# "Strong" men; gender roles in a fantasy culture and strength of character



## Alile (Oct 4, 2016)

I am just so fed up with these so-called "strong" men characters. I am sick and tired of hearing about "those broad shoulders", an upper body shaped by years of working in the smithy. I hate those unruly brown curls, that dimple in his chin, that striding gait and how he holds himself when fighting with the sword (shield arm in front, feet spaced apart one in front of the other at a slanting angle - have heard it before). I'm so sick of these cardboard paper characters I often read about, so "strong".

It's easy to think of men as strong, isn't it, when all you can compare them to are women, so often labelled "the weaker sex". Don't you think we should take a good look at this and try to open up our eyes to what our culture has imposed on us? "Strong". It seems to me it is time to look at the man's role today, and then try to use that in our work as writers of fantasy. What seems to be the truth here in our present time may not be so in your writing. Gender roles have forever been changing, and the male role is changing, but the real question is what your worldbuilding is like. Please read a little about different cultures, different times, sociology, social pshycology before you try to make up your own. There is so much knowledge to learn from, there really is no need to re-invent the wheel. Be aware of these things in your world, when you build social play and gender roles.

Men are humans. Just like women are by the way. What the heck is strength then? How much you can benchpress? Or how you control your emotions? Is it how socially skillful you are; "he was imposing", and how good you are at manipulating? How good you are at your work used to matter very much, now it's more about IQ and the monies you earn. Or...  Is it maybe strength of character we mean?

Isn't it funny how we write about our characters, and that phrase is staring you right in the face...... Strength of character?
Yes, I like that phase, and I guess that is what I was looking for. Any character can have strength of character, no? I will admit... Even men.


----------



## skip.knox (Oct 4, 2016)

Go for it!

I have a different set of criteria for creating my characters, but I'm all for others blazing their own trails!


----------



## DragonOfTheAerie (Oct 4, 2016)

There's a ton of talk about how cultural and societal standards and expectations for women are damaging and limiting, but expectations for how men are "supposed" to be are often just as much so, and furthermore, it's far more taboo to break those standards in fiction for men than it is for women. Since fiction is a direct representation of the ideas of our culture, it's a problem worth addressing. 

There are other male character tropes, like the scholarly/scientist/intelligent or whatever character, who is permitted to to have a slenderly build and be physically weak (but unfortunately is not permitted to be a love interest or Hero, at best a sidekick.) 

Men in fiction typically have to be strong and muscular, with a chiseled jaw and powerful body. No thin, willowy or wiry builds are permitted. Never, ever show emotion other than anger...especially not crying. Huge taboo against crying...A "strong guy" won't cry unless a close family member/love interest just died, and even then it will be silent, manly tears. They have to be super protective of every female around them. Typically their skills consist of using weapons and being a warrior. He's a fighter, he solves his problems using physical confrontation. But aside from that, he's kind of generic. He doesn't have odd interests/hobbies, he doesn't have quirks. He's just a Generic Manly Warrior Guy. 

I could go on, but...it's a very narrow set of guys that are permitted to be the Hero of a fantasy tale. (And the love interest of the heroine. An EVEN MORE narrow category.) The socially awkward philosophers who love socks, overenthusuastic but frequently asthmatic explorers/scientists who go about the countryside looking for dragons to document and study, and generally anyone who's not an uber-masculine fighter are far less common. Maybe I just like quirks. I don't know. My characters are usually extremely quirky. But if a character like this was cast as the MC a lot of the book's marketing appeal would be capitalizing on the oddness of the choice of MC.


----------



## Ban (Oct 4, 2016)

Alile said:


> I am sick and tired of hearing about "those broad shoulders", an upper body shaped by years of working in the smithy. I hate those unruly brown curls, that dimple in his chin, that striding gait and how he holds himself when fighting with the sword (shield arm in front, feet spaced apart one in front of the other at a slanting angle - have heard it before).



*Swoon*


No but in all seriousness I personally have no problem with the standard strong male character. Especially in movies they are often generic enough for me to focus on the world and the other characters without worrying about Awesome McBaldhead.


----------



## glutton (Oct 4, 2016)

DragonOfTheAerie said:


> There's a ton of talk about how cultural and societal standards and expectations for women are damaging and limiting, but expectations for how men are "supposed" to be are often just as much so, and furthermore, it's far more taboo to break those standards in fiction for men than it is for women. Since fiction is a direct representation of the ideas of our culture, it's a problem worth addressing.
> 
> There are other male character tropes, like the scholarly/scientist/intelligent or whatever character, who is permitted to to have a slenderly build and be physically weak (but unfortunately is not permitted to be a love interest or Hero, at best a sidekick.)
> 
> ...



I've gone with a weaker and also emotionally 'softer' male love interest a few times, though they are usually still warriors to some degree, but then again most major characters in my stories are warriors to some degree.

Like Ann the awesome princess who can singlehandedly take out 13 bandits for fun and kill a bear with her bare hands next to Mark, a trained militia member who can hold his own against and maybe beat an average fighter, but that's about it. When Ann is introduced Mark runs from said 13 bandits while Ann wrecks them and no, he never catches up to let alone surpasses her in combat. XD


----------



## DragonOfTheAerie (Oct 4, 2016)

glutton said:


> I've gone with a weaker and also emotionally 'softer' male love interest a few times, though they are usually still warriors to some degree, but then again most major characters in my stories are warriors to some degree.
> 
> Like Ann the awesome princess who can singlehandedly take out 13 bandits for fun and kill a bear with her bare hands next to Mark, a trained militia member who can hold his own against and maybe beat an average fighter, but that's about it. When Ann is introduced Mark runs from said 13 bandits while Ann wrecks them and no, he never catches up to let alone surpasses her in combat. XD



My MC's love interest is an intelligent, thoughtful, sensitive, kind of emotional guy; she's a scary fighter who rides dragons and throws knives and doesn't take crap from anyone. He's not a lot in battle, and not super buff and muscular with the chiseled jaw and everything at all, but not all characters are fighters. The two of them fit together rather perfectly.


----------



## Ireth (Oct 4, 2016)

The secondary MC in my main WIP is the actual MC's widowed father, so there's no romance in his subplot at all. He's not as physically strong as his older brother, nor is he the stoic, emotionless type. In fact he's very prone to anxiety, also has PTSD, shows his emotions openly, and while he does battle to protect those he loves, it's typically his second choice when diplomacy fails. He also tends toward quirkiness -- he's a music teacher who loves acting onstage, and has a great fondness for musicals, chocolate (especially Reeses), and Earl Grey tea.


----------



## Legendary Sidekick (Oct 4, 2016)




----------



## Legendary Sidekick (Oct 4, 2016)

In all seriousness, thanks, Allie. Great points and I do agree—female characters can slay dragons, male characters can have emotion. I try not to let either gender lean toward an extreme. Awesome McBaldhead (a.k.a. Dick Riddick) is the male equivalent of the chainmail bikini.

He's the chainmail boxer short.


----------



## DragonOfTheAerie (Oct 4, 2016)

Ireth said:


> The secondary MC in my main WIP is the actual MC's widowed father, so there's no romance in his subplot at all. He's not as physically strong as his older brother, nor is he the stoic, emotionless type. In fact he's very prone to anxiety, also has PTSD, shows his emotions openly, and while he does battle to protect those he loves, it's typically his second choice when diplomacy fails. He also tends toward quirkiness -- he's a music teacher who loves acting onstage, and has a great fondness for musicals, chocolate (especially Reeses), and Earl Grey tea.



He sounds like my kind of character, haha. I love unconventional, quirky characters.


----------



## DragonOfTheAerie (Oct 4, 2016)

Legendary Sidekick said:


> In all seriousness, thanks, Allie. Great points and I do agree—female characters can slay dragons, male characters can have emotion. I try not to let either gender lean toward an extreme. Awesome McBaldhead (a.k.a. Dick Riddick) is the male equivalent of the chainmail bikini.
> 
> He's the chainmail boxer short.



Chainmail boxer shorts? Those sound...super painful.


----------



## Demesnedenoir (Oct 4, 2016)

Chainmail, I shudder at the word usage... It's not a chainmail wedgie, it's a mail wedgie, heh heh. 

And it isn't pleasant.


----------



## DragonOfTheAerie (Oct 4, 2016)

Demesnedenoir said:


> Chainmail, I shudder at the word usage... It's not a chainmail wedgie, it's a mail wedgie, heh heh.
> 
> And it isn't pleasant.



You have personal experience with mail wedgies? Do elaborate...


----------



## Demesnedenoir (Oct 4, 2016)

The problem is not strong men, if there's a problem at all, it's the popularity of a role (the warrior in his prime) in fantasy fiction. A well trained warrior in his prime is going to be v-shaped of some variety more often than not. It's not like I know what Jean le Maingre (the guy climbed a ladder on the underside in full plate) really looked like, but it's a damned good bet he was one damned fit dude, and if this is what people are writing, it just makes sense.

Elric is certainly not the v-shoulder macho man, nor are a lot of characters. 

But I don't have a problem with character that's well written. Simple.


----------



## Demesnedenoir (Oct 4, 2016)

This one time, in barbarian band camp... and worse, it wasn't riveted either, it was cheap butted mail (pun intended) and pinched like a son-of-a-gun.

And one should, quite seriously, wax. heh heh.



DragonOfTheAerie said:


> You have personal experience with mail wedgies? Do elaborate...


----------



## DragonOfTheAerie (Oct 4, 2016)

Demesnedenoir said:


> The problem is not strong men, if there's a problem at all, it's the popularity of a role (the warrior in his prime) in fantasy fiction. A well trained warrior in his prime is going to be v-shaped of some variety more often than not. It's not like I know what Jean le Maingre (the guy climbed a ladder on the underside in full plate) really looked like, but it's a damned good bet he was one damned fit dude, and if this is what people are writing, it just makes sense.
> 
> Elric is certainly not the v-shoulder macho man, nor are a lot of characters.
> 
> But I don't have a problem with character that's well written. Simple.



Good point. A dandelion fluff of a guy is not going to be able to swing a huge battleaxe and beat up huge warriors and plow through enemy ranks. 

Main characters in combat roles, or that solve their problems through fighting, are very common though. Also, even non-warrior characters tend to be buff and muscular.


----------



## Demesnedenoir (Oct 4, 2016)

I honestly don't pay enough attention to character description to care when reading, LOL. 



DragonOfTheAerie said:


> Good point. A dandelion fluff of a guy is not going to be able to swing a huge battleaxe and beat up huge warriors and plow through enemy ranks.
> 
> Main characters in combat roles, or that solve their problems through fighting, are very common though. Also, even non-warrior characters tend to be buff and muscular.


----------



## skip.knox (Oct 4, 2016)

Barbarian band camp. Is that where you all learn to play the ax?


----------



## glutton (Oct 4, 2016)

Demesnedenoir said:


> I honestly don't pay enough attention to character description to care when reading, LOL.



You might not notice many of my female characters being covered in scars and/or wielding a giant weapon then XD


----------



## La Volpe (Oct 5, 2016)

Alile said:


> It seems to me it is time to look at the man's role today, and then try to use that in our work as writers of fantasy. What seems to be the truth here in our present time may not be so in your writing. Gender roles have forever been changing, and the male role is changing, but the real question is what your worldbuilding is like. Please read a little about different cultures, different times, sociology, social pshycology before you try to make up your own. There is so much knowledge to learn from, there really is no need to re-invent the wheel. Be aware of these things in your world, when you build social play and gender roles.



An important thing to note here is that most fantasy involves medieval-like time periods. Which means that men are obviously going to be ushered towards combat and physical strength roles, because they're more expendable (which is actually relevant in many fantasy worlds) and they biologically have more physical strength.



> Men are humans. Just like women are by the way. What the heck is strength then? How much you can benchpress? Or how you control your emotions? Is it how socially skillful you are; "he was imposing", and how good you are at manipulating? How good you are at your work used to matter very much, now it's more about IQ and the monies you earn. Or...  Is it maybe strength of character we mean?
> 
> Isn't it funny how we write about our characters, and that phrase is staring you right in the face...... Strength of character?
> Yes, I like that phase, and I guess that is what I was looking for. Any character can have strength of character, no? I will admit... Even men.



Strength of character seems to imply goodness, which is not necessarily present in all 'strong' characters. Sometimes, a 'strong' character is exactly that. Strong. I.e. able to lift heavy objects and do rigorous activity for extended periods of time.

I like to think of strong characters as people who act. I.e. who make decisions and follow through on their goals. This can be achieved by lopping off heads or by tricking someone into drinking the poisoned drink, or by whatever means necessary.



DragonOfTheAerie said:


> But aside from that, he's kind of generic. He doesn't have odd interests/hobbies, he doesn't have quirks. He's just a Generic Manly Warrior Guy.



I think we should differentiate here between a badly written character and so-called 'strong' male character. I.e. being a buff warrior guy doesn't preclude a person from having quirks and an interesting personality.

I don't think I've read a book with a main character who is a flat Generic Manly Warrior Guy in... well, ever. Maybe I'm just reading different books?


----------



## Russ (Oct 5, 2016)

While there are stereotypes about male fighting men looking and acting a certain way, I don't see it as much of a crisis or cause for alarm for two reasons.

Firstly, if you want a character, or story that is based around combat, you do need a certain amount of physical and mental strength and prowess to do that.  It is freakin' hard to do a sword fight, in or out of armour, with or without a _*maille*_ wedgie. 

Secondly fantasy literature is full of main characters who do not have traditional looks or physical prowess.  Perhaps more than any other genre that I can think of.

I don't think Frodo would make the cover of men's health.  Elric, surely would not.  Thomas Covenant was a leper.  How about Raeodin in Elantis?  

Now from time to time, I quite enjoy a read of say Conan, or Sojan, or some crafty muscle bound killing machine, but I think if you are somehow finding your reading filled with muscle bound characters who you don't like or are too traditionally masculine for your taste, I think you are making bad decisions on what to read.


----------



## Nimue (Oct 5, 2016)

...Did the OP read like satire or sarcasm to anyone else, playing off the "strong female characters" thread? If that's the case, though, I'm not entirely sure what the intention was.  No, I think it's pretty clear that there's a lot more leeway in male characterization than just "strength"--perhaps that was the point here?


----------



## DragonOfTheAerie (Oct 5, 2016)

Nimue said:


> ...Did the OP read like satire or sarcasm to anyone else, playing off the "strong female characters" thread? If that's the case, though, I'm not entirely sure what the intention was.  No, I think it's pretty clear that there's a lot more leeway in male characterization than just "strength"--perhaps that was the point here?



Could be. If so, the weird thing is that male roles in fantasy actually do have some limiting cliches and stereotypes that we have yet to shake off.


----------



## Demesnedenoir (Oct 5, 2016)

Unless appearance is important to the story.. nope. Or, the scars are the result of an in story event, such as Tyrion. Jaime getting his hand cut off, that sort of stuff. Basic non-story description is white noise reading to me. 



glutton said:


> You might not notice many of my female characters being covered in scars and/or wielding a giant weapon then XD


----------



## glutton (Oct 5, 2016)

Demesnedenoir said:


> Unless appearance is important to the story.. nope. Or, the scars are the result of an in story event, such as Tyrion. Jaime getting his hand cut off, that sort of stuff. Basic non-story description is white noise reading to me.



Ah, well some of them are self-conscious about their scarring and/or have other characters react to it such as their friends comforting them, enemies mocking them, strangers being intimidated or people being amazed they are still alive... not sure if that is enough to be considered important.

Weapon size probably is fairly important for the type of stories I write XD


----------



## Demesnedenoir (Oct 5, 2016)

Yeah, I thought about Maille vs Maile but didn't bother to confirm, too little sleep, heh heh. But at least the usage was correct if not the spelling, LOL. And besides, maille pronounce with spanish rules would sound funny, heh heh.



Russ said:


> While there are stereotypes about male fighting men looking and acting a certain way, I don't see it as much of a crisis or cause for alarm for two reasons.
> 
> Firstly, if you want a character, or story that is based around combat, you do need a certain amount of physical and mental strength and prowess to do that.  It is freakin' hard to do a sword fight, in or out of armour, with or without a _*maille*_ wedgie.
> 
> ...


----------



## Demesnedenoir (Oct 5, 2016)

Yes, that would do it, it would become part of the character and their psychological makeup. Too often that sort of description becomes more like stage makeup. 

I won't go all Freud on weapon size, heh heh.



glutton said:


> Ah, well some of them are self-conscious about their scarring and/or have other characters react to it such as their friends comforting them, enemies mocking them, strangers being intimidated or people being amazed they are still alive... not sure if that is enough to be considered important.
> 
> Weapon size probably is fairly important for the type of stories I write XD


----------



## Loric (Oct 8, 2016)

Alile said:


> women, so often labelled "the weaker sex".



That's because, physically speaking, women generally are the weaker sex in that regard. What is the problem? that is reality. And what is wrong with tough male characters? is this to do with writing or do you have an underlying problem with men? you don't sound particularly positive in your post. Can't help but wonder.


----------



## Steerpike (Oct 8, 2016)

Loric said:


> That's because, physically speaking, women generally are the weaker sex in that regard. What is the problem? that is reality. And what is wrong with tough male characters? is this to do with writing or do you have an underlying problem with men? you don't sound particularly positive in your post. Can't help but wonder.



We have already closed one thread on a related topic due to people turning it from a discussion of issues to a discussion of people in thread. Don't be the person to take this thread down that path.


----------



## Loric (Oct 8, 2016)

Steerpike said:


> We have already closed one thread on a related topic due to people turning it from a discussion of issues to a discussion of people in thread. Don't be the person to take this thread down that path.



We'll when you are saying you're sick of ''strong men'' in literature then that doesn't really give off positive vibes, so you have to ask the question, what is the agenda behind this statement? 

I'm not attacking the OP at all, they are free to write or read whatever they please. I'm just saying, when you post your opinion on a public forum, you do open yourself up to criticism and questions. Anyways, I'm not really bothered at all, I just wanted to know the intent behind the OP's statement. If you don't want to be questioned or criticised, it's probably not best to post such strong opinions about either gender on the internet. You can't be too precious. 

Anyways, no problem Steerpike.


----------



## DragonOfTheAerie (Oct 9, 2016)

Loric said:


> We'll when you are saying you're sick of ''strong men'' in literature then that doesn't really give off positive vibes, so you have to ask the question, what is the agenda behind this statement?
> 
> I'm not attacking the OP at all, they are free to write or read whatever they please. I'm just saying, when you post your opinion on a public forum, you do open yourself up to criticism and questions. Anyways, I'm not really bothered at all, I just wanted to know the intent behind the OP's statement. If you don't want to be questioned or criticised, it's probably not best to post such strong opinions about either gender on the internet. You can't be too precious.
> 
> Anyways, no problem Steerpike.



"Strong" can mean lots of things. I don't think the OP meant a broad definition of "strong", and referred to a particular stereotype. 

I don't think a man or anyone has to be physically strong to be a strong person or character. When applied to make characters our idea of strength can be narrow.


----------



## Demesnedenoir (Oct 9, 2016)

Fact is, when writing and someone says the words strong male/female character/lead, physical strength is not what I'm going to think of, which is why the opening of this thread got an immediate eye roll from me, but I tried to take it seriously even though it comes off as trolling. It also came off as a cliched reaction to an archetype, while using the term strong in a way not really used in writing circles. Pretty much all successful stories have a strong lead, whether in Hollywood or paperback. 

It was a lame start to a conversation that simply promised to get more lame as it went, as is typical of these topics. 



DragonOfTheAerie said:


> "Strong" can mean lots of things. I don't think the OP meant a broad definition of "strong", and referred to a particular stereotype.
> 
> I don't think a man or anyone has to be physically strong to be a strong person or character. When applied to make characters our idea of strength can be narrow.


----------



## SaltyDog (Oct 9, 2016)

Both my male and female MC's both are strong, emotionally and physically.  They can hold their own in a fight, but they aren't super soldiers.  They're just people in my story, with no gender being more powerful or useful then the other.


----------



## Netardapope (Oct 9, 2016)

Alile said:


> I am just so fed up with these so-called "strong" men characters. I am sick and tired of hearing about "those broad shoulders", an upper body shaped by years of working in the smithy. I hate those unruly brown curls, that dimple in his chin, that striding gait and how he holds himself when fighting with the sword (shield arm in front, feet spaced apart one in front of the other at a slanting angle - have heard it before). I'm so sick of these cardboard paper characters I often read about, so "strong".
> 
> It's easy to think of men as strong, isn't it, when all you can compare them to are women, so often labelled "the weaker sex". Don't you think we should take a good look at this and try to open up our eyes to what our culture has imposed on us? "Strong". It seems to me it is time to look at the man's role today, and then try to use that in our work as writers of fantasy. What seems to be the truth here in our present time may not be so in your writing. Gender roles have forever been changing, and the male role is changing, but the real question is what your worldbuilding is like. Please read a little about different cultures, different times, sociology, social pshycology before you try to make up your own. There is so much knowledge to learn from, there really is no need to re-invent the wheel. Be aware of these things in your world, when you build social play and gender roles.
> 
> ...


Well, not to be a downer, but biologically speaking, men do have a tendency to be stronger than women and woman do have biological tendencies towards childrearing and being "weaker". That's why societies organized gender roles, as some genders tended to be better at stuff than others. We live in a time were there is overlap in these roles, and there's nothing wrong with that.

I feel your anger is misdirected toward something that is a normal standard. It has little to do with societal conditioning, but everything to do with biology. It's just that if you're creating a world with the same parameters as ours, you'll end up with men that are biologically more likely to be physically strong and women that are more likely to be physically weak.

Sent from my SM-G386T using Tapatalk


----------



## spectre (Oct 9, 2016)

The points brought up here are Precisely why flaws can be so powerful in a story as well as there being a need for character development outside of the archetypes or tropes through interactions and reactions to obstacles. I'm going to leave it at that.


----------



## Holoman (Oct 10, 2016)

In my WIP I have a protagonist that is pretty anxious. He's physically quite strong and fast though never described, but there are people around that just trounce him in a fight. He gets seriously injured a couple of times to which he's in agony and is in tears.

Many, many alpha readers have found him very unlikable pretty much because he is a "wuss". They point out his tears in particular.

I'm close to giving up on the idea of having an anxious, sensitive protagonist and going back to a fearless brute who grins at pain.


----------



## Netardapope (Oct 10, 2016)

Holoman said:


> In my WIP I have a protagonist that is pretty anxious. He's physically quite strong and fast though never described, but there are people around that just trounce him in a fight. He gets seriously injured a couple of times to which he's in agony and is in tears.
> 
> Many, many alpha readers have found him very unlikable pretty much because he is a "wuss". They point out his tears in particular.
> 
> I'm close to giving up on the idea of having an anxious, sensitive protagonist and going back to a fearless brute who grins at pain.


I love my rough barbarian types, but you shouldn't just change your characters because one type of reader said it was annoying. Maybe the problem is that your anxious hero is TOO anxious, and is not showing any character growth. Remember, the issue might not be that readers don't like anxious characters on the whole, but that you're not giving a sense of progress to that character.

Maybe you should try having his plot arc go in a direction in which he grows more sure of himself at a gradual pace. This way, his anxiety doesn't feel stagnant. As for the tears, your character is your character. In my first book, my main male protagonist cried a lot, but it fit how I wanted to build him up. You just have to remember that people want to see your character making progress.

Sent from my SM-G386T using Tapatalk


----------



## DragonOfTheAerie (Oct 10, 2016)

Netardapope said:


> I love my rough barbarian types, but you shouldn't just change your characters because one type of reader said it was annoying. Maybe the problem is that your anxious hero is TOO anxious, and is not showing any character growth. Remember, the issue might not be that readers don't like anxious characters on the whole, but that you're not giving a sense of progress to that character.
> 
> Maybe you should try having his plot arc go in a direction in which he grows more sure of himself at a gradual pace. This way, his anxiety doesn't feel stagnant. As for the tears, your character is your character. In my first book, my main male protagonist cried a lot, but it fit how I wanted to build him up. You just have to remember that people want to see your character making progress.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G386T using Tapatalk



It's fine for male characters to cry...some of mine are very unemotional and don't readily show their feelings, others less so; but many of them get pushed to such a breaking point that the tears come, at least once. Not from physical pain, though, which generally seems less manly...though in the case of grievous battle wounds it might be realistic. War is hell.

Don't let one person's advice get you to change your story to fit their preferences. But if lots of people are saying the same, you may want to tone it down a bit. 

I've found that it sounds much less wimpy to say that a character's eyes were watering from the pain (or something) rather than they were crying, though.


----------



## Chessie (Oct 10, 2016)

I think that with men it's important to remember that they also have emotions. The only times I've seen men cry was when shit was really, really bad. Our culture/society teaches boys that they shouldn't cry, that they shouldn't be emotional, but fact of the matter is that men are humans, too! When my son cries because he's being a butt and wants to have his own way, then I tell him to knock it off. But if he cries because he's upset about something and he's showing emotion, I encourage it. 

Men showing vulnerability is a strength. The image of a sturdy, muscular, super six pack ab man with a warhammer is no more unrealistic than a size 0 pin up. Not every man is like that. Hell, most aren't. But, as a sister, wife, mother, and daughter...I'll say that when men show emotion it makes me emotional, too lol. There's nothing more sexy than a man showing he's human.


----------



## glutton (Oct 10, 2016)

One thing I like about writing female main characters is that I can have them cry without worrying too much about them seeming wimpy... especially if they've proven to be a wrecking ball of a warrior throughout the rest of the story XD


----------



## La Volpe (Oct 10, 2016)

Chesterama said:


> Men showing vulnerability is a strength.



This might be true in some cases, but remember that (especially) men tend to form hierarchies, and showing vulnerability makes you, well, vulnerable.

In something like war, if a soldier sees his general crying over a wound (no matter how grievous), he's not going to think that his general is strong. He's going to think that he can't count on his general anymore. And that maybe someone else should be taking over, since the general can't hold it together.

I.e. Showing vulnerability in dangerous situations is most definitely not a strength. At least, not from another man's perspective, I don't think.


----------



## Chessie (Oct 10, 2016)

La Volpe said:


> This might be true in some cases, but remember that (especially) men tend to form hierarchies, and showing vulnerability makes you, well, vulnerable.
> 
> In something like war, if a soldier sees his general crying over a wound (no matter how grievous), he's not going to think that his general is strong. He's going to think that he can't count on his general anymore. And that maybe someone else should be taking over, since the general can't hold it together.
> 
> I.e. Showing vulnerability in dangerous situations is most definitely not a strength. At least, not from another man's perspective, I don't think.


True, but I was more referring to outside of war/battle/being around other men.


----------



## Holoman (Oct 11, 2016)

Netardapope said:


> I love my rough barbarian types, but you shouldn't just change your characters because one type of reader said it was annoying. Maybe the problem is that your anxious hero is TOO anxious, and is not showing any character growth. Remember, the issue might not be that readers don't like anxious characters on the whole, but that you're not giving a sense of progress to that character.
> 
> Maybe you should try having his plot arc go in a direction in which he grows more sure of himself at a gradual pace. This way, his anxiety doesn't feel stagnant. As for the tears, your character is your character. In my first book, my main male protagonist cried a lot, but it fit how I wanted to build him up. You just have to remember that people want to see your character making progress.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G386T using Tapatalk



The problem is these comments are after only a couple of chapters. There's no time for growth, as they don't really give him a chance.

It's tough but I'm going to keep playing around with it to see if I can fashion something that the majority of readers don't dislike. There are plenty of unemotional barbarians in my story around the MC for people that like that sort of thing


----------



## valiant12 (Oct 12, 2016)

> In my WIP I have a protagonist that is pretty anxious. He's physically quite strong and fast though never described, but there are people around that just trounce him in a fight. He gets seriously injured a couple of times to which he's in agony and is in tears.
> 
> Many, many alpha readers have found him very unlikable pretty much because he is a "wuss". They point out his tears in particular.



Fantasy is a very escapist genre.
You readers probably expected a larger than life mc. If your story contains a lot of fighting, they probably would expect that the hero is tough baddass fighter.


----------



## La Volpe (Oct 12, 2016)

Holoman said:


> The problem is these comments are after only a couple of chapters. There's no time for growth, as they don't really give him a chance.
> 
> It's tough but I'm going to keep playing around with it to see if I can fashion something that the majority of readers don't dislike. There are plenty of unemotional barbarians in my story around the MC for people that like that sort of thing



This may or may not be applicable to your situation:
I find that I often like characters who go from annoying to cool. I.e. I might dislike the character at the beginning, but the growth arc changes him (or her) into something else. E.g. whiny >> badass. And when this transformation takes place, I tend to like the character more, because he's overcome more than a badass character who's just like that from the beginning.

On another note, what positive attributes have you given him? Perhaps giving him more (if you have any) attributes that make him likable will offset the negative attribute of him being seen as weak.


----------



## KBA (Oct 12, 2016)

When my son was young I wanted him to read fantasy fiction with a different kind of "strong male" hero. So I had him read, "The Forgotten Door."  Sure, he also read the superheroes, but he read The Forgotten Door by Alexander Key over and over again. It's a kid's chapter book but maybe take a look to get another type of strong male -- a boy, who even outdoes the macho authority figures after him without dripping in sterodial magnitude testosterone.


----------



## Alile (Oct 12, 2016)

I've let the debate go on a little bit now. My agenda? It wasn't trolling at all. I meant to put things out there, whip up a debate for our mutual benefit and make my point. Maybe I overdid it. But: I've seen way too many threads about the "so-called" "strong" female character. I was trying to over-do it in my description of the "strong" man, so you guys would know the sarcasm and interpret my post as sort of a comment to the hated "so-called" "strong" female character. However, I think the male gender role deserves it's own discussion. I wanted other people's viewpoint on this. When we can debate the strong women and hate them; we should be able to discuss the "stong" male character too. It has other challenges and issues. Maybe if we bring that to light, we can create some life to the Warrior type of guy. Maybe I or you get to think this through. 

I in all seriousness mean that women can be strong people just like men are. A woman can lift weights and be a lot stronger that those couch-potatoes or highborn plump ladies. So your heroine could be the strongest woman among all the other women. Maybe she's not stronger than a lot of men. But don't you see, she doesn't need to be. And a man could benchpress a car (?) ;-) and be stronger than any other man. But why compare the two champions to each other? Men and women don't really PHYSICALLY compete in the same league, but you have a lot of PHYSICALLY strong women out there. And men! Women who train in martial arts learn a lot of tricks to turn a big mans size against him for example. My point is, why does it have to be such a big deal? If a book talked about battle non-stop and physical strength and excersize and weightlifting... I for one would be bored to death. If I really fell for that, I could read any "Excersice and healthy foods" magazine.  
So I say, let them be strong. That type of strengh ony gets a story so far. 

I think it's the other strength that is important, strength of character. Different people are different in this too. Some are wise, some are clever and smart, some have passions or willpower, some have something worth defending, some believe in something. I guess it could be anything, big and small, if it works in a story... They have a cause, don't they, there is a reason why you write about them, right? Any woman or man worth reading about should perhaps be a little bigger than life, something interesting, be somebody, and at the same time be believable. Men and women alike, come on, their physical bodies isn't why we read the book!!!! Doesn't a story have to bring something more to the table to be worth reading?

I think any person alive is a complex being. They have memories, they have skills, they have lived, they like things and hate things, they have strengths and weaknesses. They have done good things, but also wrong, there has been a time when they were scared and times they showed courage. If you think about all the things that make a person, they are all unique. So should our characters be. Even if you write a coming of age story for young adults you owe it to your readers to challenge them and intrigue them. By using cardboard characters (two-sided people) you underestimate your audience.

Now, yes, a lot of fantasy litterature is set in a medieval world. But don't you see my point? If you write about OUR middle ages, you are simply writing a historical novel, set in OUR history. My fantasy world is created by ME. And I decide how life is there. They have magic, for example, so it's fantasy. It's not a realistic historical novel, set in OUR world. You decide how your fantasy world is, and who says it has to be just like our middle ages were, get my point?

Steven Erikson is a great writer who has written a bloody, war-torn amazing fantasy series, called "A Tale of the Malazian Book of the Fallen". In his Malazan armies, men and women fight side by side, he describes the Empires wars and any soldier might be a man, or it might be a woman. It's a great tale, I encourage you to read it. Corporal Picker is a woman, and the second-in-command of a God is a woman. Yeah, let's just say that his Gods are busy fighting both humans and themselves, just as the humans fight for gods and plot against them too. He deals so easily with this issue of men and women, it's simply not an issue in his books.

Maybe men have to "become" men, maybe they need to be strong and so on. Yes, maybe their strength is a different one than in a woman. A man needs to protect his family, but every single mom I know would die to save her child, every single one of them would die in a heartbeat if it meant their child would live on instead. Call them mommies and housewives all you want. If you had a child, it gives you a family you actually do need to protect and care for and provide for, be it man or woman. A lot of women get to become women by giving birth and it's still a dangerous thing to give birth. That for many is their rite of passage into womanhood. I guess we two sexes do have biological differences. Maybe the way we see strength and experience strength is different in between us. My point is that we are both strong, we, all of us, are human beings. So should or charaters be.

I feel like all that is debated is within biological sociology. Biological differences. The whole point is that my university syllabus in social psychology mentions biology; social biology, in one chapter in a 300 page long book, quite frankly saying that it's not really even an issue anymore. They just brush off that kind of talk these days. Remember that gender roles are created by the society you live in. It's what's normal, what is expected, what is acceptable. These words make you fit in, they make you accepted, these things make you a normal man or woman. These norms, these social rules, have changed over time and are not the same in all societies in this world. And you are going to make a fantasy world.... you get to decide this yourself.

What good is it to make women lesser humans, I mean, all oppression ends because people get to tired of it. Don't they? And how interesting will your women be if they never get to speak their voice and tell their story? Well. I'm just saying, these made-up women who say "Yes, my liege" or "As you will, my lord". I'm not buying that. I just don't believe in it. We women are humans too. We have our opionions too. We are made lesser by this world's history and society. "Men can't cry" because of the same history and society. Thankfully, I don't read nor write about that silly world. I create my own worlds.


----------



## DragonOfTheAerie (Oct 12, 2016)

I think it comes down to how ridiculously simplistic and ambiguous a description "strong" is. What does it even mean? Furthermore, why is it even important? Why must a character be 'strong'? 

Characters can't be summed up in the descriptor 'strong.' They're people. They're COMPLICATED. They all have their strengths and weaknesses. And strength can come in an incredible variety of forms. 

It's not a helpful description, I don't think, and I wish it weren't so prevalent.


----------



## glutton (Oct 12, 2016)

Alile said:


> I've let the debate go on a little bit now. My agenda? It wasn't trolling at all. I meant to put things out there, whip up a debate for our mutual benefit and make my point. Maybe I overdid it. But: I've seen way too many threads about the "so-called" "strong" female character. I was trying to over-do it in my description of the "strong" man, so you guys would know the sarcasm and interpret my post as sort of a comment to the hated "so-called" "strong" female character. However, I think the male gender role deserves it's own discussion. I wanted other people's viewpoint on this. When we can debate the strong women and hate them; we should be able to discuss the "stong" male character too. It has other challenges and issues. Maybe if we bring that to light, we can create some life to the Warrior type of guy. Maybe I or you get to think this through.
> 
> I in all seriousness mean that women can be strong people just like men are. A woman can lift weights and be a lot stronger that those couch-potatoes or highborn plump ladies. So your heroine could be the strongest woman among all the other women. Maybe she's not stronger than a lot of men. But don't you see, she doesn't need to be. And a man could benchpress a car (?) ;-) and be stronger than any other man. But why compare the two champions to each other? Men and women don't really PHYSICALLY compete in the same league, but you have a lot of PHYSICALLY strong women out there. And men! Women who train in martial arts learn a lot of tricks to turn a big mans size against him for example. My point is, why does it have to be such a big deal? If a book talked about battle non-stop and physical strength and excersize and weightlifting... I for one would be bored to death. If I really fell for that, I could read any "Excersice and healthy foods" magazine.
> So I say, let them be strong. That type of strengh ony gets a story so far.
> ...



There's also no need for the strongest women to be significantly weaker than the strongest men in a fantasy setting, even if they are in real life. I don't usually make a definitive strength comparison between the strongest males and females in my stories, but they tend to match up well in battle and it's really clear in many cases that the strongest women would be quite superhuman by the standards of real life men (or humans in general).


----------



## Demesnedenoir (Oct 13, 2016)

Whilst trying to stifle a yawn over the topic... if men and women fight side by side, rule side by side, with pure equality the writer eliminates a potential cultural/personal tension often desirable in fiction... yes it's fantasy, but it's a reflection. And seriously, I suspect everyone writing fantasy knows they can make the sexes equal, they can make women physically stronger than men, the men could all be 4'6" while the women are 6'6" and do backflips to jam basketballs without an assist from trampolines, the women can spit and BBQ the men after copulating if they like, the writer can do whatever. But fiction is more dramatic and effective (in most cases) when it is a reflection of reality rather than a departure. 

One can also have humans and klingons, elves and orcs, all sitting around the campfire singing kumbaya (or the Back Speech equivalent) but what does it achieve? 

I won't even go into picking on Erikson.


----------



## glutton (Oct 13, 2016)

Demesnedenoir said:


> Whilst trying to stifle a yawn over the topic... if men and women fight side by side, rule side by side, with pure equality the writer eliminates a potential cultural/personal tension often desirable in fiction... yes it's fantasy, but it's a reflection. And seriously, I suspect everyone writing fantasy knows they can make the sexes equal, they can make women physically stronger than men, the men could all be 4'6" while the women are 6'6" and do backflips to jam basketballs without an assist from trampolines, the women can spit and BBQ the men after copulating if they like, the writer can do whatever. But fiction is more dramatic and effective (in most cases) when it is a reflection of reality rather than a departure.
> 
> One can also have humans and klingons, elves and orcs, all sitting around the campfire singing kumbaya (or the Back Speech equivalent) but what does it achieve?
> 
> I won't even go into picking on Erikson.



I have it both ways, average women are weaker than average men which accounts for the newbie female warriors often being underestimated, but top tier warriors are monstrous beings who transcend normal standards by... a lot.

The very strongest male warrior might still be a bit stronger than the strongest female but when the strongest female can already beat up kaiju sized monsters in pure melee combat, there isn't enough of a functional difference for it to matter to most XD And that's talking pure strength, overall formidability is a little different (the girls tend to be ridiculously durable)

I do both stories with top tier warriors and non-top tier ones which allows for both styles to be explored. My current WIP is split between a merchant girl MC and a demigod-like princess, the merchant acknowledges she is weaker than many men and has strategies/fighting style to mitigate that while the princess is an absolute destroyer who can wreck men, monsters, and the very angels of 'God' XD.


----------



## DragonOfTheAerie (Oct 13, 2016)

Saying that women are physically weaker than men is kind of ambiguous anyway. Men tend to be larger, yes, and thus have more muscle mass...I suppose. 

In Krav Maga, I was told that a woman's legs are stronger than a man's, whereas men have more upper body strength. So...how are we measuring the strength of the whole person? Total muscle mass, I guess? 

Does strength even equate to being a better fighter, though...?


----------



## glutton (Oct 13, 2016)

DragonOfTheAerie said:


> Saying that women are physically weaker than men is kind of ambiguous anyway. Men tend to be larger, yes, and thus have more muscle mass...I suppose.
> 
> In Krav Maga, I was told that a woman's legs are stronger than a man's, whereas men have more upper body strength. So...how are we measuring the strength of the whole person? Total muscle mass, I guess?
> 
> Does strength even equate to being a better fighter, though...?



Speaking in terms of real life, men have significantly greater upper body strength proportionally while only slightly greater lower body strength proportionally. But men are also larger on average so the average man also has greater lower body strength than the average woman.

Strength is VERY important in a fight if skill is equal or near equal. Size is also a big factor assuming both are similarly skilled.


----------



## La Volpe (Oct 13, 2016)

Alile said:


> Maybe men have to "become" men, maybe they need to be strong and so on. Yes, maybe their strength is a different one than in a woman. A man needs to protect his family, but every single mom I know would die to save her child, every single one of them would die in a heartbeat if it meant their child would live on instead. Call them mommies and housewives all you want. If you had a child, it gives you a family you actually do need to protect and care for and provide for, be it man or woman. A lot of women get to become women by giving birth and it's still a dangerous thing to give birth. That for many is their rite of passage into womanhood. I guess we two sexes do have biological differences. Maybe the way we see strength and experience strength is different in between us. My point is that we are both strong, we, all of us, are human beings. So should or charaters be.



If we don't have a solid definition for 'strong', then it's probably not a useful term to use. I.e. if I say 'strong male character' and some people point to definition A and others to B, maybe we need to come up with better, more descriptive terms?

If men have a different kind of strong than women, what exactly is the problem?



> I feel like all that is debated is within biological sociology. Biological differences. The whole point is that my university syllabus in social psychology mentions biology; social biology, in one chapter in a 300 page long book, quite frankly saying that it's not really even an issue anymore. They just brush off that kind of talk these days. Remember that gender roles are created by the society you live in. It's what's normal, what is expected, what is acceptable. These words make you fit in, they make you accepted, these things make you a normal man or woman. These norms, these social rules, have changed over time and are not the same in all societies in this world. And you are going to make a fantasy world.... you get to decide this yourself.



Biological differences create social conventions. Women going to war alongside men is perfectly plausible in this age. But if your fantasy world is created with the scarcity of our middle ages, then I'd wager the social norms would tend towards the same thing. I mean, I can't think of a single civilisation that would send out the same amount of men and women to fight in wars. That's not a smart move. You're essentially cutting your population growth in half. And that will most likely end up in your town/civilisation getting murdered/assimilated.



> What good is it to make women lesser humans, I mean, all oppression ends because people get to tired of it. Don't they? And how interesting will your women be if they never get to speak their voice and tell their story? Well. I'm just saying, these made-up women who say "Yes, my liege" or "As you will, my lord". I'm not buying that. I just don't believe in it. We women are humans too. We have our opionions too. We are made lesser by this world's history and society. "Men can't cry" because of the same history and society. Thankfully, I don't read nor write about that silly world. I create my own worlds.



I don't think any authors (these days) are making women lesser humans. Maybe they're making fictional societies that oppress women. Is that what you mean?

And again, in the middle ages (or a fantasy version of that), assuming there are no other ways (e.g. magic), violence is the determinant of power. I.e. because men biologically have more physical strength than women, they will, by and large, be able to overpower women. Ergo, men will take a dominant role, simply because they have the physical strength to fight off other men etc. There are countless examples of women making use of other methods to achieve power; and those are perfectly valid (and interesting). But the majority of people will fall into these roles simply because the situation forces it (on both men and women).


----------



## Holoman (Oct 13, 2016)

La Volpe said:


> This may or may not be applicable to your situation:
> I find that I often like characters who go from annoying to cool. I.e. I might dislike the character at the beginning, but the growth arc changes him (or her) into something else. E.g. whiny >> badass. And when this transformation takes place, I tend to like the character more, because he's overcome more than a badass character who's just like that from the beginning.
> 
> On another note, what positive attributes have you given him? Perhaps giving him more (if you have any) attributes that make him likable will offset the negative attribute of him being seen as weak.



That's interesting, in fact I can think of a character like Tony Stark that I really disliked when I first watched Iron Man but that has grown on me.

Part of the problem is he has a sort of amnesia, so he's not got a lot of character to start with. His positive attributes are that I try to make him sarcastic with himself for a bit of humour, as I'm quite like that. Beyond that he does have a panther companion and I try to get his interaction with the pet to show a compassionate side and it is where his bravery first starts coming through when he wants to protect his pet.


----------



## glutton (Oct 13, 2016)

On another note I think the strength difference issue is compounded by many writers wanting to have strong female fighters who keep up with men in a semi-'realistic' world yet also keep them a 'standard'/conventionally aesthetic size. I think most readers would accept it fairly easily if a work of fiction depicted say a 6' 200 lb female warrior hanging in battle with men... like Brienne who is even bigger than that... but more often you have a 120 lb woman doing the same alongside a buff male hero which stretches suspension of disbelief more.

While I write blatantly unrealistic fiction I also often make my accomplished female warriors heavier for their height to sell their 'epic destroyer' image better and make them look clearly imposing instead of the usual waif fu, some examples of the MCs' height/weight are 6' 240 lbs, 6'2 190 lbs, 5'9 170 lbs, 5'1 160 lbs (super squat tank lol), and for some of the supporting characters 6'2 280 lbs (fat but also HUGE), 7' 300 lbs, 5'10 220 lbs, 5'11 185 lbs etc. I do have some less bulky ones too but at least more than half of them look the part XD The princess in my current WIP is only 5'4 150 lbs - still beefy for her height - but has trouble fitting into non-custom made fashionable clothes due to her well developed arms and shoulders, and so on.

And then of course they are often covered in scars and/or carry around massive weapons to sell it further. They don't let the male characters have a monopoly on looking beastly lol


----------



## La Volpe (Oct 13, 2016)

Holoman said:


> That's interesting, in fact I can think of a character like Tony Stark that I really disliked when I first watched Iron Man but that has grown on me.
> 
> Part of the problem is he has a sort of amnesia, so he's not got a lot of character to start with. His positive attributes are that I try to make him sarcastic with himself for a bit of humour, as I'm quite like that. Beyond that he does have a panther companion and I try to get his interaction with the pet to show a compassionate side and it is where his bravery first starts coming through when he wants to protect his pet.



Is he making decisions? I.e. does he want something and does he go to great lengths to achieve it? I think having a kind of determination can go a long way in alleviating the annoyance of "weak" or "whiny" traits.

Bravery is also a good contender, probably. E.g. having him make a rash decision to put himself in bodily danger to protect his pet, even though he's scared of getting hurt, and cries about it afterwards.

But I think you'll have to put it into practice to see if it'll work.


----------



## Michael K. Eidson (Oct 13, 2016)

In my WIP, the main male character is clinically depressed, even though he's not been diagnosed as such. He isn't particularly strong physically. In fact, he could be (and is at least once) described as gangly by an observer. The only fighting he's done in his life was as a youngster, protecting the cattle on his father's ranch from predators. As an adult, he finds himself the target of the affections of more than one female character, which makes him considerably uncomfortable, especially since he's married. He does occasionally demonstrate that he has it in him to care about others. His struggle is in caring about himself.


----------



## Holoman (Oct 14, 2016)

La Volpe said:


> Is he making decisions? I.e. does he want something and does he go to great lengths to achieve it? I think having a kind of determination can go a long way in alleviating the annoyance of "weak" or "whiny" traits.
> 
> Bravery is also a good contender, probably. E.g. having him make a rash decision to put himself in bodily danger to protect his pet, even though he's scared of getting hurt, and cries about it afterwards.
> 
> But I think you'll have to put it into practice to see if it'll work.



To start with its a mixture of him choosing where to go and his friends telling him what they need to do to fix him. They also have a lot of conflict between them and at first he just gets pushed around, but a few chapters in finally stands up to them and starts to drive the plot forward himself. 

But yes I think what I've done so far may not have enough of him driving the plot and too much following the others that know what they're doing. I may end up adding another POV character from the start that is separated from them and that really is a strong character to give those readers someone to like at least. For now I'm just going to keep reworking to see if I can find a good balance.


----------



## Russ (Oct 14, 2016)

La Volpe said:


> Biological differences create social conventions. Women going to war alongside men is perfectly plausible in this age. But if your fantasy world is created with the scarcity of our middle ages, then I'd wager the social norms would tend towards the same thing. I mean, I can't think of a single civilisation that would send out the same amount of men and women to fight in wars. That's not a smart move. You're essentially cutting your population growth in half. And that will most likely end up in your town/civilisation getting murdered/assimilated.



Biological conditions are only one factor, often a small one, in creating social conditions or biases.  In the case of many of the social conditions or biases against women, most of the ones I can think of were not based on biology.

While I can't think of a society that sent the same number of men and women into combat, I can think of lots, including in the middle ages, where women did participate in fighting quite directly in many roles.  And for a work of fiction you don't need a whole society of women warriors, just the one or the few whose story you want to tell.

Oddly enough I did a presentation on this a few years back at the Ad Astra Spec fic convention entitled "Fighting Women of the Middle Ages."  It was well received.


----------

