Jeff's Blog

Those of us who read romance all know the formula: damsel in distress, knight in shining armor, quest, resolution, and finally, a happily ever after ending. No matter how we alter the story, the basic framework from which the plot has been constructed can be identified. In m/m stories, the “damsel” isn’t really a damsel, though. It’s a gay man facing obstacles. The knight in shining armor is his love interest. The quest is to somehow make their romance work in spite of the obstacles. Once they’ve overcome the obstacles and completed their quest, they live happily ever after.

Thousands upon thousands of these stories have been written over the years within the romance genre, and for most of these years, the protagonists have been the female damsel and the male hero. When the authors of these m/f romances decided to cross over and write gay-themed romances, they simply traded out the damsel for a gay man. But, some reasoned, a man can’t be a damsel. Men are supposed to be masculine, so they made huge banners and took them to the conferences bragging about the fact that m/m romances have TWO heroes, not just one. They gave the damsel the axe!

They cranked out a bunch of stories where two hyper-masculine guys fell in love and got down and dirty, screwing each other’s brains out. They were oh-so careful not to depict either of their characters as being too soft, too emotive or effeminate, lest he be confused with the absent damsel. The whole point—the very basis of their marketing strategy—was to offer TWO heroes, not just one.

As m/m romance exploded and grew in size to where real gay men began to notice that there were all these gay-themed stories out there, some of the gay men got a tad annoyed. Some began to protest, pointing out that most gay men did not even come close to resembling these ὔber-masculine Neanderthals. A lot of gay men, they reasoned, were extremely emotive. They all had friends and acquaintances who were soft-hearted, sensitive, and in many cases, just plain effeminate. Many of them were kind of effeminate themselves.

A lot of gay men said, “Wait a minute! I want the damsel in distress. I love the stories where a softer, more vulnerable central character is rescued by and falls in love with his larger-than-life hero.”

The experts disagreed. “No, no, no!” they said. “That’s perpetuating a stereotype. We can never write gay characters that actually seem gay! I mean, who’s to say what ‘gay’ even is? Gay men can be masculine, too.” And so they dug in their heels. They went so far as to say that if a gay character even slightly resembled a female character, emotionally or otherwise, he was a “chick with a dick”.

I, being on the softer side myself, tended to side with those who called for more diverse protagonists. My favorite type of story (and if you’ve read my stories, you won’t be surprised) is the plot in which a shy, vulnerable main character falls in love with a very masculine guy who figuratively sweeps him off his feet (well, sometimes even literally). Hence, the Dumb Jock series—it’s the classic jock/nerd trope.

However, I’m not opposed to stories that contain two masculine guys. I even like stories with two effeminate guys. I like stories with drag queens, transgender characters, rednecks, social climbers, emos, jocks, cowboys, nerds—you name it! I like all different types of gay men. Some are Doms, and some are subs. Some are persnickety snobs while others are down to earth average Joes. But you know what? That’s how real gay men are! We’re not all the same. We’re not all hyper-masculine, and we don’t even all like super-macho men.

I’m all for following the formula if that’s what’s in my heart to write. Sometimes I don’t envision my characters to fit into that mold, though. Sometimes I see the character as being whiny, having low self-esteem, liking to dress in drag, or even being a crybaby. The reason for this is because characters represent real people. Life imitates art, you know—or vice-versa.

Of course, one could argue that m/m romance is not different than any other genre. In order to succeed, you have to be willing to write the types of stories and characters that the readers want. Obviously, the dynamic of two macho guys together has been phenomenally popular. The authors who’ve crafted these stories realize their reader is base is primarily comprised of straight women, and straight women LOVE strong, masculine men.  The authors are just giving their readers what they want. Right?

That’s fine. I get it, and that’s probably why the authors who crank out these stories sell so many more books than I do. There are a lot more straight, female readers in the world than there are gay men. But I decided a long time ago I’d rather write the characters who are real to me than to be popular. Hopefully enough readers still buy my books in order for me to pay my bills, but if I have to sacrifice my vision and morph my characters into hetero-normative stereotypes in order to succeed, frankly, I’d rather fail.

Those of us who read romance all know the formula: damsel in distress, knight in shining armor, quest, resolution, and finally, a happily ever after ending. No matter how we alter the story, the basic framework from which the plot has been constructed can be identified. In m/m stories, the “damsel” isn’t really a damsel, though. It’s a gay man facing obstacles. The knight in shining armor is his love interest. The quest is to somehow make their romance work in spite of the obstacles. Once they’ve overcome the obstacles and completed their quest, they live happily ever after.

Thousands upon thousands of these stories have been written over the years within the romance genre, and for most of these years, the protagonists have been the female damsel and the male hero. When the authors of these m/f romances decided to cross over and write gay-themed romances, they simply traded out the damsel for a gay man. But, some reasoned, a man can’t be a damsel. Men are supposed to be masculine, so they made huge banners and took them to the conferences bragging about the fact that m/m romances have TWO heroes, not just one. They gave the damsel the axe!

They cranked out a bunch of stories where two hyper-masculine guys fell in love and got down and dirty, screwing each other’s brains out. They were oh-so careful not to depict either of their characters as being too soft, too emotive or effeminate, lest he be confused with the absent damsel. The whole point—the very basis of their marketing strategy—was to offer TWO heroes, not just one.

As m/m romance exploded and grew in size to where real gay men began to notice that there were all these gay-themed stories out there, some of the gay men got a tad annoyed. Some began to protest, pointing out that most gay men did not even come close to resembling these ὔber-masculine Neanderthals. A lot of gay men, they reasoned, were extremely emotive. They all had friends and acquaintances who were soft-hearted, sensitive, and in many cases, just plain effeminate. Many of them were kind of effeminate themselves.

A lot of gay men said, “Wait a minute! I want the damsel in distress. I love the stories where a softer, more vulnerable central character is rescued by and falls in love with his larger-than-life hero.”

The experts disagreed. “No, no, no!” they said. “That’s perpetuating a stereotype. We can never write gay characters that actually seem gay! I mean, who’s to say what ‘gay’ even is? Gay men can be masculine, too.” And so they dug in their heels. They went so far as to say that if a gay character even slightly resembled a female character, emotionally or otherwise, he was a “chick with a dick”.

I, being on the softer side myself, tended to side with those who called for more diverse protagonists. My favorite type of story (and if you’ve read my stories, you won’t be surprised) is the plot in which a shy, vulnerable main character falls in love with a very masculine guy who figuratively sweeps him off his feet (well, sometimes even literally). Hence, the Dumb Jock series—it’s the classic jock/nerd trope.

However, I’m not opposed to stories that contain two masculine guys. I even like stories with two effeminate guys. I like stories with drag queens, transgender characters, rednecks, social climbers, emos, jocks, cowboys, nerds—you name it! I like all different types of gay men. Some are Doms, and some are subs. Some are persnickety snobs while others are down to earth average Joes. But you know what? That’s how real gay men are! We’re not all the same. We’re not all hyper-masculine, and we don’t even all like super-macho men.

I’m all for following the formula if that’s what’s in my heart to write. Sometimes I don’t envision my characters to fit into that mold, though. Sometimes I see the character as being whiny, having low self-esteem, liking to dress in drag, or even being a crybaby. The reason for this is because characters represent real people. Life imitates art, you know—or vice-versa.

Of course, one could argue that m/m romance is not different than any other genre. In order to succeed, you have to be willing to write the types of stories and characters that the readers want. Obviously, the dynamic of two macho guys together has been phenomenally popular. The authors who’ve crafted these stories realize their reader is base is primarily comprised of straight women, and straight women LOVE strong, masculine men.  The authors are just giving their readers what they want. Right?

That’s fine. I get it, and that’s probably why the authors who crank out these stories sell so many more books than I do. There are a lot more straight, female readers in the world than there are gay men. But I decided a long time ago I’d rather write the characters who are real to me than to be popular. Hopefully enough readers still buy my books in order for me to pay my bills, but if I have to sacrifice my vision and morph my characters into hetero-normative stereotypes in order to succeed, frankly, I’d rather fail.