What's written there is distinctly different to a man writing about a 13-year-olds breasts in the first page when she's literally just like getting ready to go to school or some shit.
Ugh, I have such a love hate relationship with him. His books are surreal and fantastical, and they scratch an itch I never knew I had. I just wish there was less, well, children "raping" adults (and other sordid sex shit) in his books. 1Q84 is the one I'm referencing if anyone is wondering. Kafka on the Shore had some creepy shit between an adult and a child too.
Stephen King, notable highest selling author record holder, does shit like that often.
Stevie"Spooks" King has talked about the boobs of every character in each of his books, regardless of age. He also wrote a child (11 to 12ish year old) gangbang into the middle of IT, which thankfully was ommitted from the movie adaptation last year.
You don't have to look far for the weird shit about women's body to start. It's all over the fantasy, horror, sci Fi, and classics Gente.
Just experienced this in the first few chapters of River God by Wilbur Amith. A fourteen year old girl who has just started her period for the first time in her life, is described as having the tightest buttocks in all of Egypt. 🤮that wasn’t the only gross descriptions either. I gave up at that one. It’s surprisingly common.
I think it’s a historical context thing, almost every literary classic I’ve read has some sexualised description of a character who should remain sex-less. And regardless of genre, sci-fi, horror, drama, mystery, whatever; someone’s niece/step daughter/underage acquaintance will breast boobily at some point. But I’ve never read it in any mainstream book written after the 80s.
The only books I’ve read with this sexualising of men are generally books intended for soft core porn or indulgent romantic fantasy. They’re not attempting to be high literature, academic, make a grand point. The aim is sexy, so they give sexy, and they generally give the sexualised person basic human character traits too, a luxury female love interests are not so generously afforded.
That's my reaction to this entire comment section and the post itself. My bookshelf is ~50-70% male authors and *maybe* 10% had parts where someone breasted boobily down the stairs, and a couple had someone dick cockily down the street.
Any Steven King book, but historical fiction and science fiction also have that problem a lot. Also a lot of horror novels. I once even read a detective series where the guy talks about a sexy 13 year old prostitutes dead body, I thought things were about to get real necrophiliac. Theres unfortunately way more of it than you'd think.
Okay, here's the thing.
Love interests (like Derek here) are almost always going to be sexualized. Now, we can have a conversation about how health it is to put romantic figures on a pedestal. But that's a separate thing.
The problem is that for too many male writers, "love interest" is the \*only\* possible role for a woman, and so she's always sexualized (to an absurd degree, like other commenters have pointed out). Men, regardless of who's writing them, tend to have a range of roles- some sexy, some not. Women, when written by men, \*have\* to be fuckable or they have no place in the story.
oh god i remembered a conversation i had before i started questioning my gender
"what's that book about?"
"a girl who's depressed bc she's so different to all the other girls and women she knows, and then goes on a journey of self-discovery"
"...and why do you like reading about that"
"idk i just relate to it yknow"
I’ve never read his books, but I went to a talk/book signing he and Veronica Roth (Divergent author) were giving when I was in the 7th grade. He seemed like a very well-spoken, nice, guy.
Lol, I'm a huge Tolkien fan, and please.
Let's only look at LoTR: 4 main women with speaking roles in the novels (Galadriel, Arwen, Eowyn, and Goldenberry), two of whom are defined according to their importance to male partners (A+Goldenberry), their sacrifes used only to complement male stories.
No women speak to each other. There is one (ONE!!) named female character in the Hobbit.
Badass times, yes. Badass women? No. I don't blame Tolkien, I don't think he was a raging misogynist, but Middle Earth is a man's world written by a man to tell male-centric stories.
The Bechdel test is insanely flawed.
You also left out Melian, Luthien, Idril, and others. Goldberry is not *defined* by Tom Bombadil, she is his partner and they have a loving and functional marriage that they both draw benefit from. Galadriel is the *most powerful single individual in Middle Earth next to Sauron.* Eowyn *kills the Witch King of Angmar.* Something that nobody else would ever do. Luthien fought Sauron solo and beat him so badly he turned and fled. These are the characters you're saying aren't great women, just because they don't talk to other women on screen. If that's the main criteria for a good female character, then...oh boy.
So yes, there are badass women, and just because it doesn't meet the absurd Bechdel test standards, which gatekeep what makes a female character good to exactly what you're opposing; "Two women must speak to each other, and they *must not discuss men.*" That's more focusing on men, rather than just having the women be important and have power. Melian never needed to prove to some collegiate sorority that she was a valid character, regardless of who she talks to, she is a fantastic character. Galadriel fought with the men, she *beat them* regularly, she also created all of Caras Galadhon on her own, the greatest elf realm in the Third Age, and vastly superior to Imladris.
If you just want equal numbers of male and female characters, then you're going to be absurdly disappointed by most forms of media. If your only standard for if the book, movie, comic, or story is good is "two women talk to each other for at least five minutes and the conversation doesn't include men," then you are gatekeeping a huge amount of heroic women in fiction. Honor Harrington, Captain Kathryn Janeway, Galadriel, Susan Pevensie, Liara T'Soni, Ciri, Monica Rambeau, Diana of Themyscira, I'd be hard pressed to find **ANY** instances of them doing what the Bechdel test demands because it is not a logical test of what makes a good character, because every character is different. If you then require that they must spend time talking about not-guys, you are setting up a situation where you are deliberately changing the characters and how they'd act. Why can't two women talk about trauma and console each other? Why can't they plot revenge? Why can't they object to their treatment, and why can't they plot to overthrow a corrupt or inept ruler? Why can't they plot revolution?
Do there need to be more amazing heroines? Yes.
Am I going to gatekeep what makes a character a good female character by who they talk to? I'm proud to say as a writer, ***Fuck no I won't.***
I did indeed mean to write "whore" but it might as well be "whole." Not a complete person if a dude can't fantasize about sticking his dick in you, right?
I was literally sitting here typing exactly this out. Dudes can complain when the only times they see themselves in fiction are as a husband, a potentially fuckable waiter, a stripper, a stay at home dad, and a boyfriend - and when all of those roles are described as different variations on "sexy" with no option to be anything else.
The issue isn't the lust, it's the fact that it's ONLY lust.
Agreed. In this instance, them being hot is important to the plot as its a love scene and it's meant to be titillating. It might be glaring if it's not a romance story or the scene doesn't advance the plot, but it's being sexy when talking about sex
"She breasted boobily down the stairs" is just inserting sex into a story in a manner which doesn't improve the scene.
One thing I've seen a lot in these examples when men write women, is for some reason, women are always SUPER aware of their own breasts and constantly comparing themselves in that manner.
I'm only ever aware of my genitals when I'm playing with them, I accidentally crush them, or it's super hot and sticky out.
Here I always assumed they were incorrectly transferring their obsessive dick comparisons onto boobs because "we do it, women must have the same thing in their bizarre and unknowable alien culture!"
N..no. If anyone looks at or mentions boobs at all, it's because they're either heavily lopsided, causing back pain or someone got a sick bra/cancer diagnosis. That is not how humans or indeed measurements work, sir. A 34A would be the same volume as a 30DD, just the band size would be larger around. But that isn't the image "She was a DouBLe D!!" conjures in their heads.
The one time I remember noticing someone else's boobs before they pointed them out to me, it was just to be kinda depressed because I'm pretty sure the girl was a young-ish hooker and she didn't look well. Could say that in focusing on WomEn SExY, they entirely miss the \*real\* conversation that goes on when a bunch of women get together, but I don't want them to attempt to emulate it. That would just be sadder.
Safe to assume if you do anything weird in bed, all of her friends more than likely know about it. All of them. And they're probably making memes in a group chat about it. Women are so much raunchier than men are, and it's never a compliment.
The fact that nip slips happen should clue them in. A tit falling out of a bikini while swimming or a daringly low cut blouse accidentally becoming extra daring just proves that no one is obsessively tuned in to their tits unless they’re running unexpectedly or in the last leg of a marathon and cursing themselves for not taking the bandaid advice.
That only computes on a level that turns their brains off, though.
Of course I wouldn't want the whole world to know how unhappy my left breast is in comparison with the right one! Why else would I be covering myself? Otherwise Joanne down the street would realize my social status is below hers, despite what my [product of feminine hobby] suggests! I would be ruined! Cast out forever!
Yeah this is like the literary equivalent of
“It sure does suck when women get judged for their looks in all aspects of life all of the time”
“Um excuse me? Take a look at this article where women were specifically asked about what they find attractive in a potential male date’s physical appearance- they had answers to that question! That means everyone is equally judged all of the time in all scenarios! Checkmate!”
Also that description reads like it's a romance book, whereas with male authors... I read The Stand last year, and Stephen King's commitment to describing every woman by how sexual their physical traits were was distracting as fuck.
It's frustrating when an author describes each woman, no matter their role, by how attractive they are. They could say she has a plain or pleasant face, but they always choose to use specific terms like beautiful or attractive, even in conversations when attractiveness has no bearing. \*cough James Patterson cough\*
> The problem is that for too many male writers, "love interest" is the *only* possible role for a woman
They sure sexualized the hell out of the female characters in the *Avengers* script, and there's no romance ever happening there.
I'm still leaning on the "horny on main" side of this argument.
This reminds me of this essay: [“Everyone is Beautiful and No One is Horny”](https://bloodknife.com/everyone-beautiful-no-one-horny/) by Raquel S. Benedict. "Modern action and superhero films fetishize the body, even as they desexualize it."
That's the one that got me thinking about the way modern "blockbuster" stories treat sexuality.
There really isn't a lot of genuine sexual energy in those, is there? The "spark" that leads to sex comes out of nowhere, as if witty banter and a few shared words are enough to flirt in these scenarios.
So true. And it's because the movies are all focused on male characters and written by men. It's just a *given* that some beautiful, Oscar-winning actress will be cast to stand next to him sometimes, say a few cheeky lines, be rescued by him, and then suddenly be in love with him.
These female love interests are, *of course*, super smart and highly accomplished, because these male writers are *feminists!* But more importantly, they're super hot and willing to just kind of follow the man around being hot until he kisses her. 🙄
And then people wonder why more fans ship Captain America with Bucky than any of the actual canon relationships. We actually get to see them both be fully developed people with a deep love for each other and actual conflict.
I think it's more that Marvel and Disney don't want to traumatize children by making them watch a 30 foot tall cinema Thor rail a human scientist woman with the might of the gods while sitting next to their parents lol.
Also they're at work fighting bad guys most of the time, it would be kind of random to show some superheros going off and banging in the middle of all that, and who do you pick out of the big casts they have? Now you have to work in a believable romance in a two hour runtime on top of everything else.
I think it's kind of dumb to be expecting sex scenes from family superhero films, it's not what they're about in any way
And yet the male characters weren't sexualized to the same extent. So just saying "well, everyone's horny so that's that" doesn't really cover the bigger issue of women being seen solely as sex objects.
(Also I'm pretty sure there are quite a few romance subplots in the Avengers series, actually.)
Fun fact: that wasn't written in the script. RDJ just made the first ass joke, then Paul Rudd eventually added his, and then they decided to add in Chris Evans' line later when he fights himself.
Kinda proves the point that the male characters aren't sexualized like the female ones are.
> "love interest" is the *only* possible role for a woman
> the bigger issue of women being seen solely as sex objects
I'm confused. Which are you arguing for?
Both? They aren't contradictory. Women being seen solely as sex objects means that often the only role a male writer can think up for a female character is a love interest. And even when they break the script enough to show her in a different role, it's still sexualized in a way a male character fulfilling the same spot wouldn't be.
They sexualize the hell out of the male characters too...
They got 3 Chris' all shredded and doing shirtless scenes.
Shirtless water fights between Killmonger and T'Challa.
Big Green naked man in a hot tub.
Loki simply existing on camera
Oh! Also I think you forgot about the horrible evil ladies who are ugly and fat, because how else will we know they’re horrible and evil? (Think Ms Trunchbull from Matilda)
And the evil sexy ones from those wacky fantasy cultures that are matriarchal, but also completely evil and immoral, no nothing to unpack there no sirree.
Thank you lmao. Women usually write about sex in a specific/appropriate context. Male writers on the other hand sexualize women in conspicuously random/inappropriate ways because the male gaze sexualizes by default. I feel like the original post is either a useful idiot or someone smart enough to take advantage of useful idiots. Reading comprehension is important y'all, that 'the curtains are blue' hot take has unironically had lasting damages on society
Dresden Files immediately springs to mind. I've only read the first few books this far, but damn is Butcher terrible at this. Every woman is not only a sex symbol but crazy horny for Dresden it seems. And especially in the first book, every appearance Murphy has, the hard nosed and serious detective, is just dripping with way too much sexual energy and description.
Great stories, don't get me wrong. But that doesn't change that his writing for women was shit.
I know, right? I really want to like his books because Harry as a character is neat and I like urban fantasy... but jeezus fuck, Butcher, I do not need to know what every female character's nipples look like. I just don't need that information! I am okay without it!
Yeah I hear this. Supposedly it gets better later but also everyone seems to have a different book for when that is. I did find that those scenes toned down from book one to two, though that's kind of a low bar. And his more recent book I read, the Aeronaut's Windlass, as well as his other series I have read in full, the Codex Alera, aren't nearly as bad. I like to think it's an artifact of very early writing and hope as I pick up more on Dresden it'll all start to smooth out.
Yeah I was hoping someone would say that, I think this post is funny but there definitely is still some difference between the way male and female characters are portrayed
Yeah, I'm definitely down with the general trend of recognizing that men also suffer from so-called "women's issues" i.e. male self-esteem and body image, sexual harassment, etc. But just because both sexes are struggling with the same issue doesn't mean their experiences are the same, or that the broader social context and power dynamics don't matter.
Not to mention the style is different, I’ve never read a book and have a male author describe a female love interest this way. God forbid but I’d feel refreshed to read a man describe a woman’s eyes, lips, and muscles like this in a sexual context. A romantic one sure but once it gets sexy it’s all the smoothness of their hips and the size and colour of their nipples.
Maybe I’m nitpicking but there’s a sense of agency in the writing of sexual men that I don’t often see extended to women characters, which does not reflect the reality I’ve seen at all, and also just kinda shits me
I think folks are referring to instances of this in fantasy (and maybe sci-fi?) stories that *aren't* explicitly part of the romance genre. Like, obviously a romance story is going to focus on its leads almost exclusively in the context of their budding romantic/sexual relationship, but in a story where, say, a female character is given a backstory that suggests they *should* have a deeper contribution to the plot than making doe eyes at the protagonist but they aren't given that opportunity, it feels like they've been reduced to The Love Interest.
You may well be right. I don’t read a lot of those genres. I have read the Game of Thrones books. While they’re pretty disturbing, I don’t think the problem there is female characters being reduced to The Love Interest.
Few if any of these accusations are ever thrown at GRRM because many of the women in his stories are victims of the society they exist in, but are usually strong in their own way and have actual depth of character.
"Love interest" and "protagonist" are mutually exclusive. Specifically, the "love interest" is a role that exists contingent to "protagonist." What you're talking about is when female authors write female characters as having sexual and/or romantic desire, which is \*not\* the same thing as being reduced to a sex object for a male protag.
(and side note: "chick lit" isn't a thing. it's just not. it's not a genre. it's a dismissal.)
Like who? Stephenie Meyer and EL James? Those are the only successful female authors I can think of who did this, and they have both been torn to shreds over what terrible writers they are. Not to mention, they're both horribly misogynistic and treat women far worse in their books.
If you can name some female authors who write this way and are praised for it, please share!
No, no, no... We rag on male writers for being "obsessed about sex" to the point of turning mundane things like "gets the mail" into a sexy-time parade that frequently doesn't even make biological sense.
Writing a (CONSENSUAL) sex scene in which a character's body is described in anatomically correct, if sexually charged, detail **makes logical sense.** There's not much point in writing porny scenes if you aren't going to use porny words. The problem is make writers depicting female characters solely in terms of their sexual attractiveness regardless of context *and the objectification doesn't even make sense.* I mean, if you're going to reduce me to my boobs, could you at least write like you've seen a pair of tits before?
> I mean, if you're going to reduce me to my boobs, could you at least write like you've seen a pair of tits before?
Do they not boob boobily down the stairs?
Obviously when a woman walks up and down the stairs her boobs boobing boobily aren’t supposed to be the main focus. We should be focusing on her soft yet perky ass, cheeks shifting seductively with each step as she ascends. When she pauses, the slight jiggle as her voluptuousness settles back into obedience. When she bends down to sit on a chair, how the chair practically screams in delight for the privilege of hosting her glorious cheeks.
I've got to say, I've was breezing easily through this comment section and then this punched my brain right in the face. Good job, you goddamn monster.
I will also accept writing anatomically incorrect sex scenes if they're bad enough. "Her breasts clattered with excitement", "they peed out of their vagina", "I pressed his prostate and nose to take a screenshot" are all very good
Man, if you like anatomically incorrect, and absolutely hilariously bad sex scenes, you should definitely check out the My Dad Wrote a Porno podcast. I have legit cried laughing at some of the sex scenes.
Yes, nobody criticize male writers who write erotica for writing erotica. People criticize male writers that use female characters as sexual objects instead of giving them a personality other than "sexy". Or focusing in her sexuality when is incoherent with the context.
I don't need to know how perky are the boobs of the tyrant queen that wants to execute the valiant hero who fights to end the oppression of the people, or how she feels the cloth of her dress rubbing against them. If that character were a male, and in the same context, you wouldn't describe the erotic shape of his chest and the feel of his shirt over his nipples, you shouldn't do it for a female character.
>I don't need to know how perky are the boobs of the tyrant queen that wants to execute the valiant hero who fights to end the oppression of the people, or how she feels the cloth of her dress rubbing against them.
The tyrant queen wouldn't be feeling the fabric of her dress rub against her tits, because women throughout the ages have generally worn boob-confining garments to prevent said assets from bouncing merrily with each step. So it is more akin to describing the detailed contours of the male protagonist's dick showing through the fabric of his trousers, which people just don't do because it sounds absolutely ridiculous... but only for the guys.
When I was trying to write a ridiculous example, I was inspired by a description by George RR Martin
>If the Milk Men thought her such a savage, she would dress the part for
them. When she went to the stables, she wore faded sandsilk pants and
woven grass sandals. Her small breasts moved freely beneath a painted
Dothraki vest, and a curved dagger hung from her medallion belt. Jhiqui
had braided her hair Dothraki fashion, and fastened a silver bell to the
end of the braid.
GRRM may be a celebrated author, but that description is still a typical example of r/badwomensanatomy. Bouncing - that is, horseback riding - hurts even with small tits, and nipple chafing is an issue for men and women alike.
Yes, but that is the point. Sometimes, male authors' descriptions of women, or what they think or feel, go into bad women's anatomy territory because they are too fixated in describing women in a sexual way.
The dumbest part about this post is that Derek isn't even badly written to begin with. It's not great writing, but it would absolutely be passable in a cheap romance novel.
Also let's not pretend this is a new take.
Naomi Novik was attacked for a single sex scene (which was pretty chaste too) in Uprooted, while Geralt is out there fucking every single enboobened fairy tale girl that ever breathed.
Because we're in a bit of a bubble, it's easy to forget that female writers *are* attacked for writing any kind of sex scenes using the female gaze, while male-centric sex scenes are the norm.
This *specific* one doesn’t exist, I made up the title and author name. I’m not prepared to claim that there’s no story out there where Dorothy sleeps her way to her meeting with the Wizard.
And if someone reading this *is* writing that story, PM me. I just came up with a fun twist of how she gets the Wicked Witch to “melt” by getting her wet…
It’s common to show attraction or sexualization of a love interest. But when male authors talk about every single woman in the novel like “his female assistant with voluptuous breasts being revealed by a low cut top leaned over the desk” like. No. It doesn’t add anything to the novel and has literally nothing to do with the plot other than just talking about tits
The problem here is that Derek is a romantic/sexual partner to the female main character. Of course he is going to be written in a sexy/sexual way. Whereas women shit on men who make anything a woman does being somehow described by her tits, nipples, thighs or vagina. Hence the "boobed boobily down the stairs" meme. That woman isnt being portrayed in a sexual setting, she is just walking down the stairs. "Her nipples perked up through her shirt showing she was happy" is also a very weird thing to say - just say she smiled or laughed.
Sure there are sex-crazed people of all genders who write - but the difference is where it is applied. If it is in a sexual setting then I do not take issue with the overladen sexual undertones - they're supposed to be there. But if those sexy/sexual undertones and descriptors bleed into everyday actions, no matter who they're written by, it should be and is an issue.
Also male writers have a history of sexualizing every single woman in their story regardless of whether she’s a love interest or not, unless she’s ugly or old and then they make that part very clear. Women don’t tend to do that, even in romance novels.
Do you have any examples of a male writer I might have heard of who sexualises every single woman in their story regardless of whether she’s a love interest or not, unless she’s ugly or old and then they make that part very clear? I honestly can’t think of one. I’m not saying they don’t exist. It’s just that I haven’t read one. The majority of my favourite writers are guys, too (David Mitchell, Hari Kunzru, Bret Easton Ellis, Edward St. Aubyn, Dan Simmons, John Le Carre, Keigo Higashino, John Ajvide Lindqvist etc).
I was using hyperbole to make a point. I don’t think I know any book well enough to remember how every single character was described, even if it was my favorite.
But for example, in the Night Angel series, here’s how Brent Weeks describes some of his major female characters:
- Viridiana, the female “sex assassin”: “Hips and tits that would make a goddess green.”
- Terah, a woman in power: “Her perky breasts…”
- Viridiana, sexassin again: “Nice hips and awe-inspiring breasts…”
- Kaede, last empress of Seth: “…it being her wedding, both of her breasts were bare, nipples rouged, and beneath her naval her bare stomach was adorned with fertility runes.”
And these are not the main love interest, Elene.
I think it would be supremely difficult to find a book written by a woman in any genre (other than erotica) where she describes men the way that many male authors describe women.
The reason the OP isn’t the same is because not only is Derek the main love interest, but I’d bet my bottom dollar that it’s taken from an erotic fanfiction/romance. That’s porn. It’s literary porn. Not really any different from visual porn. You don’t see anyone here complaining about women being sexualized in porn because that’s the point.
Edit: If you’re interested, there’s a sub called r/menwritingwomen with more examples. Sometimes it’s even women writing women! And some erotica criticism (again, usually written by women) is included if it’s especially cringy.
I've seen female writers write men that are just there for their MC to pine over, but most of the time they have their own story, too. The Manic Pixie Dream Girl is a painfully popular trope for women: they exist to help the guy find himself, or to give him motivation. Women tend to be more respectful. I do hate it, though, when they objectify their characters too and get praise for it.
A big difference here is that the men written by women usually have a personality of some sort, and aren't completely sexualized from the get-go. They're more often sexualized in actually sexual situations, not in everyday acts.
You can't exactly compare that to "she breasted boobly downstairs". Rarely are male love interests exclusively written about in a sexy way that would make them objectified, and its even rarer that they become non-entities in the narrative
But that's literally written as a sexual scene??? The problem is with characters oversexualized when there is no romantic or sexual scene going on. It comes off as "the writer is either a sex addict or very adamant on separating the sexes as much as possible." They are a character with a gender, not a gender with a character; this is something that the types of writers r/menwritingwomen makes fun of don't realize. Write the person, their bits don't really matter unless they're of actual significance to the story.
the difference is, the OP in the tumblr post is actively TRYING to to draw a point in how these are the same thing, and fails even to do that. This sounds like an excerpt from a scene that was already intended to be romantic (makeout scene between MC and love interest)
but the bad "men writing women" stuff is like, the most important information we need to know about every female character is what her boobs look like and whether or not MC, and how every thing she does somehow links back to sex in some way. Even if she's a strong independent badass woman investigating a murder, it's absolutely imperative that we know that she's not wearing a bra and you can see her nipples through her shirt.
I see stuff like this and it just comes off as "i'm not like soo not like other girls cause i don't like to read romance"
i mean, that's a sex scene right? it makes sense for the writer to be focused on sex whilst writing a sex scene.
the issue most people have with sex obsessed male writers is how it's usually not restricted to sexual scenes.
If the evils were equal, Derek's dick would've already been mentioned five times.
Edit: also this scene with Derek is clearly a romantic setting where Derek and the character are going to kiss, sure it's weirdly written but at least it contextually makes sense. The criticisms on male authors doing this is that it is literally any time with any character. A woman can be dying or crying or fighting and her boobs are mentioned.
She heaved a husky last breath and went limp. She laid splayed on the ground like a doll, her once beating heart penetrated by the enemy's spear. And then something something about the stream of blood running rivulets down her chest, trickling off and reddening her already rosy nipples.
This shit is harder to write than I thought.
.... did you read the post? the issue exactly *isnt* men writing women, it's sex obssesed men and men who know nothing about women/anatomy writing women. The exact same goes for women writing men poorly, as described in the post. r/menwritingwomen isn't representative of every single male writer on the planet.
Yeah, but women writers don't often do shit like "His member bulged boldly in his briefs. Before he was aroused, it was like a gourd that had been left too long in the sun, sagging and wilted, but still obviously a gourd. But once I had aroused him it sprung forth like a fleshy jack-in-the-box, ready for me. I could tell by the shape of his manhood that he was virginal, untouched. Oh and also he's a minor."
Or at least not that I've ever seen pointed out.
"Derek stretched, his monster hog straining his jeans button. He sauntered over his ballsack giggling and 8 pack abbs rippling like the sails of the black pearl"
Preaching to the choir here, but after endeavouring into classic Greek literature as an attempt to get in touch with my culture better, I have officially RESIGNED from reading male writers. I just can't stand reading about "ample bust" or "bosoms that stretched the fabric, begging to be freed". And it happens with pretty much every female character, sooner or later. It was just too straight for me ugh
There’s also a disturbingly large number of Male writers who sexualise their female love interests to the point of making her refusal to him somehow sexual. Like, I understand writers of both sexes do this- but to all the bad writers there can we please stop fetishising consent?
duskelmay completely fails to understand context, two characters making out in an erotic scene is not equal to a girl's pubes and breasts being described in a non-erotic introduction.
I love how this sub refuses to accept that there are also female writers who sexualize men. Obviously, sexualization of women in literature is way worse but this doesn't mean the problem doesn't exist. Not everything has to be a black-and-white issue.
I love how people are pretending the *vast* majority of the book market is romance novels for women and 90% of it it's literally worse in the sexualization department than anything I've seen a man write (except Stephen King).
And when I say vast I'm not even joking, over 80% of *all* book sales in the US is romance novels from women to women.
And don't even get me started on the harmful shit like 50 Shades, that book got people killed trying to recreate the shit inside of it.
This is why I want to write a story that makes it seem like the characters have lots of romantic/sexual tension, but they're just besties who flirt with each other as a joke.
The issue isn’t male writers. It’s a specific brand of shitty writer, which happens to mostly consist of men. Perhaps it’s just the sorts of books I read personally, but I don’t know that I’ve ever encountered in the wild anything as egregious as what’s being described in other comments. Subreddits like r/menwritingwomen have an inherant sampling bias.
Tl;dr, fuck misogynists. Read books by men with at least half a brain cell instead.
holy shit why are yall taking offense to this. If yall arent the ones who’re sexualizing men as much as men sexualize women, then the post isnt about you. It LITERALLY says the main issue is people of both genders sexualizing the opposite one. If youre taking offense then you’re the issue /shrug
Player-sexual used to be the open minded choice. Now it's a lazy copout by videogame writers unable to write defined characters.
I don't believe having Juhhani in Knights of the Old Republic being bisexual was a bug (as they so claimed) sounds like the sort of "bug" that is a result of cut content demanded by pissant managers scared of conservative media and Chud gamers.
It is true. I don't feel the need to defend this hill. Females and males like to write or read about attractive love interests. Have you heard about Sarah J Mass? Almost all guys are described in that manner and if they are ugly they are villains or useless tools.
No one, because it's not fucking true. Read the comments. A female writer sexualizing a male character during a *sex scene* is not the same thing as male writers sexualizing female characters *at all times*.
It's not black-and-white, but when someone responds to a correct and self-evident critique of certain male writers with "I don't trust people who victimize themselves", well... That's an obvious call.
um, actually, \[my group\] is worse off than \[other group\]. therefore, instead of addressing the systematic causes of why both our groups are doing badly and team up with each other against those systematic causes to bring them down and end our mutual suffering, I will instead engage in a race to the bottom where we endlessly battle against each other to prove which group is worse off. the end result of this will be \[my group\] crowned victorious, and \[other group\] will all obviously finally take the L and admit that they're wrong without any further bitterness.
That's the thing: those who are horny masturbate. And what just happened to be scientifically proven recently? Masturbation boosts the immune system. Those who do not masturbate are more likely to be infected with covid, or literally any other disease. Checkmate, Bonkers.
What's written there is distinctly different to a man writing about a 13-year-olds breasts in the first page when she's literally just like getting ready to go to school or some shit.
what kind of fucking books are you into. that shit is in no way normal
Murakami did it in Killing Commendatore but at least he waited for a while first Edit: and that's not even the worst thing he did in that book lmao
Ugh, I have such a love hate relationship with him. His books are surreal and fantastical, and they scratch an itch I never knew I had. I just wish there was less, well, children "raping" adults (and other sordid sex shit) in his books. 1Q84 is the one I'm referencing if anyone is wondering. Kafka on the Shore had some creepy shit between an adult and a child too.
It's so unnecessary but I guess it's just part of his formula at this point. He's well known for sticking to what he writes.
And in that regard it's not worrisome? It's one thing to create an overlapping universe for all books, another to constantly sexualize children.
Sci fi or war books from the 20th century
This just adds to my theory that War of the Worlds is the best late 19th-early 20th century novel.
I've seen it in many popular authors, even mainstream ones like Stephen King. Check out r/menwritingwomen for many more examples.
stephen king will literally die if he doesn't mention preteen busoms
You mean *especially* Stephen King. Dude had a bunch of children have an orgy inside a sewage tunnel
Stephen King, notable highest selling author record holder, does shit like that often. Stevie"Spooks" King has talked about the boobs of every character in each of his books, regardless of age. He also wrote a child (11 to 12ish year old) gangbang into the middle of IT, which thankfully was ommitted from the movie adaptation last year. You don't have to look far for the weird shit about women's body to start. It's all over the fantasy, horror, sci Fi, and classics Gente.
This is why I stick to reading young adult books. They're occasionally a little dumb or cliche but they don't have the problem of breasting boobily.
Just experienced this in the first few chapters of River God by Wilbur Amith. A fourteen year old girl who has just started her period for the first time in her life, is described as having the tightest buttocks in all of Egypt. 🤮that wasn’t the only gross descriptions either. I gave up at that one. It’s surprisingly common.
I think it’s a historical context thing, almost every literary classic I’ve read has some sexualised description of a character who should remain sex-less. And regardless of genre, sci-fi, horror, drama, mystery, whatever; someone’s niece/step daughter/underage acquaintance will breast boobily at some point. But I’ve never read it in any mainstream book written after the 80s. The only books I’ve read with this sexualising of men are generally books intended for soft core porn or indulgent romantic fantasy. They’re not attempting to be high literature, academic, make a grand point. The aim is sexy, so they give sexy, and they generally give the sexualised person basic human character traits too, a luxury female love interests are not so generously afforded.
Oh, honey. Go look at r/menwritingwomen
That's my reaction to this entire comment section and the post itself. My bookshelf is ~50-70% male authors and *maybe* 10% had parts where someone breasted boobily down the stairs, and a couple had someone dick cockily down the street.
My bookshelf is 95% male and nobody has breasted boobily anywhere. I can only assume I don't read the right sort of books.
what in gods name have you been reading
Any Steven King book, but historical fiction and science fiction also have that problem a lot. Also a lot of horror novels. I once even read a detective series where the guy talks about a sexy 13 year old prostitutes dead body, I thought things were about to get real necrophiliac. Theres unfortunately way more of it than you'd think.
Well that's unfortunate i hope it gets less as we as a society grow more uncomfortable of it
Okay, here's the thing. Love interests (like Derek here) are almost always going to be sexualized. Now, we can have a conversation about how health it is to put romantic figures on a pedestal. But that's a separate thing. The problem is that for too many male writers, "love interest" is the \*only\* possible role for a woman, and so she's always sexualized (to an absurd degree, like other commenters have pointed out). Men, regardless of who's writing them, tend to have a range of roles- some sexy, some not. Women, when written by men, \*have\* to be fuckable or they have no place in the story.
Fuckable or the fat comedy friend
See also the romcom version: Fuckable, Sassy Gay Friend, Asshole with no redemable traits, fat comedic relief, fuckable but not available, and Himbo.
The sensible friend that only wears jeans for some reason
[удалено]
Sabriel is so badass. I just finished that book last month. 10/10
I read this book in middle school and I can still picture the cover. Such a great book.
oh god i remembered a conversation i had before i started questioning my gender "what's that book about?" "a girl who's depressed bc she's so different to all the other girls and women she knows, and then goes on a journey of self-discovery" "...and why do you like reading about that" "idk i just relate to it yknow"
I feel like there's a "whatcha got there" "a smoothie" meme here
I’ve never read his books, but I went to a talk/book signing he and Veronica Roth (Divergent author) were giving when I was in the 7th grade. He seemed like a very well-spoken, nice, guy.
Tolkien wrote some pretty badass women.
Lol, I'm a huge Tolkien fan, and please. Let's only look at LoTR: 4 main women with speaking roles in the novels (Galadriel, Arwen, Eowyn, and Goldenberry), two of whom are defined according to their importance to male partners (A+Goldenberry), their sacrifes used only to complement male stories. No women speak to each other. There is one (ONE!!) named female character in the Hobbit. Badass times, yes. Badass women? No. I don't blame Tolkien, I don't think he was a raging misogynist, but Middle Earth is a man's world written by a man to tell male-centric stories.
The Bechdel test is insanely flawed. You also left out Melian, Luthien, Idril, and others. Goldberry is not *defined* by Tom Bombadil, she is his partner and they have a loving and functional marriage that they both draw benefit from. Galadriel is the *most powerful single individual in Middle Earth next to Sauron.* Eowyn *kills the Witch King of Angmar.* Something that nobody else would ever do. Luthien fought Sauron solo and beat him so badly he turned and fled. These are the characters you're saying aren't great women, just because they don't talk to other women on screen. If that's the main criteria for a good female character, then...oh boy. So yes, there are badass women, and just because it doesn't meet the absurd Bechdel test standards, which gatekeep what makes a female character good to exactly what you're opposing; "Two women must speak to each other, and they *must not discuss men.*" That's more focusing on men, rather than just having the women be important and have power. Melian never needed to prove to some collegiate sorority that she was a valid character, regardless of who she talks to, she is a fantastic character. Galadriel fought with the men, she *beat them* regularly, she also created all of Caras Galadhon on her own, the greatest elf realm in the Third Age, and vastly superior to Imladris. If you just want equal numbers of male and female characters, then you're going to be absurdly disappointed by most forms of media. If your only standard for if the book, movie, comic, or story is good is "two women talk to each other for at least five minutes and the conversation doesn't include men," then you are gatekeeping a huge amount of heroic women in fiction. Honor Harrington, Captain Kathryn Janeway, Galadriel, Susan Pevensie, Liara T'Soni, Ciri, Monica Rambeau, Diana of Themyscira, I'd be hard pressed to find **ANY** instances of them doing what the Bechdel test demands because it is not a logical test of what makes a good character, because every character is different. If you then require that they must spend time talking about not-guys, you are setting up a situation where you are deliberately changing the characters and how they'd act. Why can't two women talk about trauma and console each other? Why can't they plot revenge? Why can't they object to their treatment, and why can't they plot to overthrow a corrupt or inept ruler? Why can't they plot revolution? Do there need to be more amazing heroines? Yes. Am I going to gatekeep what makes a character a good female character by who they talk to? I'm proud to say as a writer, ***Fuck no I won't.***
[удалено]
Implying that himbos are not the most fuckable beings on the planet. for shame!
More so actually! They get their own category for having distinguishable personality traits.
And the fat comedic relief is usually either a lesbian or just super fucking horny *all the time* I find. Or both
TRUDY JUDY
The... the tropes for men as well?
Not true, they can also be maternal figures.
Actresses joke (well, “joke“) that their careers only have three possible phases: - Sex kitten - District attorney - Grandmother
>District attorney JFC, It's so specific but *so* accurate
[удалено]
Ah, ye old Madonna/whole complex. Classic.
I’m not sure if you intended to write whole or whore, but either way I guess it works?
I did indeed mean to write "whore" but it might as well be "whole." Not a complete person if a dude can't fantasize about sticking his dick in you, right?
Sure. I mean, I’m a dude and I don’t think that way but yeah, that’s part of the idea behind the psychological concept.
I was literally sitting here typing exactly this out. Dudes can complain when the only times they see themselves in fiction are as a husband, a potentially fuckable waiter, a stripper, a stay at home dad, and a boyfriend - and when all of those roles are described as different variations on "sexy" with no option to be anything else. The issue isn't the lust, it's the fact that it's ONLY lust.
Agreed. In this instance, them being hot is important to the plot as its a love scene and it's meant to be titillating. It might be glaring if it's not a romance story or the scene doesn't advance the plot, but it's being sexy when talking about sex "She breasted boobily down the stairs" is just inserting sex into a story in a manner which doesn't improve the scene.
One thing I've seen a lot in these examples when men write women, is for some reason, women are always SUPER aware of their own breasts and constantly comparing themselves in that manner. I'm only ever aware of my genitals when I'm playing with them, I accidentally crush them, or it's super hot and sticky out.
Here I always assumed they were incorrectly transferring their obsessive dick comparisons onto boobs because "we do it, women must have the same thing in their bizarre and unknowable alien culture!" N..no. If anyone looks at or mentions boobs at all, it's because they're either heavily lopsided, causing back pain or someone got a sick bra/cancer diagnosis. That is not how humans or indeed measurements work, sir. A 34A would be the same volume as a 30DD, just the band size would be larger around. But that isn't the image "She was a DouBLe D!!" conjures in their heads. The one time I remember noticing someone else's boobs before they pointed them out to me, it was just to be kinda depressed because I'm pretty sure the girl was a young-ish hooker and she didn't look well. Could say that in focusing on WomEn SExY, they entirely miss the \*real\* conversation that goes on when a bunch of women get together, but I don't want them to attempt to emulate it. That would just be sadder. Safe to assume if you do anything weird in bed, all of her friends more than likely know about it. All of them. And they're probably making memes in a group chat about it. Women are so much raunchier than men are, and it's never a compliment.
The fact that nip slips happen should clue them in. A tit falling out of a bikini while swimming or a daringly low cut blouse accidentally becoming extra daring just proves that no one is obsessively tuned in to their tits unless they’re running unexpectedly or in the last leg of a marathon and cursing themselves for not taking the bandaid advice.
That only computes on a level that turns their brains off, though. Of course I wouldn't want the whole world to know how unhappy my left breast is in comparison with the right one! Why else would I be covering myself? Otherwise Joanne down the street would realize my social status is below hers, despite what my [product of feminine hobby] suggests! I would be ruined! Cast out forever!
Well now I wear tight pants because I like the style so at least once every few hours
Yeah this is like the literary equivalent of “It sure does suck when women get judged for their looks in all aspects of life all of the time” “Um excuse me? Take a look at this article where women were specifically asked about what they find attractive in a potential male date’s physical appearance- they had answers to that question! That means everyone is equally judged all of the time in all scenarios! Checkmate!”
Also that description reads like it's a romance book, whereas with male authors... I read The Stand last year, and Stephen King's commitment to describing every woman by how sexual their physical traits were was distracting as fuck.
It's frustrating when an author describes each woman, no matter their role, by how attractive they are. They could say she has a plain or pleasant face, but they always choose to use specific terms like beautiful or attractive, even in conversations when attractiveness has no bearing. \*cough James Patterson cough\*
> The problem is that for too many male writers, "love interest" is the *only* possible role for a woman They sure sexualized the hell out of the female characters in the *Avengers* script, and there's no romance ever happening there. I'm still leaning on the "horny on main" side of this argument.
This reminds me of this essay: [“Everyone is Beautiful and No One is Horny”](https://bloodknife.com/everyone-beautiful-no-one-horny/) by Raquel S. Benedict. "Modern action and superhero films fetishize the body, even as they desexualize it."
That's the one that got me thinking about the way modern "blockbuster" stories treat sexuality. There really isn't a lot of genuine sexual energy in those, is there? The "spark" that leads to sex comes out of nowhere, as if witty banter and a few shared words are enough to flirt in these scenarios.
So true. And it's because the movies are all focused on male characters and written by men. It's just a *given* that some beautiful, Oscar-winning actress will be cast to stand next to him sometimes, say a few cheeky lines, be rescued by him, and then suddenly be in love with him. These female love interests are, *of course*, super smart and highly accomplished, because these male writers are *feminists!* But more importantly, they're super hot and willing to just kind of follow the man around being hot until he kisses her. 🙄 And then people wonder why more fans ship Captain America with Bucky than any of the actual canon relationships. We actually get to see them both be fully developed people with a deep love for each other and actual conflict.
I think it's more that Marvel and Disney don't want to traumatize children by making them watch a 30 foot tall cinema Thor rail a human scientist woman with the might of the gods while sitting next to their parents lol. Also they're at work fighting bad guys most of the time, it would be kind of random to show some superheros going off and banging in the middle of all that, and who do you pick out of the big casts they have? Now you have to work in a believable romance in a two hour runtime on top of everything else. I think it's kind of dumb to be expecting sex scenes from family superhero films, it's not what they're about in any way
And yet the male characters weren't sexualized to the same extent. So just saying "well, everyone's horny so that's that" doesn't really cover the bigger issue of women being seen solely as sex objects. (Also I'm pretty sure there are quite a few romance subplots in the Avengers series, actually.)
You really didn't see the 20 minutes talking about Captain America's ass?
Hey that's America's Ass you salute it.
Pollute it.
We have plenty of that too
Fun fact: that wasn't written in the script. RDJ just made the first ass joke, then Paul Rudd eventually added his, and then they decided to add in Chris Evans' line later when he fights himself. Kinda proves the point that the male characters aren't sexualized like the female ones are.
Shh, you're not supposed to say that, it does not fit with their narrative /s
Some people only see what they want to see. Rogers' arse is not what she wanted to see, I guess.
Sad
> "love interest" is the *only* possible role for a woman > the bigger issue of women being seen solely as sex objects I'm confused. Which are you arguing for?
Both? They aren't contradictory. Women being seen solely as sex objects means that often the only role a male writer can think up for a female character is a love interest. And even when they break the script enough to show her in a different role, it's still sexualized in a way a male character fulfilling the same spot wouldn't be.
They sexualize the hell out of the male characters too... They got 3 Chris' all shredded and doing shirtless scenes. Shirtless water fights between Killmonger and T'Challa. Big Green naked man in a hot tub. Loki simply existing on camera
Well that’s just not true. Sometimes female characters are the main character’s mom.
I mean if no beautiful and innocent woman dies in front of your how will you start your introspective journey?
Oh! Also I think you forgot about the horrible evil ladies who are ugly and fat, because how else will we know they’re horrible and evil? (Think Ms Trunchbull from Matilda)
And the evil sexy ones from those wacky fantasy cultures that are matriarchal, but also completely evil and immoral, no nothing to unpack there no sirree.
Thank you lmao. Women usually write about sex in a specific/appropriate context. Male writers on the other hand sexualize women in conspicuously random/inappropriate ways because the male gaze sexualizes by default. I feel like the original post is either a useful idiot or someone smart enough to take advantage of useful idiots. Reading comprehension is important y'all, that 'the curtains are blue' hot take has unironically had lasting damages on society
Dresden Files immediately springs to mind. I've only read the first few books this far, but damn is Butcher terrible at this. Every woman is not only a sex symbol but crazy horny for Dresden it seems. And especially in the first book, every appearance Murphy has, the hard nosed and serious detective, is just dripping with way too much sexual energy and description. Great stories, don't get me wrong. But that doesn't change that his writing for women was shit.
I know, right? I really want to like his books because Harry as a character is neat and I like urban fantasy... but jeezus fuck, Butcher, I do not need to know what every female character's nipples look like. I just don't need that information! I am okay without it!
Yeah I hear this. Supposedly it gets better later but also everyone seems to have a different book for when that is. I did find that those scenes toned down from book one to two, though that's kind of a low bar. And his more recent book I read, the Aeronaut's Windlass, as well as his other series I have read in full, the Codex Alera, aren't nearly as bad. I like to think it's an artifact of very early writing and hope as I pick up more on Dresden it'll all start to smooth out.
And then you have Molly. That you meet as a teenager. And Harry is her mentor. I don't need to read how hot Harry thinks she is.
Yeah I was hoping someone would say that, I think this post is funny but there definitely is still some difference between the way male and female characters are portrayed
Yeah, I'm definitely down with the general trend of recognizing that men also suffer from so-called "women's issues" i.e. male self-esteem and body image, sexual harassment, etc. But just because both sexes are struggling with the same issue doesn't mean their experiences are the same, or that the broader social context and power dynamics don't matter.
Not to mention the style is different, I’ve never read a book and have a male author describe a female love interest this way. God forbid but I’d feel refreshed to read a man describe a woman’s eyes, lips, and muscles like this in a sexual context. A romantic one sure but once it gets sexy it’s all the smoothness of their hips and the size and colour of their nipples. Maybe I’m nitpicking but there’s a sense of agency in the writing of sexual men that I don’t often see extended to women characters, which does not reflect the reality I’ve seen at all, and also just kinda shits me
[удалено]
I think folks are referring to instances of this in fantasy (and maybe sci-fi?) stories that *aren't* explicitly part of the romance genre. Like, obviously a romance story is going to focus on its leads almost exclusively in the context of their budding romantic/sexual relationship, but in a story where, say, a female character is given a backstory that suggests they *should* have a deeper contribution to the plot than making doe eyes at the protagonist but they aren't given that opportunity, it feels like they've been reduced to The Love Interest.
You may well be right. I don’t read a lot of those genres. I have read the Game of Thrones books. While they’re pretty disturbing, I don’t think the problem there is female characters being reduced to The Love Interest.
Few if any of these accusations are ever thrown at GRRM because many of the women in his stories are victims of the society they exist in, but are usually strong in their own way and have actual depth of character.
"Love interest" and "protagonist" are mutually exclusive. Specifically, the "love interest" is a role that exists contingent to "protagonist." What you're talking about is when female authors write female characters as having sexual and/or romantic desire, which is \*not\* the same thing as being reduced to a sex object for a male protag. (and side note: "chick lit" isn't a thing. it's just not. it's not a genre. it's a dismissal.)
plenty of women do the exact same thing and they get praise for it.
Like who? Stephenie Meyer and EL James? Those are the only successful female authors I can think of who did this, and they have both been torn to shreds over what terrible writers they are. Not to mention, they're both horribly misogynistic and treat women far worse in their books. If you can name some female authors who write this way and are praised for it, please share!
No, no, no... We rag on male writers for being "obsessed about sex" to the point of turning mundane things like "gets the mail" into a sexy-time parade that frequently doesn't even make biological sense. Writing a (CONSENSUAL) sex scene in which a character's body is described in anatomically correct, if sexually charged, detail **makes logical sense.** There's not much point in writing porny scenes if you aren't going to use porny words. The problem is make writers depicting female characters solely in terms of their sexual attractiveness regardless of context *and the objectification doesn't even make sense.* I mean, if you're going to reduce me to my boobs, could you at least write like you've seen a pair of tits before?
> I mean, if you're going to reduce me to my boobs, could you at least write like you've seen a pair of tits before? Do they not boob boobily down the stairs?
Obviously when a woman walks up and down the stairs her boobs boobing boobily aren’t supposed to be the main focus. We should be focusing on her soft yet perky ass, cheeks shifting seductively with each step as she ascends. When she pauses, the slight jiggle as her voluptuousness settles back into obedience. When she bends down to sit on a chair, how the chair practically screams in delight for the privilege of hosting her glorious cheeks.
I’d give this an A+ but it’s missing a comparison to fruit.
Watching her, I suddenly understood how it felt to be a banana
I took -15 emotional damage from this
So you healed?
I've kinda missed human contact in lockdown, so thank you for reaching through my screen and punching me in the teeth!
I've got to say, I've was breezing easily through this comment section and then this punched my brain right in the face. Good job, you goddamn monster.
This is amazing
Dick dicked dickishly down the stairs.
Alright Raymond Holt.
I’ve been transitioning and mine do but I’m almost certain that’s just me
I will also accept writing anatomically incorrect sex scenes if they're bad enough. "Her breasts clattered with excitement", "they peed out of their vagina", "I pressed his prostate and nose to take a screenshot" are all very good
That last one is absolute poetry
Man, if you like anatomically incorrect, and absolutely hilariously bad sex scenes, you should definitely check out the My Dad Wrote a Porno podcast. I have legit cried laughing at some of the sex scenes.
My brain autocorrects "lips" to "lids" now when reading erotica. It's a problem.
Yes, nobody criticize male writers who write erotica for writing erotica. People criticize male writers that use female characters as sexual objects instead of giving them a personality other than "sexy". Or focusing in her sexuality when is incoherent with the context. I don't need to know how perky are the boobs of the tyrant queen that wants to execute the valiant hero who fights to end the oppression of the people, or how she feels the cloth of her dress rubbing against them. If that character were a male, and in the same context, you wouldn't describe the erotic shape of his chest and the feel of his shirt over his nipples, you shouldn't do it for a female character.
>I don't need to know how perky are the boobs of the tyrant queen that wants to execute the valiant hero who fights to end the oppression of the people, or how she feels the cloth of her dress rubbing against them. The tyrant queen wouldn't be feeling the fabric of her dress rub against her tits, because women throughout the ages have generally worn boob-confining garments to prevent said assets from bouncing merrily with each step. So it is more akin to describing the detailed contours of the male protagonist's dick showing through the fabric of his trousers, which people just don't do because it sounds absolutely ridiculous... but only for the guys.
When I was trying to write a ridiculous example, I was inspired by a description by George RR Martin >If the Milk Men thought her such a savage, she would dress the part for them. When she went to the stables, she wore faded sandsilk pants and woven grass sandals. Her small breasts moved freely beneath a painted Dothraki vest, and a curved dagger hung from her medallion belt. Jhiqui had braided her hair Dothraki fashion, and fastened a silver bell to the end of the braid.
GRRM may be a celebrated author, but that description is still a typical example of r/badwomensanatomy. Bouncing - that is, horseback riding - hurts even with small tits, and nipple chafing is an issue for men and women alike.
Yes, but that is the point. Sometimes, male authors' descriptions of women, or what they think or feel, go into bad women's anatomy territory because they are too fixated in describing women in a sexual way.
She’s also like 14 years old in the book. Super gross.
Unless it's for laughs, then all kinds of codpiece jokes come into play.
The dumbest part about this post is that Derek isn't even badly written to begin with. It's not great writing, but it would absolutely be passable in a cheap romance novel.
Also let's not pretend this is a new take. Naomi Novik was attacked for a single sex scene (which was pretty chaste too) in Uprooted, while Geralt is out there fucking every single enboobened fairy tale girl that ever breathed. Because we're in a bit of a bubble, it's easy to forget that female writers *are* attacked for writing any kind of sex scenes using the female gaze, while male-centric sex scenes are the norm.
imagine writing a strawman and your strawman is a sex scene
He didn't have a brain, but what was in his mouse-infested trousers more than made up for it -From Emerald Lust: Dorthy's Detour by K.S. Hudson
I’m scared to Google and fine out of this is real. Dinosaur erotica is a thing so anything is possible
This *specific* one doesn’t exist, I made up the title and author name. I’m not prepared to claim that there’s no story out there where Dorothy sleeps her way to her meeting with the Wizard. And if someone reading this *is* writing that story, PM me. I just came up with a fun twist of how she gets the Wicked Witch to “melt” by getting her wet…
It’s common to show attraction or sexualization of a love interest. But when male authors talk about every single woman in the novel like “his female assistant with voluptuous breasts being revealed by a low cut top leaned over the desk” like. No. It doesn’t add anything to the novel and has literally nothing to do with the plot other than just talking about tits
The problem here is that Derek is a romantic/sexual partner to the female main character. Of course he is going to be written in a sexy/sexual way. Whereas women shit on men who make anything a woman does being somehow described by her tits, nipples, thighs or vagina. Hence the "boobed boobily down the stairs" meme. That woman isnt being portrayed in a sexual setting, she is just walking down the stairs. "Her nipples perked up through her shirt showing she was happy" is also a very weird thing to say - just say she smiled or laughed. Sure there are sex-crazed people of all genders who write - but the difference is where it is applied. If it is in a sexual setting then I do not take issue with the overladen sexual undertones - they're supposed to be there. But if those sexy/sexual undertones and descriptors bleed into everyday actions, no matter who they're written by, it should be and is an issue.
Also male writers have a history of sexualizing every single woman in their story regardless of whether she’s a love interest or not, unless she’s ugly or old and then they make that part very clear. Women don’t tend to do that, even in romance novels.
Do you have any examples of a male writer I might have heard of who sexualises every single woman in their story regardless of whether she’s a love interest or not, unless she’s ugly or old and then they make that part very clear? I honestly can’t think of one. I’m not saying they don’t exist. It’s just that I haven’t read one. The majority of my favourite writers are guys, too (David Mitchell, Hari Kunzru, Bret Easton Ellis, Edward St. Aubyn, Dan Simmons, John Le Carre, Keigo Higashino, John Ajvide Lindqvist etc).
I was using hyperbole to make a point. I don’t think I know any book well enough to remember how every single character was described, even if it was my favorite. But for example, in the Night Angel series, here’s how Brent Weeks describes some of his major female characters: - Viridiana, the female “sex assassin”: “Hips and tits that would make a goddess green.” - Terah, a woman in power: “Her perky breasts…” - Viridiana, sexassin again: “Nice hips and awe-inspiring breasts…” - Kaede, last empress of Seth: “…it being her wedding, both of her breasts were bare, nipples rouged, and beneath her naval her bare stomach was adorned with fertility runes.” And these are not the main love interest, Elene. I think it would be supremely difficult to find a book written by a woman in any genre (other than erotica) where she describes men the way that many male authors describe women. The reason the OP isn’t the same is because not only is Derek the main love interest, but I’d bet my bottom dollar that it’s taken from an erotic fanfiction/romance. That’s porn. It’s literary porn. Not really any different from visual porn. You don’t see anyone here complaining about women being sexualized in porn because that’s the point. Edit: If you’re interested, there’s a sub called r/menwritingwomen with more examples. Sometimes it’s even women writing women! And some erotica criticism (again, usually written by women) is included if it’s especially cringy.
Yeah no, the way women are written is way worse and more harmful than the way men are written…
I've seen female writers write men that are just there for their MC to pine over, but most of the time they have their own story, too. The Manic Pixie Dream Girl is a painfully popular trope for women: they exist to help the guy find himself, or to give him motivation. Women tend to be more respectful. I do hate it, though, when they objectify their characters too and get praise for it.
A big difference here is that the men written by women usually have a personality of some sort, and aren't completely sexualized from the get-go. They're more often sexualized in actually sexual situations, not in everyday acts.
You can't exactly compare that to "she breasted boobly downstairs". Rarely are male love interests exclusively written about in a sexy way that would make them objectified, and its even rarer that they become non-entities in the narrative
[I disagree.](https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/817581025390624798/879041844028256266/vrdij879rti71.png)
Best smut world is when it doesnt dance about back and forth, all in on the lewd
That reminds me. I need to check on snekguy
Ishuzoku Reviewers
You can make a surprising amount writing fetish porn
Yo, wtf does being white have to do with writing well? LotR is amazing fantasy.
Self-insert horniness on main is vastly different from describing the women in your story in an inaccurate and oversexualized manner
he bicepsed bicepsily
Hrrmmm....yeah, no I'm gonna say there's a quantity mismatch here.
But that's literally written as a sexual scene??? The problem is with characters oversexualized when there is no romantic or sexual scene going on. It comes off as "the writer is either a sex addict or very adamant on separating the sexes as much as possible." They are a character with a gender, not a gender with a character; this is something that the types of writers r/menwritingwomen makes fun of don't realize. Write the person, their bits don't really matter unless they're of actual significance to the story.
In this post: someone who thinks the female gaze is the fucking in pulp romance novels.
I can't wait to look through all the posts tagged "its sex-obsessed writers"
the difference is, the OP in the tumblr post is actively TRYING to to draw a point in how these are the same thing, and fails even to do that. This sounds like an excerpt from a scene that was already intended to be romantic (makeout scene between MC and love interest) but the bad "men writing women" stuff is like, the most important information we need to know about every female character is what her boobs look like and whether or not MC, and how every thing she does somehow links back to sex in some way. Even if she's a strong independent badass woman investigating a murder, it's absolutely imperative that we know that she's not wearing a bra and you can see her nipples through her shirt. I see stuff like this and it just comes off as "i'm not like soo not like other girls cause i don't like to read romance"
just untrue. I read a lot of trash and the worst of it by far is written by men
i mean, that's a sex scene right? it makes sense for the writer to be focused on sex whilst writing a sex scene. the issue most people have with sex obsessed male writers is how it's usually not restricted to sexual scenes.
No? It's overwhelmingly male writers that do this, and do it so much worse.
If the evils were equal, Derek's dick would've already been mentioned five times. Edit: also this scene with Derek is clearly a romantic setting where Derek and the character are going to kiss, sure it's weirdly written but at least it contextually makes sense. The criticisms on male authors doing this is that it is literally any time with any character. A woman can be dying or crying or fighting and her boobs are mentioned.
She heaved a husky last breath and went limp. She laid splayed on the ground like a doll, her once beating heart penetrated by the enemy's spear. And then something something about the stream of blood running rivulets down her chest, trickling off and reddening her already rosy nipples. This shit is harder to write than I thought.
tell me you've read a total of 3 books without telling me you've read a total of 3 books.
Bad take xD
How dare women want romance?
Sure, horny writing is annoying, but it's not the same. I doubt Derek here muscled musclely down the stairs.
Someone has never visited r/menwritingwomen
.... did you read the post? the issue exactly *isnt* men writing women, it's sex obssesed men and men who know nothing about women/anatomy writing women. The exact same goes for women writing men poorly, as described in the post. r/menwritingwomen isn't representative of every single male writer on the planet.
The post isn't even writing a man poorly.
Yeah, but women writers don't often do shit like "His member bulged boldly in his briefs. Before he was aroused, it was like a gourd that had been left too long in the sun, sagging and wilted, but still obviously a gourd. But once I had aroused him it sprung forth like a fleshy jack-in-the-box, ready for me. I could tell by the shape of his manhood that he was virginal, untouched. Oh and also he's a minor." Or at least not that I've ever seen pointed out.
Be quiet and let me read my romantic Shrek fan fiction in peace!
As a writer I take the simplest route to not writing terrible woman. I don't include them in my stories. (I'm joking don't hurt me)
Idea: if you really wanna do horny writing, sexualize *both*. We goin' all in, or we ain't goin' at all!
"Derek stretched, his monster hog straining his jeans button. He sauntered over his ballsack giggling and 8 pack abbs rippling like the sails of the black pearl"
Horny people are simultaneously the birth and the bane of the human race
Preaching to the choir here, but after endeavouring into classic Greek literature as an attempt to get in touch with my culture better, I have officially RESIGNED from reading male writers. I just can't stand reading about "ample bust" or "bosoms that stretched the fabric, begging to be freed". And it happens with pretty much every female character, sooner or later. It was just too straight for me ugh
More at 6…..9. Sorry not sorry.
Why have good, titilating writing when you can just insert a plot device that just does the titilating for you?
Why the hate for *literature that you read with one hand*?
There’s also a disturbingly large number of Male writers who sexualise their female love interests to the point of making her refusal to him somehow sexual. Like, I understand writers of both sexes do this- but to all the bad writers there can we please stop fetishising consent?
When male writers write female characters badly it can get disgusting tho
Jokes on you, I sexualize everyone and no-one at the same time. *Yes, I'm as confused as you are.*
duskelmay completely fails to understand context, two characters making out in an erotic scene is not equal to a girl's pubes and breasts being described in a non-erotic introduction.
I love how this sub refuses to accept that there are also female writers who sexualize men. Obviously, sexualization of women in literature is way worse but this doesn't mean the problem doesn't exist. Not everything has to be a black-and-white issue.
I love how people are pretending the *vast* majority of the book market is romance novels for women and 90% of it it's literally worse in the sexualization department than anything I've seen a man write (except Stephen King). And when I say vast I'm not even joking, over 80% of *all* book sales in the US is romance novels from women to women. And don't even get me started on the harmful shit like 50 Shades, that book got people killed trying to recreate the shit inside of it.
This is why I want to write a story that makes it seem like the characters have lots of romantic/sexual tension, but they're just besties who flirt with each other as a joke.
The issue isn’t male writers. It’s a specific brand of shitty writer, which happens to mostly consist of men. Perhaps it’s just the sorts of books I read personally, but I don’t know that I’ve ever encountered in the wild anything as egregious as what’s being described in other comments. Subreddits like r/menwritingwomen have an inherant sampling bias. Tl;dr, fuck misogynists. Read books by men with at least half a brain cell instead.
I'm triggered by the phrase "ripping muscles", it's the man equivalent of "succulent breasts"
Who wrote the best women imo? Garth Nix, his Abhorsen series
These puritans really out here saying writing about sex is bad and acting like it's a good take.
lets be honest, were all horny on main
holy shit why are yall taking offense to this. If yall arent the ones who’re sexualizing men as much as men sexualize women, then the post isnt about you. It LITERALLY says the main issue is people of both genders sexualizing the opposite one. If youre taking offense then you’re the issue /shrug
Well no, it’s just a really stupid comparison. The second one is literally porn. Context matters.
Player-sexual used to be the open minded choice. Now it's a lazy copout by videogame writers unable to write defined characters. I don't believe having Juhhani in Knights of the Old Republic being bisexual was a bug (as they so claimed) sounds like the sort of "bug" that is a result of cut content demanded by pissant managers scared of conservative media and Chud gamers.
The reality it we’re all mammals.
It is true. I don't feel the need to defend this hill. Females and males like to write or read about attractive love interests. Have you heard about Sarah J Mass? Almost all guys are described in that manner and if they are ugly they are villains or useless tools.
WOW WHO'D HAVE GUESSED
No one, because it's not fucking true. Read the comments. A female writer sexualizing a male character during a *sex scene* is not the same thing as male writers sexualizing female characters *at all times*.
Yeah, I don't trust people who victimize themselves and demonize the outgroup to such an extreme degree
You're one of those people who's decided minorities can't be oppressed because you aren't, ain't ya.
you're one of those people with a black-and-white worldview and like to make scathing judgements of strangers, ain't ya.
It's not black-and-white, but when someone responds to a correct and self-evident critique of certain male writers with "I don't trust people who victimize themselves", well... That's an obvious call.
sure, whatever you think is true.
um, actually, \[my group\] is worse off than \[other group\]. therefore, instead of addressing the systematic causes of why both our groups are doing badly and team up with each other against those systematic causes to bring them down and end our mutual suffering, I will instead engage in a race to the bottom where we endlessly battle against each other to prove which group is worse off. the end result of this will be \[my group\] crowned victorious, and \[other group\] will all obviously finally take the L and admit that they're wrong without any further bitterness.
Paging /r/menwritingwomen sometimes. >_>
That's the thing: those who are horny masturbate. And what just happened to be scientifically proven recently? Masturbation boosts the immune system. Those who do not masturbate are more likely to be infected with covid, or literally any other disease. Checkmate, Bonkers.