An observation after a year only reading books written by women.

I thought I’d share a little unscientific observation I made after a year spent only reading books written by women (across all genres) in order to correct for the preponderance of male authors on my bookshelf. On the whole, I found very little difference between male and female authors except for one thing:

Male authors tend to have their protagonists explicitly written as taking action, for good or ill. This applies to male and female protagonists.
Female authors have their protagonists watch as actions happen around them, even in cases where the protagonist is driving the plot. The protagonists’ key actions are done "off the page".

I’m sure I am over-generalising and I am fully expecting my case to fall apart under scrutiny, but I thought it would warrant some discussion !

Some examples:
In Hilary Mantel's Wolf Hall, Thomas Cromwell – the ultimate arch-manipulator and man of destiny – is never shown actually making a decision. It is implied he is, because others react to him, and he is always in the room when things are being decided, but he is never actually shown ordering someone to be executed. In contrast, authors like CJ Samson and Patrick O’Brien have their characters perform their actions on the page.

Likewise, if we compare books in another genre: Agatha Christie's protagonists don't actually physically investigate. They mostly seem to appear in the right place to listen and watch. Lee Child's characters on the other hand will be shown to explore, interrogate and take proactive acyion.

In YA literature, Harry Potter is famously passive, despite being the chosen one, etc, etc. Anthony Horowitz's leads on the other hand are always explicitly doing things off their own decision-making. I'd be interested to know if Katniss Everdeen is actually shown taking action explicitly off her own back.

In fantasy, I can't think of an instance in Ursula K LeGuin's Earthsea series where the protagonist isn't acted upon and therefore has to react, rather than decide for themselves. E.g. Ged is the protagonist of the first book. He is reactive to the chase by the shadow and in the end chooses to accept what is happening to him. However, when he appears in the Tombs of Atuan, he is no longer the protagonist, so he is now shown to take active decisions which the protagonist Tenar has to live with. Same goes for his role in the Farthest Shore.
Terry Pratchett's female protagonists (e.g. Susan, Tiffany) are very proactive, to the point that some have felt they are too "male".

In sci fi, Margaret Atwood's Oryx and Crake has the main character as an observer to Crake's actions, rather than having Crake as the main character. Mary Shelley never actually shows Frankenstein giving life to the Creature, but rather sort of brushes over it. Then he's reacting to the Creature who is the character driving the plot with his actions until the pov switches to the Creature who never describes himself doing anything. His actions happen "off-screen". On the flip side: Iain M Banks' The Player of Games has a very proactive protagonist, despite the character being manipulated the whole way through. George Orwell's Winston takes subversive actions explicitly on the page, even though he is shown to be ultimately powerless.