Image description
A Twitter screenshot which shows a quote-retweet and a reply to said QRT.
The quoted tweet from Alex & Books (@AlexAndBooks_) on November 5, 2025 reads,
Books men like to read vs. Books women like to read:
and has an image of a graph titled “Goodreads reviewers by genre and sex (Thelwall M., 2017)”; the data seems to be from the 2017 paper “Reader and author gender and genre in Goodreads” by Mike Thelwall. The graph has a list of Goodreads genres on the Y-axis and percentage of readers on the X-axis, with bars for “Males” and “Females” (representing the gender proportion of reviewers in a sample of books within each genre), and the list of genres sorted from highest male readership to lowest male readership. The most striking thing about the graph is that females overwhelmingly dominate in nearly all genres, with only four genres having more male than female readers (and only relatively small margins even then). The genre with the highest male-to-female ratio (roughly 59% to 39%) is philosophy.
I have provided tabular editions of this data below in two versions: an abbreviated version with only the genres and percentages, as in the graph, as well as a full version with all the data from the paper plus the percentages (since the percentages were not in the original paper, only raw numbers).
The QRT from august (@regularagust) on November 8 reads,
This becomes way funnier to look at if you know what the philosophy section in the average bookstore looks like.
The reply from 滿帖子乖謬之言觀汝似有瘋症 (@remmettmaxwell) on November 8 reads,
what we imagine: “phenomenology of the being and cognition” by j. j. r. von Grosseschleichen (1889)
what they mean: “locking in: 12 lessons on the meaning of life i learned from being with the operators in the coast guard auxiliary”
Data (abbreviated, percentages only)
| Genre[1] | Male % | Female % |
|---|---|---|
| philosophy | 59.1% | 40.9% |
| sequential-art>comics | 57.8% | 42.2% |
| politics | 56.4% | 43.6% |
| sequential-art>graphic-novels | 54.9% | 45.1% |
| science-fiction | 49.8% | 50.2% |
| history | 46.9% | 53.1% |
| religion | 42.0% | 58.0% |
| science | 41.4% | 58.6% |
| literature | 40.9% | 59.1% |
| horror | 40.8% | 59.2% |
| classics | 36.5% | 63.5% |
| non-fiction | 35.8% | 64.2% |
| reference | 35.0% | 65.0% |
| novels | 34.6% | 65.4% |
| biography | 34.2% | 65.8% |
| adventure | 33.9% | 66.1% |
| psychology | 33.7% | 66.3% |
| short-stories | 32.7% | 67.3% |
| thriller | 32.2% | 67.8% |
| travel | 30.9% | 69.1% |
| mystery>crime | 30.4% | 69.6% |
| poetry | 29.8% | 70.2% |
| art | 29.4% | 70.6% |
| fantasy | 27.8% | 72.2% |
| autobiography>memoir | 24.9% | 75.1% |
| christian | 24.4% | 75.6% |
| fiction | 23.9% | 76.1% |
| humor | 23.1% | 76.9% |
| thriller>mystery-thriller | 22.9% | 77.1% |
| mystery | 21.8% | 78.2% |
| sequential-art>manga | 21.1% | 78.9% |
| suspense | 21.1% | 78.9% |
| historical | 17.8% | 82.2% |
| historical-fiction | 16.9% | 83.1% |
| fantasy>magic | 16.8% | 83.2% |
| romance>m-m-romance | 15.8% | 84.2% |
| young-adult | 15.0% | 85.0% |
| childrens | 13.1% | 86.9% |
| food-and-drink>cookbooks | 13.1% | 86.9% |
| animals | 12.6% | 87.4% |
| adult | 12.3% | 87.7% |
| fantasy>paranormal | 11.7% | 88.3% |
| contemporary | 10.4% | 89.6% |
| childrens>picture-books | 9.8% | 90.2% |
| adult-fiction>erotica | 6.3% | 93.7% |
| romance | 5.4% | 94.6% |
| romance>paranormal-romance | 4.0% | 96.0% |
| womens-fiction>chick-lit | 3.6% | 96.4% |
| romance>contemporary-romance | 2.7% | 97.3% |
| romance>historical-romance | 2.5% | 97.5% |
Data (full)
| Genre* | Books | Ratings | Male reviewers | Female reviewers | Male % | Female % | Reviews for RQ5[2] |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| philosophy | 5131 | 95606 | 11234 | 7772 | 59.1% | 40.9% | 857 |
| sequential-art>comics | 8567 | 166331 | 13334 | 9749 | 57.8% | 42.2% | 1263 |
| politics | 3894 | 34030 | 12657 | 9790 | 56.4% | 43.6% | 490 |
| sequential-art>graphic-novels | 6961 | 169828 | 13204 | 10828 | 54.9% | 45.1% | 878 |
| science-fiction | 9967 | 261253 | 22221 | 22363 | 49.8% | 50.2% | 1614 |
| history | 16315 | 199503 | 33017 | 37310 | 46.9% | 53.1% | 4033 |
| religion | 5056 | 54552 | 11505 | 15890 | 42.0% | 58.0% | 676 |
| science | 4463 | 71467 | 9908 | 14006 | 41.4% | 58.6% | 938 |
| literature | 3697 | 77384 | 9679 | 13979 | 40.9% | 59.1% | 92 |
| horror | 5545 | 161636 | 9923 | 14398 | 40.8% | 59.2% | 914 |
| classics | 5187 | 664000 | 10818 | 18831 | 36.5% | 63.5% | 556 |
| non-fiction | 40208 | 507491 | 69899 | 125264 | 35.8% | 64.2% | 8215 |
| reference | 6039 | 27524 | 8862 | 16453 | 35.0% | 65.0% | 580 |
| novels | 4564 | 52933 | 11389 | 21551 | 34.6% | 65.4% | 76 |
| biography | 7925 | 103156 | 18571 | 35705 | 34.2% | 65.8% | 1627 |
| adventure | 4822 | 83352 | 13506 | 26298 | 33.9% | 66.1% | 180 |
| psychology | 3259 | 49520 | 6378 | 12558 | 33.7% | 66.3% | 617 |
| short-stories | 7834 | 96615 | 8555 | 17644 | 32.7% | 67.3% | 758 |
| thriller | 5003 | 86473 | 12521 | 26326 | 32.2% | 67.8% | 453 |
| travel | 2941 | 31811 | 4369 | 9781 | 30.9% | 69.1% | 654 |
| mystery>crime | 4786 | 72899 | 11691 | 26793 | 30.4% | 69.6% | 272 |
| poetry | 7011 | 111621 | 5686 | 13389 | 29.8% | 70.2% | 1943 |
| art | 4469 | 30879 | 4043 | 9718 | 29.4% | 70.6% | 876 |
| fantasy | 19909 | 1057426 | 26409 | 68596 | 27.8% | 72.2% | 2758 |
| autobiography>memoir | 3673 | 67055 | 8576 | 25807 | 24.9% | 75.1% | 480 |
| christian | 4356 | 45478 | 7915 | 24530 | 24.4% | 75.6% | 796 |
| fiction | 41475 | 1218673 | 69470 | 220826 | 23.9% | 76.1% | 5187 |
| humor | 6409 | 87725 | 10417 | 34633 | 23.1% | 76.9% | 516 |
| thriller>mystery-thriller | 3167 | 26621 | 7562 | 25407 | 22.9% | 77.1% | 30 |
| mystery | 13093 | 389375 | 20210 | 72440 | 21.8% | 78.2% | 3645 |
| sequential-art>manga | 6623 | 285353 | 349 | 1306 | 21.1% | 78.9% | 162 |
| suspense | 3829 | 41560 | 6874 | 25647 | 21.1% | 78.9% | 79 |
| historical | 8654 | 137803 | 12514 | 57776 | 17.8% | 82.2% | 260 |
| historical-fiction | 9243 | 309406 | 12213 | 60237 | 16.9% | 83.1% | 1909 |
| fantasy>magic | 3028 | 60821 | 3188 | 15762 | 16.8% | 83.2% | 70 |
| romance>m-m-romance | 5729 | 125520 | 1100 | 5847 | 15.8% | 84.2% | 525 |
| young-adult | 11286 | 621919 | 10739 | 60915 | 15.0% | 85.0% | 1943 |
| childrens | 14147 | 163267 | 11264 | 74404 | 13.1% | 86.9% | 1989 |
| food-and-drink>cookbooks | 3642 | 36381 | 1183 | 7833 | 13.1% | 86.9% | 899 |
| animals | 3280 | 29674 | 3501 | 24264 | 12.6% | 87.4% | 294 |
| adult | 7043 | 72240 | 7151 | 50876 | 12.3% | 87.7% | 101 |
| fantasy>paranormal | 9094 | 261909 | 4556 | 34374 | 11.7% | 88.3% | 599 |
| contemporary | 13853 | 204599 | 8471 | 72730 | 10.4% | 89.6% | 227 |
| childrens>picture-books | 7410 | 131850 | 4754 | 43752 | 9.8% | 90.2% | 2945 |
| adult-fiction>erotica | 6981 | 78255 | 906 | 13487 | 6.3% | 93.7% | 427 |
| romance | 29205 | 676026 | 6805 | 119519 | 5.4% | 94.6% | 3342 |
| romance>paranormal-romance | 4239 | 110105 | 706 | 17100 | 4.0% | 96.0% | 288 |
| womens-fiction>chick-lit | 4072 | 91559 | 1318 | 35144 | 3.6% | 96.4% | 481 |
| romance>contemporary-romance | 7403 | 91478 | 868 | 30965 | 2.7% | 97.3% | 212 |
| romance>historical-romance | 3767 | 103730 | 555 | 21370 | 2.5% | 97.5% | 872 |
edit: just realized the link I gave for the paper wasn’t the open access link I used, so here’s a direct link for that one
The symbol > indicates that the category on the right has been classified by Goodreads as being a subcategory of the category on the left. ↩︎
Review Question 5: Are there differences in the types of things that male and female reviewers write about male and female authored books in specific genres? ↩︎
Dude I hate Marcus Aurelius and his stoicism. “There’s nothing one can do”, “we should just accept things as they are and not really try to change anything ever”… brother you are THE EMPEROR OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE. You are the person who CAN do the most like ever. Instead you choose to whine and be a little pussy? Come the fuck on.
Lol, I do sympathize with this to an extent, but I do think that this book has some good tidbits for those struggling with the ‘choose your battles’ problem. Accepting that you won’t influence everything, and letting that not impact you deeply in a negative way, can really help in focusing on what you can do. MA was definitely mixing these 2 things up quite often, where he could actually affect things but was stoic anyways, but I don’t think dismissing it outright is useful to communists.
It just pisses me off that he thought HE would be the dude to pass on that message and live the ideology. And that makes a bunch of privileged chuds think “if not even Marcus Aurelius could actually change things, why should I try?”. When they could actually do something.
Yeah, these people are also highly ignorant of the history and culture in which Aurelius found himself. I read it like this: MA was living in a world and culture and position where taking action, being decisive, and such were all givens. Of course he had to be able to do all that, and why focus on something so obvious? So MA was wrestling with the, for him, harder aspects of powerlessness which, though limited, were his main enemy.
Chuds read things like it’s an evangelical reading the bible: every word is the truth regardless of any context. (This is also a western Marxist tendency regarding Marx). So MA saying he couldn’t change something is read as nothing can ever change so complain about attempts