The Top 3 Problems with Current Arguments for Men's Fiction
But It's Great that It's Being Discussed at All
The viral noticing of the problem began, so far as I can tell, with a video by author John A. Douglas, reacting to a tweet from Publisher’s Weekly asking, “Why don’t straight men read novels?” As motion-selfies go, it’s not a bad video. Douglas makes several points that need to be made, and he provides evidence by entering bookstores and Big Box department stores, video-recording retail bookshelves and the books which occupy them. However, one of his points seems to be the total extent of criticism that some talking heads of Youtube have for tradpub’s current discriminatory state of pozz.
#1: “Female-Coded” Book Covers
This type of criticism often mentions the fantastic, imaginative painted covers of the past, then contrasts them with the covers on traditionally published books of today. Over-represented in the latter category is the “romantasy” cover art—I guess because so many of the most vocal indie authors (who opine about the book biz) write fantasy.
We all know that we’re not supposed to judge a book by its cover; but one of the hard lessons I learned as an independent author is that readers most definitely do, anyway. As Nonsense-Free Editor pointed out in one of her video lectures on the subject, covers exist to accomplish for books what thumbnails accomplish for Tik Tok or YT uploads. They are meant to intrigue a potential reader enough to pull the book down from the physical or virtual shelf, sample some of the prose, and decide whether or not to buy it and read the whole thing.
Covers are designed to appeal to the target audience. A quick glance at the cover art on display tells you that tradpub is only interested in female (or effeminate) readers. The artsy-fartsy cover designs are merely evidence. They’re a symptom, if you will. Don’t get so focused on the superficial details that you miss the disease. The New York Publishing Cartel (NYPC) is not publishing dude-lit, then simply misbranding it with girly covers. The tradpub industry is pozzed down to its very core, and so are the books they publish. It doesn’t ignore men; it actively despises us.
Book covers are worth noting, as one item of evidence, but much like coughing up blood, it’s mostly a bellweather indicating there’s a systemic issue under the surface.
#2: Female Domination of the Publishing Industry
This is also a fair point. Female agents and editors want gynocentric fiction by female authors, to publish and sell to female readers. And the overwhelming majority of agents, editors, publishers, assistants, marketers, etc. are female. The only “male fiction” they will print and sell is as follows:
Classic fiction by iconic authors of a non-pozzed yesteryear who didn’t have to kowtow to Team Womyn.
Older authors with a proven track record because they were grandfathered in from back when actual diversity was permitted.
“Important” literature by sexual deviants about which feminists care.
Though I didn’t have the statistics at my fingertips, I noticed this back in the ‘90s. But here’s an important point to take away: there were some male editors and agents in tradpub back then. Hell, there’s a few still in it now.
UPDATE: M.S. Olney has some statistics at his own post on the topic:
Marketing: 83% female
Publicity: 92% female
Editorial: 78% female
The problem is not just the chromosomes and genitalia of the gatekeepers. Ultimately, it is the ideology. Like so many industries, the NYPC is a feminista hive mind. The males there want to pozz the world just as desperately, if not worse, than the womyn. And the tendency to White Knight goes back farther than you were led to believe.
There was a time when traditional publishing was male-dominated. That’s back when it offered engaging fiction for both men and women. But contrary to the prevailing Narrative, that microcosm of “the patriarchy” was not the He-Man Woman-Haters’ Club. Those men let women in. They let those women invite more women in. They let them influence (later dictate) hiring policies. And they ultimately let them take over. And unlike men, when women seized power, they moved to secure it in ironclad perpetuity and lock the other sex out. However women may treat other women on a personal level, there is absolutely no disputing the consistent solidarity of Team Womyn.
Yes, the New York Publishing Cartel is 80-90% female. But more importantly, it is an avowed enemy of anything and anybody masculine (except for their bulldyke pals, of course).
#3: Pozzed Fetishism is Included in the Emerging Re-Definition of “Men’s Fiction”
Like the broader reaction to Big Tent Woketardery in pop culture, critics of tradpub don’t actually want all the cultural Marxism rejected outright; they just want it dialed back to 1995 levels.
Women enjoy reading about characters with whom they can relate. Nobody’s got a problem with that. Probably nobody in America has had a problem with that for a century or more. I enjoy reading about characters I can relate to, as well. But the presumptive consensus is that there’s something wrong with that, because I’m a man.
I don’t enjoy reading about badass macho dudes with breasts and vaginas. I don’t enjoy reading about effeminate angst-filled biological males, either.
Men have been told for decades that stories of men fighting, hunting, surviving, competing…kicking ass in any way…is sophomoric and toxic. Watching or reading about exceptional men doing stuff that men are physiologically designed to do has been rendered counter-cultural. However, watching or reading about women do what they were not physiologically designed to do, was nigh-universally hailed as bold, groundbreaking, and cutting edge, until it became ubiquitous. Now if anybody points out the idiocy of it, they are either ignored or attacked. And treated to a deluge of anecdotes (of a simple, nearly identical formula) about real life badass grrrlbosses.
Testosterone is toxic and dangerous in men, you see.
The badass grrrlboss/macho chick fetish is even more popular with men than women, and it knows few boundaries. White Knights on the right and left subscribe to it. It appears to be almost as obligatory in independent fiction as in tradpub fare. It doesn't even seem to pause at racial or national boundaries. (Well, it’s probably not as prevalent in Russia. Say what you want about the Putin government, but it seems to at least avoid poisoning its own culture with gender confusion.) The gender insanity in sports for the last several years has proven the badass macho chick archetype has no basis in reality, yet the compulsion to inundate us with this fallacy only grows and spreads. I’m not sure about the psychology behind it, but the fetish is inescapable and has guided defense policy (for example) despite science, logic, and any modicum of concern for military readiness.
The fact that fiction fraught with this fetish is considered part of “male-coded” entertainment is rather pathetic, and confirmation that “Clown World” is an apt euphemism for our absurd postmodern existence.
I was gonna make this a five-item list, but the post is already getting too long. Tell me what you think in the comments, and what your #4 and #5 might be.
I’ve got a lot more to say on this subject, and will probably do just that next time. Thanks for reading.
I wrote about this too. The people working in the publishing industry in the US and UK is well over 85% female. No other sector would have such a disparity if it were the other way around, there'd be outcry for more women etc. - https://msolney.substack.com/p/why-do-male-readers-feel-left-behind?r=7hgcb
Brian Niemeier hit on the elements on #3 pretty hard with his recent post on Substack and his blog. This line helps sum up some of what you are getting at:
"Because at the end of the day, the nupagan crowd wants pre-1965 demographics with post-1968 morality. Their vices blind them to the fact that those circumstances are mutually exclusive."
Full read here: https://brianniemeier.substack.com/p/you-cant-spell-culture-without-cult
Here's one point or attack where I think Men's Fiction might get a better foothold on writing, especially if you are new to it:
"Write for a 10- to 13-year old boy. Make the language and situations age appropriate for them, regardless if the book is for YA or Adults."
You tag stories to adventure and overcoming obstacles. You incorporate proven morality as an invisible-yet-discoverable foundation in your writing. You don't beat people over the head with it, but rather you show it in the characters' thoughts, actions, consequences, and outcomes. You don't write sex scenes, but you might show light romance or its implication.
Sex scenes don't advance the story, and if you aren't advancing the story, then you are wrong.
Writing for kids is harder than writing for adults, but laying down that restriction will provide constraints that allow you to become a better writer of fiction over time.