Are there really 'men's books' and 'women's books'?

Experience forces a librarian to conclude that – at least when it comes to books – some sexual stereotypes are true.

Atef Hassan/Reuters
A librarian sorts books at a library in Basra, Iraq.

Yesterday a suit-clad man in his late 50s came up to the circulation desk with a stack of books to check out at the library where I work.

They were all romances.

As he handed me his library card, I waited for the disclaimer. Sure enough, he announced,  "These aren't for me. They're for my wife."

 "A likely story," I joked. "Don't worry, there's nothing wrong with a dude enjoying the occasional bodice-ripper."

"No, really,"  he insisted, reddening. "She's home with the flu! She sent me to the library with a reading list!"

"It's okay," I said, laughing, "I believe you."

Do men ever check out romances for themselves? In over a decade of library work I've never seen it happen. Although if straight men did read romances, they might learn a few things.

Apparently, they'd rather not.

As a feminist, I'm all in favor of avoiding gender stereotyping. Still, working in a public library has demolished any "Free to be You and Me" notion I might have had about guys and gals being just the same. When our patrons bring their books to the circulation desk for check-out, there are few surprises.

"Battle Secrets of World War II?" It's a dude.

"I Kissed An Earl?" It's a lady.

Both genders do read literary fiction, mysteries and travel books. Nobody of either gender reads poetry anymore.

And everyone seems to love Stephen King.

But for a certain kind of book, there's absolutely no crossover. No man has ever checked out "Entwined Together" without a disclaimer. And when women check out "Take, Burn or Destroy: A Novel of Naval Adventure," they invariably remark, "This is for my husband."

Is no woman curious enough about the appeal of naval adventure to fictionally partake?

Not in my library.

Although if she did, she might learn something.

But for our women readers, a book with "naval adventure" in the title is dead in the water. Nor will their husbands or boyfriends go for anything with a half-clad couple embracing on the cover, or the words "love," "desire" or "passion" in the title.

Unless it's "Love Of Mayhem" or "Passion for Tanks, Battles and Explosions."

When a local politician put out a call last year for books to send to our front-line troops, Deb and I went through the books on our sale table for titles that would appeal to what we figured was a group of predominately young, straight guys.

"Battle Earth?"


"Nelson's Fighting Cocks?" (Yes, the book really exists.)

"That's a winner!"

We ended up with a selection of macho titles and thrillers, some literary fiction, two Paul Monette classics for the out-and-proud, and (optimistically) a poetry collection. But we left Debbie Macomber and Jennifer Crusie on the table.

A library patron who overheard us took us to task. "Don't censor the books you send the troops because of your own gender bias," she protested.

"I'm a feminist too," I told her. "But I'm also a realist. Trust me – sending chick lit to the troops would be a colossal waste of time and postage."

"But if only – "

"We understand your concern," Deb cut in. "But we're trained professionals here. Just let us do our job?"

We sent a bunch of manly titles to the troops and felt just fine about it. If there's a soldier out there who was longing to kick back after a hard day's fighting with a copy of "The Viscount Who Loved Me," all I can say is "I'm sorry."

Will things ever change? They're marketing Easy Bake Ovens to little boys these days, so anything is possible. Maybe we're on the cusp of a Gender Neutral Reading Utopia, a brave new world where women check out "Retreat, Hell!" and men eagerly await the next Julie Garwood.

Would that be a better world? I actually think it would. Opening your mind and expanding your horizons is a good thing. (And I personally plan to tackle "Tank Battle!" as soon as I've finished reading "Crazy for You.")

In the meantime, want to blow your local librarian's mind? If you're female, the next time you hit the library, check out "Take, Burn or Destroy." If you're a dude, bring a batch of romances up to the circulation desk for check out.

With no disclaimer.

(Extra points if you exclaim, "I can't wait to get home, grab a cold drink, and get lost in "Sins and Scarlet Lace.")

Go ahead. Defy a few gender stereotypes. I dare you. (You might even learn something.)

Roz Warren writes for The New York Times, The Huffington Post, and Womens Voices For Change. Connect with Roz on Facebook at

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to

QR Code to Are there really 'men's books' and 'women's books'?
Read this article in
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today