The other morning on the subway I sat next to an attractive young blonde woman who was reading something on her iPad. She was very well-dressed, carrying a Prada bag with tastefully applied make-up indeed, she had an unmistakable air of wealth, material success and even authority. I suspected she worked as a highly-paid Wall Street lawyer or stockbroker or something of that sort. So, I was curious to see what she was so focused on. The Wall Street Journal perhaps? The Economist? Quite the contrary; rather, she was concentrating on a romance novel. Then I realized that I have known many women who love romance novels--smart, attractive, successful, "liberated," modem females who nonetheless find some kind of deep satisfaction and thrill from those hyper-romantic, artificial and extremely unrealistic tales of handsome, manly heroes falling in love with virginal women, enduring a series of adventures, then no doubt having a happy ending.  _ . Yet, the genre  remains enormously popular. Consider some of these surprising statistics from the good folks at the Romance Writers of America (RWA): *More than 9,000 romance titles were released last year, with sales of about $1.44 billion (more than triple the revenues generated by classic literary fiction). *More than 90 percent of the market are women (okay, that's not at all surprising). * Readers are typically women between the ages 30 and 54 who are themselves involved in a romantic relationship (betraying the stereotype that only lonely women long for these tales of love and adventure). *Almost 40 percent of romance book consumers have an annual income of between $50,000 and $99,900 (placing them firmly in the middle class). I had thought that romance novels accounted for a very small share of the literary market, so I was quite surprised that this part has such enormous popularity. But I must wonder why so many women--forty years after the women's liberation movement continue to indulge in the fanciful tales? I'm not sure if it represents a kind of "rejection" of the women's liberation movement, but clearly something is missing in the lives of contemporary ladies. A romance author named Donna Hatch who focuses on the Regency period (early 19th century Britain) explained the appeal of such books this way: "Regency men were civilized and treated women with courtesy. When a lady entered the room, gentlemen stood, doffed their hats, offered an arm, bowed, and a hundred other little things I wish men still did today. But they were also very athletic; they hunted, raced, boxed, rode horses. They were manly. Strong. Noble. Honorable. And that is why I love them!" Mrs. Hatch may have expressed the secret desires and attitudes of untold millions of her peers---that is, in the early 21st century, have women grown tired of the burdens and expectations that the "freedoms" they have gained give them? Is this a rejection of modem feminism? Do women long for days of old when men were masculine gentlemen and women were feminine and protected as precious treasures and regarded as possessions? Perhaps most women (even the ones who get lost in romance novels) do not want to go all the way back but it is obvious, _ . In the author's opinion, what is missing in the lives of contemporary women?
Authority. Dignity. Liberty. Care.