Where is that defining line, Mr. Manly Masculine Man, and would I recognize it if I tripped over it?

I’ve been reading a lot lately. I think in the past year or so I’ve read more in this genre than I ever have before, and especially in the last five, six months.

And I’ve noticed a few things that’ve made me curious.

One of those is the disparity between the books that’re cited as being the best, bar none, testosterone-frying-the-motherboard-as-you-read examples of male characterization, and my personal reaction to them. First, lemme let you in on a leeeeettle secret: Cat = not-a-guy. Never claimed to be and wouldn't have the energy to keep up that sort of fallacy anyway. And I’m not even going to attempt to distinguish between female pen-names, male pen-names and ambiguous pen-names because in general, it doesn’t seem to make a difference to me.

I don’t see a difference, that's the point. And yes, as a writer it's possible I'm reading it deliberately looking for things that, as a reader, I wouldn't get the least bit hung up on, but none of them read as particularly masculine to me — whatever that means. I don’t see much of a difference being in the head of a hero in an oft recommended M/M book than being in the head of any of the female leads in any one of the paranormal/UF/contemp/whatever books I’ve read over the same period of time. They feel the same, in their internalized thoughts, their behaviour, their reactions.

Is it a good thing or a bad thing? Personally, I’d probably say good – shouldn’t the character always be "who" rather than "what"? – and if you ask me whether any of these books worked as stories, then most of the time I'd say "yes".

But there's a lot of pressure to Get It Right, and a lot of readers complaining (understandably) about too many `chicks with dicks` in M/M fiction, that a lot of stories are just het romance with one gender switched. I guess on the flipside, picking out those overly feminized traits should be easier, but some of the recommended – specifically as examples of Manly, Masculine Men – stories contained some of the most overwrought, hand-wringing navel-gazing I've read in a long time. Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against navel-gazing unless it's dragging the pace down, but aren't we always told `Real Men Don't Spend Ages Agonizing Over Their Feelings!" (at which point I usually want to introduce the speaker to some of the men in my life and go "Ya think?!")? Would I even have pulled up on those details at all if the books weren't specifically recommended for their realistic male portrayal? Did that part stand out more precisely because of that delicate see-saw M/M writers have to balance in the name of verisimilitude? Am I being over-critical or over-thinky?

(Answers : Probably not; probably; what, you haven't worked that out about me yet?)

Personally, in experience and in fiction, I’ve always been of the mind that people have a lot more in common—especially emotionally when it comes to relationships and relating to each other—than they have different. I know (straight) women who’d rather have teeth pulled than speak about their emotions and I know (straight) men who’ll talk about their feelings at the drop of a hat and their level of take-charge, problem-solving reaches its limits with the daily crossword. Love feels like love, hurt feels like hurt, guilt like guilt, longing like longing. Maybe the articulation of those things manifest in different ways, but generally if you make me feel something for that character then I don’t care if a remarkably intelligent badger is tapping away at the keys on the other end. I’m not commenting on the characterization, exactly, just….where that mythical dividing line is supposed to be between `fantasy guy written through a woman’s perspective` and `yep, this is a perfect example of how to write a `real` man`.

So why do some books come across to (predominantly female, AFAIK) reviewers as specifically scoring high on the male characterization scale? Books I’ve read and enjoyed, don't get me wrong, but I’d been sitting there waiting for the amazing crash from above and the angels trumpeting "This! This detail and this mindset and this pattern of logic and this line of behaviour and this sullen grunting and preoccupation with his dick is what defines this book as Certified with 100% Real Man!".

Never came. Is that because it's how I'd automatically write my men, and wouldn’t notice anything different to what I’d write myself - for better or worse? Or is it that there really ISN’T the huge difference we’re led to believe? And at the end of the day, I guess you have to consider the majority of M/M's audience. Maybe it's that fantasy Real Man we're looking for when it all comes down, and it's that striking a chord? I don't know.

Like I said, make me care about the character and I'll forgive just about anything, but the analytical, need-it-all-defined-down-to-the-last-nth little imp in my soul can't help but wonder what that defining element is for readers/reviewers. I'm pretty sure I couldn't pinpoint it myself, but it's damn well getting in the way of my enjoying some great books lately and sometimes it even smacks of bad stereotyping. Stereotyping with good intentions, perhaps, but stereotyping nonetheless.

I sincerely hope my guys never come across as overly feminized. Never been called on it (even if one of my covers – which I adore, btw – did), but who knows, and I’m sure as hell not gonna stand here and claim any different. I write them as the characters they present, as the story calls for – isn't that what we all do? – and if they're held up as examples of anything, I hope it'd be as a good story, no more and no less than that. Read more!

Why yes, I do remember how to use this thing...

There’s been a great deal of stuff abounding lately about the do's and don’ts, shoulds and shouldn’ts of author promotion, in particular how an author should behave on blogs/social media.
I’m the first to admit I suck intensely at a) talking about myself and b) talking generally. Just check out the overwhelming lack of posts on this thing. Most of that is just that I’m horrifically bad at this kind of stuff anyway—I’m the archetypal shy, retiring writer. Mostly shy. I’m happier hiding out behind my computer screen, hiding behind my stories and characters rather than pushing myself out there. I mean, no-one wants to know what I think about anything, and anyway, no-one even knows who I am most the time.

Which, I’m thinking, when it comes to building an interaction with readers (hello, any readers! *waves* I do love you, honest, I’m just like that awfully socially awkward boyfriend you had that one time who did adore you but always forgot our anniversary until about 7.p.m. and had to run out to the gas station to pick up flowers that smelled like premium unleaded) is kinda a problem.

And it’s not even so much about the promo, as it is my uncertainty when it comes to all the unspoken (and occasionally spoken) Rules Of This Whole Online Thing.

I’m probably at that point of being old enough AND young enough to have pretty much both watched and grown up with the net as an all encompassing behemoth that’s part of everyday life. I’ve seen the rise of blogging and social media and interaction, and yes I get the concept `well it’s like a journal` and yes, I had one of those growing up (complete with ubiquitous stickers reading `keep out`, though I never had one of those cool ones with a key and lock). But even if I was of a personality to think that the world needed to know what my cat vomited today, or what I had for breakfast there’s very little self-confidence there to shove it out there regardless. But I could fill this damn thing to the brim if I typed up every random `hmm, it’d be interesting to share that` thought I have every day.

But then comes those do's and don’ts—don’t share too much personal information vs. share, it makes you seem like a real person (and here all this time I was thinking I was a Decepticon). No views on politics, religion, current affairs. No opinions on just about anything in case it rocks the boat with someone somewhere. But then no-one wants reams of reviews and crazyass promo all the time, and I can’t blame them. I’ve always felt lame for having very little else on here bar the occasional freebie.

‘Course, I wonder if there’s more value in a freebie fic to anyone hitting me up than my ranting and rambling. If you’re here because of my writing, and I don’t know why else you would be, then I guess you’d rather read the stories.

But I think about how my own perceptions of writers I admire and follow has changed—positively and negatively—because of their online presence, because of their thoughts either melding or opposing my own, their experiences of their craft, the industry, the highs and lows of it all. I don’t think there’s a whole lot I can offer in terms of challenging, thought provoking metanalysis, but hey…maybe it’d be nice to share a bit of what makes Cat tick sometimes. Even if I still have no idea how much is too much, or how little is just being mean.

And for the record, breakfast was yoghurt and the cat didn't vomit anything, but she does need a new flea collar. Read more!

Afterthought -- Cover Art and Sneak Peek

The cover for "Afterthought" is here, and I'm really pleased with it!



There's also a new short extract from "Afterthought" up at my site! Read more!

Twitterpated!

Joined Twitter.

http://twitter.com/Cat_Kane

Yeah yeah, I have no excuse (except that it's all over BBC FiveLive right now, and FiveLive tends to be the audio of choice when I don't want music). But!!! While I might not be good at maintaining blogs, maybe 140 characters is do-able.

....Pffft. Read more!

Christmas Fic -- Saints And Angels

A few years ago, amid a mad last-minute rush to fulfill all my Christmas obligations (which at the time included papers for my Masters', ficathon challenges, the usual Christmas insanity plus two family birthdays in the two days before Christmas!), I was whapped over the head by a mistletoe-wielding muse who demanded this story be written.

Some folks might've seen it on Livejournal that year or, later on, on my site, but thanks to another crazy-rushed Christmas and in lieu of a new festive story, I thought I'd post the links up here for anyone who didn't get the chance to read it then!

Saints And Angels
Two lost souls meet before Christmas, but just who’s saving who?
Rating : NC-17 overall

Chapter One | Chapter Two | Chapter Three | Chapter Four

Alternatively, Saints And Angels can be found on my site, under Writings --> Site Exclusives.

Happy Holidays to everyone, and here's hoping 2009 will be fantastic for you all! Read more!

"The House on Sheridan Street" is out from Torquere Press!

Gale Solomon is a real estate developer, buying properties and renovating them for profit. The latest house has been giving him nothing but headaches, though. Protestors are picketing the old Sheridan house, demanding that it be 'saved'. On top of that, Nathan Oakley has shown up, claiming to be a long-lost grandson of the previous owner, demanding his inheritance back.

Gale knows that Nathan’s not Mrs. Oakley's grandson; no living relative was found by the estate, so Nathan must be running a scam. Too bad Gale likes Nathan. Maybe more than likes him. Will a mysterious letter help clear things up or make them worse? And what exactly is going on in the attic of the old Sheridan House?

Get your copy today! Read more!

Old Ghosts Download & New Reviews

As promised, here's a link to download a .PDF format copy of "Old Ghosts" in its entirety -- Old Ghosts

There have also been some more reviews coming in, both for Best Laid Plans (from Liquid Silver Books) and for Hung Up, a story from the "Under This Cowboy's Hat" Anthology (from Torquere Press).

Night Owl Romance Reviews -- Best Laid Plans

Wild On Books -- Best Laid Plans

Romance Junkies Reviews -- Best Laid Plans

Fallen Angel Reviews -- Under This Cowboy's Hat (Anthology) Read more!