What's driving the gender gap in our reading habits?
One of the first to lament this apparent decline was American writer Jacob Savage. Armed with a battery of statistics, he claimed in Compact magazine that after 2014 'the doors shut' for male Millennials in the US: 'The literary pipeline for white men was effectively shut down … Diversity preferences may explain their absence from prize lists, but they can't account for why they've so completely failed to capture the zeitgeist.' He claims there's a lost generation of literary men who may not know how to say something genuinely interesting and new.
Things got so dire in the mind of British novelist Jude Cook that he decided to set up an independent publishing house, Conduit Books, focussing on literary fiction and memoirs by men: 'overlooked narratives' on 'fatherhood, masculinity, working class male experiences, sex, relationships, and negotiating the 21st century as a man'. Conduit has already cut off open submissions, no doubt besieged with manuscripts. We will see its first titles next year.
But is there really a decline and if so, what might have caused it? One reason is that we're still correcting for a very long period when men dominated literary culture. Indeed, that was why the Stella Prize and the Davitt Prize in Australia, the Women's Prize for Fiction in the UK and the Carol Shields Prize in Canada were set up, and I don't yet see any good evidence that they can shut up shop because their work is done.
Maybe the perception of decline is because most agents and commissioning editors these days are women. Or maybe, as Savage says, male writers are floundering in their attempts to capture the zeitgeist. But perhaps the simplest explanation is that fewer men and more women are reading fiction.
About 80 per cent of fiction sales are to women, who are also the most avid readers. Naturally, they want to read about issues that matter to them. Their reading ranges from literary to popular fiction, with the huge sales of female writers such as Colleen Hoover and the romantasy authors almost entirely driven by women.
They are also keen to talk about books, in person and online, and recommend them to friends. No wonder publishers are looking out for more of the same.
But why are fewer men reading? Are they discouraged because reading fiction seems to be a solitary pursuit that their peer group doesn't favour? Joseph Bernstein investigated the phenomenon for The New York Times and reckoned that to boost readership, 'it might be a matter of men approaching their reading lives a little more like women do – getting recommendations online from celebrities and influencers, browsing together, forming book clubs'.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Advertiser
7 hours ago
- The Advertiser
S.Korean court denies Baby Shark copyright claim
South Korea's Supreme Court has rejected a 30 million won ($A33,000) damage claim by an American composer who accused a South Korean kids content company of plagiarising his version of Baby Shark. The decision on Thursday ends a six-year legal battle over the globally popular tune known for its catchy "doo doo doo doo doo doo" hook. The top court upheld lower-court rulings dating to 2021 and 2023 that found no sufficient grounds to conclude Pinkfong infringed on Jonathan Wright's copyright. Wright, also known as Johnny Only, had recorded his version in 2011, four years before Pinkfong's, but both were based on a traditional melody popular for years at children's summer camps in the United States. The courts ruled that Wright's version did not differ enough from the original melody to qualify as an original creative work eligible for copyright protection, and that Pinkfong's song had clear differences from Wright's. The Supreme Court said its ruling reaffirms the established legal principle on existing folk tunes as derivative work. "The Supreme Court accepts the lower court's finding that the plaintiff's song did not involve substantial modifications to the folk tune related to the case to the extent that it could be regarded, by common social standards, as a separate work," it said in a statement. Pinkfong said the ruling confirmed its version of Baby Shark was based on a "traditional singalong chant" that was in the public domain. Chong Kyong-sok, Wright's South Korean lawyer called the outcome "a little disappointing", but said "the matter is now settled". Pinkfong's Baby Shark became a global phenomenon after it was released on YouTube in 2015, with the original Baby Shark Dance video exceeding 16 billion views and peaking at No.32 on the Billboard Hot 100. Baby Shark remains a crucial product for Pinkfong, which earned 45.1 billion won in revenue in the first half of 2025, according to its regulatory filing. The company has turned the five-member shark family - Baby Shark, Mama Shark, Papa Shark, Grandma Shark, and Grandpa Shark - into TV and Netflix shows, movies, smartphone apps and world-touring musicals. South Korea's Supreme Court has rejected a 30 million won ($A33,000) damage claim by an American composer who accused a South Korean kids content company of plagiarising his version of Baby Shark. The decision on Thursday ends a six-year legal battle over the globally popular tune known for its catchy "doo doo doo doo doo doo" hook. The top court upheld lower-court rulings dating to 2021 and 2023 that found no sufficient grounds to conclude Pinkfong infringed on Jonathan Wright's copyright. Wright, also known as Johnny Only, had recorded his version in 2011, four years before Pinkfong's, but both were based on a traditional melody popular for years at children's summer camps in the United States. The courts ruled that Wright's version did not differ enough from the original melody to qualify as an original creative work eligible for copyright protection, and that Pinkfong's song had clear differences from Wright's. The Supreme Court said its ruling reaffirms the established legal principle on existing folk tunes as derivative work. "The Supreme Court accepts the lower court's finding that the plaintiff's song did not involve substantial modifications to the folk tune related to the case to the extent that it could be regarded, by common social standards, as a separate work," it said in a statement. Pinkfong said the ruling confirmed its version of Baby Shark was based on a "traditional singalong chant" that was in the public domain. Chong Kyong-sok, Wright's South Korean lawyer called the outcome "a little disappointing", but said "the matter is now settled". Pinkfong's Baby Shark became a global phenomenon after it was released on YouTube in 2015, with the original Baby Shark Dance video exceeding 16 billion views and peaking at No.32 on the Billboard Hot 100. Baby Shark remains a crucial product for Pinkfong, which earned 45.1 billion won in revenue in the first half of 2025, according to its regulatory filing. The company has turned the five-member shark family - Baby Shark, Mama Shark, Papa Shark, Grandma Shark, and Grandpa Shark - into TV and Netflix shows, movies, smartphone apps and world-touring musicals. South Korea's Supreme Court has rejected a 30 million won ($A33,000) damage claim by an American composer who accused a South Korean kids content company of plagiarising his version of Baby Shark. The decision on Thursday ends a six-year legal battle over the globally popular tune known for its catchy "doo doo doo doo doo doo" hook. The top court upheld lower-court rulings dating to 2021 and 2023 that found no sufficient grounds to conclude Pinkfong infringed on Jonathan Wright's copyright. Wright, also known as Johnny Only, had recorded his version in 2011, four years before Pinkfong's, but both were based on a traditional melody popular for years at children's summer camps in the United States. The courts ruled that Wright's version did not differ enough from the original melody to qualify as an original creative work eligible for copyright protection, and that Pinkfong's song had clear differences from Wright's. The Supreme Court said its ruling reaffirms the established legal principle on existing folk tunes as derivative work. "The Supreme Court accepts the lower court's finding that the plaintiff's song did not involve substantial modifications to the folk tune related to the case to the extent that it could be regarded, by common social standards, as a separate work," it said in a statement. Pinkfong said the ruling confirmed its version of Baby Shark was based on a "traditional singalong chant" that was in the public domain. Chong Kyong-sok, Wright's South Korean lawyer called the outcome "a little disappointing", but said "the matter is now settled". Pinkfong's Baby Shark became a global phenomenon after it was released on YouTube in 2015, with the original Baby Shark Dance video exceeding 16 billion views and peaking at No.32 on the Billboard Hot 100. Baby Shark remains a crucial product for Pinkfong, which earned 45.1 billion won in revenue in the first half of 2025, according to its regulatory filing. The company has turned the five-member shark family - Baby Shark, Mama Shark, Papa Shark, Grandma Shark, and Grandpa Shark - into TV and Netflix shows, movies, smartphone apps and world-touring musicals. South Korea's Supreme Court has rejected a 30 million won ($A33,000) damage claim by an American composer who accused a South Korean kids content company of plagiarising his version of Baby Shark. The decision on Thursday ends a six-year legal battle over the globally popular tune known for its catchy "doo doo doo doo doo doo" hook. The top court upheld lower-court rulings dating to 2021 and 2023 that found no sufficient grounds to conclude Pinkfong infringed on Jonathan Wright's copyright. Wright, also known as Johnny Only, had recorded his version in 2011, four years before Pinkfong's, but both were based on a traditional melody popular for years at children's summer camps in the United States. The courts ruled that Wright's version did not differ enough from the original melody to qualify as an original creative work eligible for copyright protection, and that Pinkfong's song had clear differences from Wright's. The Supreme Court said its ruling reaffirms the established legal principle on existing folk tunes as derivative work. "The Supreme Court accepts the lower court's finding that the plaintiff's song did not involve substantial modifications to the folk tune related to the case to the extent that it could be regarded, by common social standards, as a separate work," it said in a statement. Pinkfong said the ruling confirmed its version of Baby Shark was based on a "traditional singalong chant" that was in the public domain. Chong Kyong-sok, Wright's South Korean lawyer called the outcome "a little disappointing", but said "the matter is now settled". Pinkfong's Baby Shark became a global phenomenon after it was released on YouTube in 2015, with the original Baby Shark Dance video exceeding 16 billion views and peaking at No.32 on the Billboard Hot 100. Baby Shark remains a crucial product for Pinkfong, which earned 45.1 billion won in revenue in the first half of 2025, according to its regulatory filing. The company has turned the five-member shark family - Baby Shark, Mama Shark, Papa Shark, Grandma Shark, and Grandpa Shark - into TV and Netflix shows, movies, smartphone apps and world-touring musicals.


Perth Now
9 hours ago
- Perth Now
S.Korean court denies Baby Shark copyright claim
South Korea's Supreme Court has rejected a 30 million won ($A33,000) damage claim by an American composer who accused a South Korean kids content company of plagiarising his version of Baby Shark. The decision on Thursday ends a six-year legal battle over the globally popular tune known for its catchy "doo doo doo doo doo doo" hook. The top court upheld lower-court rulings dating to 2021 and 2023 that found no sufficient grounds to conclude Pinkfong infringed on Jonathan Wright's copyright. Wright, also known as Johnny Only, had recorded his version in 2011, four years before Pinkfong's, but both were based on a traditional melody popular for years at children's summer camps in the United States. The courts ruled that Wright's version did not differ enough from the original melody to qualify as an original creative work eligible for copyright protection, and that Pinkfong's song had clear differences from Wright's. The Supreme Court said its ruling reaffirms the established legal principle on existing folk tunes as derivative work. "The Supreme Court accepts the lower court's finding that the plaintiff's song did not involve substantial modifications to the folk tune related to the case to the extent that it could be regarded, by common social standards, as a separate work," it said in a statement. Wright's South Korean lawyer and Pinkfong did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Pinkfong's Baby Shark became a global phenomenon after it was released on YouTube in 2015, with the original Baby Shark Dance video exceeding 16 billion views and peaking at No.32 on the Billboard Hot 100. Baby Shark remains a crucial product for Pinkfong, which earned 45.1 billion won in revenue in the first half of 2025, according to its regulatory filing. The company has turned the five-member shark family - Baby Shark, Mama Shark, Papa Shark, Grandma Shark, and Grandpa Shark - into TV and Netflix shows, movies, smartphone apps and world-touring musicals.

Sky News AU
14 hours ago
- Sky News AU
Donald Trump announces Kennedy Center Award recipients
US President Donald Trump has announced who will be honoured at the 2025 Kennedy Centre Awards. Country musician George Strait, movie star Sylvester Stallone and rock band KISS will be celebrated with honours, which is one of the highest accolades in American performing arts. The president has recently taken a keen interest in the awards, vowing to overhaul the institution he believes is "too liberal'.