How do I Women?

[Anonymous No.16507268]

I got back into working on a character origin outline for a script I'm going to write.

The deeper I go into writing the female character, I realize: I don't know how to write women. I feel like an autist at this point. Just writing about this unrealistic, careerist millennial type without proper context to how ambitious women, to any degree, actually navigate the work place.

How often would you guys write something that's out of your depth? Do you guys write the character with your gut, do more research, or stop entirely?

[Anonymous No.16507273]

>>16507268

Just go off the basis of vulgar stereotypes and hearsay. You usually won't be too far off the mark

[Anonymous No.16507286]

>>16507273

That's easy, but wouldn't that cheapen the process?

[Anonymous No.16507291]

>>16507268
1. Listen to the first five episodes of the podcast "Red Scare"
2. Watch "Lady Bird" and "But I'm a Cheerleader"
3. Listen to the albums "Chelsea Girls" by Nico and "Eli and the Thirteenth Confession" by Laura Nyro
You should be good then

[Anonymous No.16507306]

>>16507268
I’ve worked for a few different companies and most the successful women in management are just calm, collected with a strong sense of propriety. They’re usually very diligent and competent.
There’s a certain type of male - a sort of aggressively friendly man, usually good looking who often jumps into a more familiar mode of conversation earlier than most people would and is usually able to pull it off. It’s more the mark of a salesman or someone who does a lot of client interfacing than of someone who works in upper management though.
There’s really no exact female equivalent to that sort because they lack the forwardness.
However women I’ve known in sales and client interfacing roles are often good looking, very well dressed, smile a lot and are very friendly.

[Anonymous No.16507322]

>>16507291
>Lady Bird

I sometimes wonder if Greta Gurwig would threaten to stab Saoirse for improvising a line on set.

[Anonymous No.16507337]

>>16507306
>calm, collected with a strong sense of propriety. They’re usually very diligent and competent.

So far, I have a bit of this. I got diligence down to a degree. But I'm confused how to potentially create opposition that naturally tests this type of archetype. Just the basic type of shit that every woman, no matter their personality, deals with.

[Anonymous No.16507342]

>>16507268
I think it's a mistake to try writing them very differently from men. It's hard to go wrong writing them as men who are attracted to men but aren't men.

[Anonymous No.16507386]

>>16507342
>It's hard to go wrong writing them as men who are attracted to men but aren't men

What do mean by this? Sorry, aspie brain.

[Anonymous No.16507395]

>>16507268
You can arrange some interviews with successful women like the one you want to write. Ask them about the kind of things you wanna know about. Tell them it's for a book, they'll appreciate it.
Writing requires research.

[Anonymous No.16507410]

>>16507337
>every woman, no matter their personality, deals with
Male coworkers wanting to fuck them?

[今晚打老虎 No.16507427]

>Receptionist: How do you write women so well?
>Melvin Udall: I think of a man. And I take away reason and accountability.

[Anonymous No.16507480]

>>16507337
There was a really overworked company I was in.
There was one very competent manager who spoke very out of character in a meeting once. Our department head (a Vice President) was telling us how we had to power through and implement these changes that were supposed to be really advantageous in the long run even though they were a pain in the ass and taking forever in the short term. And he told us that if we got any pushback from outside the department to come to him.
Suddenly she was just like- “ok, but you know it doesn’t really work like that, right?”
It wasn’t especially explosive but it was pretty out of character.
Basically, she had two bosses she was reporting to and all the shit the Finance dept was having her push through was making her look like a fool to the people she was responsible to in the Operations Department.
Pretty much everybody in an office has been burned by those competing instructions at one time or another when there’s just too much work to be done.

Another thing is when there’s just way too much going on- and someone either tells you or implies that it’s more important to be fast than precisely accurate right now. You’ve really just gotta hope that when a mistake or discrepancy comes out in January that they’ll remember telling you that in October (it doesn’t always happen when the time comes).

I overheard a female manager kind of freaking out once (and the Dept. head was trying to calm her) because she had been made responsible for teaching me and a few others how to do a few quarterly tasks so that going forward she wouldn’t have to do them at all. Trouble was, walking us through it before and reviewing it after made everything take five times as long as it did when she just did it herself. Plus if we fucked up and she didn’t catch it; it might have come back to her.

That’s just some random stuff you see all the time, regardless of gender.

[Anonymous No.16507646]

>>16507268
>how to write women
the same way you write men but with more long vowels and fewer trochaic inversions

[Anonymous No.16507823]

>>16507480

This is incredibly based and frustrating as fuck.

[Anonymous No.16508448]

>>16507395
I've thought about this. I might end up reaching out to a few people.

[Anonymous No.16508494]

>>16507480

I agree with >>16507823, there's so many layers of fuckery, poor correspondence, and incompetence that's oh-so-familiar.

[Anonymous No.16509944]

>>16507480
That and pc load letter

[Anonymous No.16509954]

>>16507268
>How do I {nown}?
Into the garbage it goes!

[Anonymous No.16509965]

>>16507291
>Watch "Lady Bird"
this. it very well encapsulates the feminine character.

[Anonymous No.16510372]

>>16507268
Watch a lot of superhero movies with female protagonists

[Anonymous No.16510416]

>>16507268
Read Gone with The Wind and Mary Shelley's Frankenstein

[Anonymous No.16510451]

>>16507386
Basically, what he's trying to say is that you write them the same as a man who is attracted to men, but not fulfilling "gay dude" stereotypes. That they are a woman is just a minor detail until something brings it to light.

[Anonymous No.16510550]

go have experiences with women and draw from them in your writing.

[Anonymous No.16511245]

>>16510451
This is true. Writing gets easier when you don't think about the gender too hard. You're better off just inserting the characteristics then deal with the nuances later.

[Anonymous No.16511608]

>>16507268
Women are always looking at themselves.

[Anonymous No.16511696]

Most women are socially anxious nervous wrecks. There's the stress head girl who stresses so much that she projects her own insecurities into almost every conversation.

The girl who has a balance between having fun, being self destructivr and having sex.

I've not met a single woman who does not care about how she looks. You can tell a woman she looks beautiful, cute, whatever. None of it will work because if she thinks she looks frumpy or 'looks like a fridge' you can't change that. But she will still seek everyones opinion because she has nothing else to talk or think about.

Honestly it'd be pretty sad to be a woman. The only positive side to being a woman is that if you are cute and you smile a lot you can approach anyone you wish and strike up a conversation. A man can do this to any man as well. But a man cannot do this to any woman he wishes.

There are so many women I have met. There are about 4 different common personalities, as there are with men.
Bit if you want to write someone special I'm sure they exist somewhere. I've def met my share of special men and women that don't fit any category.
If you would like me to explain any more women I've met I'm happy to.

Also I'm a very very straight acting homosexual and most women are very distant - almost scared of me until they find out I'm a homo. I honestly feel sorry for straight dudes that the have to deal with this fuckery.
Until you can filter out the mentally ill women from the ones that aren't you won't get a good gf.

[Anonymous No.16511761]

>>16509954
>>16509954
>>16509954

CEO of missing the (obvious) corny joke.

[Anonymous No.16511762]

>>16511696
>I've not met a single woman who does not care about how she looks.
You can't really blame them. Men 100% have a singular quality they prefer in women, above everything else, and it's looks.
I'm not saying what women prefer is better, it's just that it's easier to conform to what women expect of men without looking shallow or unserious.

[Anonymous No.16511772]

>>16507268
Write a man then take away loyalty, shame, honor and a sense of duty

[Anonymous No.16511808]

>>16511696

Please elaborate further. I'm not too crazy about putting people in archetypal boxes, but you seem to have people pegged.

Talking to women on a general basiskinda blows ass, mainly with women in my age range (20s). It's a justifiable feeling, since most guys from 20-33 are probably degenerates. But mostly because millennials/gen-Z have a myriad of social anxieties and neuroses, a lot of woman don't trust the opposite sex unless they have a reason to.

A buddy of mine is a pretty hetero-passing queer. I'll have to ask him about that.

[Anonymous No.16511866]

>>16511696
>Until you can filter out the mentally ill women from the ones that aren't you won't get a good gf.
Yeah you definitely haven’t read a single reply in this thread, that’s not what we’re talking about at all virgin

[Anonymous No.16511920]

>>16507268
Read beloved female characters written by women like Austen, Alcott, the Bronte Sisters, and build on that?
Read the biographies of great women like the famous writers mentioned above and build on that?
I don't understand why you didn't think of this.

[Anonymous No.16511993]

>>16511920

Switching back and forth from reading and writing will make my head explode. Not everyone has the ability to cram a peace of fiction like its nothing.

[Anonymous No.16512002]

>>16511993
That's sometimes what it take to write a great book.

[Anonymous No.16512019]

>>16512002

Yeah, OK. I'll stop being a little bitch.

[Anonymous No.16512026]

>>16511993
So you are midwit same here bro

[Anonymous No.16512048]

>>16512026
I'm working on it. Just because I am, doesn't make it tolerable.

[Anonymous No.16512142]

>>16511920
He’s probably looking to write about people in contemporary situations

[Anonymous No.16512158]

>>16511920
I feel like if it was easy to just reproduce beloved characters from classic novels (without doing a total ripoff) not many people would need writing advice.

[Anonymous No.16512299]

>>16512142
Exactly. It takes place in this day and age.

[Anonymous No.16512365]

>>16507268
All my female characters fit neatly into these three archetypes:
Sporty crossdressing tomboy
Lady Macbeth
Big tiddy mommy gf

[Anonymous No.16512381]

>>16512365

Hows that worked out for you?

[Anonymous No.16512392]

>>16507427
This is the only answer OP

[Anonymous No.16512407]

>>16512392

Ya'll mf'ers really hate women, damn.

[Anonymous No.16512571]

>>16507268
Do them as you feel, dude. Even if it's not buyable, that'll make the script yours.

[Anonymous No.16512578]

>>16511608

You probably hang out with some self-absorbed woman.

[Anonymous No.16512743]

>>16511762
To be fair, this extends to everyone. Male, female, tranny; all must be beautiful. Ugliness is an inconsiderate trait, unless by a deformity, which is excusable.

[Anonymous No.16513142]

Think about how you could write them in the worst way possible--the way that differs the most from how you intend them to be perceived--then write the opposite.

[Anonymous No.16513677]

>>16512743
>inconsiderate

To who? People who won't fuck you because you're unattractive? You're the kind of person who would probably say being "ugly" is a death sentence.

[Anonymous No.16513692]

>>16513142

Funny that you say this. This is kind of how I want the story to go. A downward spiral kind of deal.

[Anonymous No.16513851]

>>16512365
mine are
>dorky tomboy
>hillbilly tomboy
>princely tomboy

[Anonymous No.16513892]

Just think up a male character and the gender swap them to make them a woman. I had the same problem years ago, but then suddenly realized that I should just write people, not men and women. No matter the gender, everyone still wants SOMETHING. Men and woman can both want to be lawyers. Men and women can both want to get married and have a family. Men and women can both hate cats.

[Anonymous No.16514052]

>>16513892

This was my driving force going into it. But as I kept re-reading it, I found it strange that she doesn't go through female specific issues.

[Anonymous No.16514275]

>>16511866
Yeah I know. I was just saying.
>using virgin as an insult

[Anonymous No.16514670]

women are children. that’s it. just keep that in mind and you’ll write great female characters.

[Anonymous No.16515816]

>>16511696
Just so you know, sodomites and pedophiles will get the rope.

[Anonymous No.16515836]

>>16514275
I see now, I didn’t read very carefully, I just thought “wizard rant”. Sorry.

[Anonymous No.16515919]

>>16511762
>it's easier to conform to what women expect
Yh you tell that to those pajeet bros who are breaking their legs in half in some barbaric medical procedure just to get two inches in them.

You tell that to the former of OKC owner, who after compiling all the data gleamed from his website, concluded in his only book, that women regard 80% undateable. It caused such a cataclysm with the media, OKC has never since then, disclosed its data.

You tell that to tell all those whom, in early 2020, a number of articles were cross pulblished on NYT WSP etc, Women deemed most men "economically unattractive"


You tell that to all those scientists and sociology proffesors whom published, peer reviewed papers that conclude; men have allot of tollerance when it comes to women.

>Women: Be tall.
>Men: Dont be fat.

[Anonymous No.16515937]

>>16515919
Nobody should ever take anything citing OKC data seriously. It’s a joke.
Though 80% does sound about right

[Anonymous No.16516013]

>>16515937
why? I am intrested in a reason you might have.
This data was published by CEO of OKcupid in his book Dataclysm, other data sets from Tinder and old match.com confirms this.

but the concept is nothing new anyways, It was always so a certain set of men were "collateral" or "rejects" its what marriage pre 21st century succefully addressed.

[Anonymous No.16516069]

>>16515816
This is so messed up.
Do you have a source for those numbers please?
tfw I hate homos now

[Anonymous No.16516136]

>>16516069
There is no source. You just gotta believe it like how a /pol/ sperg will trust an infograph without even researching it.
Also it may come as a suprise to you but you can't measure who is a pedophile and who isn't a pedophile.
People who are hypersexual and have sex with any gender usually get classed as gay or not straight so yeah it makes sense as to why there would be more pedophiles who are not straight. But there wil never be any proof.
The funny thing is feel much safer with a flaming faggot looking after my niece than anyone who browses 4chan

[Anonymous No.16516187]

>>16516136
Your sick in the head. You have taken the cart so far ahead of the horse, you would be willing to put up your loved ones as experiment.
I hate /pol/ but I hate your lot more.

[Anonymous No.16516208]

>>16507268
I am by no means an skilled writer, but my advice is that you just go off personal experience. Women are people just like you and me, they just happen to have tits and a vagina, they have periods and sometimes get offended by dumb stuff, or they get underestimated by men who can't fuck, or overestimated by men who can't fuck but use Reddit.

[Anonymous No.16516238]

>>16516136
>you can't measure who is a pedophile and who isn't a pedophile.
Hmmm...
>People who are hypersexual and have sex with any gender usually get classed as gay
[Citation needed]
>there would be more pedophiles who are not straight
>But there wil never be any proof.
Any chance you signed Focualts Petition to lower age of consent?

[Anonymous No.16516242]

>>16507286
Writing is craft, the content is Archetype its going to be fine.

[Anonymous No.16516276]

>>16513892
Just terrible. I know the modern world has conditioned you away from catagoric differentiation, but there are major rifts between the male and female mentality.
Gender is engrained into our language for a reason.

[Anonymous No.16516282]

>>16516238
Meh
leave him, he is one of those who no amounts of sources of papers, even be it peer reviewed ones will convince him.

The two thirds of all the catholic pedophile victims are known to be boys. Boy scouts of america collapsed becuase of this issue. It had gotten so bad that The church of later day saints had to pull its funding from BSA (a partnership of more than 100 years) BSA announced bankruptcy not longer after. Good.

[Anonymous No.16516292]

>>16516238
Intrestingly enought Michelle Foucalt was a raging homo that died of AIDS. how fitting and satisfactory.

[Anonymous No.16516342]

>>16516013
Like you said the basic concept is fine; but just taking OKC users (which is also taking stuff like accounts that are technically active but not used often, or seriously) is a flawed sample and not a legitimate tool to extrapolate trends in the broader population.
It’s really just saying what’s happening to single men on OKC. Ditto match.com and whatever else. Obviously a sexually successful male is a lot less likely to make an account and every male is at a much worse disadvantage than he would be in other settings.
Plus don’t forget how old the OKC data is, it’s from like 2012.
This is anecdotal but I was in college in 2012 and nobody used OKC or Tinder (which itself was much more popular than OKC for a long time).
Though it might be good for pointing out what you’re odds on OKC are, i’m not even sure if it’s good for that 8 years later. Online dating is a lot more normalized now and all the apps have less emphasis on casual sex.
And of course the people behind actually compiling the data have a vested interest in being generous when they describe the number of active users they have.

Like I said, there’s definitely a real trend there that’s similar to what you mentioned, I just don’t think that data is a good thing to cite to draw attention to it and I see it posted in infographics all the time.

[Anonymous No.16516348]

>>16516187
I wish you well anon. I can't make you think otherwise when you are so hate driven.
I hope for you to have a happy life.

[Anonymous No.16516361]

>>16516238
There is no source you drongo. You can't prove my point and you can't prove your own point.
Do you not understand social science and it's flaws?

[Anonymous No.16516372]

I think of a man, then I take away reason and accountability.

[Anonymous No.16516409]

>>16516348
Nice slight of hand you pulled there.
I am not him. but its telling you equal his concern for children who know no better and can be taken advantage of to hatred.

People have legitamte concerns.

[Anonymous No.16516431]

>>16516136
>>you can't measure who is a pedophile and who isn't a pedophile.
Wtf.... You have to go back to whatever shithole you crawled out of.

[Anonymous No.16516470]

>>16507268
I want to know the context behind your image, OP. She had a nervous breakdown at what in Hawaii?

To answer your questions: Don't think of it as writing "women", but rather as writing a person. Because women are just people. They vary. If you try to write "women" you're just going to be falling back on broad stereotypes, either going along with them or trying to subvert them. Just write a character whose gender is entirely irrelevant and is little more than a background detail. Someone might complain that your character isn't acting like a woman would, you can simply respond that's true, but it is how this character would act.

>Do you guys write the character with your gut, do more research, or stop entirely?
Gut, always. I'll research details and maybe look into real world examples of similar personalities, but again, I'm inventing a new person so I'm going to decide how she behaves, sees the world, and navigates the challenges thrown at her.

[Anonymous No.16516493]

>>16516238
Equally compelling is the evidence of gay activists themselves who state clearly there is a link between the gay lifestyle and paedophilia.

For instance, Alfred Kinsey, the sex researcher and famous gay activist, found in 1948 that 37% of all gay men admitted to having sex with children

Gay activists Jay and Young reported in 1979 that 23% of gay men preyed on younger boys. Such conclusions have become commonplace among professional researchers outside of the academic bubble

[Anonymous No.16516517]

>>16516069
HIV: https://www.cdc.gov/hiv/group/msm/index.html
Syphilis: https://www.cdc.gov/msmhealth/STD.htm
Child Predators: http://www.familyresearchinst.org/2012/01/how-much-child-molestation-is-homosexual/
http://www.familyresearchinst.org/2009/02/child-molestation-and-homosexuality-2/

Not finding 92% or 37% number, but there are a bunch of articles that talk about the rose in cases but don't give a percent.

Bonus: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20642872/

[Anonymous No.16516562]

>>16516409
Is it really worth living your life in fear?

>>16516431
Are pedos going to tell you they are a pedo? Of course they won't.

[Anonymous No.16516609]

>>16516517
Wow people who have anal sex are more likely to have HIV and Syphillis! Colour me surprised!

Also
>Source: Paul Cameron
Good job outing yourself as a pseud.

However you're on the right track with the last source. Good job on that at least. Even though it's a meta-analysis.