A Question For Men Only

[sarahsbloke]

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]

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?

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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!

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]

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]

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]

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]

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

[wdeen]

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]

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]

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]

  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]

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.

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.

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.

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:

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?

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]

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]

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]

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.

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]

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]

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]

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!