Ebooks and Age

[eschwartz]

Originally Posted by Catlady

They're not too manly to write romance though--hiding behind a flowerly feminine pseudonym.

Crass commercialism is always okay, so long as no one knows you do it.

[CWatkinsNash]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

I do think that asking if anyone is LGBTQ is just wrong. Those two answer need to go. Why does it matter sexual orientation?

I'm pretty sure that was an attempt to include non-binary-gendered individuals. Well-meaning but incorrect in this context.

[murg]

Originally Posted by djulian

Hmm...I'm definitely not over 45, and I'm definitely not a woman, and I read on my Kindle a ton.

I'm curious about the following:
- Is this unique to Kobo's user base?
- Is this true for reading in general (and not just e-reading)? (There are some notes on that in the article.)
- Is this true for MR forum participants?

This looks like it's based on Kobo's own survey.

In that case, it's obvious that 45 year old women who read Romance are the most likely to be conned into completing an online survey which will result them a non-working discount coupon. The other demographics are too smart for Kobo.

[meeera]

Originally Posted by CWatkinsNash

I'm pretty sure that was an attempt to include non-binary-gendered individuals. I would have worded it as "non-binary / other" rather than LGBTQ, just for clarity's sake, but LGBTQ certainly can refer to both orientation and gender identity.

Lesbian, gay, bi, and trans refer to gender identities that aren't "man" or "woman"? Nope, and implying so can be outright offensive (Gay men aren't real men? Trans women aren't real women? Etc.). Genderqueer, genderfluid, nonbinary, intersex, sure. But using "LGBTQ" as a synonym for "not man or woman" is just plain wrong.

[GeoffR]

I think a big reason ebooks appeal to older people is simply eyesight. Being able to adjust the font size, line spacing, and font weight; and not being restricted to the limited selection available as large-print paper books. I doubt it is Kobo-specific.

[CWatkinsNash]

Originally Posted by meeera

Lesbian, gay, bi, and trans refer to gender identities that aren't "man" or "woman"? Nope, and implying so can be outright offensive (Gay men aren't real men? Trans women aren't real women? Etc.). Genderqueer, genderfluid, nonbinary, intersex, sure. But using "LGBTQ" as a synonym for "not man or woman" is just plain wrong.

Lately I've been seeing the standard LGBTQ used in a context which includes intersex and non-binary gender identities, without the "I" included. A community thing rather than a specific thing, and of course it doesn't work in the context of the poll. I'm most certainly not implying anything about anyone. A poorly worded response on my part, however, which I have edited. Regardless, if we go into detail in this thread, we'll get moved out of it.

On topic...

I'm amused by the whole "mommy porn" thing. When I was growing up, some of the middle-aged-and-up men in my family were reading paperback westerns that were basically erotica set in the old west. I remember, as a small child, picking a book from the shelf, wondering why my grandfather liked those books so much. Boy, was that an education.

[Terisa de morgan]

It's the same snobby view that usually affects to romance reader. At the end, I think it says more about who uses the term than who reads the books.

[AnemicOak]

Originally Posted by Terisa de morgan

It's the same snobby view that usually affects to romance reader. At the end, I think it says more about who uses the term than who reads the books.

+1....

[MGlitch]

There are loads of studies out there that show women read more from a young age and continue to do so as they grow up. Whether this is somehow a gender trait that is coded in our DNA, or it's something that is brought on through social constructs is as of yet undetermined.

There are also studies out there, beside the Kobo survey, which report that the younger you are the less likely you are to like ereaders. Of course there are exceptions, because we aren't all the same person.

Now the natural extrapolation from these surveys is that older women will make up the larger percentage of ereader owners.

As far as MR is concerned, you're limiting the scope of your survey fairly drastically. I don't think this community is representative of the world community, or even the community of ereader users.

[Sweetpea]

It is said I'm female. It is also said that I have been born less than 45 years ago.

I hate romance novels and crime novels I tend to ignore as well.

Originally Posted by howyoudoin

Also the fact that Kobo keep pushing that genre with their recommendations and email newsletters.

Which is why I generally take one glance at their recommendations and newsletters and then completely ignore them...

[meeera]

Originally Posted by CWatkinsNash

Lately I've been seeing the standard LGBTQ used in a context which includes intersex and non-binary gender identities, without the "I" included. A community thing rather than a specific thing, and of course it doesn't work in the context of the poll.

Queer and trans* _can_ include nonbinary/GQ/GF people, but neither necessarily does (neither does intersex, come to that); and as you say "LGBTQ" make no sense at all in this poll context.

[eschwartz]

Originally Posted by Sweetpea

It is said I'm female. It is also said that I have been born less than 45 years ago.

I hate romance novels and crime novels I tend to ignore as well.


Which is why I generally take one glance at their recommendations and newsletters and then completely ignore them...

I'm in it (reading) for the wizards and dragons.
Though that may not be odd for my demographic...

[djulian]

Thanks all for the responses, everyone! It's interesting that the MR participants are so far split evenly between men and women, and that the reader age is predominately over 45.

@Meera & @CWatkinsNash: I appreciate the useful comments. No offense was meant, and for any that was given, I apologize. It was unintentional, and the result of a lack of familiarity on my part with regards to current gender theory.

[MikeB1972]

Originally Posted by Catlady

They're not too manly to write romance though--hiding behind a flowerly feminine pseudonym.

I'm a lumberjack and I'm OK

[MikeB1972]

Originally Posted by meeera

Lesbian, gay, bi, and trans refer to gender identities that aren't "man" or "woman"? Nope, and implying so can be outright offensive (Gay men aren't real men? Trans women aren't real women? Etc.). Genderqueer, genderfluid, nonbinary, intersex, sure. But using "LGBTQ" as a synonym for "not man or woman" is just plain wrong.

So Man/Woman/Other works?

I don't particularly care what people call themselves, as long as they don't go ballistic at me when I use the wrong pronoun, if people create new pronouns and I don't know them, tough.