this is also why boys are reading so much less now that children’s publishing has become female dominated
men write archetypes. women write about themselves.
men write about heroes, villains, gods, monsters, extraordinary characters who embody something greater than themselves, heroes that boys can admire and aspire to become
women write characters who look like them, think like them, have their problems and insecurities, characters they can identify with and project themselves onto
men use writing as a vehicle for self-transcendence while women use it as a vehicle for self-recognition
it’s the difference between wanting to become Batman and wanting Batman to become you
it’s then obvious why boys craving the hero’s journey would rather retreat into video games than read yet another piece of autobiographical, gossip-filled, moralizing turboslop
if you want boys to start reading again you need to let men write again
https://x.com/IterIntellectus/status/2120442199288549797?a=5A5idI-7zu9KlIQ4I4I&s=20
The core observation holds up well. Children's publishing is heavily female (authors ~60%, industry staff higher). Recent middle-grade data shows girl protagonists outnumber boys ~2:1, especially in realistic fiction. Boys do read less and score lower; the gap is longstanding and real.
Lego's actual research found sex-typical play differences—boys lean action/systems/exterior, girls identification/interiors/role-play—though the viral Batman paraphrase is stylized. Average preferences track: boys more often seek agency, hierarchy, and hero's-journey archetypes; many current titles emphasize relational/self-recognition stories. Games supply the former more reliably.
Not the only factor (screens, maturity gaps, reading coded feminine matter too). Still, the content shift is measurable and likely contributes. More male-authored adventure/systemizing books would help.
Boys aren’t reading because of bad parenting and clueless fathers.
Nobody seriously thinks 7-year-olds are scanning new releases and going “not based, I’m out.” They don’t control what gets bought or put in front of them. Parents do.
There are centuries of great books. My boys read plenty that isn’t modern slop. Curating is the job. There’s more pre-2000 material than any kid could finish in a lifetime, and only so many hours a week to use it.
Getting boys into books takes work. We did zero screen time until 3, turned the den into a library, and now my boys (7 and 3.5) have never held an iPad and are obsessed with reading.
If anyone wants book suggestions, msg me. Happy to share.
Every time this subject comes up, I can't help but be reminded of how Toy Story nailed this.
Buzz realizes he's not actually an import and and heroic space ranger. He has an identity crisis.
Then he gets picked up by Sid's little sister, and immediately she puts women's clothes on him, calls him "Mrs. Nesbitt" and puts him in a tea party.
I'll take this one step further.
Women are defined by consumption.
Men are defined by production.
What defines women is based on things going inward
What defines men is what comes outward.
Consider evolutionary psychology at play.
Our society is too consumer focused, thus too feminized.
We need to alter our society to be more production focused, but not on things that lead to more consumption.
Therefore, we need to make our society more spiritually focused. Producing things of artistic and spiritual value while reducing the things we consume
Less disposables, less foods, less STUFF.
More family, more community, more meditation, more things beneficial to humanity.
Basing the entirety of our well-being on a numerical monetary economic forecast is absurdly stupid. yes it has to be part of the equation, BUT ONLY PART not the whole thing.
