/minor gripe. I have the same issue with non-fiction being non-fiction. I would rather have Real and non-real books. (Or a less clunky term.) Or Fiction and Real sections.
Wouldn't be very accurate, though - there's a lot of 'real' stuff in fiction, it's just not 'stuff that actually happened'.
How can it be real if it didn't happen?
Because there are certain fundamental truths about the human condition that are explored heavily in fiction, for a start. On the more mundane side of things, if I write a story and set it somewhere that exists and the story happens amongst accurate events and setting, there is your 'real' within the fiction. You can also get your arse sued off for borrowing a little too heavily from reality in regards to your characters and events =) I can't think of a single (decent) work of fiction off the top of my head that did not heavily reflect reality, even if through a lot of colourful filters. The number one thing that makes bad fiction bad is lack of realism, especially in characters.
-- boobs do nothing for me, I want moustaches and chest hair.