She starts the article by saying that she started paying attention to who wrote what and structured her choice around that, and then goes on to say, Even after admitting that she didn't even realize the ethnicity/race/gender of the people she was reading in the first place, until she started making the distinction. There's definitely an imbalance here, but I doubt that it's causing most people to think that straight white men are highly superior when it comes to literature. I could always be wrong, though! Really, though, she's talking about fiction. I don't think she is taking into account how some literature is going to be affected by characteristics of the author differently. If I'm reading a book on history, for example, the nationality of the author might matter more than how they identify, and whether or not they're a person of color--not that those details aren't relevant, just that one author might be just as good as another in certain categories. I think it's an interesting article, and an interesting concept, but I'm going to keep reading the literature that I like regardless of how the author identifies.If the majority of books being held up and pronounced Good and Worthy are by white, straight, cis men, it's easy to slip into thinking that most good and worthy books are by authors that fit that description.