I think a lot of it comes down to how people were taught math.
In my generation, it was almost all rote memorization. You memorize times tables. You memorize the steps to do long division. You memorize specific formulas. And then you have to draft it all into proofs to explain why things work, but you were never really taught why things work in the first place. The answer was always “It just does.”
Rather than rote memorization, a better use of time for younger students is to focus more on the logic of math, to really get that “why” component before asking them to complete dozens of repetitive problems for homework.
Other parts of it might also just come down to entertainment value, to be honest. Here’s where my perspective veers further into anecdote, but maybe it rings true for others, I don’t know.
Learning about aphantasia was a new one for me. I don’t have it, but I am acquainted with two people who do, and both of those people did well at math in school but hated history and literature. On the other hand, those were my favorite subjects, because being able to immerse myself in a story or put myself in a certain time and place made those subjects more bearable, sometimes fun.
It occurred to me that the way they felt reading books was probably a lot like how I felt doing math: just a lot of reading information on a page and memorizing important details to regurgitate later for some assessment or another. But for them, the logic of math probably made that subject easier to engage with than something as vague as an author’s intent.
O.G. San is such a good name.