Ebooks and Age

[drjd]

I don't see any apparent correlation between age, sex and reading habits. It is rather dependent on the cultural, social and educational backgrounds of individuals.

[meeera]

Originally Posted by MikeB1972

So Man/Woman/Other works?

Depends on the circumstances. In this case, the OP doesn't appear to be wanting to survey gender or sexuality anyway, but age, so gender can simply be left out of it altogether. If you're creating a survey where gender is relevant, your best bet is a free text box.

[djulian]

Originally Posted by meeera

Depends on the circumstances. In this case, the OP doesn't appear to be wanting to survey gender or sexuality anyway, but age, so gender can simply be left out of it altogether. If you're creating a survey where gender is relevant, your best bet is a free text box.

I included gender originally because the article made a big deal of the predominance of women of 45+ years in the ereading market.

Also, I'm not sure how to include a free text box, and I've seen them wildly abused in other online polls (with hilarious results).

[pdurrant]

I suggest changing 'LGBTQ' to 'Other'.

And if you want to keep up a MobileRead tradition, change the last option to "The blue one, next to the fish".

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by eschwartz

Men are too manly to read romance. Obviously.

(And Twilight (!!!) was nevertheless disturbingly popular amongst a certain portion of my male-only high school. )

They saw it as a cautionary tale about the expectations of the other half of the species. I'll bet quite a few became hermits and monks after reading those books.

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by Catlady

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

Some do it openly and proudly, like Sydney Sheldon, and some do it openly but insist they don't really write romance, like Nicholas Sparks.

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by pdurrant

I suggest changing 'LGBTQ' to 'Other'.

And if you want to keep up a MobileRead tradition, change the last option to "The blue one, next to the fish".

Or add, "I'm just an AI, Turing testing Mobilereads".

[sun surfer]

Originally Posted by pdurrant

I suggest changing 'LGBTQ' to 'Other'.

"Other" can seem dismissive. I would recommend something like "Non-Binary Gender".

And make either the younger or older options include the age of 45, lol.

[howyoudoin]

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.

No, it really doesn't.

There are romance books.

There are mommy porn books.

It is wrong to conflate romance with mommy porn.

It is not wrong to call mommy porn mommy porn.

Ignoring this simple concept and employing terms like snobbery and irrationality smacks of defensiveness.

[howyoudoin]

Originally Posted by Sweetpea

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

+1

I increasingly find myself doing this. It sucks that I'll probably lose out on actually good offers now and then because of it.

[crich70]

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?


http://www.theguardian.com/books/201...n-study-claims

ETA: Also, seriously, please forgive me if the poll options are unnecessarily restrictive or unfair in some manner. I started the thread as a poll and then I realized I didn't have nearly enough fields/options for the reality of life and identity.

I figured they meant 45 and older. I'm almost halfway between 45 and 46 and I love ebook tech.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by howyoudoin

It is not wrong to call mommy porn mommy porn.

Sure it is. Mainly because mommy porn doesn't really exist. And if it did, its definition would be different for everyone that used it; and it wouldn't only be mommies that read it. Hence the pointlessness and dismissiveness of the term. It's an unnecessary stereotyping of the demographic that reads it. There's no "mommy scifi," or "mommy mystery", or "mommy thriller", so why the need for a "mommy porn?"

I'd call it, "Romance that uptight Romance readers feel the need to ostracize," myself.

[howyoudoin]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

Sure it is. Mainly because mommy porn doesn't really exist. And if it did, its definition would be different for everyone that used it; and it wouldn't only be mommies that read it. Hence the pointlessness and dismissiveness of the term. It's an unnecessary stereotyping of the demographic that reads it. There's no "mommy scifi," or "mommy mystery", or "mommy thriller", so why the need for a "mommy porn?"

I'd call it, "Romance that uptight Romance readers feel the need to ostracize," myself.

It does exist, and the difficulty in defining it is the same as the difficulty in pin pointing pornography.

As someone is supposed to have remarked when asked to distinguish between art and pornography: "I can't tell you the difference in so many words, but I sure as hell know pornography when I see it!"

Point being, difficulty in defining something is not an indication that it doesn't exist.

It's the 'mommy' part that rankles, isn't it? That makes sense.

If only we had a different term for the literary porn patronised majorly by women of a certain age group.

[shalym]

Originally Posted by howyoudoin

It does exist, and the difficulty in defining it is the same as the difficulty in pin pointing pornography.

As someone is supposed to have remarked when asked to distinguish between art and pornography: "I can't tell you the difference in so many words, but I sure as hell know pornography when I see it!"

Point being, difficulty in defining something is not an indication that it doesn't exist.

It's the 'mommy' part that rankles, isn't it? That makes sense.

If only we had a different term for the literary porn patronised majorly by women of a certain age group.

Ok...so what exactly are you calling "mommy porn"? Is it erotic romance? Because, you know, that actually is a genre. https://www.allromanceebooks.com/rom...ks-erotic.html
What is the "certain age group" that you're talking about? I know quite a few women who read both romance and erotic romance, and they range in age from 17 to 74. Most of them are in their mid 20s to late 30s.

Shari

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by howyoudoin

It's the 'mommy' part that rankles, isn't it? That makes sense.

Of course it rankles. It's a pointless distinction.

If only we had a different term for the literary porn patronised majorly by women of a certain age group.

Why the need for such a term at all? There's no other subgenres that get so specific about including their primary patrons' genders, roles or childbearing status in their titles. No "Early 30s Female Urban Fantasy" No "Retired Gentlemen's Rope Opera."

"Porn" suffices (if you must differentiate between it and other romance/erotic fiction in the first place). Which demographic a book is targeted at has never been a very reliable indicator of which demographic is actually reading it anyway.