Books & Pains: Is Masculinity a Larger Blind Spot than Femininity?
If you were to presuppose that the purpose of non-fiction books is to fill a knowledge gap… And if you were to combine that with the idea that the market reflects general human demand…
You might intuitively discover a rough correlation between the number of books available on a subject, and the knowledge gaps/problems/pains that people are trying to solve. In other words, you might conclude that the more books there are on a topic, the greater the pain is felt on that topic. (Hence the existence of the book to, hopefully, address that problem/pain.)
ie: Collectively, religious/spiritual texts are most in print throughout the world, therefore, you might connect that there is a significant human desire for spiritual fulfillment. Whereas books on weaving baskets are significantly fewer. And, likewise, the cooking section of the bookstore is often quite full as we all seem to have a desire to eat well.
And so, I always find it interesting when I see various correlations in the availability of books… For example, that there are twice as many books on Amazon that are relevant to a search on “masculinity,” yet half as many on “femininity.”
