Active and Passive Male Characters

[AG31]

My sense is that women are more attracted to a man who is (or at leasts projects as being) comfortably himself than than a man who seems to try to be what women want him to be.

That sure works for me.

 

[AG31]

Mike Gayle's early novels were described as "male chicklit". They were also very readable. My Legendary Girlfriend. Dinner for Two, Brand New Friend, His'n'Hers, Wish You Were Here, Turning Thirty.

Well, I acquired My Legendary Girlfriend and Dinner for Two because I'm interested in the differences between men and women. I thought reading chicklit written by a man might shed some light. And it did. But the bottom line was that I didn't find any "immutable" differences. See my new post to discuss further.

As for Gayle's writing, I got some insight into the subject in two ways.

1 - I engaged in a mind game. I would imagine that the main character was female (mostly for Legendary, for plot reasons). Did it work? Well, it COULD work but it FELT like a male. I was casting about for a way to articulate what was going on. I told hubby about the challenge. I said "he felt distanced from his experience. He's depressed about the loss of his girlfriend, but we know almost nothing about her. We don't know her personality or the details of her life." Hubby reminded me of "the duh factor." Once, decades ago, I forget why, he had occasion to explain to me one of the differences between men and women. That is, there are lots of details of living that just fly over a man's consciousness. (See point 2 below.) Then I explained to him how, in the book, the MC doesn't tell us much about the ex girlfriend except that he misses her. Hubby said, "He doesn't tell her." Meaning that just because he doesn't articulate it doesn't mean he doesn't experience. Then he reminded me about something that happened when we were on a couples retreat 50 years ago. At one point all the women went to one room off of the main gathering area and the men went to another. Each group could see the other through glass doors. The women immediately began chattering about the assigned topic (forget what) and continued for the 15 or 20 minutes. The men mostly stared at them in wonder and tried to figure out what to say.

2 - Gayle himself has a number of occasions to muse on the subject of male/female differences because of the plot of the second book, dinner for two. Here's a good description of what I was alluding to in point 1.

The reason why women excel at wedding arrangements is that for them the small things in life are as important as the big things, if not more so.

Anyway, thanks for pointing out Gayle. He's a very engaging writer, which is a good thing because I think both stories were too long for their plots.

 

[StillStunned]

Well, I acquired My Legendary Girlfriend and Dinner for Two because I'm interested in the differences between men and women. I thought reading chicklit written by a man might shed some light. And it did. But the bottom line was that I didn't find any "immutable" differences. See my new post to discuss further.

As for Gayle's writing, I got some insight into the subject in two ways.

1 - I engaged in a mind game. I would imagine that the main character was female (mostly for Legendary, for plot reasons). Did it work? Well, it COULD work but it FELT like a male. I was casting about for a way to articulate what was going on. I told hubby about the challenge. I said "he felt distanced from his experience. He's depressed about the loss of his girlfriend, but we know almost nothing about her. We don't know her personality or the details of her life." Hubby reminded me of "the duh factor." Once, decades ago, I forget why, he had occasion to explain to me one of the differences between men and women. That is, there are lots of details of living that just fly over a man's consciousness. (See point 2 below.) Then I explained to him how, in the book, the MC doesn't tell us much about the ex girlfriend except that he misses her. Hubby said, "He doesn't tell her." Meaning that just because he doesn't articulate it doesn't mean he doesn't experience.

Perhaps, if you're looking for differences between men and women, you might have found one. It's been nearly 30 years since I read MLG, but at no point did any of the narrator's thoughts or actions seem strange to me. It all felt very natural.

Anyway, thanks for pointing out Gayle. He's a very engaging writer, which is a good thing because I think both stories were too long for their plots.

Glad you enjoyed them! As for stories that are too long for their plots, isn't that essentially a feature of romance? We all know what the destination is, but it's the journey that's important.

 

[WeShallUnclench]

In this recent short story of mine, I tried a bit of a balancing act: In the first half, all of the sexual aggressiveness comes from the female character (though it's less of a "I am so randomly horny for you" and more of a "I will shamelessly mess with you until you do something interesting" sort of deal), in the second half, it comes from the guy.

https://www.literotica.com/s/taste-the-midsummer-cunt?page=2

Do we feel this avoids going too deep into "uninteresting passive guy" territory?

 

[burgwad]

I wager a lot of us who write passionately at length and for zero ROI about the inner lives of others skew tender-hearted, companionable, and “subby.” We mostly write what we know. It just comes out better that way, plus it’s therapeutic.

When we branch out and try to write assertive, horny, self-centered characters, they come across as other and false. We don’t get what it’s like to be that kind of personality, and it shows. And who’s most apt to let us hear about it? Assertive, horny, self-centered readers.

I write as therapy. I use stories to explore parts of myself. I employ outside personalities the best I can, but I will never convey them as complexly and with the same nuance as I can my own.

An unfortunate outcome of this MO is that I tend to write foils to my subby protagonists who are sexually complementary, i.e., your run of the mill hornball unicorns. I have and will always have a weakness for clever, headstrong partners. I render these traits as lovingly as I can. I strain for realism. I do! But the result is always unconvincing, even to me. And the big picture takeaway is nevertheless that I write subby, inexplicably magnetic MCs who get to bed essentially anyone they please.

 

[WeShallUnclench]

I wager a lot of us who write passionately at length and for zero ROI about the inner lives of others skew tender-hearted, companionable, and “subby.” We mostly write what we know. It just comes out better that way, plus it’s therapeutic.

When we branch out and try to write assertive, horny, self-centered characters, they come across as other and false. We don’t get what it’s like to be that kind of personality, and it shows. And who’s most apt to let us hear about it? Assertive, horny, self-centered readers.

I write as therapy. I use stories to explore parts of myself. I employ outside personalities the best I can, but I will never convey them as complexly and with the same nuance as I can my own.

An unfortunate outcome of this MO is that I tend to write foils to my subby protagonists who are sexually complementary, i.e., your run of the mill hornball unicorns. I have and will always have a weakness for clever, headstrong partners. I render these traits as lovingly as I can. I strain for realism. I do! But the result is always unconvincing, even to me. And the big picture takeaway is nevertheless that I write subby, inexplicably magnetic MCs who get to bed essentially anyone they please.

That's a bit of the thing, though - sexually assertive characters should still be written lovingly, not as superficial sex toys - unless it's a character that's meant to be unsympathetic.

I get that's what you're trying to do, of course.

Personally, I try to write every important character like I am role playing them, try to get some of my own creature-hood into them.
It helps in that regard that all of my stories are somewhat goofy, and all of my characters are, to a degree, losers and walking disasters. Write close to home, as you say.

Except of course for characters I hate. Fck those fckers. They are just smooth, lean, efficent tools of pissing me off.*

*EDIT: Upon reflection, I realize I even tend to give those assholes traits I find relatable, such as "cares about family".

 

[burgwad]

In a parallel universe, someone is lamenting all the “dommy” MCs who somehow magically get any passive, shy, compassionate unicorn they want to fall in love with them.

I wonder if writing as a pastime just appeals more to people who love communicating, relating, and trying to accommodate an imagined reader. This might explain why the overwhelming majority of erotica feels like it’s dominated by ”subby,” accommodating, spineless sexual preferences. It might also explain why so much of the worst erotica, the rotten mountains of chaff we aren’t even really discussing here, is vapid, horny, and underbaked - it is the misbegotten effort of legions of would be dommy writers.

A hamfisted approach is great for video porn. But that same straight-to-the-point mentality just doesn’t translate very rewardingly to the written word. I think asshole writers do exist - I mean, they sort of run this joint (as is their way) - but they face an entirely different set of challenges in their work.

Except they don’t. Because subby types are non-confrontational, especially in regards to dommy types, who as much as they LOVE to disagree are also terrible at it. And so the realest challenge facing the asshole writer - even before writing empathically accurate non-asshole characters, which yeah, will be a hurdle for them - is probably actually self-awareness and reflection. If they’re serious about writing, then they’ll have a much higher dependence on editors, and on being in community with other writers. You’d half expect, counterintuitively, that an active “thriving” community of erotica writers would be largely overrun with self-centered assholes talking disjointedly past each other, or otherwise sitting off to the side and cracking wise. And yet, that’d be their best option.

Meanwhile, the only feedback assholes are apt to receive is from subby sycophants afraid to tell it how it really is, or from other dommy assholes too callous to bother making their feedback digestible. In both cases, not super useful feedback. Especially to an asshole, who doesn’t care what others think anyway.

 

[StillStunned]

I wonder if writing as a pastime just appeals more to people who love communicating, relating, and trying to accommodate an imagined reader. This might explain why the overwhelming majority of erotica feels like it’s dominated by ”subby,” accommodating, spineless sexual preferences. It might also explain why so much of the worst erotica, the rotten mountains of chaff we aren’t even really discussing here, is vapid, horny, and underbaked - it is the misbegotten effort of legions of would be ”dommy” writers.

Could be. I'm having great fun writing a nasty POV character who suddenly finds himself in possession of a demon's power. He becomes dominant and aggressive. But - to my mind at least - he's clearly intended as a bad guy, and what I'm enjoying is the novelty of it, as opposed to the characters I usually write.

 

[Kelliezgirl]

Could be. I'm having great fun writing a nasty POV character who suddenly finds himself in possession of a demon's power. He becomes dominant and aggressive. But - to my mind at least - he's clearly intended as a bad guy, and what I'm enjoying is the novelty of it, as opposed to the characters I usually write.

I ended up putting a story on hold after 15k words because I needed the MMC to be a little crueler and more aggressive than I'm comfortable with. I don't like writing villains.

 

[Kelliezgirl]

The rest of the world: Girls need agency, they shouldn't just wait around for boys to rescue them!

The AH: Why are these girls running around, having agency, asserting themselves and deciding who to have sex with? They need to sit back and wait for an aggressive boy.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

The rest of the world: Girls need agency, they shouldn't just wait around for boys to rescue them!

The AH: Why are these girls running around, having agency, asserting themselves and deciding who to have sex with? They need to sit back and wait for an aggressive boy.

It's not that characters need to be written the 'right' way as opposed to the 'wrong' way. In fact that's the problem. 90% of (het) stories on lit have an aggressive trampy female jumping a gameless unsexy male for no reason other than pure horniness. Lit would be much more vibrant if things varied up.

 

[lovecraft68]

The rest of the world: Girls need agency, they shouldn't just wait around for boys to rescue them!

The AH: Why are these girls running around, having agency, asserting themselves and deciding who to have sex with? They need to sit back and wait for an aggressive boy.

Um, you can exclude me from that.
I'm constantly berated in my comments for my male characters being simps because my stories aren't "bitch get on your knees."

 

[AwkwardlySet]

The most common, and I would say one of the best advice that is often given to new authors is to write what they want to write - to write for themselves. I've seen absolutely no evidence here, or through my own reading experience, that all these women and men in the stories are not written in the way that authors wanted to write them.
If there are so many slutty women and lazy or subby men, it's because authors wanted to write them as such - because it depicts their own fantasies. So all this ends up being is a simple complaint about "Why aren't there more stories that please me personally?" Well, I can also say that there is a minuscule percentage of stories that please my own taste, my own kinks and themes here, but it feels silly to complain about it. It doesn't lead anywhere, really.

 

[Kelliezgirl]

It's not that characters need to be written the 'right' way as opposed to the 'wrong' way. In fact that's the problem. 90% of (het) stories on lit have an aggressive trampy female jumping a gameless unsexy male for no reason other than pure horniness. Lit would be much more vibrant if things varied up.

Weird, because I've read quite a few stories on Lit and I guess by pure chance I've avoided this cliche you keep insisting ruins the site.
You've complained in the storytelling thread that people give low scores and make negative comments if you don't "repeat their fantasy back to them".
Yet that seems to be exactly what you want.

Just doing a quick count there are over 400,000 stories on Lit.
So, even if your 90% number is correct that leaves 40,000 stories.
That isn't "vibrant" enough for you?

It's like music, if you don't like a certain genre, don't listen to it.
But there is no need incessantly bitch that something you don't like is popular.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

The most common, and I would say one of the best advice that is often given to new authors is to write what they want to write - to write for themselves. I've seen absolutely no evidence here, or through my own reading experience, that all these women and men in the stories are not written in the way that authors wanted to write them.
If there are so many slutty women and lazy or subby men, it's because authors wanted to write them as such - because it depicts their own fantasies. So all this ends up being is a simple complaint about "Why aren't there more stories that please me personally?" Well, I can also say that there is a minuscule percentage of stories that please my own taste, my own kinks and themes here, but it feels silly to complain about it. It doesn't lead anywhere, really.

This thread started with this post

https://forum.literotica.com/threads/active-and-passive-male-characters.1616888/#post-99429706

Which quoted me in another thread wherein the OP had asked for advice on how to write stories more appealing to women and/or to both genders. There are 'so many slutty women and lazy subby men' because that is the fantasy and that's fine, but think about it. The majority of writers on lit are men. Let's be real, a good many of the female writers on lit are actually men pretending to be women (and there's nothing wrong with that). There aren't many male accounts that are women secretly pretending to be men. So the actual male writers is much more than half.

This thread was a good discussion on the topic of creating better sexier male characters and how they might make a better reading experience for women. If you want to call that complaining, you go right ahead.

 

[Kelliezgirl]

The most common, and I would say one of the best advice that is often given to new authors is to write what they want to write - to write for themselves. I've seen absolutely no evidence here, or through my own reading experience, that all these women and men in the stories are not written in the way that authors wanted to write them.
If there are so many slutty women and lazy or subby men, it's because authors wanted to write them as such - because it depicts their own fantasies. So all this ends up being is a simple complaint about "Why aren't there more stories that please me personally?" Well, I can also say that there is a minuscule percentage of stories that please my own taste, my own kinks and themes here, but it feels silly to complain about it. It doesn't lead anywhere, really.

Exactly.

 

[AwkwardlySet]

So the actual male writers is much more than half.

This thread was a good discussion on the topic of creating better sexier male characters and how they might make a better reading experience for women. If you want to call that complaining, you go right ahead.

No, it was a discussion on how to write male characters that you find sexier and pleasing. I see no evidence that such male characters are what many female readers want to read about.
It would be like me claiming that because I like reading about confident and seductively domineering, but also classy and elegant women, and because I am a guy, that's what all or at least most guys like to read about. Yet the reality of stories here on Lit easily proves me wrong. It's a generalization based on nothing but personal taste. I am sure you can recognize this. At least be more specific and say that it's what women like you like reading about, not women in general.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

No, it was a discussion on how to write male characters that you find sexier and pleasing.

Srsly? Umm, okay.

 

[burgwad]

It's not that characters need to be written the 'right' way as opposed to the 'wrong' way. In fact that's the problem. 90% of (het) stories on lit have an aggressive trampy female jumping a gameless unsexy male for no reason other than pure horniness. Lit would be much more vibrant if things varied up.

Gameless and unsexy, lol. That is a little harsh. My “subby” males still have it where it counts, like they’re fit, charming, and stand up for themselves. But also I don’t think you’re wrong. “Unsexy” gets at something true for a lot of readers, and “gameless” is a great encapsulation of that these guys aren’t playing in a way that in real life would ever result in so much winning.

But I admit, I am not super eager to give classically masculine guys much real estate in my sexual fantasies. The few who make it through are usually either rapists, toadies, or at best, lovable idiots. I know there are lots of good male lovers out there who know how to be dominant, assertive, and even classically masculine without being fuckasses, but … it’s sort of like, they’re already winning at real life? They don’t need to win at erotic fantasy, too? They’re hard to root for.

It’s like if we were writing afro-futurist fantasy and one of the most common complaints from readers was that they wished more white characters were in positions of leadership.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

But I admit, I am not super eager to give classically masculine guys much real estate in my sexual fantasies. The few who make it through are usually either rapists, toadies, or at best, lovable idiots. I know there are lots of good male lovers out there who know how to be dominant, assertive, and even classically masculine without being fuckasses, but … it’s sort of like, they’re already winning at real life? They don’t need to win at erotic fantasy, too? They’re hard to root for.

I haven't read you so I'm not saying specifically your characters, but these limp guys are so rampant on lit.

He doesn't even have to be your classic macho Marlboro man who aggressively takes women. You want a girl to jump your guy's bones? Make him jumpable. If I may quote myself from page 1 of this thread.

The aggressive woman is always confident. I see this quote in men's profiles all the time "love a woman who knows what she wants and is not afraid to go get it". What they are leaving out is that what they want the woman to want is limp boring 'me' (the guy, not me : P ). If the woman is that hot and that confident, she'll go bang Guy Pierce. Yet in these stories this boring guy who does absolutely nothing to even get her attention is somehow the target of this perfectly hot skanky woman. There is nothing wrong with this fantasy as a fantasy, but there's a lot wrong with it as a plot. There's nothing there. It is the most common thing you will find on lit, and it is not an engaging plot at all, and certainly does nothing to stir the imagination of women. Personally, if I'm gonna jump and climb a guy, he needs to be special, the guy who captivates the room singing and playing piano, the guy who leads the rebellion and is steadfast in his ideals. I want THAT guy, before any other girls get him. I'm not going to waste my time with some lump of putty at the pub who couldn't even be arsed to get off his barstool to play darts or snooker

This male character is virtually non-existent on lit.

 

[Levorotatory]

He doesn't even have to be your classic macho Marlboro man who aggressively takes women. You want a girl to jump your guy's bones? Make him jumpable. If I may quote myself from page 1 of this thread.

.. if I'm gonna jump and climb a guy, he needs to be special, the guy who captivates the room singing and playing piano, the guy who leads the rebellion and is steadfast in his ideals. ...

You say he doesn't need to be the "classic macho Marlboro man", then describe someone who is basically that. Confident and not afraid pursue what they want. What about the very talented but not so confident guy who thinks he is playing and singing by himself, but is actually captivating someone he doesn't know is listening? The brilliant analyst who is better with machines than with people but whose work keeps the rebellion from being crushed? Or any other way that someone might make a difference without making themselves the center of attention?

 

[StillStunned]

In my series "The Rivals", the male character is careful and methodical, while the female character is an adrenaline junkie. So even though he's not in any way shy or innocent, she generally initiates the sex. Does that make him passive? I don't think so: he actively flirts, and once the sex has started he's just as much in control as she is. It's just that she's the one making the first move.

 

[WeShallUnclench]

The majority of writers on lit are men. Let's be real, a good many of the female writers on lit are actually men pretending to be women (and there's nothing wrong with that). There aren't many male accounts that are women secretly pretending to be men. So the actual male writers is much more than half.

Ah, I was gonna ask about that, but from your previous comments as someone with experience on this site, I kinda already suspected that's the case.

Erotic literature is traditionally considered a somewhat "feminine" domain. With that, I would have expected, perhaps naively, most of our community to be women, or at the very least a rough 50/50 ratio (among the binary demographic).

But you're basically confirming lit has been "overrun by men" (and thus features predominantly male fantasies?).

General musing possibly worth its own thread:
Do we feel that's an inevitable sort of trend, with a project like this?

 

[Bramblethorn]

The most common, and I would say one of the best advice that is often given to new authors is to write what they want to write - to write for themselves. I've seen absolutely no evidence here, or through my own reading experience, that all these women and men in the stories are not written in the way that authors wanted to write them.
If there are so many slutty women and lazy or subby men, it's because authors wanted to write them as such - because it depicts their own fantasies. So all this ends up being is a simple complaint about "Why aren't there more stories that please me personally?" Well, I can also say that there is a minuscule percentage of stories that please my own taste, my own kinks and themes here, but it feels silly to complain about it. It doesn't lead anywhere, really.

When an author writes two-dimensional characters, it might be because that's the kind of story the author likes reading. But it might also be because that's all they know how to do, or because they don't have the time/energy to write somebody more interesting, or because they think that's what the audience wants. That last one can become self-reinforcing.

IMHO my later stories here are more adventurous and sophisticated than my earlier ones, not because my tastes have changed but because my abilities have and because I have more trust in my readers to deal with something less conventional.

 

[ElectricBlue]

Erotic literature is traditionally considered a somewhat "feminine" domain. With that, I would have expected, perhaps naively, most of our community to be women, or at the very least a rough 50/50 ratio (among the binary demographic).

But you're basically confirming lit has been "overrun by men" (and thus features predominantly male fantasies?).

Nobody actually knows the author gender split. It's probably predominantly male, but 60/40, 70/30, 80/20? No one knows that, not even the site owner. One could hazard a guess, but that's all it would be, a guess.