to mind. Their examples provide some ammunition for the idea that men don't really know how to write women. But they're not everybody.

6. The "problem" is compounded in erotica, but it's debatable whether it's a problem. People who write erotic stories often are trying to project and satisfy fantasies rather than write great literature. E.L. James wanted to sell a lot of books so she wrote a cartoonish male character that she thought would appeal to her mostly female audience. As a male, I think the Christian Grey figure is a cringe-worthy cartoon. Men write erotic stories that project their own fantasies. There's nothing wrong with that, in my opinion, but the result may dissatisfy women readers looking for something more complex than projection. And by the way, I don't think there's anything wrong with writing, or reading, stories that project one's own fantasies.

So, my short answer is, yes, I personally believe that male authors can write convincing and deep female characters, and yes, many male authors nevertheless don't do so, and yes, you should write and read without regard to whatever any other person, male or female, thinks about that subject.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

First off, this is a porn site. I’m not saying that in any disparaging way, but erotic tends to trump well-written. No? Consider that just about everything here is erotic to some degree. Now consider what proportion are well-done. Maybe one in ten gets the famous red H for reader happiness (story hotness) and even half of those are pretty sad. There are some very fine writers here, ones I hope someday to come close to emulating. But it is sex that distinguishes and drives 95% of the work here and that cannot fail to have a distorting influence.

Exactly this. The majority of readers are here to read a fantasy. They see a tag with a kink that they're into and get excited and click. If they get halfway through reading and realize that the words on the screen don't match their fantasy closely enough, they perceive a discongruency (<- unsexy word, sue me, heh), feel that the scene shouldn't or wouldn't happen that way - at least not in their mind - and jump to the conclusion that therefore it's not realistic. Well the question still begs - realistic to whose reality (read: fantasy), the writer's or the reader's?

As you say Penny, 95% of the stuff here is PORN - and as I said earlier in the thread, that's totally okay!

This also doesn't mean that whoever wrote the story can't write, not necessarily anyway. Recently I've read a couple of pieces that were quite well crafted but didn't really turn me on. The first was literally a unicorn girl (it said so in the title). The writer's skills were strong. He painted the picture. I was still bored because the plot was simply some perfectly hot woman determined to have this guy who did absolutely nothing to engage her - hence a unicorn. It was boring - boring for ME, but not for all the guys out there with that fantasy (I would suppose). I'm also not naive enough to believe that a girl like that doesn't actually exist out there in the real world somewhere. The other was a longer piece that had a very intriguing dynamic between the characters. It was very well written to the point that even after three pages in it finally revealed itself to be a BDSM pain story (which bores the hell out of me) I still wanted to continue to see where the plot ultimately led to. I scrolled over a lot of the spanking and titty-clamps and "please may I cum sir" stuff but the plot itself (which I saw through part of but not all of it) was actually pretty good. Overall, it didn't turn me on, but again that's ME. Anyone else into permission and titty-clamps and ball gags probably would have loved the whole thing. It was very well done.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

6. The "problem" is compounded in erotica, but it's debatable whether it's a problem. People who write erotic stories often are trying to project and satisfy fantasies rather than write great literature. E.L. James wanted to sell a lot of books so she wrote a cartoonish male character that she thought would appeal to her mostly female audience. As a male, I think the Christian Grey figure is a cringe-worthy cartoon. Men write erotic stories that project their own fantasies. There's nothing wrong with that, in my opinion, but the result may dissatisfy women readers looking for something more complex than projection. And by the way, I don't think there's anything wrong with writing, or reading, stories that project one's own fantasies.

Again, exactly this. If someone can't post their sexual fantasy on literotica for fear of being realistic or not, just where the hell else should they post it?

Realism (or believeability) is there. It just depends on who's definition of real.

 

[Seadog777]

I just woke up.
Got on and saw a few more pages on here. LOL.
Too many notifications for me to apply too individually.
So I look forward to the next discussion.
Always fun.

 

[ElectricBlue]

Is this a hopeless situation? Do you think that men and women are so hopelessly different that neither can write realistic reactions for the other in the grip of sexual interaction? Are there writers anyone has found who do seem to get it, women who can write realistic men or men who can write realistic women in extremis?

Thanks for being patient with this new person who would like to learn. I turned in a couple of “prologues” last night to test the water, but then I read here that people are waiting months for their writing to be evaluated (No criticism…I understand).

This question seems to pop up often, and the answer is always, yes, of course men can write realistic women, and vice versa.

I'm going to cite myself as an example - I've had several comments saying, "i was surprised to see you're a male author - I could have sworn that was written by a woman." Which I assume to mean, writing with a woman's intuition, empathy, intimacy etc., and by extension, realistic portrayals of women (from a male author).

Regarding your other comment - what do you mean by "waiting months"?

Even a new author such as yourself can expect to see their first stories go up in a week or so - and if you explicitly want feedback, go to the Feedback Forum and start a thread there, once your story is published.

Nobody waits "months", and there's not really an "evaluation" as such - your story either meets the site's content policies, or it doesn't - in which case you'll get a (generic) rejection notice.

 

[Bramblethorn]

Yeah, its a porn trope. I think it can last awhile, but jealousy always rears its head at some point.

IME there's two different kinds of jealousy.

One is "I can't bear the thought of my partner fucking/loving somebody else". AFAICT for some people that's just hard-wired into how they work, for some it's a learned thing that can be unlearned, for some it's just not a thing. I don't get that, and going by the last 20+ years I'm pretty sure my partner doesn't either. Problem is, some people think they're okay with the idea until it actually happens and then they discover they're really not, and that can get messy...

The other is "I need a certain amount of [time/attention/support/etc.] from my partner, and I'm not getting it because of their commitments to somebody else". I think just about everybody gets that from time to time, I've certainly experienced it. But that's often manageable if people use their words and act like adults.

There was a woman on the forum a few years ago bragging about her husband and wife and their amazing polyamory relationship. She was married to the husband, the other woman was a friend from school she reconnected with years later and somehow became part of the relationship. About a year later, she no longer posted here, and I heard through the grapevine the whole thing blew up and all three went their ways

That's reality, you talk to real swingers they're the first to tell you its not for everyone. Talk to the fools here in the fetish forum and every couple is down for it.

I've been poly since my early twenties, and it's worked well for me, but I absolutely agree it's not for everybody. So many people go into poly/open/swinging for bad reasons.

I do think part of it is that monogamous couples who are miserable with one another often stick together anyway and suffer in silence, whereas poly relationships that aren't working are more likely to split.

 

[LdyHoneybee]

A few random, probably not-well-connected and possibly inconsistent thoughts on this thread:

1. Holy cow, 4 pages already in one day. LdyHoneybee you got a rise out of people, and that's a good thing.

2. It's a legitimate and endlessly interesting subject.

3. My short answer: I don't know. I tend to believe that anybody, anywhere, of any background, can, with a little effort, write a character of a completely different background who will seem plausible and convincing to a person of that same background. But I can't tell you that you should believe that. I believe your beliefs are as legitimate as anyone's.

4. I think it's always more helpful to answer questions like this in the concrete than in the abstract. I think there are plenty of examples throughout the history of literature of strong, interesting, persuasive female characters written by male authors: Anna Karenina by Leo Tolstoy, Lisbeth Salmander by Stieg Larssen, Madame Bovary by Gustave Flaubert, etc. Ask yourself: what are the very best examples of female characters written by male authors, and what do you think of them? I'm a man, and I can hardly argue against your judgment if you find the characters wanting.

5. I think there are plenty of examples of "great" writers whose female characters tend to be wanting: Hemingway, Philip Roth, John Updike are a few who come to mind. Their examples provide some ammunition for the idea that men don't really know how to write women. But they're not everybody.

6. The "problem" is compounded in erotica, but it's debatable whether it's a problem. People who write erotic stories often are trying to project and satisfy fantasies rather than write great literature. E.L. James wanted to sell a lot of books so she wrote a cartoonish male character that she thought would appeal to her mostly female audience. As a male, I think the Christian Grey figure is a cringe-worthy cartoon. Men write erotic stories that project their own fantasies. There's nothing wrong with that, in my opinion, but the result may dissatisfy women readers looking for something more complex than projection. And by the way, I don't think there's anything wrong with writing, or reading, stories that project one's own fantasies.

So, my short answer is, yes, I personally believe that male authors can write convincing and deep female characters, and yes, many male authors nevertheless don't do so, and yes, you should write and read without regard to whatever any other person, male or female, thinks about that subject.

I totally agree about that horrible Grey series: completely ridiculous…and I am female! What about women who write men? I had a short private conversation with one of the guys here about _Lion of Ireland_ by Morgan Llewellen (a female) who writes 3rd limited POV with the title character Brian Boru (an historical person) as the narrative voice.

This question seems to pop up often, and the answer is always, yes, of course men can write realistic women, and vice versa.

I'm going to cite myself as an example - I've had several comments saying, "i was surprised to see you're a male author - I could have sworn that was written by a woman." Which I assume to mean, writing with a woman's intuition, empathy, intimacy etc., and by extension, realistic portrayals of women (from a male author).

Regarding your other comment - what do you mean by "waiting months"?

Even a new author such as yourself can expect to see their first stories go up in a week or so - and if you explicitly want feedback, go to the Feedback Forum and start a thread there, once your story is published.

Nobody waits "months", and there's not really an "evaluation" as such - your story either meets the site's content policies, or it doesn't - in which case you'll get a (generic) rejection notice.

oh thanks! i got “months” from comments by people who said that. Thanks so much for the explanation of that process! Two days old here.

 

[SimonDoom]

I'll add this: My view is that in fiction "realism" is not the goal. It is not important. The goal is verisimilitude, the "appearance of realism." It means just enough realistic touches to hook the reader and keep the reader from saying "What bullshit!" and clicking out of the story. Readers' needs vary greatly on this subject. As a reader, I'm fairly "easy" in this regard. If the story is artful and the prose is good, I don't care too much whether it's "realistic." Also, as some others have noted here, what seems "unrealistic" to some may seem totally normal to others. Like polyamory, or wife-sharing. To some, these lifestyles are unimaginable; to others, they're part of everyday life. I think if a person, talking about fiction, says "I can't imagine [fill in the blank]" it means they don't have a good imagination.

My view about women characters is that women, like men, are almost infinitely variable, so I'm not too concerned about whether some readers might think, "A woman would never do that!" I feel pretty confident that some women, actually, would, and I feel no obligation to write characters who conform to statistical norms. I focus more on making sure that my characters, male and female, have recognizable personalities and motivations and that their actions are consistent with their motivations. Most of my readers seem OK with the way I've done things, but I've had plenty of readers tell me, "This is stupid trash" or something like that. I'm OK with that, too.

 

[Auden James]

While I haven't seen the film and therefore shouldn't judge it, my initial impression is that it's basically a male fantasy based on a "Stockholm Syndrome" plot device.

Seriously, why don't you follow your own advice and first watch the film in question before attempting to judge it without any basis for judgement? There's no SS plot device in the film's script, though—as pretty much all of Verhoeven's films—it depicts the sexes in a way that rather runs counter to today's trending "gender discourse," so much is true.

Besides LdyHoneyBee didn't recount the plot correctly, for Agnes (played by Jennifer Jason Leigh) is in fact not raped by the whole gang precisely because Martin (played by Rutger Hauer), after having her first (a quite ambiguous scene by the way), stops the gang from raping her by setting fire to the encampment. Hence she's not "serially raped," and thus there's no basis to your argument at all.

It's a gritty film, so make sure to watch the uncut version of it!

 

[Auden James]

I did say that i do agree it is EASIER for women generally (not specifically) to “understand“ men because of generations of formerly survival oriented instruction and experience, not that “men do not understand women.”

What kind of lopsided argument is this? If you seriously want to make a neo-Darwinian argument, then the opposite is just as true, as only those men survived and reproduced in the past who, to use your terms, "understood women" enough to be successful with them. Hence it wouldn't be easier—on an evolutionary basis—for either sex to understand the other as they both found themselves under similar (sexual) selection pressures.

In fact, since writing often involves significant and actual control of the psyche of both male and female characters by an author who identifies as one or the other, I am also wondering if many female authors understand males enough to actually represent their internal thoughts and reactions. I observe among my friends and family a general non prejudicial tendency of my female friends to gravitate to female authors and my male friends to be likely to favor male authors although I am NOT saying that the women never read male authors or that the guys have NEVER read a book by a woman.

I don't think that the problem for female authors of depiciting male characters in convincing ways is limited only to their "internal thoughts and reactions," as I think that for some female authors, e. g. Donna Tartt, the problem already starts with their voice (especially in first-person narration) and actions (doing or refraining from doing things that men in all probability would rather not do or not refrain from doing, respectively). Other times the male characters created by female authors turn out rather cartoonish, e. g. Christian Grey, or their sexual orientation comes across as unbelievable as is the case with virtually all of the supposedly heterosexual male characters of Anne Rice who aren't believable in the least.