# A Question For Men Only



## Nebula7 (Apr 21, 2011)

Question: Do you mainly read books written by male authors? If so, why? If not, why? I'd like to hear your opinions.

As a man and an avid reader for 50 years I've come to the conclusion that I like books written by men. They write from a man's perspective and I read from one (da). Almost every time I read a book written by a woman I end up not liking it. I've tried many times but have never been really satisfied. I'm sure there are good female authors out there but that's not my point. It's my reading of them that concerns me. Don't get me wrong, I like women a lot including my wife, so it's nothing personal. Just can't get into their books. My own mother happens to be the same way - she prefers books written by men. 

 And for the record I checked my wife's library and it was almost 100% female authors. P.G. Wodehouse is her favorite but outside of him and a couple of non-fiction books they all written by women. Funny, I'd never noticed before.


----------



## Krista D. Ball (Mar 8, 2011)

Are you sure all of the books you've read and liked are actually by men?


----------



## QuantumIguana (Dec 29, 2010)

I don't really pay that much attention. I would say that I am more likely to read male authors, but I'm a big reader of science fiction. C.J. Cherryh is one of my favorite authors, up there with Pratchett in my list of must-buys.


----------



## Krista D. Ball (Mar 8, 2011)

CJ is a female (in case no one knew)


----------



## Coral Moore (Nov 29, 2009)

> As an avid reader for 30 years I've come to the conclusion that I like books written by Hispanic, straight, chubby women. They write from my perspective. Every time I read a book written by anything but a Hispanic, straight, chubby woman I end up not liking it. I've tried many times but have never been satisfied. I'm sure there are good non-Hispanic, straight, chubby women authors out there but that's not my point. It's my reading of them that concerns me. Don't get me wrong, I like non-Hispanic, straight, chubby women a lot including my husband, so it's nothing personal. Just can't get into their books.


Now do you see how ridiculous this sounds?


----------



## StephenLivingston (May 10, 2011)

The gender of the author has no bearing on whether I read a book or not.  I've read brilliant books and poor books by both male and female authors.
Best wishes, Stephen Livingston.


----------



## Krista D. Ball (Mar 8, 2011)

Stephen, I did a reading challenge once that was like this:

Male author
debut author
Female author
established author
Non-English author
debut author
Non-white author
established author
Non-North American author
debut author


etc etc It was fascinating because I had to seek out books and discovered that many of my favourite books already fell into one of these categories and I didn't realize it! I got to re-read my favourites and discover new authors, too.


----------



## Mike D. aka jmiked (Oct 28, 2008)

It's something I pay no attention to, and probably am not even aware of most of the time.

Mike


----------



## StephenLivingston (May 10, 2011)

Hi Krista, discovering a great new author is one of the joys of life.
Best wishes, Stephen Livingston.


----------



## Todd Young (May 2, 2011)

I don't think it matters. I probably read more female authors than male authors, but I really don't use that as a criteria for what I'm going to read.


----------



## Geemont (Nov 18, 2008)

I defiantly read more books by male authors than female, 27 out of 161 in 2011, but that's just the way it plays out. There are very good female authors in just about every genre: literature, mystery, non-fiction, science fiction, and even a few writing _hard_ science fiction. Also, as someone has already pointed out, some authors may be women writing under a man's name to avoid bias.


----------



## Mike McIntyre (Jan 19, 2011)

Your question sent me running to Goodreads to check my own stats. I was stunned to learn that of the 305 books I've rated, only 22--about 7%--were written by women. I gave most of them 4 and 5 stars, though, which probably means I should be reading more women authors. As an aside, Natsuo Kirino's "Out," and Denise Mina's "The Dead Hour," were as good as any male-written genre books I've read in a long time.


----------



## jumbojohnny (Dec 25, 2011)

Done a quick think back, I don't know the exact figures, but it really seems even Stevens; from the kids books I read through to now. If there is a bias to male authors then I suppose it's because, like most men, I don't read Romance cra-, er, books. But, I think it's about equal.


----------



## Chad Winters (Oct 28, 2008)

Many of my favorite sci-fi authors were women, many had female main characters

CJ Cherrry
Ursula K LeGuin
Kage Baker
Mercedes Lackey
Anne McCaffrey
Elizabeth Moon
Octavia Butler
Joan D. Vinge
Julian May
James Triptree Jr

I'm pretty sure I have never made a reading decision based on the author's gender. And I'm glad..because those were some good books

**Dang!! I almost forgot Andre Norton**


----------



## QuantumIguana (Dec 29, 2010)

Male authors don't write from "the" male perspective, they write from their own. Your perspective isn't "the" male perspetive either. I'm male, and your perspective and mine probably aren't the same.


----------



## Grumbles (Nov 29, 2011)

Coral Moore said:


> Now do you see how ridiculous this sounds?


I don't think it is ridiculous at all. Chic lit, african american lit, "queer lit" (not my phrasing), etc are all genres that have developed because people were drawn to authors with certain points of view/backgrounds.

I haven't looked, but I would guess that a large portion of my books are written by male writers. This isn't a purposeful decision, but the noir/crime genre and horror genre that I am currently reading are written mostly by men. There are definitely some strong women writers out there who I enjoy, but I have never sought them out (I don't pick books based on author gender...).


----------



## MariaESchneider (Aug 1, 2009)

The OPs point is perfectly valid--and I hear it ALL THE TIME in my cozy group, only the other way around.  I'm not kidding.  I'm in two fairly large cozy groups and we've had the discussion.  A large percentage of them are women (all) and a large percentage of them don't want to read cozies written by men.  They've "tried them and just don't like them."  Some are more than willing to try again and others simply won't, not even if if the book is free.

On the site I used to review for, they did a "Look at your shelf and report back--how many authors are women versus men."  The site was mostly sci/fi and fantasy readers/reviewers.  A fair number of the men readers discovered, much to their surprise, that they obviously gravitated towards male authors.  This was not on purpose and a lot of them decided to go explore women writers.  Completely unconsciously, or by virtue of magazines/shorts/what they were exposed to, they read a lot more male authors and in some cases, 90 percent.  Some of that could also be because it's only in recent times that female authors have made headway in getting published frequently in the sci-fi/fantasy genre.

Those of us women at the site (I only remember 3 of them specifically, although there were at least 2 other reviewers that I can think of at the moment who were female) had a pretty even number of male/female authors on the shelf.  My own shelf leaned toward women authors, but not by a whole lot.  I was also, coincidentally, the one at the site who happened to read the MOST cozies at the time.  

One of the guys read mostly thrillers and he admitted that he tended to look for male authors because he felt he enjoyed the novels more.  He was willing to try recs but he really did lean consciously towards male writers.

And look, like it or not, all of us have a style.  That doesn't mean it's a male versus female style and I've known male cozy authors and I've know male authors who would like to try their hand at cozies.  I know women READERS who WILL not read books with main characters who are male.  They just aren't interested.

Wrong or right the biases exist.  As writers it's really only our job to write the best story possible.  It's not going to appeal to everyone and it's perfectly reasonable and valid for people to have preferences.  It's not automatically discrimination to say "I don't enjoy most women writers as much as male writers so I tend to buy male writers."    Now, if that is rephrased to say, "No woman can write as good a book as a man," that's a different story.  

But I don't think that is what the OP meant.  I took his post to mean he likes the style of male writers most often and therefore he buys male writers.


----------



## MariaESchneider (Aug 1, 2009)

Oh and OP opinion aside-

For those of you who are sure gender doesn't matter--go check your shelves.  (Freebies on the kindle don't count.)  What have you spent money on over the years?  When it comes to actual BUYING patterns, you might surprise yourself.

I actually thought my shelf might be more biased toward women writers than it was.


----------



## SylviaLucas (Sep 14, 2011)

Mike McIntyre said:


> As an aside, Natsuo Kirino's "Out," and Denise Mina's "The Dead Hour," were as good as any male-written genre books I've read in a long time.


 Augh!

Implies the male-written genre books are "the standard to aspire to."

Augh!
[/freakout]

You have to wonder, though, how many female authors have been turned down because their writing didn't fit into whatever box an editor or publisher thought it should. A friend's literary fiction had a hard time finding a publisher because they didn't know how to market it. It wasn't "women's fiction," see - not a straight romance, not a straight family drama with either a cancer victim or an affair. Yet, I bought a book by a former instructor that's also difficult to categorize in a traditional "men's fiction" category (oh - wait! there isn't one!), and it was published by a big-name publisher.

(Maybe his book was better, you say. Maybe. But I'm willing to bet that it's the rare female author who gets her non-"women's fiction" book published vs. the standard male author.)

Which leads us to why there's more male writing on your shelves.

[Disclaimer: this is a theory. If this were a real statistic, you would see numbers and percentages. This is a theory. Beeeeeep.]


----------



## Seanathin23 (Jul 24, 2011)

I don't pay attention to the gender of the author, because they need to be able to write both sexes equally convincingly in the end.


----------



## Tony Richards (Jul 6, 2011)

In general, the gender of the author makes no difference -- I'm a huge admirer of classic writers like Dorothy Parker and Katherine Mansfield, and a woman's name on the cover does nothing to put me off a book. But I'm afraid I do struggle with novels written from the point of view of -- say -- a lonely teenaged girl; there's just nothing much there for me to relate to.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

When I started reading adult fiction, I read a lot of male authors--Heinlein, Clarke, Burroughs, Gardner/AA Fair, Stephen King.  So when I discovered there were some darn good women writing mysteries & sci fi, many of them with female protagonists, I intentionally sought them out.  Eventually, there were enough women in the field that I didn't have to seek them out; I could just find them in the course of looking for good books.  Now I don't worry whether it's a male or female writer, just whether it's a good story with characters I'm interested in.  I love McCaffery, JD Robb (Nora Roberts not as much), Scottoline and I also love Robert Parker and Lee Child.

But I see nothing wrong with looking for books by male authors or with female characters....anymore than I think it's wrong to buy someone's books because you're on an internet forum with them and you want to support them.   

Oh, wait, the OP wanted men's opinions.  Sorry.


Betsy


----------



## Todd Trumpet (Sep 7, 2011)

Two words:

Jane.
Austen.

Todd

P.S.  But I don't talk about it with my football buddies...


----------



## Geoffrey (Jun 20, 2009)

I read both men and women.  Some of my favorite authors are female (Nancy Kress, Sheri S. Tepper, Katherine Kurtz), but at a guess, I've probably read more books by men than by women but that's mostly because I've read more Science Fiction/Fantasy than any other genre and those have been predominantly male dominated genres until about the past 20 - 25 years when it started changing.

But, counting my life as a whole, I've also read more books written by white people, written by North Americans, written by the middle class, written by heterosexuals ... the list goes on.  And, again, that's a function of who was being published in those genres more than anything I actively pursued.   To be honest, in the past 20 years, there has been a noticeable change in these genres and its been easier to find authors outside those parameters.

For the fun of it, I looked at my last 42 books (everything since Nov 1) and 20 books were written by women ....


----------



## Coral Moore (Nov 29, 2009)

Tony Richards said:


> In general, the gender of the author makes no difference -- I'm a huge admirer of classic writers like Dorothy Parker and Katherine Mansfield, and a woman's name on the cover does nothing to put me off a book. But I'm afraid I do struggle with novels written from the point of view of -- say -- a lonely teenaged girl; there's just nothing much there for me to relate to.


The like, or dislike, of a particular type of character I can appreciate and agree with. That's worlds different from intentionally picking only women or men writers because of some ephemeral quality that can't even be put into words.

_(I realized after I posted that this seems like I'm still responding to Tony. I didn't intend that so I just wanted to make it clear. The paragraph below is in response to the people who said it was okay to choose books based on the gender of the author.)_
A reader is free to like or dislike my work based on whatever criteria he wants, that's fine. A reader can say that she doesn't want to try my book because of the genre it's in, also fine. But to automatically assume that because I'm a woman my book is going to be a certain way, that's wrong. I'll scream the wrongness of it every day of my life. It's just as wrong as not reading a book by a person of a different race, or a different faith, or a different _anything_ on that basis alone.


----------



## sarahsbloke (Sep 24, 2011)

Nebula7 said:


> Question: Do you mainly read books written by male authors? If so, why? If not, why? I'd like to hear your opinions.
> 
> As a man and an avid reader for 50 years I've come to the conclusion that I like books written by men. They write from a man's perspective and I read from one (da). Every time I read a book written by a woman I end up not liking it. I've tried many times but have never been satisfied. I'm sure there are good female authors out there but that's not my point. It's my reading of them that concerns me. Don't get me wrong, I like women a lot including my wife, so it's nothing personal. Just can't get into their books.


I have to agree with you.
When I was in my 20s and book choices were limited, I just read everything available. Then I discovered the 'satisfaction ratio' was much higher with male writers. Now with the explosion of available books, I mainly read those written by men.
It's similar to deciding what book genres you like to read.


----------



## NogDog (May 1, 2009)

I would say that a significant majority of my favorite books are written by men. However, I have read a not insignificant number of books written by women that I really liked. Therefore, I do not limit my reading choices by the gender of the author, _but_ I'll admit that if a book that looks interesting to me appears to have been written by a woman, I'm inclined to give it a closer look and check out some reviews to get a sense of whether it looks like it may wander too much into the land of "chick lit" for my personal preferences.


----------



## Mike McIntyre (Jan 19, 2011)

SylviaLucas said:


> Augh!
> 
> Implies the male-written genre books are "the standard to aspire to."
> 
> ...


Unfortunately, this knee-jerk, out-of-context reply is where these gender threads ultimately devolve.


----------



## RDaneel54 (Sep 10, 2010)

Last year 31/121 were by female authors.  This year, 5/9.  I really like certain female authors, to the extent that their books are must reads.  Examples include Connie Willis, J.D. Robb, Anne Perry, Lois McMaster Bujold.  I'm about the quality of the writing - not the gender of the author.

Dean

Sent from my Kindle Fire using Tapatalk


----------



## mooshie78 (Jul 15, 2010)

It's not something I've every actively thought about.

But thinking quickly over my favorite books and things I've read recently, most the authors are male for whatever reason.


----------



## NogDog (May 1, 2009)

This thread reminded me that I should add Ursula K. LeGuin's original three "Earthsea" novels to my GoodReads.com list, with 5-star ratings.


----------



## David Adams (Jan 2, 2012)

But... what if you're like me, a male writer who strongly favours female protagonists, usually those in positions of command and authority (and who could kick my arse any day)? 

Or do you prefer "men writing about men"?


----------



## Todd Thorne (Dec 28, 2011)

I like well written, engaging, entertaining stories that take me someplace incredible with fascinating characters and imaginative plots embedded into the journey.

If an author provides the above, I press the Like button without giving it another thought.

--Todd


----------



## NogDog (May 1, 2009)

David Adams said:


> But... what if you're like me, a male writer who strongly favours female protagonists, usually those in positions of command and authority (and who could kick my arse any day)?
> 
> Or do you prefer "men writing about men"?


I never rule out anything, but I'd say more often than not -- or at least often enough that I've noticed it, anyway -- I find female protagonists written by male authors (especially in any sort of action-oriented book) to be "men who look like women". Admittedly, (a) that is a blatant generalization, (b) there are many good exceptions that disprove it, and (c) sometimes I enjoy those stories/characters anyway. 

The best, most empathetic authors of either gender can handle characters of both genders well; but not all authors are that gifted/skilled, and more than a few have trouble writing truly convincing characters of the other gender (and perhaps there may be a few who are better with the opposite gender?).

(IMHO, of course.)


----------



## EStoops (Oct 24, 2011)

Hmmm. Odd question.

Here's what I know -- the two genres I quite literally love to hate are hitting exactly one-to-one. One is written almost exclusively by men, and the other almost exclusively by women. The genre nearest and dearest to my heart is dominated by male writers, and therefore my bookshelf is also dominated by male authors. I'd offer all kinds of speculation, but I think I'd manage to offend someone, in some unintended way and I'd rather not do that. 

When I go to conventions, it's the female authors I get to talk to and they are delightful, almost always, to sit down with. The male authors seem more guarded/unapproachable.


----------



## David Adams (Jan 2, 2012)

NogDog said:


> I find female protagonists written by male authors (especially in any sort of action-oriented book) to be "men who look like women".


It's interesting. When writing for Melissa Liao I basically wanted to make sure I avoided that, while still maintaining her role as a captain, she was still a _female_ character...

In fact, she said it better than I could (heh):

(regarding forms of address) "While naval tradition dictates that female officers are to be referred to as 'sir', I believe that female officers can be feminine without compromising their authority. 'Ma'am' or 'Captain' will do just fine, thank you, or 'Commander' if we're not onboard the ship."


----------



## Nebula7 (Apr 21, 2011)

Some very good points have been made here. I found it amusing that quite a few women answered the question even though it was directed to men. (There's a joke in there somewhere but I'm not going to say it.) 

  It could very well be because of the genres that I read are mostly written by men. I guess if I read romance there would be more women authors on my shelf. I will add that I think I also favor books with male lead characters but not on purpose since most men write with men in that role but I don't think men capture a women in lit as well as women do (which is the way it should be). If a man ever really figures out how women thinks then he'll be a billionaire with the book. (Ask any married man if he's figured his wife out and if he's honest he'll say no). Of course if an author writes shallow character's then they can get away with anything. 

  And for the record I checked my wife's library and it was almost 100% female authors. P.G. Wodehouse is her favorite but outside of him and a couple of nonfiction books they all written by women. Funny, I'd never noticed before.

  I agree with Todd that Jane Austin is really good. Just not what I normally read. 

Tony says the gender makes no difference and I say that's impossible. We write what we know and through the lens who we are. Men and women are different for a reason. We compliment one another and that would not happen if we thought the same way. Even if you believe we are nothing but evolved apes the evidence is overwhelming that men and women look at things differently. Not that one thought is superior to the other.


----------



## patrickt (Aug 28, 2010)

I generally read books written by men. Years ago I saw a notice posted at the book store  for a reading group being started. I was writing down the information and saw a clerk grinning and shaking his head. I aksed him why and he said, "Mixed groups rarely work."

I joined the group and he was right. Men and women often read different books. One book, "Heart Mountain", got a totally different reaction from the few men and the women. It was grossly inaccurate and men in the military during WWII were talking about flying on a DC3. A WWII vet got very agitated and said, "C47. No soldier would have called it a DC3. One of the women was frustrated and said, "None of those details matter. It's the relationships that are important." Bingo.

I was irritated by people who showed up for the meetings without having read the book who thought they should still "share". If you don't read the book, don't join in. When we read "Death Comes for the Archbishop" an Indian village was hard to see because the shelters were made of mud and rock and blended in with the landscape. A woman said, "I admire how the Indians stayed ecologically grounded." I said, "Absolutely. One group wanted to build with aluminum and fiberglass but the chief said, "Never. We're ecologically pure."" Okay, that was near then end of my tenure in that group.

The only authors working as a man/woman team who I read would be Charles Todd and his mother, Caroline. I picked one up a few months ago and the sharp shift between the man's chapters and the woman's made reading awkward and when the protagonist spent over 20 pages reciting the traumas of his life to his partner who was in a coma I started skipping the woman's chapters. The book wasn't bad that way.

I would also assume that there is at least a perception that some people prefer male authors because so many female authors use male names, use only their initials, or use silly first names that don't indicate a gender. I've heard men writing for women do the same thing with gender masquerading but I can't say I've noticed because I don't read those genres.


----------



## Nebula7 (Apr 21, 2011)

> I would also assume that there is at least a perception that some people prefer male authors because so many female authors use male names, use only their initials, or use silly first names that don't indicate a gender. I've heard men writing for women do the same thing with gender masquerading but I can't say I've noticed because I don't read those genres.


Good point. However I never read a new author without researching them first. If they don't have a website I find another way, but there's always a way. If I were to read one book a week for the next 50 years there would be 10 million books each week that I wouldn't be reading. Life is too short to waste on books I won't like when there are too many good books worth reading.


----------



## Harry Shannon (Jul 30, 2010)

There are exceptions (UK crime writer Mo Hayder for example) but overall I tend to favor male authors when it comes ti fiction, not so much for biography. No idea why.


----------



## QuantumIguana (Dec 29, 2010)

patrickt said:


> I joined the group and he was right. Men and women often read different books. One book, "Heart Mountain", got a totally different reaction from the few men and the women. It was grossly inaccurate and men in the military during WWII were talking about flying on a DC3. A WWII vet got very agitated and said, "C47. No soldier would have called it a DC3. One of the women was frustrated and said, "None of those details matter. It's the relationships that are important." Bingo.


This doesn't say anything about men and women. The key factor was that the man was a WWII veteran, and very familiar with the content, so the errors stood out like beacons. You would have most likely had the same reaction from female WWII veterans who served in the WAC. The errors meant little to the woman, not because she was a woman, but because she wasn't familiar with the terminology, for her, it was just a little detail. The details can kill someone's enjoyment of a story, if those details are important to the reader. They look like nitpicks to someone else. For someone familiar with how someone would have spoken during WWII, a detail like getting the name of a plane wrong is like hitting a pothole. Someone else might read the book and be concerned that the characters behaved like you expect from people in WWII.


----------



## Krista D. Ball (Mar 8, 2011)

Nebula7 said:


> I guess if I read romance there would be more women authors on my shelf.


  Women do write in other genres.


----------



## Krista D. Ball (Mar 8, 2011)

Nebula7 said:


> Good point. However I never read a new author without researching them first. If they don't have a website I find another way, but there's always a way. If I were to read one book a week for the next 50 years there would be 10 million books each week that I wouldn't be reading. Life is too short to waste on books I won't like when there are too many good books worth reading.


So you purposely look for books actually written by men and will not read a book that might be written by a women masquerading as a man?


----------



## Jan Strnad (May 27, 2010)

The whole argument assumes that there is a huge Magic Marker line between men and women. In truth, it's a spectrum of masculinity/femininity and human beings --both writers and readers--fall somewhere in the spectrum.

The generalities only apply when the writer or reader inhabits an extreme end of the spectrum. That leaves a vast middleground of male and female writers who may appeal to a vast middleground of male and female readers.


----------



## mooshie78 (Jul 15, 2010)

David Adams said:


> But... what if you're like me, a male writer who strongly favours female protagonists, usually those in positions of command and authority (and who could kick my arse any day)?
> 
> Or do you prefer "men writing about men"?


That's also something I haven't thought much about. But thinking over my favorite books, most of my favorite protagonists are male.

So I guess it is in some ways easier for me to relate to a male character than a female. Especially if its something like a book about relationships. I can relate to a male's view on relationships more than a females most of the time. For instance, I have a hard time seeing a female author writing a book like High Fidelity that IMO provided an incredibly accurate view of how myself and most of my close male friends have dealt with relationships.

I certainly never have, and never will, avoid books written by females or featuring female protagonists. I like to read things from different points of view. Just interesting thinking back and realizing how most of my favorites have been written by men and featured male characters, despite no conscious effort on my part to focus on those things in choosing books.


----------



## Coral Moore (Nov 29, 2009)

Nebula7 said:


> Some very good points have been made here. I found it amusing that quite a few women answered the question even though it was directed to men. (There's a joke in there somewhere but I'm not going to say it.)


I'm sorry you've been subjected to the rampant opinions of so many unruly women. We should just stay where we're told and be quiet.

While it's awesome that you want to hang out in the 1920's with impermeable gender roles, the world has moved on. My recommendation is that you read some scientific essays about the actual impact of gender on thought processes. Since it's your preference, I'm sure you can find some written by men.


----------



## NogDog (May 1, 2009)

Coral Moore said:


> I'm sorry you've been subjected to the rampant opinions of so many unruly women. We should just stay where we're told and be quiet.
> 
> While it's awesome that you want to hang out in the 1920's with impermeable gender roles, the world has moved on. My recommendation is that you read some scientific essays about the actual impact of gender on thought processes. Since it's your preference, I'm sure you can find some written by men.


I don't think (I may be wrong here) that anyone is saying that female authors cannot write convincing male characters or male-oriented stories, or vice versa for male authors. However, many of us are saying that _on average_ we (males) tend to gravitate toward male characters written by male authors.

If you actually believe that there is no significant difference between how the _typical_ male and _typical_ female (I guess each part of that typical family with 1.67 children?) view the world and experience life, then I guess I'll just have to agree to disagree. Does this mean that _no_ author can write totally convincing characters of the opposite gender nor stories that will appeal to members of that gender? Of course not: we're only talking about generalizations and tendencies here, not 100% true and immutable laws.

As I said above: I for one never rule out female authors nor female protagonists (by either gender of author), but _in general_ the large majority of my favorite books have been written by male authors and centered around male protagonists, with more than a few very successful exceptions to that _general_ "rule". If you feel that is some sort of a "male chauvinist pig" attitude, I apologize, though I think you may be fooling yourself if you think that _in general_ there is no difference between what, _on average_, authors of different genders write.

But in reference to that, I think _any_ reader of one gender who simply automatically rejects books by or about the opposite gender is unnecessarily limiting his/her options when it comes to finding good books. It is so simple these days to read a few reviews and then sample any book, that simply ignoring it because an author's name appears to be male or female is, at best, an over-reaction in my book (no pun intended).


----------



## Geemont (Nov 18, 2008)

David Adams said:


> But... what if you're like me, a male writer who strongly favours female protagonists, usually those in positions of command and authority (and who could kick my arse any day)?


Uhm... Those are the types of books I'd rather avoid. They're false through and through. Perhaps you should pick up _Pushing Ice_  by Alastair Reynolds. It has female protagonists in command, but they're not the kick your arse type.

And for now levity: Men! by Martin Mull.


----------



## J.R.Mooneyham (Mar 14, 2011)

I'm a male. As I don't generally notice the sex of an author (and am aware that pseudonyms have frequently cloaked author genders in the past), I'm not really sure if I have a gender preference or not in my reading. I mean, it could be tough to tell!

I'm pretty sure I read tons of stuff by women authors in my youth, because I read everything I could get my hands on, and my favorite genres weren't always available. Andre Norton was a favorite sci fi author of mine (I think that was a she). I also read Ursula K. Le Guin, Anne McCaffrey, and others. For a period of at least months in high school, I devoured all my mom's gothic mysteries, most of which were (at least apparently) written by women. Then I absorbed all the gothic mysteries at my local libraries too.

I believe I read most of Agatha Christie's available books back then too.

The very last thing I read recently was the Vorkosigan saga by Lois McMaster Bujold, and that 10 book series struck me as being among the best books I ever read in my life, and Bujold possibly being the best single story teller I've ever come across (I'm now mourning the completion of that set).

Note that the central character in most of Bujold's Vorkosigan books is a young man, and so Bujold must channel a young man's thoughts there. At this she is superb. Supernaturally, unbelievably superb. At least from this particular male reader's perspective.

Among the half dozen books I read prior to Bujold's was at least one other woman author: our own Sybil Nelson (who frequents KB), and her first Priscilla the Great book. Nelson's wild romp with a superpowered teen girl is infectiously fun and endearing, and I'll likely be reading more of her later, despite that genre being pretty far afield from my usual hard sci fi fare and action/adventure books.

However, I have tons of favorite apparently male authors too, with guys like Charlie Stross and Neal Stephenson and Iain M. Banks among those authors I've read several books by respectively, the past year.

So anyway Nebula7, you're definitely missing out on a LOT of reading enjoyment, if for some psychological reason you cannot enjoy a book with an apparent female author. Thankfully for you some women authors use male pseudonyms, and thus those at least might be possibilities for you. I'm so sorry for your loss of all the others.


----------



## Coral Moore (Nov 29, 2009)

NogDog said:


> I don't think (I may be wrong here) that anyone is saying that female authors cannot write convincing male characters or male-oriented stories, or vice versa for male authors. However, many of us are saying that _on average_ we (males) tend to gravitate toward male characters written by male authors.
> 
> If you actually believe that there is no significant difference between how the _typical_ male and _typical_ female (I guess each part of that typical family with 1.67 children?) view the world and experience life, then I guess I'll just have to agree to disagree. Does this mean that _no_ author can write totally convincing characters of the opposite gender nor stories that will appeal to members of that gender? Of course not: we're only talking about generalizations and tendencies here, not 100% true and immutable laws.
> 
> ...


First, I don't think you're a chauvinist. If you thought my prickly-worded reply was aimed at you in particular, I apologize. For that matter, despite my obvious irritation at this topic, I don't think anyone in this thread is a chauvinist based on a couple of sentences written on the internet.

As I said in an earlier reply, there is nothing wrong with wanting to connect with a particular kind of character. You find that you connect with male characters more than females and enjoy those books more. Want to hear something funny? So do I. Does that mean there's something wrong with me? Am I upsetting the delicate balance of what's considered womanly and manly? Does that mean I read more male authors than female? I honestly have no idea. I've never checked.

The notion that men and women think differently according to some magical delineation based on gender is outdated. Most of the perceived differences have been shown to be more psychological than biological. There are plenty of men who think more like the "typical" woman (whatever that means) and the other way around. (Before anyone thinks I'm implying something I'm not, that difference has _nothing_ to do with sexual orientation.) Your brain is just your brain. Yes, your gender impacts how your brain works, of course it does. The hormonal differences make a huge difference in the structural workings of the brain. But that structural and hormonal stuff is not the sum total of who you are. It's a combination of your biology and your experience.

My brain loves numbers and logic. Am I an "untypical" woman? I never really thought so. Quite a few men I know are much more emotional than I am. Are they "untypical" or am I? Where do these demarcations of what is manly and womanly start and stop? Who gets to decide how women think and how men think? Is it you? Is it me?

In summary, and without all the snark (I think I took some of Julie's unused snark this week), making any sort of assumption based solely on gender is pointless. There are more exceptions than you think, and the rules are murky at best. If the OP wants to read only men, more than anything I feel sorry for him. Same goes for anyone who wants to read only women. People who limit themselves that way are missing out.


----------



## mooshie78 (Jul 15, 2010)

It's just not gender, hormones etc. affecting how one's brain works, what their personalities are etc.

It's also (and probably moreso) how the genders are differentially socialized that leads to the differences between the "average" or "typical" male or female.

And of course there are variations with some women being more into typical "male" things like action movies, sports etc., and males into more typical "female" things like romantic stories, cooking etc.  Not everyone is socialized into the stereotypical gender roles, and probably even less so than in the past as society has changed with women entering the workforce etc. over recent decades.

So that's why it would be silly to actively avoid authors or protagonists of the opposite gender, as even if you fit the stereotype of your gender there will be people of the opposite gender writing stories and characters you identify with.  But at the same time, on average the stereotypical male is probably going to more often identify with stories written by other males and with male protagonists just due to the fact that the majority of people are still socialized into at least the basics of stereotypical gender roles--such as males needing to be tough/macho, the absurd double standards about sexual promiscuity across gender etc.  Which probably explains why some like myself tend to gravitate to male authors/character without consciously attempting to do so.


----------



## NogDog (May 1, 2009)

Coral Moore said:


> ...The notion that men and women think differently according to some magical delineation based on gender is outdated. Most of the perceived differences have been shown to be more psychological than biological....


For me, it's not a question of whether or not I _should_ think differently nor _why_ I think differently. (And mind you, I think differently than a lot of people do, regardless of gender.  ) It's simply (?) a generalization that most men do, in fact, think differently about certain things and in different ways than women do -- again, in general. In my experience, a higher percentage of men are more interested in and passionate about certain sports. How much of that is societal and how much is biological, I don't know. And I also know that my older sister knows more than I do about what's going on in certain sports that are normally considered "guy" sports.

So, whether or not it's politically correct to perceive gender differences or not, in my mind -- in general -- there _are_ differences (or perhaps "tendencies" would be a better word?). Those tendencies, whether outdated or not, whether biological or societal, do, in fact, affect what books I, as a somewhat typical male, like to read. As the original post was merely asking whether or not we men tend to read books mainly by and/or about men and why we do, that is all I, at least, am trying to say -- not whether or not it is modern or correct to do so, but simply stating how it is for me.

And no, I was not taking your comments personally, just as an excuse to do one of my favorite things in life: play Devil's Advocate.


----------



## Grace Elliot (Mar 14, 2011)

I'm female and had to peek - intrigued to see what you guys were talking about. 

And to throw a spanner in the works, a few, but very loyal readers of my books (and other historical romances) are male. 
Would you read HR? 
If not, why not?


----------



## Krista D. Ball (Mar 8, 2011)

I find any conversation about "typical male" hilarious, considering the evolution of what is considered manly.


----------



## Coral Moore (Nov 29, 2009)

NogDog said:


> As the original post was merely asking whether or not we men tend to read books mainly by and/or about men and why we do, that is all I, at least, am trying to say -- not whether or not it is modern or correct to do so, but simply stating how it is for me.


Well, the original post has changed significantly since it was originally posted.  Some of my aforementioned Sith-borrowed snark was aimed toward statements that are no longer there. To me, the first version read a little more like "hey guys, agree with me about how all chick books suck."



NogDog said:


> For me, it's not a question of whether or not I _should_ think differently nor _why_ I think differently. (And mind you, I think differently than a lot of people do, regardless of gender.  ) It's simply (?) a generalization that most men do, in fact, think differently about certain things and in different ways than women do -- again, in general. In my experience, a higher percentage of men are more interested in and passionate about certain sports. How much of that is societal and how much is biological, I don't know. And I also know that my older sister knows more than I do about what's going on in certain sports that are normally considered "guy" sports.
> 
> So, whether or not it's politically correct to perceive gender differences or not, in my mind -- in general -- there _are_ differences (or perhaps "tendencies" would be a better word?). Those tendencies, whether outdated or not, whether biological or societal, do, in fact, affect what books I, as a somewhat typical male, like to read.


But those differences are _not_ gender based, that's exactly my point. You perceive that they are, and for many years society as a whole believed that, but they aren't. You even said it yourself, your sister likes guy sports. She likes something that is not related (by your or whoever's rules) to her gender. I like math. A man upthread said he liked romances. I would argue that the gender tendencies you're talking about do not affect your books *YOUR* tendencies do. They are not the same.



NogDog said:


> And no, I was not taking your comments personally, just as an excuse to do one of my favorite things in life: play Devil's Advocate.


I like doing that too. Does that make you girly or me manly?


----------



## NogDog (May 1, 2009)

Perhaps I need to get more mathematical and define my terms. 

When I imply that there may be certain generic gender tendencies, I do not mean that to denote that I consider them to be either genetic or behavioral or some combination (which with most complex things in life is the case). Rather, I mean that those general gender tendencies are _observed_ differences in a statistical context, e.g. "76.3% of men consider themselves to be 'X', while only 19.5% of women consider themselves to be 'X'." It does not in any way mean that such measured (or at least perceived) tendencies are unchanging, nor that there are no deviations from the supposed norms in either direction (e.g. the 23.7% of men who do not consider themselves to be 'X').* It only means that those tendencies have been detected to have some statistical significance and my have an impact on what a statistically significant percentage of men may tend to find attractive in terms of reading material, at this particular time of observation.

Dang it: I _knew_ I should've been an author of boring text books!
____________
* Hmmm...maybe I should have picked a different variable name, so as not to confuse that with the X chromosome?


----------



## QuantumIguana (Dec 29, 2010)

Men used to wear lace and powdered wigs. Now if you bathe, people deride you as metrosexual.


----------



## mooshie78 (Jul 15, 2010)

I think it's just an issue where one has to be careful not to be too extreme one way or the other.

It's absurd to think gender roles/stereotypes are absolute and everyone adheres to them.  But it's also silly to ignore that gender roles to exist and there are clear differences in the sexes across a host of dimensions ranging from personality traits to hobby interests and so on that can be identified when studying trends across the population.

To use romance novels as one example, acknowledging that most romance novels are written by females, and a huge majority of the readers of romance novels are female doesn't mean that all females enjoy romance novels or that no males do (or that no male could write a romance novel that females would enjoy).  It's just evidence that on average more females than males enjoy romance stories for whatever reason (biology, socialization into gender roles etc.).

It's just the way the social sciences work.  Nothing is absolute like in the hard sciences, so research focuses on general trends and tendencies.  Not every individual is going to match the general trends.  There are always tons of exceptions to every rule.


----------



## Coral Moore (Nov 29, 2009)

NogDog said:


> Perhaps I need to get more mathematical and define my terms.


Now you're just flirting.



NogDog said:


> When I imply that there may be certain generic gender tendencies, I do not mean that to denote that I consider them to be either genetic or behavioral or some combination (which with most complex things in life is the case). Rather, I mean that those general gender tendencies are _observed_ differences in a statistical context, e.g. "76.3% of men consider themselves to be 'X', while only 19.5% of women consider themselves to be 'X'." It does not in any way mean that such measured (or at least perceived) tendencies are unchanging, nor that there are no deviations from the supposed norms in either direction (e.g. the 23.7% of men who do not consider themselves to be 'X').* It only means that those tendencies have been detected to have some statistical significance and my have an impact on what a statistically significant percentage of men may tend to find attractive in terms of reading material, at this particular time of observation.


The problem with using statistics to discuss this, as with anything societal or biological (as you stated), is that examining one category in a vacuum is really not worthwhile. Even that one number itself, though you admit it's variable and changing, means very little. While we can count the number of men who like football and compare them with percentages, that's not telling us much. So, 76.3% of men like football and 23.7% of men don't. Is that implying something about football, or about those men? Does this number mean football is as a whole more masculine? Even if I grant you that football might be a more masculine pastime, does that make those 23.7% of men any less masculine because they don't like it? What if those 23.7% like NASCAR and hate romances? Are they more or less masculine? How do we weight these traits on a spectrum of manliness and who decides what goes where? How many of these traits are allowed before you teeter that scale over into not-so-manly? And once you go over that mystical line into not-so-manly, should you only read women authors?


----------



## Krista D. Ball (Mar 8, 2011)

mooshie78 said:


> To use romance novels as one example, acknowledging that most romance novels are written by females, and a huge majority of the readers of romance novels are female doesn't mean that all females enjoy romance novels or that no males do (or that no male could write a romance novel that females would enjoy). It's just evidence that on average more females than males enjoy romance stories for whatever reason (biology, socialization into gender roles etc.).


This one is always interesting. Jane Austen is considered a romance author today* and many men won't read her because it's just girly romance. Yet, Jane Austen was extremely popular during WW1 with men on the front. Letters and diaries of men in the trenches show this. So, it's just a part of the evolution of what manly is (same as womanly). Likewise, in another hundred years, it'll be something else.

*regardless if this is right or wrong, just what people say


----------



## mooshie78 (Jul 15, 2010)

Krista D. Ball said:


> This one is always interesting. Jane Austen is considered a romance author today* and many men won't read her because it's just girly romance. Yet, Jane Austen was extremely popular during WW1 with men on the front. Letters and diaries of men in the trenches show this. So, it's just a part of the evolution of what manly is (same as womanly). Likewise, in another hundred years, it'll be something else.
> 
> *regardless if this is right or wrong, just what people say


Absolutely. That's the other thing with the social sciences. Not only are things not absolutes like in the hard sciences, they're also not constants.

Things change over time. Social trends are very different from one decade to another, or one part of the world to another even at the same time etc.

How interested you are in social trends, and how meaningful you think they are, are just up to the individual. I'm biased as I'm a social scientists myself (criminology) so I find things like this fascinating. Others couldn't care less and think it's a bunch of BS to even bother studying.


----------



## MariaESchneider (Aug 1, 2009)

patrickt said:


> I generally read books written by men. Years ago I saw a notice posted at the book store for a reading group being started. I was writing down the information and saw a clerk grinning and shaking his head. I aksed him why and he said, "Mixed groups rarely work."
> 
> I joined the group and he was right. Men and women often read different books. One book, "Heart Mountain", got a totally different reaction from the few men and the women. It was grossly inaccurate and men in the military during WWII were talking about flying on a DC3. A WWII vet got very agitated and said, "C47. No soldier would have called it a DC3. One of the women was frustrated and said, "None of those details matter. It's the relationships that are important." Bingo.
> 
> ...


Your book group stories are HILARIOUS! Love it. 
Actually statistically women's book sell better right now (women authors). (I actually only researched cozy mysteries and urban fantasy for stats. It could be different for different genres.) I know at least one male author who writes romance. I believe he uses his initials.

However, that was not true in the past. Since women weren't considered capable of a career and it wasn't proper etc, it was much harder to get published as a woman. It is still rumored to be the case in certain genres (fantasy/sci-fi) with certain editors.


----------



## mooshie78 (Jul 15, 2010)

MariaESchneider said:


> Your book group stories are HILARIOUS! Love it.
> Actually statistically women's book sell better right now (women authors). (I actually only researched cozy mysteries and urban fantasy for stats. It could be different for different genres.)


That's probably reflective of the demographics of people buying books though. Most stats I've seen show a decent majority of the book buying population are female.

For instance, the study reported on below found that 64% of book buyers (across all genres) were female. There are differences by genre, the article noted that detective and thriller genre buyers were 60% female, while fantasy had a more even gender split.

http://stephenslighthouse.com/2010/09/04/u-s-book-consumer-demographics-bowker/


----------



## MariaESchneider (Aug 1, 2009)

NogDog said:


> For me, it's not a question of whether or not I _should_ think differently nor _why_ I think differently. (And mind you, I think differently than a lot of people do, regardless of gender.  ) It's simply (?) a generalization that most men do, in fact, think differently about certain things and in different ways than women do -- again, in general. In my experience, a higher percentage of men are more interested in and passionate about certain sports. How much of that is societal and how much is biological, I don't know. And I also know that my older sister knows more than I do about what's going on in certain sports that are normally considered "guy" sports.
> 
> So, whether or not it's politically correct to perceive gender differences or not, in my mind -- in general -- there _are_ differences (or perhaps "tendencies" would be a better word?). Those tendencies, whether outdated or not, whether biological or societal, do, in fact, affect what books I, as a somewhat typical male, like to read. As the original post was merely asking whether or not we men tend to read books mainly by and/or about men and why we do, that is all I, at least, am trying to say -- not whether or not it is modern or correct to do so, but simply stating how it is for me.
> 
> And no, I was not taking your comments personally, just as an excuse to do one of my favorite things in life: play Devil's Advocate.


I've no idea if it is politically correct or not, but my husband does not think the way I do. Neither does my father or my brothers (okay, one of them has aspergers so he thinks differently, period.) But it is often funny to husband and myself when we are working on a task together. We both get things done, but given the exact same task, I don't know if there is a single one we'd tackle the same way. We often notice this when it comes to things as SIMPLE as driving into Walmart and parking. I always park in a certain place because I like to go in gardening. This would not occur to him. He tends to park off to the side in a certain area. He tends to look for places where the car is less likely to get dinged, hit and that are easy to enter and exit (especially for backing out.) These aren't necessarily gender differences, but everyone thinks differently. We have different things going on in our heads and different priorities.


----------



## MariaESchneider (Aug 1, 2009)

mooshie78 said:


> That's probably reflective of the demographics of people buying books though. Most stats I've seen show a decent majority of the book buying population are female.
> 
> For instance, the study reported on below found that 64% of book buyers (across all genres) were female. There are differences by genre, the article noted that detective and thriller genre buyers were 60% female, while fantasy had a more even gender split.
> 
> http://stephenslighthouse.com/2010/09/04/u-s-book-consumer-demographics-bowker/


Yes, I'd agree with that.


----------



## Chad Winters (Oct 28, 2008)

mooshie78 said:


> I think it's just an issue where one has to be careful not to be too extreme one way or the other.
> 
> It's absurd to think gender roles/stereotypes are absolute and everyone adheres to them. But it's also silly to ignore that gender roles to exist and there are clear differences in the sexes across a host of dimensions ranging from personality traits to hobby interests and so on that can be identified when studying trends across the population.
> 
> It's just the way the social sciences work. Nothing is absolute like in the hard sciences, so research focuses on general trends and tendencies. Not every individual is going to match the general trends. There are always tons of exceptions to every rule.


Well said, I agree


----------



## NogDog (May 1, 2009)

> It's just the way the social sciences work. Nothing is absolute like in the hard sciences, so research focuses on general trends and tendencies.


I guess quantum physics is not a "hard" science, since it is, in fact, largely about statistics and probability. (I'm such an annoying trouble-maker, eh?  )


----------



## Chad Winters (Oct 28, 2008)

NogDog said:


> I guess quantum physics is not a "hard" science, since it is, in fact, largely about statistics and probability. (I'm such an annoying trouble-maker, eh?  )


Given the fluidity of rules of for Quantum Physics you might have a point....


----------



## Guest (Jan 18, 2012)

I clicked just to laugh at how many women refused to be silenced.


----------



## NogDog (May 1, 2009)

Chad Winters (#102) said:


> Given the fluidity of rules of for Quantum Physics you might have a point....


Quantum Electro-Dynamics (QED) is widely considered one of the most accurate scientific theories ever, having been experimentally verified to a very large number of decimal places; yet it is highly dependent upon probability. Thus, arguments can be made (though I have neither the knowledge nor experience to argue them) that the social sciences _can_ be (though not necessarily are yet) every bit as "hard" of a science as any of the so-called physical sciences. For a sci-fi speculation on this, see Azimov's "Foundation" books. 

Similarly to quantum physics where you cannot say with any certainty where a given electron will be at any chosen moment but can make highly accurate predictions on where a group of billions of atomic particles will be; while you cannot say with any certainty how one individual human will behave, you can (in theory, anyway) make highly accurate predictions on how large groups of humans will behave (on average, anyway).


----------



## soyfrank (Feb 2, 2011)

When it comes to reading, I don't care about gender and don't really think about it all that much. However, as a writer, I've never written in the first-person as a woman. I'm not sure I could do it effectively for some reason. Weird.


----------



## mooshie78 (Jul 15, 2010)

Re: hard vs. soft science, my only point is there are certain disciplines like chemistry where you can do lab experiments in a vacuum and get the same result 100% of the time.

The social world isn't that way.  I can do research and find a particular crime prevention program had a significant effect in reducing crime in the target areas in my study.  But I can't give any firm guarantee that it will work in another city, or even a different set of neighborhoods in the same city!  Best I can say is there's not reason to think it wouldn't work in similar locations but that's an empirical question.

And the same is true of simply studying social trends and patterns.  There's no such thing a book that will only appeal to women (or men) or can only be written by women or men.  But that doesn't negate that certain genres are read/written by a strong majority of one gender or the other. Or more broadly, that gender roles still exist and a majority of people adhere to lots of gender specific norms in their daily lives, but nevertheless there are people who don't follow gender roles in a variety of ways.  However, that there are lots of exceptions to the rule doesn't mean that gender roles aren't still present and important in society.  They are and they're useful for things like marketing books etc. 


Put more simply, there are just no absolutes in the social world like there are in some hard science disciplines that can perform experiments in a vacuum. I certainly meant no offense to the "soft" sciences, and I loathe that term being a social scientist myself!


----------



## Coral Moore (Nov 29, 2009)

MariaESchneider said:


> I've no idea if it is politically correct or not, but my husband does not think the way I do. Neither does my father or my brothers (okay, one of them has aspergers so he thinks differently, period.) But it is often funny to husband and myself when we are working on a task together. We both get things done, but given the exact same task, I don't know if there is a single one we'd tackle the same way. We often notice this when it comes to things as SIMPLE as driving into Walmart and parking. I always park in a certain place because I like to go in gardening. This would not occur to him. He tends to park off to the side in a certain area. He tends to look for places where the car is less likely to get dinged, hit and that are easy to enter and exit (especially for backing out.) These aren't necessarily gender differences, but everyone thinks differently. We have different things going on in our heads and different priorities.


Interesting that you said this, because I was thinking about this thread on my way home today and came to exactly the same conclusion. My husband and I talk about things like this a lot. Probably 5% of our conversations discuss variations of this very issue. We're both into science. We both love to debate and argue and devil's advocate. We talk about gender issues in one guise or another almost every day. Know what we've figured out in our ten years of knowing each other? We think about things very similarly. This is covering hundreds of topics from the absurd to the awe-inspiring. Now, I don't mean that we agree on everything, because we absolutely do not. I mean we follow the same process to draw conclusions. Our brains work in the same way.

You and your husband are different. That's fine, wonderful even, but we can't assume that difference is a gender difference just because you happen to be of two different genders. I'm different from you too, in probably every single one of those ways you mentioned above, and we're both women. Drawing the line at gender makes no sense, that's all I've been trying to say this entire thread.


----------



## Randirogue (Apr 25, 2011)

mooshie78 said:


> It's just not gender, hormones etc. affecting how one's brain works, what their personalities are etc.
> 
> It's also (and probably moreso) how the genders are differentially socialized that leads to the differences between the "average" or "typical" male or female.
> 
> ...


As much as I didn't want to get within a mile of posting on this thread (harkens it with the "has an author ever said anything to make you not want to read their books" threads and debates, lol), I did think of something to contribute...

Culture factors in as well. Not all cultures value the same things as Americans (and other similar nationalities/cultures) do, even in gender roles. Some cultures reverse some the the aspects that Americans (and similar cultures) stereotypically assign to genders. Sometimes, those same cultures take other aspects that they similarly stereotypically assign to genders as Americans (and related cultures) to an even greater extreme than Americans (and related cultures) do.

I'm not specifying details of these cultures or stereotypes because I don't want to write a dissertation or anything. ~_~ooo (Which, by no means, is a promise that this post will be short. ~_~ooo.) I'm also no expert on them by any means.

But... the same can be said of subcultures within a country, nationality, religion, society, etc.

For instance, some subcultures of Ivy League stereotypes are recognized as exhibiting what a more blue-collar subculture may consider to be feminine affectations to the men in it.

And, of course, it can break down into even smaller groupings than that, such as families.

For instance, the overdone sports culture in my family growing up made me *not* want to get too entangled with someone who was also like that. I like to play sports, I'm good at them, but I'm not interested in a life devoted to being a fan of them. I don't hold it against anyone that does wish that for themselves, but such a lifestyle has been a longstanding turn-off for me. As such, it's not surprising that my husband is not into sports. He played a little soccer as a kid, but never got into watching sports on tv or in person or anything like that. He'd never even swung a bat properly until I showed him how to do it when I requested going to some local batting cages for my birthday one year (like I said, I like to play sports, just not follow them or actively participate in the culture surrounding them). For him, sports weren't a part of his culture growing up. Music was. Science was. Literature was. The more of his family I met, the more I realized the depth of his familial influences in this area. Part of it was his heritage. Part of it was genetic disposition towards aptitudes and skills. Part of it was just him.

Isn't that why demographics break down into grander intricacies than simply male and female?

I've seen several comments on this thread indicating, perhaps, that it comes down to a preference of being able to relate to the character's pov (or author's too).

It can also be connected to what we aspire to be as well. Or what we admire in others (regardless of how much we exhibit those traits in ourselves or how accurately we attribute our exhibiting them).

Whatever a person's reasons for choosing their preferences, it's good to be able to find material to fit into those paradigms.

It's good to be able to reach out and connect with others who share those preferences as well. Everyone deserves to feel they are not alone. For me to think otherwise would, to me, feel like I was encouraging the ostracizing of a person (or group of people), and well... I like to think I'm not too prone to that sort of behavior. (Not that I'm condemning anyone who feels otherwise, of course). (And why do I feel like one of the "neutral" people from "Futurama" right now. Dying Neutronian says, "Tell my wife... 'Hello.'")

Also... I tend to root for the underdog (or what I perceive as the underdog at any given moment, from moment to moment - it can change... often, based upon whatever the current circumstances may be). And, from what I've come to understand during the course of my publishing research (which could be incorrect, of course - I claim no actual expertise), there are more women readers. Thus, by that logic, there would be less male readers. Thus, the male readers are in the minority.

If a male reader with a particular preference for a type of book (regardless of what defines that preference) seeks out others like him in order to connect to them based on this similarity... then, I say, by all means... revel in it.

Not that my opinion of the subject really matters. I doubt the OP wants my permission or blessing. lol. Not that I'm trying to give it either.

However, since I've seen some hints that some posters to this thread may be bothered by the OPs wish to commiserate over shared book preferences... and since I am one to typically rally against making anyone feel small or alienated... I thought I'd offer up these thoughts on how I can reason such concepts together - how I can keep my own feminine (and proud) side from also hinting (too terribly, at least) at bother by the OP.

But, since this is another one of my overly long and rather pointless posts... you all could just ignore it and continue right on with your day/night... kindleboards experience. ~_~ooo

(And for those who stuck it out through this entire silly--and now, mildly embarrassing--post of mine. Thank you and I envy your stamina. ~_~ooo)


----------



## Randirogue (Apr 25, 2011)

oliewankanobe said:


> I clicked just to laugh at how many women refused to be silenced.


That's why I clicked too. I wanted to see if, in fact, only men actually responded. I likened it to possibly itching to look at car crash: it could be bad, it could be mild, it could just be a person ran a stop sign.

~_~ooo

(And, oh noes! Now, I've posted twice! But then, I do have kind of a mannish name. ~_~ooo)


----------



## sarahsbloke (Sep 24, 2011)

Krista D. Ball said:


> I find any conversation about "typical male" hilarious, considering the evolution of what is considered manly.


Not all countries are changing!
Not all countries started from the same attitudes and values of manliness.


----------



## mooshie78 (Jul 15, 2010)

Randirogue said:


> As much as I didn't want to get within a mile of posting on this thread (harkens it with the "has an author ever said anything to make you not want to read their books" threads and debates, lol), I did think of something to contribute...
> 
> Culture factors in as well. Not all cultures value the same things as Americans (and other similar nationalities/cultures) do, even in gender roles. Some cultures reverse some the the aspects that Americans (and similar cultures) stereotypically assign to genders. Sometimes, those same cultures take other aspects that they similarly stereotypically assign to genders as Americans (and related cultures) to an even greater extreme than Americans (and related cultures) do.
> 
> ...


Some great points in there.

Humans are complex beings. Gender (and gender role socialization) are just one small part among the vast array of factors that make us who we are as individuals.

So I wasn't trying in anyway to say that gender roles are absolute or anything. Just that we can't ignore that they do exist and they are part of what make us who we are. People differ in the degree to which they personally approximate the general gender role of their specific culture, but the fact that people are born one gender or the other and the degree to which they are socialized into their culture specific gender role (or not socialized into it) is one part of the many things that shape who we are.

In short, I was just saying that the fact that many people don't fit the gender role stereotypes of their culture don't mean that gender roles don't exist and that cultures aren't trying socialize people into them (even if one's family avoids them). I mean their all kinds of obvious examples of this. Just sticking with US culture, there's things like: Dolls for girls, cars and action figures for boys. Different dress styles expected for males and females to appear "normal". Women wearing make up in their daily lives, but men not. And then down to the other level of things like the majority of fans of romance novels or romantic comedies being female, or the majority of posters on a football message board being male etc.

So gender and gender role does play some role in shaping who we are, what we're interested in etc. But it's by no means the only factor, hence why so many people don't fit their stereotypical gender role. All the other factors that influence our development can override gender and gender role socialization, some people aren't socialized as heavily into gender roles (i.e. their families actively tried not to do gender based socialization) and so on.


----------



## Krista D. Ball (Mar 8, 2011)

sarahsbloke said:


> Not all countries are changing!
> Not all countries started from the same attitudes and values of manliness.


While it's true that different countries and cultures do not start at the same place, it is incorrect to say that they are not changing. Humans are constantly evolving. History shows us this time and again.


----------



## Math (Oct 13, 2011)

Woah! What's with the cultural anthropology?   I enjoyed the posts about psychology, though.

Weird (to me) that men, and women, are more likely to pick up a spy thriller by, say, "Dirk Ironhold" than his real birth name of "Sandy Limplipps"
But that's me: I'm watching Rooster Cogburn - not John Wayne or even Marion Morrison. So what? He was still brill.

To be honest, isn't it a bit sad that people will buy a (*new-author) book based on a name - rather than the blurb or a review? Heck, even the cover's got more clowt than a new-author's name.


----------



## Jen Black (Oct 17, 2011)

As a female writer, how could I resist reading a thread that states the Question is for men only?   I  prefer writing from both gender viewpoints rather than sticking with only one, and enjoy the different way the genders think. I have considered writing under a genderless name, using only initials than a forename, in order to avoid exactly the sort of labelling that goes on with assuming women write for women and men for men. There's a lot to be learned from reading/writing both!
Jen


----------



## Paul Reid (Nov 18, 2010)

This is a very interesting question and I straight away went through my bookcases, guessing that the books would be predominantly by male authors. To my surprise and relief, however, the divide was roughly 50/50. I don't feel so bad now!


----------



## UnicornEmily (Jul 2, 2011)

I've noticed the same thing in reverse, but not nearly as strongly. And my "favorite authors of all time" list is split cleanly down the middle, as far as gender goes. In fact, the last three authors to join it were all male! And two did a REALLY good job (in my opinion) of writing from a female perspective, with a female protagonist in a series no less.

(In case you're curious, these are Brandon Mull and Brandon Sanderson. LOVE their books.)

Other authors do feel more "male" to me than gender-neutral, but I truly love their work anyway (Timothy Zahn, Isaac Asimov, and some of Robert Heinlein, for example).

I think you need to be a little careful about this kind of observation, because it's too easy to go from "huh, that's interesting" to "now I have a semi-prejudiced excuse to not try new things." Valid observation, however, and it's nice to know you've figured out something interesting about your tastes.

My brother, amusingly, has started using "female author" (in a snooty, condescending tone) as a euphemism for "they included sex scenes." It kind of makes me want to slap him when he says that kind of thing. _I_ don't ever write sex scenes, nor do any of my favorite authors, thanks!


----------



## patrickt (Aug 28, 2010)

Grace Elliot said:


> I'm female and had to peek - intrigued to see what you guys were talking about.
> 
> And to throw a spanner in the works, a few, but very loyal readers of my books (and other historical romances) are male.
> Would you read HR?
> If not, why not?


No, I don't read romance novels, don't watch soap operas, and have never seen an Oprah Winfrey program. A romance novel, historical or otherwise, simply doesn't interest me.

I would like to compliment the people posting here for their reasonable, thought out responses. There was little of the snarky politically correct sniping that usually appears in threads with these topics.

I was involved in a lawsuit. At the end of a 3.5 year battle the defendants offered to double the money if I'd keep the settlement a secret and drop my demand for a public apology. Not a single woman I knew, certainly not my wife, understood my refusal to take that offer. Most of the men I knew did understand. The men who didn't understand were young and had been raised in single-parent homes.

Men and women are different. Both are valuable. Yes, people and cultures evolve but they also devolve. Some even cease to exist.


----------



## Coral Moore (Nov 29, 2009)

Paul Reid said:


> This is a very interesting question and I straight away went through my bookcases, guessing that the books would be predominantly by male authors. To my surprise and relief, however, the divide was roughly 50/50. I don't feel so bad now!


I hope I wasn't someone who made you feel bad about incidental preference. That was never my intention. If you happen to read more men or women, no one in this thread has said you're a bad person. It's asserting that kind of preference and then refusing to read anything else when folks, myself included, get the grumbles.


----------



## MariaESchneider (Aug 1, 2009)

UnicornEmily said:


> I've noticed the same thing in reverse, but not nearly as strongly. And my "favorite authors of all time" list is split cleanly down the middle, as far as gender goes. In fact, the last three authors to join it were all male! And two did a REALLY good job (in my opinion) of writing from a female perspective, with a female protagonist in a series no less.
> 
> (In case you're curious, these are Brandon Mull and Brandon Sanderson. LOVE their books.)
> 
> ...


That's funny. I skimmed the second half of Mistborn because I thought he did a terrible job with the main female in that book. I couldn't stand how she went from a very street-savvy street person to a simpering, easily fooled court female. But I've also thought the interpretation of some of the above threads was different from my own to (Not in a bad way, just different.) I guess the thing to keep in mind is that we are all different!

P.S. Please authors--remember--don't talk about your writing style. This whole thread, which is very interesting, will end up moved to the writer's corner and fade...


----------



## Chad Winters (Oct 28, 2008)

MariaESchneider said:


> That's funny. I skimmed the second half of Mistborn because I thought he did a terrible job with the main female in that book. I couldn't stand how she went from a very street-savvy street person to a simpering, easily fooled court female. But I've also thought the interpretation of some of the above threads was different from my own to (Not in a bad way, just different.) I guess the thing to keep in mind is that we are all different!
> 
> P.S. Please authors--remember--don't talk about your writing style. This whole thread, which is very interesting, will end up moved to the writer's corner and fade...


Interesting....I considered it more "fish-out-of-water", the streetwise orphan out of place and unsure of the new rules at court


----------



## MariaESchneider (Aug 1, 2009)

Chad Winters (#102) said:


> Interesting....I considered it more "fish-out-of-water", the streetwise orphan out of place and unsure of the new rules at court


I hear what you are saying, but I had trouble with it because for someone who grew up suspicious of EVERYONE and knowing that people around her were both good and bad...yanno. To me it was one thing to be unsure of rules and other to be completely gullible, especially of lies and deceit. It ruined the book for me because I felt that instead of it having a strong woman character...it had this simpleton who didn't catch on very fast. I suppose it is plausible that she was overwhelmed and lost her sense of suspicion, but I thought that part was under-developed. In other words, no one worked very hard to fool her and that left her character flat, uninteresting and changed from the initial chapters (ie, she was a convenient plot device, rather than a well-rounded character.)

Sorry, we are now waaay off topic!


----------



## SylviaLucas (Sep 14, 2011)

Mike McIntyre said:


> Unfortunately, this knee-jerk, out-of-context reply is where these gender threads ultimately devolve.


 I'm sorry, Mike. The humor/smile in the post was supposed to be obvious, but if it wasn't, that's my error. However, what I said wasn't really out of context.

The sentiment "She's as good as a man" (those weren't your words - I'm using that as a simplified, and comparable, example) does imply that she's _better_ than because she's _as good as a man_ - with the man used here as the standard of excellence. And I think it's that kind of thinking that turns many people away from female writers.

Whether my reply was thought to be a "knee-jerk" reaction doesn't negate the point I was making (which is salient). But I truly didn't mean to make the thread devolve into anything, so I apologize for using more energy and enthusiasm than I should have. I'll keep my serene, professional voice in the forefront in the future. Sometimes.


----------



## Coral Moore (Nov 29, 2009)

Message redacted because Geoffrey is right, the back and forth is not beneficial.


----------



## wdeen (Dec 29, 2011)

Yes, I do mainly read books by male authors. It just seems they are more prominent in the genres I read. With one exception. I read Star Trek series novels and several of the writers are female. Dorothy Fontana, Margaret Armen, Joyce Perry and others. Beyond that, my interest in historical fiction is limited when it comes to female writers.


----------



## MariaESchneider (Aug 1, 2009)

SylviaLucas said:


> I'm sorry, Mike. The humor/smile in the post was supposed to be obvious, but if it wasn't, that's my error. However, what I said wasn't really out of context.
> 
> The sentiment "She's as good as a man" (those weren't your words - I'm using that as a simplified, and comparable, example) does imply that she's _better_ than because she's _as good as a man_ - with the man used here as the standard of excellence. And I think it's that kind of thinking that turns many people away from female writers.
> 
> Whether my reply was thought to be a "knee-jerk" reaction doesn't negate the point I was making (which is salient). But I truly didn't mean to make the thread devolve into anything, so I apologize for using more energy and enthusiasm than I should have. I'll keep my serene, professional voice in the forefront in the future. Sometimes.


I thought it was out of context and I don't read his line in any way as a derogatory comparison. I just don't see it. He said the books were good. He said they were as good as the last two he read. Shrug. I had actually typed that at the time, but didn't want to derail the original OP question. Not that we've seen the OP around...perhaps we scared him off with our enthusiasm in counting our books. He probably thought he'd get two replies, one yes and one no.


----------



## Geoffrey (Jun 20, 2009)

Everyone,

This has been an interesting conversation so far and in most cases civil.  However, I'm concerned that the conversation has begun to derail into who said what and whether it's proper to say that.  So, in an effort to get the topic back on track, let me ask some different, related questions:


1.  Are your preferred genres read predominantly by one gender and has that changed over time or is it a constant?  
2.  Likewise with authors.  Are the authors in your preferred genre predominantly one gender and is that changing as well? 
3.  What differences do you note in writing styles between writers of different genders in that genre?  if you read a novel written 20 or more years ago, do those differences hold true or are the differences different?  
4.  Has our changing perception of gender roles changed how we perceive different authors and/or have these changing perceptions also changed how one gender or another writes?
5.  Is is possible to write a novel from a gender neutral perspective?


----------



## Chad Winters (Oct 28, 2008)

Geoffrey said:


> However, I'm concerned that the conversation has begun to derail into who said what and whether it's proper to say that.


He said.....She said..... I had to do it


----------



## Randirogue (Apr 25, 2011)

Math said:


> Woah! What's with the cultural anthropology?  I enjoyed the posts about psychology, though.
> 
> Weird (to me) that men, and women, are more likely to pick up a spy thriller by, say, "Dirk Ironhold" than his real birth name of "Sandy Limplipps"
> But that's me: I'm watching Rooster Cogburn - not John Wayne or even Marion Morrison. So what? He was still brill.
> ...


I think you hit the heart of the matter to an extent. Whatever a reader's reasons for being interested in what is attracting them to prefer an author's name is almost irrevelevant. In a way, it's just that the reader is attracted. There's no way to attract all the readers interest for the same reasons. People are just too different. Their reasons behind their choices and preferences are too myriad. Yet, masses do tend to be attracted to "attractive" things, the basis of that attraction being possibly linked to trends (whether "pop," cultural, gender-driven, etc.).

Your relating it to the effect of an attractive, eye-catching, relevant cover is quite apropos, IMO. Same with the comparison to simply an unattractive, non-hip author name.

What's that saying? The effectiveness of a speaker is like 75% what they look like, 20% what the speaker sounds like, and only like 5% what he or she actually says. Perhaps their is a similar relationship connecting readers to their preferences in reading material as well.

For instance, I know that I'm more likely to stick it out through a sci-fi/fantasy book if the plot is a little weak, or the prose stale and uninspired, or characters flatter, or premise contrived than I would for a comedy or historical or romance or literary genres. A book outside my typical preferences has to work harder, be of higher quality, in order to keep my attention through to the end.

This may very well be transferable to a lot of readers, just that the defining attributes of their preference differ from mine. In the case of the OP, his preference fall into the parameters of author gender and narrative verse.

While declaring his preference for male author names (since,well, it could sometimes be a pseudonym of a female writer) may not be admirable in modern societal or cultural context, while it may not be politically correct, that doesn't make it any less true, real, honest, or valid. Objectively speaking, it is a parallel to my bias towards sci-fi/fantasy. I may not mean to alienate writers of stories outside my typical preferences, but it is an unfortunate byproduct of having a preference, of having the freedom to have a preference.



mooshie78 said:


> Some great points in there.
> 
> Humans are complex beings. Gender (and gender role socialization) are just one small part among the vast array of factors that make us who we are as individuals.
> 
> ...


I should've specified that I wasn't countering your post when I went on and on about cultural attributes being a factor of gender expectations, etc. I didn't even think of how I would be giving that impression until I read this reply of yours to my comment.

I had only included the quote from your post originally as a reference point. Your post made me think of the cultural aspect. That's all.

I apologize for not clarifying this when I first posted on this thread.

*Modified to add:*


Geoffrey said:


> Everyone,
> 
> This has been an interesting conversation so far and in most cases civil. However, I'm concerned that the conversation has begun to derail into who said what and whether it's proper to say that. So, in an effort to get the topic back on track, let me ask some different, related questions:
> 
> ...


I saw this after I posted this comment. My comments don't exactly fit into what Geoffrey suggests, but I'm not sure if if conflicts it either. If it does, my apologies. If need be, I will gladly remove it.

Thanks everyone.

[Also, please forgive typos, especially an occasionally odd wrod choice. I blame my inexperience with typing on my iPad and the odd word on its autocorrect. ~_~ooo]


----------



## UnicornEmily (Jul 2, 2011)

MariaESchneider said:


> That's funny. I skimmed the second half of Mistborn because I thought he did a terrible job with the main female in that book. I couldn't stand how she went from a very street-savvy street person to a simpering, easily fooled court female.


Huh! That is funny! And a valid complaint.

I actually did think that the female viewpoints in _Warbreaker_ were much better than Vin in Mistborn; Vin's not particularly "girly," so she comes across more gender-neutral to me in the way she's written. (Which isn't a bad thing, just a thing.) But I didn't have any feelings that she became "simpering" or "easily fooled." She seemed to continue staying tough and street-savvy to me the whole time. She just seemd to be in an uncomfortably new situation. I was impressed with both the sisters in _Warbreaker,_ though, especially the really girly one whose name escapes me. She definitely felt extremely female to me.

Anyway, to get back to the topics and the new questions!

I do think it's possible to read things "gender-neutral," and I also think it's possible for things to be really "masculine" or "feminine." But I also think that's no guarantee of which genders will read things. I have three (male, straight) friends who are addicted to extremely girly, fluffy romance stories. And two female friends who have a strong preference for "masculine" stories. So while gender definitely plays a role demographically, it varies by individually wildly.


----------



## jcpilley (Jan 18, 2012)

I honestly don't pay attention to the author's gender. If it's a story or topic I'm interested in I'll read it regardless.


----------



## SylviaLucas (Sep 14, 2011)

MariaESchneider said:


> I thought it was out of context and I don't read his line in any way as a derogatory comparison.


If more than one person saw my reply as out of context, I'll trust that it was. My etiquette was off, and I'll correct it. Sorry for the derail.



Geoffrey said:


> Everyone,
> 
> This has been an interesting conversation so far and in most cases civil. However, I'm concerned that the conversation has begun to derail into who said what and whether it's proper to say that. So, in an effort to get the topic back on track, let me ask some different, related questions:
> 
> 1. Are your preferred genres read predominantly by one gender and has that changed over time or is it a constant?


My preferred genre has been literary fiction and mystery/suspense, which I think are read by both genders equally (?). But I'd say it used to be, a long time ago, that women were the readers, because they had all the free time while their husbands were working. (Or maybe I'm getting this from a very old book I read called "The Husband's Story." Books were "silly.")



> 3. What differences do you note in writing styles between writers of different genders in that genre? if you read a novel written 20 or more years ago, do those differences hold true or are the differences different?


 This is hard to answer for literary fiction. The male writers, who have been studied more and looked at more frequently as the go-to literary resources, have a certain perspective that almost seems to be taken for granted as "the norm."

When getting into female literary writers, the point of view, which was different because it was from a woman, was _clearly _different, and because it wasn't the male pov I was used to, seemed distinctly "female." Different relationship observations, different story focus, different kinds of conflict. I find I'm most attracted to the female literary authors who provide their unique point of view without going into the very deep end of "women's issues." (I would feel the same way, I think, about male writers who go into the deep end of "men's issues." Somewhere in the middle is preferred.)



> 4. Has our changing perception of gender roles changed how we perceive different authors and/or have these changing perceptions also changed how one gender or another writes?


Probably, but there's a lot of good fiction both men and women would enjoy that turns many men away because it's called "women's fiction" because it's written by women and offers a perspective that isn't male. However, judging from what's here in the boards, anyway, it does seem like a lot of men are perfectly happy to read fiction by women, which probably wasn't the case 40 years ago.


> 5. Is it possible to write a novel from a gender neutral perspective?


 Yes. (Depending on surroundings and character history.)


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

So. Not a man. But I'm a moderator so I can answer anyway. 

I can't abide romance or chick-lit or any of that sort of thing. I read some when I was younger but always found it to be just silly. The situations never seemed to be something that struck me as even a little bit realistic, and I usually would be saying to myself within the first few pages, "well, here's what he/she needs to do and it would all be sorted." Of course, that would make a dull book. . .but having sussed out what, to me, was the most sensible course of action, I couldn't take much pleasure in reading about people doing exactly the wrong thing -- from my perspective. I just couldn't 'suspend my disbelief' that far.

I read mostly mysteries (not keen on police procedurals and cozies I can take or leave), suspense (spies, searching for lost artifacts, gothic), but also quite enjoy many things that are usually categorized as men's adventure or the like: Clive Cussler, Tom Clancy, etc. OTOH, I have no use for most 'horror' especially graphically violent, have passed through my fantasy phase, and am not interested in reading about werewolves or vampires who walk among us. . .much less about people who want to have 'a real relationship' (or even just sex ) with them. I do enjoy a good historical as long as there is interesting plot and it's not pure romance.

As to Geoffrey's questions -- geez, you mean I'm supposed to think about these things!  -- I don't know that I pay close attention to whether the writer is male or female. I have learned what I like and the list of authors who are on my 'always buy' list, contains both men and women. I think I seek out the content and don't worry so much about who wrote it. Certainly there are authors I've read for years who use initials only. I never much thought about whether they were male or female. I do recall several cases where, when I learned which they were I was surprised -- sometimes because I'd thought they were men and I was wrong and sometimes because I'd thought they were women and I was wrong.

I do think character make up has evolved over the years. . . in HS I recall reading some books that were adventure type stories -- not even 'classics' but written in the 70's. (I worked at a law office evenings for 4 hours a night answering phones (that didn't ring very often) and there were books there for the reading once I finished all my homework.) The hero was always a manly man, white male, his sidekick was another manly man, white male. If there were any characters who weren't manly man white males they were clearly subservient, and any women were downright wimpy. . .usually wearing high heels and nylons even though they KNEW they were going camping. Drove me nuts. I see that much less often with books written in the last 10-15 years. Nowadays the hero is as likely to be described as smart and educated -- think MacGyver -- and the sidekick has usually also got some quirky skill with something akin to rocket science. And the girls wear boots or sneakers and jeans and are just as useful on the quest as the men -- rather than having to be continually rescued. Heck, sometimes it's the girl who's _leading_ the team.


----------



## JScott (Dec 3, 2011)

I had never thought about that question before, but now that I think about it, I do read mostly male authors (I am a man), but not exclusively. I suppose it really is the genre and that male authors might be more prevalent in those that I read.


----------



## Jan Strnad (May 27, 2010)

Grace Elliot said:


> I'm female and had to peek - intrigued to see what you guys were talking about.
> 
> And to throw a spanner in the works, a few, but very loyal readers of my books (and other historical romances) are male.
> Would you read HR?
> If not, why not?


I'm sorry. I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry! (Just wanted to get the apologies out of the way first.)

Whenever my wife and I are channel-surfing for something to watch together and we happen on anything that even remotely resembles historical romance, I let out a moan if not an outright scream of terror. As soon as I see characters walking around in long dresses and ruffled collars, I can't hit the > button fast enough.

[My wife has a similar reaction when I suggest we watch "Bait Car" or "The World's Dumbest Drunken Lowlifes."]

My reaction is so profound, I can't imagine it's purely sociological or some kind of learned behavior. It must be atavistic, something in my DNA, formed over generations, coming from my ancient, reptilian brain. I recoil from historical romance as I would from a hissing cobra, instinctively, as if my very survival depends on it. I'm sorry (again) but that's all of the "why not" I can give you.

Please keep in mind that I say this as an author working in (according to a survey that may still be lurking on Kindleboards) the most despised, reviled and to-be-avoided-at-all-costs genre in existence, "horror."

Just as I know that "horror" takes many literary forms and that most people are unaware of these subtle distinctions and dismiss the entire genre unfairly, there are probably many forms of historical romance that I'm too ignorant of the genre to even know they exist. There are probably some historical romances out there that I'd enjoy thoroughly if I gave them a chance and weren't running from them like a gazelle from a pride of slavering lions.

But there you have it.

This doesn't mean I won't read female authors, however. Far from it. I usually find their characterizations to be more subtle and nuanced and interesting than those of male writers. But put those characters in fleur-de-lis dresses and buccaneer shirts and I'm heading for the hills, probably waving my arms in a very non-masculine and embarrassing manner.

I'm sorry.

I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry!


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

Jan Strnad said:


> I'm sorry. I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry! (Just wanted to get the apologies out of the way first.)
> 
> Whenever my wife and I are channel-surfing for something to watch together and we happen on anything that even remotely resembles historical romance, I let out a moan if not an outright scream of terror. As soon as I see characters walking around in long dresses and ruffled collars, I can't hit the > button fast enough.
> 
> [My wife has a similar reaction when I suggest we watch "Bait Car" or "The World's Dumbest Drunken Lowlifes."]


FWIW, I'd have the same reaction as you to period romance.

And I'd have the same reaction as your wife to the shows you mention. . . . do they really exist?

I refuse to be pigeon-holed.


----------



## FrankZubek (Aug 31, 2010)

I have never cared about gender.
It's the STORY!  

If the plot sounds good and is well written, I'll read it

If you write well I'll probably check out more of your work

To me, man or woman author makes no diff (or one gender needing to "be" another gender (I.E. women, historically, needing to have the first names in initials to pass themselves off as "males" in order to get published because tradition dictates that only one particular gender "is allowed" to write IN that genre. ---- Gee haven't we gotten past that yet? Cripes!)

Again-- STORY counts.


----------



## Gregory Lynn (Aug 9, 2011)

Nebula7 said:


> Question: Do you mainly read books written by male authors? If so, why? If not, why? I'd like to hear your opinions.


Couldn't care less. Half the time I don't even know.


----------



## grahampowell (Feb 10, 2011)

The novels I read are mostly by men, but that's because men mostly wrote the hardboiled novels of the 40s through the 60s that I enjoy.  But even back then there were women who wrote that style, and whose work I enjoy, such as Leigh Brackett and "Vin Packer" (Marijane Meaker).

Lately I've been reading a lot more traditional English mysteries, and it's pretty tough to get too far into those if you don't read women.



Graham


----------



## Jan Strnad (May 27, 2010)

Ann, "Bait Car" is real. I love it! The cops set up some kind of scenario where a car is left unlocked, keys in the ignition, and then sit back to see who takes the "bait." (Somehow, this is not entrapment.) So somebody comes along, scopes out the car, slides behind the wheel, and with a guilty glance over the shoulder, makes off with it!

Of course, they are on camera. And the cops can kill the engine and lock the doors by remote control. So, after a few blocks, they kill the car and trap the perp inside. 

The best part is the lie the thieves come up with to explain why they're in someone else's car. "This lady, she asked me to bring her car to her." "This guy told me to drive the car to this place." "I was looking for the owner." Meanwhile the cops sit back and go "uh-huh, uh-huh, uh-huh" knowing that the person is spewing a whole lotta b.s.

Come on...what's not to love?

The other show is a pastiche of titles: "The World's Dumbest Criminals," "The World's Worst Drivers," etc. Watching any of them is like shooting Novacaine into your brain, but I love 'em!

Meanwhile my wife is wondering who's having sex in the ER on "Grey's Anatomy." So, when there's a conflict...we compromise and watch "Grey's Anatomy."

Is there a difference between the male and the female brains? Oh, I think so!

On the other hand, I really do enjoy a good, relationship-based drama and find mindless action stories pretty boring. I really need to care about the people as people before I care about them as protagonists.


----------



## Tamara Rose Blodgett (Apr 1, 2011)

I guess I'm not listening too well because you asked for men only but...
There's a ton of great female writers. But when a male author has talent it speaks to me in a profound way. I confess, I'm nuts over Stephen King's work! I just read a book where I questioned if a man was really the author. He had an uncanny grasp of the feminine psyche, and of course the male as well! Wonderful. _King's X_ by Stephen Harper. He was scary-accurate on both genders...

My two cents. Hope I didn't offend answering your "male only" question 

_--- edited... no self-promotion outside the Book Bazaar forum. please read our Forum Decorum thread._


----------



## AllenMitchum (Jan 12, 2012)

My fiction reads tend to be written almost entirely by males. My non-fiction reads are more balanced. Neither of those are intentional. The fiction genres that I'm interested in tend to be dominated by males, which might be the explanation.


----------



## MadCityWriter (Dec 8, 2011)

My husband LOVES Nevada Barr books. Has read them all.  The heroine is Anna Pigeon, a National Parks Ranger.  Each story is set in a different National Park.  He just got the latest book for his birthday.  Nevada Barr herself was a park ranger, so her novels are totally authentic.


----------



## leep (Aug 25, 2011)

Some of it will come down to the genres you read.  Romance, chick lit tends to be written by women, scifi largely by men.  Though there are obvious exceptions.

I think authors of the same sex tend to appeal because they see things from the same perspective, men and women do see the world differently, they have different drivers and priorities.

That said, I don't pick books based on the author (for new books, obiously if I find someone I like I stick with them), the story is the most important thing.


----------



## markcooper76 (Jan 22, 2012)

It is not a general rule for me but yes it is a preference for me to read books written by a male author as I can certainly related a lot more!


----------



## DH_Sayer (Dec 20, 2011)

I must admit that most of my favorite books are written by men, and a lot of them seem "geared" specifically for them (ie. men), or have a reputation for being books only men will like (eg. Infinite Jest, Heller's Something Happened, Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas, anything by Mamet). But I do like some female authors, too, like Flannery O'Connor and Marilyn Robinson. But that sounds defensive. I don't know....shrug. Good stuff's good stuff, is my pithy and hardly insightful judgment.


----------



## sesmith (Dec 21, 2011)

Don't care about gender; my current list of most-read authors has 6 men and 3 women.


----------

