Neuroscience of Romantasy
Why are women absolutely feral for romantasy books?
In this episode, we dive into the neuroscience of romantasy, fiction, and storytelling to explore why millions of readers are completely obsessed with books like ACOTAR, Fourth Wing, Zodiac Academy, and Outlander.
Is it just escapism… or is something deeper happening here?
We unpack how stories can literally change the way we think, feel, and relate to the world. From empathy and emotional intelligence to healing complicated relationships with sexuality and intimacy, fiction might be doing far more for our brains (and real lives!!!) than we’ve been told.
We also get honest about the cultural stigma around romance novels and “romantasy,” why media created by women and for women is often dismissed as lowbrow, and how powerful stories can model healthier relationships, self-worth, and emotional growth.
Along the way we talk about:
• Mads’ current romantasy obsession and hilarious profiling of Kat as certain beloved character in the fandom
• Why romantasy books feel so immersive and addictive
• The neuroscience behind fiction, empathy, and romantic attachment
• Female pleasure, the female gaze, and storytelling
• Why characters like Nesta trigger such strong reactions from readers
We explore the heart of this obsession...
What happens when women start consuming stories where they are powerful, desired, respected, and deeply loved?
What happens when we become emotionally immersed in stories of transformation, strength, and devotion against all odds?
Join Kat and Mads as they argue that romantasy isn’t “just trash entertainment.”
It’s practice for a different kind of life. An extremely entertaining way to remember you’re one powerful bitch ;)
💬 If you enjoyed this episode, subscribe wherever you listen, leave a review, and share it with a friend who still thinks her smutty books are just a guilty pleasure. OR THE ONE THAT NEEDS A LITTLE EXTRA NUDGE TO PUT DOWN Let Them Theory AND PICK UP Crescent City INSTEAD.
Follow us on Instagram @rewiredwomanpod for behind-the-scenes moments and science-meets-soul conversations that help you rewire how you relate to yourself.
References Acevedo, B. P., & Aron, A. P. (2014). Romantic love, pair-bonding, and the dopaminergic reward system. American Psychological Association EBooks, 55–69. https://doi.org/10.1037/14250-004 ADRIAN, J. E., CLEMENTE, R. A., VILLANUEVA, L., & RIEFFE, C. (2005). Parent–child picture-book reading, mothers’ mental state language and children’s theory of mind. Journal of Child Language, 32(3), 673–686. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0305000905006963 Cannoot, E., Moors, A. C., & Chopik, W. J. (2026). Associations between big five personality traits, facets, and sexual fantasies. PLoS ONE, 21(2), e0329745–e0329745. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0329745 Good, E., & Schaab, K. (2022). The Biological Influence of Stories & The Importance of Reading Fiction. The Kennesaw Journal of Undergraduate Research, 9. https://digitalcommons.kennesaw.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1234&context=kjur Mar, R. A., Oatley, K., Hirsh, J., dela Paz, J., & Peterson, J. B. (2006). Bookworms versus nerds: Exposure to Fiction versus non-fiction, Divergent Associations with Social ability, and the Simulation of Fictional Social Worlds. Journal of Research in Personality, 40(5), 694–712. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2005.08.002 Mar, R. A., Oatley, K., & Peterson, J. B. (2009). Exploring the link between reading fiction and empathy: Ruling out individual differences and examining outcomes. Communications, 34(4). https://doi.org/10.1515/comm.2009.025 Tamir, D. I., Bricker, A. B., Dodell-Feder, D., & Mitchell, J. P. (2015). Reading fiction and reading minds: The role of simulation in the default network. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 11(2), 215–224. https://doi.org/10.1093/scan/nsv114 Weitin, T., Fabian, T., Glawion, A., Brottrager, J., & Pilz, Z. (2024). Is badfiction processed differently by the human brain? An electrophysical study on reading experience. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 17. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2023.1333965
