Disaster and confrontation

[foreverlurk]

@Olo

I’m not female so maybe not qualified to answer fully, but what I personally like about it compared to MOST (not all) male writers :

• Larger overall focus on psychological aspects and growth of characters
• Insights and narratives presented purely from the SW’s point of view (sooo interesting)
• Slower pace overall, richer build-up to get to the spicy parts (bigger payoff!)
• More space and easier for me to insert as the male/giant in stories, sometimes eerily so(!)

My take is that usually the male gaze is focused on our (male) needs without delving too much into the consequences of such actions. I guess partly because some male authors would then share at least some level of guilt or shame at their character’s actions, or also perhaps because they don’t actually care and see the SW as a sex object/tool (which is okay sometimes, not judging).

But again I want to reiterate not all male authors are like that.

[Olo]

@littlest-lily said:

Obviously this is a big generalization and all genders can enjoy any of it~

I imagine everyone is capable of either “gaze,” and I asked because I want to work on them.

[miss-lillipants]

@Olo

@littlest-lily and @foreverlurk have covered a lot already, but I’ll also weight in. Unlike what the term suggests, it’s an approach to story-telling that’s not exclusively for women, but so named when understood as a contrast to the concept of the “male gaze” and as something that specifically centres a woman/women as a character.

For me, as mentioned, it’s about building empathy and understanding for a character (usually, a woman) as a person with emotions, rather than someone to be objectified. They normally also have some agency, even if it’s just to have an opinion or thoughts in a hopeless situation, rather than some voiceless, mindless doll. I think the “slower” pace is a consequence of this kind of narrative rather than a characteristic per se because it takes time to develop something/someone that is complex, rather than simply focussing on what they look like and how that will gratify the viewer/reader. So you can already expect a build-up like that to be relatively slow - just depends on how much of a burn or detail the creator wants to achieve.

This article is a good intro summary and also talks about respecting the character as well. Re: respect, I don’t think this should be synonymous with “liking” a character or putting them on some pedestal. You can create dislikable, even morally corrupt characters, who you can respect/have due regard for as a person with depth, motivations, struggles, joys, etc. And then you can throw them in the bin - metaphorically and/or literally, whatever floats your boat.

[blehb]

@Olo To add on to what others are saying, I feel like “femgaze” stuff tends to go out of its way to really describe the giant and things like his status, personality, level of attraction, etc. That tends to be ignored in “malegaze” content, which is understandable since the appeal comes from the shrunken woman.

And that’s not to say femgaze creators just focus on making the giant hot. There can be a lot of variation- the context and motive is what’s truly important. He could be a shy, nerdier guy desperate to have a certain woman to himself. Maybe he’s wealthy, powerful, and handsome- he doesn’t NEED to do the whole shrinking thing, but he does it purely because it’s enjoyable for him. Or maybe he’s just an average dude that’s just trying to help the best he can.

Of course, this can also apply to superficial things like hair and eye color and stuff. I love being able to visualize what the author is intending. But you can definitely leave physical descriptors open to interpretation as long as you convey things through his attitude and relationships.

[Olo]

Thank you for the feedback. My initial impressions largely matched up with the areas of focus mentioned (I also did a little googling), but it’s very helpful to hear how they apply in the context of size writing. The visual/emotional balance is one that has to be struck anew for every story, and I think it’s important to keep that balance consistent over the course of the story.

One challenge I’ve had ever since I started writing size stories is gauging the right level of description. Popular fetish-writing guides tell you to err on the side of too much description rather than not enough; in the case of Size, the reader wants to be constantly told how huge or tiny everything is to the POV character. One thing I’ve tried to keep in mind is that objects (and people) can both physical size and dramatic size. The Biggo’s hand might be the relative size of a small car, but if the Biggo is the POV character’s only hope for survival then their hand will seem even bigger.

@miss-lillipants said:

And then you can throw them in the bin

I feel like I did something like this when I built up the protagonist of The Interview as an accomplished woman only to have her meet an absurd and ignominious end.

[miss-lillipants]

@blehb said:

Of course, this can also apply to superficial things like hair and eye color and stuff. I love being able to visualize what the author is intending.

Yes! All of that shouldn’t discourage someone to give thought to what their characters look like. The emotional and physical features of a character aren’t mutually exclusive after all.

I generally give more grace to kink stuff especially (not just creations but forum posts and reflections too, no kinkshaming!) because of how personal they can and often are. For example, my giants are almost always handsome and attractive - to me, at least, because it’s my fantasy. I would like for a giant in another person’s story to be attractive, but I don’t always need specific details as to what, why or how. Tbh part of it’s to subvert the “ugly giant” trope. I just want big man and little lady.

[blehb]

@miss-lillipants I prefer my giants to be conventionally attractive as well, but I have read some good stories that make the giant more on the “unhygienic/unattractive” side, I suppose. Seems to be a common humiliation aspect across the size community. Again, not really my thing, but I wanted to acknowledge the variety of stories out there.

Plus, beauty is subjective! Which is why I think some writers will leave out descriptions. They’ll imply the giant is attractive and what that means is up to you and your preferences. I do think there is a benefit to going into detail about physical descriptions though. Things like body hair, muscle mass, etc. obviously influence interactions on such a small scale.

(I totally agree with you on the ugly giant trope. I’ll hear about a piece of media that has giants in it and go to look and they’re definitely more on the monstrous side. I mean I’m not expecting the real world to cater to my strange little interests but c’mon. )

[foreverlurk]

@miss-lillipants said in Disaster and confrontation:

an opinion or thoughts in a hopeless situation, rather than some voiceless, mindless doll.

Loved your thoughts on the fem/male/gaze. I think you nailed something important to me - agency in the face of a grim situation. I love it when a SW in a story uses everything to escape her fate, and doesn’t give up even if she ultimately fails. No fun in her being this passive victim, which can be found even in a lot of classic SW stories.

@blehb said in Disaster and confrontation:

Or maybe he’s just an average dude that’s just trying to help the best he can.

Yes, this… all the while keeping his urges in check, pushing his willpower near the breaking point. That’s my trope lol. Personally I like character descriptions to remain vague, as they allow me to project more easily into the story - if the giant is a handsome, strong and tall 20-something, it makes it harder for my early midlife self to insert.

[Olo]

This post is deleted!

[Olo]

@blehb said:

Plus, beauty is subjective! Which is why I think some writers will leave out descriptions. They’ll imply the giant is attractive and what that means is up to you and your preferences.

This was my initial instinct when I first started writing Size stories, but I quickly changed my mind for two reasons.

Interior monologues are too important to erotica not to include the POV character’s opinions on the physical attributes of the character they’re having feelings about. Those little details are going to take on greater significance as the protagonist reflects on what it’s like to be near them (or separated from them). If the reader is just too repelled by the giant’s mustache or beer gut, well, you can’t please everybody.

Similarly, another well-known trope of erotica/romance is that emotional attraction often precedes physical attraction, and attributes that might be insignificant or even unattractive on a dating app or in a singles bar become endearing or even arousing later in the relationship.

Reasons specific to Size: being overwhelmed by a giant’s physical attributes is a central experience in size fantasy. How they smell, the texture of their skin, the color and style of their hair, the clothes they wear (and enclose tiny POV characters), how their voice sounds to tiny eardrums—it’s not a Size story without these details.

Another aspect of Size that is important to me is that tinies can’t be choosers. Meaningful consent is an elusive beast in all but the most gentle Size stories, and becoming acclimated to the tiny role in a mixed-size relationship includes accepting all the physical realities. That process of acceptance is a crucial element of this genre.

[Olo]

@foreverlurk said:

if the giant is a handsome, strong and tall 20-something, it makes it harder for my early midlife self to insert.

It’s getting harder and harder for me to write college-age characters the farther I get from those years. It’s not just that I don’t know the current slang, I don’t even know how they hook up any more.

[foreverlurk]

@Olo I know - one thing that helps me keeping a connection with the young folks is having someone at home who’s clos(er) to that generation and doesn’t mind explaining his old man what’s what these days.

I also like to generate AI renders with 35-40 year olds sometimes, without them looking like supermodels or pretty boys. Strangely it’s harder to get the AI to generate just plain normal looking moms or dads lol.

[Olo]

@foreverlurk I’m not a 3D render artist, so I don’t know what models are available, but I’d like to see more normal-looking people in Size renders. Plain faces, higher BMI, and older folks. Enough with the boobs that look like helium dirigibles. Bring back gravity.

[littlest-lily]

I had another thought on the whole male/female gaze thing, because initially I was only thinking about written stories, but it’s also something that I’ve seen with art. I’ve seen so many collages or drawings of naked sexy lady on a desk, or in a fist, where the focus does seem entirely on the SW. As opposed to there being more of a focus on the giant - seeing the both of them, or seeing his face in the background. Or heck, even if it’s just a lady in a hand, there can still be personality in that hand, a difference in the way he’s touching her, the way she’s looking at him - the focus being more on whatever level of emotional connection they share.

Of course, some of the differences here stem from how tricky it is to make art that fully illustrates both the tiny and the biggo (I’m all too aware of that struggle lol). But I still think there’s something to it. Again, I’m doing a lot of generalizing, and I’m not saying anything is objectively right or wrong, just interesting things to think about!

[Olo]

@littlest-lily I mean, the term “the male gaze” originated in film studies and I’ve seen it much more in reference to visual arts. That’s part of why I asked: its application to text seemed less obvious to me.

I’ve complained about this before; search on Subject for “Sex Objects.” Unlike textual depictions, visual representations have to be specific about the objects of their gaze(s). For better or worse, the bottom line remains: if we want more gratifying representations of giant men in M/f art, more tiny straight women need to make it.