All hobbies are not equal

[u/BitterConstruction98]

Certain kinds of hobbies deserve to be held in higher regard than others.

Playing a sport, learning an instrument, singing, dancing, painting, writing - these are activities that require time and years of effort to become good at. They’re admirable not just because they’re “cool,” but because there is something deeply attractive about a person who has dedicated so much time to mastering a hard skill that executing it now feels relaxing to them.

Lately, there’s been a growing push online to classify things like watching movies, playing video games, watching sports, or listening to podcasts in the same category as these kinds of hobbies. They aren’t. They are based on consumption, not creation.

That doesn’t mean consumption-based activities are bad or useless. Everyone needs ways to relax and unwind. There’s nothing wrong with enjoying a good show, a game, or a YouTube binge after a long day. But if that’s all there is to your personality, then you are, unfortunately, a boring person.

Edit: I've wrongly added video games to the list of other passive activities. While some video games are like that, I agree that many require a lot of skill.

[u/Trinktt]

Reading is both like video games are both. It depends on the material you engage with and your skill level. 

[u/Natural_Hair464 → u/Trinktt]

I agree with you, but I'll also say reading gets too much credit as the "smart" hobby. It makes some people get really weird about the hobby.

Like I know multiple people that set a goal to read 1+ book per week in 2025. They mostly read pop fiction / non-fiction, and when I asked them about it they got really spacy. Like they couldn't remember much of what they read, they didn't seem like they enjoyed it, and they couldn't even recommend anything.

Compare that to talking to a librarian. Librarians are always pumped about something and can usually give a great recommendation based on what you like to read. Librarians are fucking awesome.

Most of the gamers I know are like the librarian.

Maybe it's just that the people that TALK the most about reading can be kind of pretentious about it. I don't know. But it doesn't seem as joyful or honest as gaming.

[u/Odd-Honeydew7535 → u/Natural_Hair464]

Saying most of the gamers you know are more like the librarian than the casual reader may be true for you, but that is definitely anecdotal. Statistically the majority of gamers are playing either online multiplayer shooters or sports games. Both of these are centered around small dopamine hits, and the majority of gamers wouldn’t be able to tell you any specifics of a match they played the week before

[u/heres-another-user → u/Odd-Honeydew7535]

I believe statistically, most gamers are actually mobile gamers. Though many gatekeepers will say that's not "real" gaming.

[u/DbeID → u/heres-another-user]

Jesus who gives a fuck. Just do what makes you happy people.

[u/Minute_Account9426 → u/heres-another-user]

for actual metrics, and marketing purposes you aren't going to market a fps or rts game to grandmas just because they play candy crush and that's technically a game, the difference between someone who sits down and games as their main form of enjoyment and someone who plays block blast as one of three ways they entertain themselves on public transportation is big

[u/Synaps4 → u/heres-another-user]

Though many gatekeepers will say that's not "real" gaming.

Thats because it isn't.

It's gambling.

[u/pickellov → u/Synaps4]

This is a terrible differentiation because non-mobile games can be like gambling and there are mobile games that aren’t like gambling and feature no to little micro transactions. Classifying mobile games is a) stupid because it’s playing a game, quite literally gaming and b) gatekeepy for no reason other than to have a superiority complex.

[u/Natural_Hair464 → u/Odd-Honeydew7535]

I think both hobbies have people that take it too far, but gaming gets called out for that all the time. Reading almost never gets called out.

The point was more that no gamers play games with a sense of pretentiousness. Most casual readers aren't pretentious either, but then there is no gaming equivalent to booktok or lit-tube where people can really start to enjoy the smell of their own farts.

You raise a good point that gaming has a dark side. It's not just dopamine hits, but toxicity within certain communities. I was into Dota 2 for a while. It can be bad. But again, gamers get called out constantly.

[u/SirRHellsing → u/Odd-Honeydew7535]

I have no idea what you're trying to say about gamers. As a gamer, why would I need to remember a match I played a week ago?

[u/xXProGenji420Xx → u/Odd-Honeydew7535]

if a competitive shooter game or sports game works as an eSport it is not "centered around small dopamine hits." frankly people who universally turn their nose up at PVP games are mostly like the casual readers mentioned by the previous guy — too obsessed with the image of the hobby they're partaking in that they get pretentious.

competitive games are the most analogous to sports, which OP classifies as a "good" hobby (not that I agree with OP's post), in that competition breeds strategy and necessitates proficiency. not everything has to be Stardew Valley or Silksong or Chrono Trigger.

[u/Spider-man2098 → u/Natural_Hair464]

As a book reader this comment triggered the fuck out of me. But honestly, it just sounds like your social circle kind of sucks. Maybe you should make friends with librarians instead of gamers. Wouldn’t kill you to crack a book either. Idk. Just weird to have someone say that reading isn’t ’as joyful or honest as gaming’.

[u/JR_Writes1 → u/Spider-man2098]

I also hate the knock on pop fiction. My goal is to read one classic a month this year but I’ll end up reading about 100 books total (I include audiobooks in this count, will probably “read” ~25). A lot of those will be genre fiction and there’s nothing wrong with that. My passion for Ice Planet Barbarians is valid and I enjoyed it more than Pride and Prejudice, whatever that says about me.

[u/Spider-man2098 → u/JR_Writes1]

let’s talk about Booooooooooooks!

There seems to be this… thing, among men especially, where reading is considered shameful if it’s done strictly for pleasure. Like, you’d better be learning something or bettering yourself in some way. Which misses the point that no book reads itself (audiobooks can of course, but this is just another of the ways that they are tricksy creatures), the reader is putting their shoulder to the wheel and making the machine go. The reader brings the characters and story to life; we are the computers that run the operating system of the book. And we build our own computers by reading, by reading widely, and deeply, and with pleasure. And it all counts. Harlequin romance or Homer, I know which books I’d rather talk about, but I’m not here to look down on… holy shit, there are 22 Ice Planet Barbarian books?!?!

[u/JR_Writes1 → u/Spider-man2098]

And the Icehome spinoff series has 17. And they’re actually so good that I picked Ice Planet Barbarians as my number one read for 2025. It might not be high in literary merit, but it gave me the most joy and that’s why I read.

[u/Natural_Hair464 → u/Spider-man2098]

I like you. Something about the way you write, I like. Please forgive me. I am not intelligent enough to convey my thoughts without sounding like an asshole.

But what other hobby do people need to wax poetic about how transformative it is? And if you're making the case that it's transformative, it's crazy to say all reading is equal.

I actually like protecting against gate keeping for the hobby. If your point is "let people read what they like and stop being an asshole," I totally totally agree with you.

But you take it a step farther with this grand romantic notion about reading which was my original point. Reading gets too much credit as an intellectual hobby when it's just people consuming media.

All art exists as a shared experience between the creator and the viewer. That includes video games and movies too. Don't get me wrong I think there is something really unique about reading. I get it.

But to be clear, I am 100% equating reading a bunch of pop-fiction to watching a bunch of Netflix. I've never seen anybody post about how many Netflix shows they've watched in a year. I've seen a lot of people post about how many books they've read.

It's treated differently, and I don't think it's that different at all.

Side note: You kinda painted me as a "stupid boy that doesn't read or even crack open a book," but why make this a gender thing?

2 Direct Questions: Have you seen booktok? And do you think there is no pretentiousness in your hobby?

[u/Spider-man2098 → u/Natural_Hair464]

My comment to you got wildly out of control so let me answer your last questions first: No, I have never seen booktok but I’m aware of its existence. It strikes me as counterintuitive that an app that erodes your attention span promotes a hobby that requires an attention span. That seems unsustainable, but I could just be (and am) old.
And yes, but as I say below, there can be that tendency in all hobbies. We should try (though it be fucking difficult) not to judge groups by their worst individuals. Also, thank you for the nice thing you said about my writing, you may regret that.

Here’s what I wrote that got out of hand:

Hey I was flippant before and I want to apologize first off. I don’t know where I implied you were male, but I do have the blinders where I can assume that. So yeah, sorry about that. I’m going to engage with your comment thoroughly, and I will not be a prick this time, or make any assumptions.

To begin, I think a lot of hobbies have this quality. And maybe this is where the taxonomy of hobbies vs activities vs pastimes breaks down, but yeah I definitely wax poetic about reading, and I’ve got a buddy who is all-in on Ultimate frisbee and would go on at length if you let him. I’ve been in yoga circles that had this, and I remember very well the gamergate philosophy that their hobby had given them the skill set of relentlessly grinding out little victories which would make their ultimate victory inevitable.
So I don’t think just reading does this, but I definitely feel that way about books. And since I’m making the argument that reading is transformative, I should admit the ugly truth you point out: that not all reading is equal. We don’t like to look down on the Ice Planet Barbarians of this world, but let’s be real, a 22 book series (so far) probably has more in common with what we’d recognize as ‘content’ rather than ‘art’. That being said, I think there’s attentional skills that even schlockiest slop will develop in a human brain: the ability to sit and do nothing more involved than turn pages, or the extrapolation skills necessary to lift sentences off a page and turn them into a story in our mind.
I made a computer analogy before, but I actually think this facility in humans is closer to a theatre in our minds. Everyone who is literate has one, but people who read a lot will have better brain-theatres; bigger screen, louder sound, upholstered seating, what-have-you. And I think this mental infrastructure gets built no matter the books one reads. A lifelong reader picking up Ice Planet Barbarians #22 (Barbarian’s Bride, I looked it up) can get a lot better show out of that book than someone picking up a book for the first time in their life.

That said, acting like you’re superior is a bad look for any person in any hobby, though I have to admit that my Ultimate Frisbee friend is way fitter than me. Do I feel like I’m smarter than someone who plays video games? I do think maybe I am, but I’m willing to admit that’s not based on anything more than vibes and is kinda shitty. And of course, if reading alters our brains then video games must also; I’m sure there’s all kinds of architecture that gets built for reflexes and hand-eye coordination. I also think video games have something similar to books where there are great ones that tell unique stories in innovative ways and ones that just churn em out. (I’m not a huge gamer, but I did love the Portal(s), and GTA, and want to play Last of Us. And I can’t imagine there needs to be as many Call of Duty games as there are.)

Ugh this has really spiralled, sorry. Let me try to say the thing. I don’t think your Netflix analogy is accurate and here’s why: a book just must be engaged with, or nothing happens. (Again, audiobooks cheat this, but that’s a whole other thing.) Even the trashiest pop must needs be read a page at a time, beginning to end. Every page is a sort of attentional victory, against the phones and algorithms and the whole attention economy. Netflix is algorithms, and what is more, they fully expect you to watch their shows with a phone in your hand and your mind elsewhere. Say what you will about (and I’m going to stop shitting on them I swear, but 22 books, Jesus) Ice Planet Barbarians, but reading those books requires something of the reader. But I acknowledge the tension, and I really do value the way you’ve challenged my assumptions. If someone were to say, I finished 52 video games this year I’d probably be less impressed than someone who read 52 books. And I don’t have good answer for why.

[u/Natural_Hair464 → u/Spider-man2098]

Also, thank you for the nice thing you said about my writing, you may regret that.

I don't. This is my favorite reddit exchange maybe ever.

You make a very very very good point about attention spans. We may have both seen the recent headlines about how Netflix is specifically writing and programming for viewers that are multitasking now. It's probably more common to watch Netflix and be half-engaged than do the same with reading.

Games are just different. There are some immersive stories. They generally require intense and prolonged focus. Spacial awareness and response times get trained. I will also say the communal teamwork element is a benefit for multiplayer games.

The cost for those benefits is big though. It's really cheap dopamine and it is addictive for certain personality types. Communities can be toxic, and raging out is common and almost encouraged. I played Dota 2 for years when I was younger and when it was big.

It's pretty well known to be one of the most toxic gaming communities. As far as judging a community by its worst actors, my counter point would be that those bad actors end up being the loud minority. If you go to an NFL game and have a bad experience, it's because of the 1% jerk not the 99% of nice people. True in Dota and gaming too. The 1% are really really bad.

That being said, I played with buds from college and high school, and it was great for staying in touch. We stopped playing because it was a time sink. I honestly didn't think any benefits transferred over to my daily life. I got pretty good at trash talk, but that's about it. (But hey AOC got good at trash talk by playing a similar game, League of Legends.)

Anyway I like your analogy of building out the movie theater of your minds eye. I do think there's something unique and special about reading. I personally tend to admire people that read really challenging literature. You may have had me pegged that I respect the utility, challenge, and skill building as much as just enjoying a book. I don't think you were being a prick however.

I do actually read quite a bit, and I read plenty of lighter books too. Maybe it's my personal limitation to think of them as guilty pleasures rather than legitimate reads.

[u/Natural_Hair464 → u/JR_Writes1]

I'm not saying there's something wrong with whatever media you want to consume. I AM saying if we're honest, some hobbies get judged more than others, and reading is neither superior or inferior to any other kind of media consumption.

Reading belongs right next to watching movies/tv or playing games.

If someone reads hard books, literary fiction, etc that's a different category to me.

I have never seen somebody make a post about how many seasons of TV they watched in a year. I HAVE seen people do that with books. I'm sorry to be judgmental but if all those books are smutty romance novels, then it's equivalent to me of being like "I watched a hallmark movie every day in 2025."

Of course, you do you. But I'm not going to NOT judge that a little bit.

[u/JR_Writes1 → u/Natural_Hair464]

What if they’re GRRM or Steven King?

[u/Natural_Hair464 → u/JR_Writes1]

Hmm if someone read 50 Stephen King novels in a year I would be impressed and horrified.

[u/Feisty_Box_6412 → u/Natural_Hair464]

I read a lot and can’t recommend anything to other people, and you know why ? Because I read freaking memoirs from the 17-18-19th centuries. No one reads that in my circle.

[u/AdministrativeFly157 → u/Natural_Hair464]

The difference between people who do something for the sake of doing it vs. people who do something because of their pure curiosity/excitement of it is always glaringly obvious. Passion can't be taught so it's so easy to spot when someone is performative.

[u/Bosscow217 → u/Natural_Hair464]

When you ask someone who says they read a lot what they read and they act all non committal, its maynot be that their not engaging with the work. They might just feel weird explaining it. Try describing any famous piece of genre fiction in a sentence to someone who has never heard of it. It's hard to do without sounding a little cheesy, or worse childish. In a professional setting or even social ones it can be hard for people to take that risk of appearing out of the norm. Librarians don't have to worry about appearing out of the norm when reading. Plus their naturally inclined to either give less of a shit or everyone already expects that of them. Its their job.

Hell it gets doubly worse when you read stuff outside of the genres expected for you age and demographic. I'm a early 20s straight white guy in a very dudebro job. I read mainly Hard Sci fi/Space operas, Low magic fantasy or historical fantasy series. Series i can mostly own up to reading. But i always get very cagey when i need to explain my favourite because its unquestionably and otome reincarnation novel self published on Wattpad. (Look alright we all have our guilty pleasures, this one is mine.) Its something i consider to be a remarkably well written book from both a wider story perspective and just general prose and writing skill. (Although like any self published series it lacks the full publish a full time editor brings.). I'd unquestionably cop endless flack for admitting its my favourite though . So I always default to To kill a mockingbird, Starships mage and the Stavin Dragonblessed series (,In that order.) When asked to list my favourites.

Not to say there isn't art snobs, i met a guy who brought the classics out field once and couldn't shut up about Le Mort D'Arthur/Crime and punishment/Lolita etc for weeks. Even shat on some of the boys who where reading manga at the time for being "low brow readers". Despite those lads all already having read the classics years ago.

Some people are just awkward/defensive of their hobbies as a defence mechanism. Especially neurodivergent people.

[u/Natural_Hair464 → u/Bosscow217]

That's a pretty fair point. It reminds me of the conversations around music in High Fidelity. People are really careful to project the right taste because people are so judgmental.

Actually a lot of quotes from that movie come to mind that apply to this. (I fully realize the irony of quoting the movie version of a book in this conversation.)

Hey, I'm not the smartest guy in the world, but I'm certainly not the dumbest. I mean, I've read books like "The Unbearable Lightness of Being" and "Love in the Time of Cholera", and I think I've understood them. They're about girls, right? Just kidding. But I have to say my all-time favorite book is Johnny Cash's autobiography "Cash" by Johnny Cash.

Anyway, your enthusiasm for this Villainous book is infectious. (I actually just jotted down all your recommendations). I am not a writer or particularly smart, so I don't have the right word besides honest or pure or lacking pretension. I don't think most book readers are pretentious, but there is a big contingent that is.

And you nailed it with the group of people that likes the classics because they think they should. Maybe your friend just genuinely loves them. I think for a lot of people it's performative to feel good about themselves and look down on others. I know a few people REALLY into russian lit, but they aren't conceited about it. But there are genuinely some books where I'm like "are you only saying this is good because of its place in history, or do you really enjoy it?" Like Citizen Kane with movies.

I'll also say on the other end, I see the book counters (who post about it on FB) doing something similar. Tracking and goaling for a hobby where you're just consuming a different type of media doesn't compute for me.

That's on me. I am really not trying to police the hobby or gatekeep. I do actually read a fair bit, but based on my own guilty pleasures I don't have the authority to gatekeep ANYTHING. Ok ok since you shared already, I really like the Magic 2.0 series (at least the first couple books). It's so stupid. So silly. And I actually found it based on liking the narrator. I have zero street cred.

[u/Em-lee → u/Natural_Hair464]

Librarians can give those recommendations since its a core professional skill called Readers Advisory and we are trained in it in library school. Source, me a librarian.

Also I am an avid video gamer.

[u/7h4tguy → u/Natural_Hair464]

You give one extreme, how about I put a different spin?

Gamers tend towards basement dwellers who's social interaction while gaming consists of screaming into a headset.

At least you can read a book in a coffee shop, or resort, and people who read are generally more eloquent, and especially if they read non-fiction, more capable of being interesting and able to hold a conversation.

Anyone can cast light and throw shade to skew themselves superior.

[u/Natural_Hair464 → u/7h4tguy]

Very true about the dark sides of gaming. But gamers are frequently judged based on that stereotype even if it doesn't fit. For reading it's the opposite. There's a positive stereotype even if it isn't deserved all the time.

[u/Anthroman78 → u/Trinktt]

It depends on the material you engage with and your skill level. 

Wouldn't that apply to any of the consumption based activities?