I did find you went a bit strongly off into the whole secure-man-thing ... but we'd also gotten away from what was the original point here. I do think that it's particularly admirable that the man in the original letter did keep his promise when his daughter was presenting him with books that aren't quite in his taste.<quoted text>
For the record, if you go back and read -- my meaning is that if someone feels that a person is not manly b/c he connects with his daughter by reading books she likes and sharing his books with her -- that to me is an insecure person and speaks volumes about that person who believes such a thing.
And if it wasn't clear, well here's an explanation that must have been needed for others to comprehend what I was saying. Not saying it was necessarily the reader, could be the writer -- but whatever.
But the other thing to look at is that the list of authors HE apparently presented to her aren't actually that far different. He does read those type of novels. What she had him read might not have been within his chosen sphere, but was definitely well within his reading comfort zone (if he was reading the authors on his list by choice). So, in reality, the agreement he made hasn't actually been all that challenging. And really, the whole letter is kind of stupid. If someone is reading what was on list A by choice, they are most likely familiar with the authors on list B, and vice versa.
If Sub or edog had said they were willing to read say, Fitzgerald but totally unwilling to read the named female authors, that's an issue of insecurity or bull-headedness. The guys like that who actually were studying English (my undergrad is English, my masters is in engineering) are just flat-out aholes. You honor Dickens but won't touch Austen or Bronte with a ten-foot pole? Ahole.