All the good characters were female, even the dragon. The men were all useless or worse: a greedy king, a father who sold his daughter for gold. Prince Charming? Vile little bustard.
You see the same thing in current fiction, including most of what’s on offer via Kindle Unlimited. It's as if all books were now required to be based on the mantra, "the source of all evil is men."
I bet that if you looked at all the PhDs exploring culture and gender, over the last ten years, less than 1% (in fact, probably none) have even mentioned the concept of misandry, in other than dismissive terms.
No wonder men are increasingly disidentified with the male role – some to the point of wanting to switch sex altogether.
I have a theory, but you may not like it, as it has overtones of conspiracy. Promoting resentment is a key ingredient to bringing about GMR.* The proletariat's been done, so male-female relations are now a more potent area for destabilisation activism. Keep telling everyone that men are oppressive, toxic, etc. Eventually the sexes will hate each other sufficiently to lead to societal breakdown and revolution (probably followed by authoritarian collectivism).
Why did the cultural Marxist Herbert Marcuse (1898-1979) and his disciples encourage people to have as much sex as possible, as a route to 'liberation'? (Feminists could argue – but mostly don't – that promoting casual sex was in men's interests more than women's.) It's possible that the now-normal serial dumping, including of pregnant women, has made men more hated than loved, and that this is what's behind the current disturbing level of misandry in novels and movies. It's also possible that this end result was, in some sense, intentional.
Perhaps Marcuse foresaw that the resulting breakdown in the 'pact' between the sexes would destabilise Western society, in a way that would suit Marxists' interests.
* GMR = the glorious Marxist revolution