Rating: 
Summary: A thought provoking work
Review: The vehemence of the condemnation of this work should be sufficient proof its content. This work is by no means completely revolutionary or perfectly written. Its style is typical of these persuasive pseudo-academic works. Fortunately, it does not use the cryptic writing style utilized by most of the academic elite. Anyone who speaks with a professor in a women's studies class, or anyone who has taken a women's studies class knows full well something is very wrong with feminism today. While this work might have a political bent, it raises important questions that need to be addressed. The time has come to look at people as individuals, not as members of a group. If that does not happen, most men of good character do not want to have anything to do with feminist women coming from major universities.
Rating: 
Summary: Misreadings, misunderstandings, and untruths
Review: ... My larger concern is with Sommers' conflation of "gender feminism" and academic feminism. It is a connection that makes no sense. Gloria Steinem and the women of NOW are *not* being read in women's studies classes; theorists and thinkers like Judith Butler, Chandra Mohanty, Patricia Williams, bell hooks, Jacquelyn Zita, Judith Halberstam, Donna Haraway, Ann Russo, Paula Moya, and many, many others are. These scholars are by and large involved with postmodernism, postcolonialism, and critical race theory; what they are doing is deconstructing and historicizing notions of gender, and exposing gender as a construct. Pitting women as victims or men as victimizers is not part of the agenda. And, proving women's superiority has been passe since the early 1980s; at this point, academic feminism is too concerned with what to do with the subject after its deconstruction by postmodernism, how to theorize the intersectionalities of race, class, gender, and sexuality, and how to create productive dialogues between First and Third World feminists to get involved in discussions of women's innate superiority. Current academic feminism, for the most part, doesn't even believe that gender is innate, so the entire argument about the prevalence of gender feminism and the hold it has over the academy is nonsense. Feminists have had a long and complicated relationship to NOW, and this ridiculous conflation of feminism and NOW just baffles me, because NOW is definitely not what most feminists would see as their spokesorganization. In fact, the whole demonization of NOW makes no sense to me, because NOW doesn't wield much real power. You know what wields real power? The NRA, big tobacco, the Religious Right; organiziations with *money*. The scapegoating of NOW, for all that I may disagree with some of its stances, is completely inane. Not to mention, I don't understand why we keep hearing so loudly and insistently from conservatives that they are being silenced by feminists. If they were truly being silenced, would we hear so much complaining? Would we see their books receive widespread attention (far, far more than any serious work of feminist scholarship could ever hope to receive), would we see their editorials every other day in campus papers, would we see them on the news (where true feminists are almost never seen)? Nope. The problem is that some people confuse being disagreed with with being silenced, but that's not the case. Just because women, people of color, and other traditionally underrepresented groups can make their voices heard does not mean that others are being silenced; it just means that the voice of the usually-white, usually-male, usually-straight, usually-middle class conservative is not the only one being heard anymore. But, just because it's not the only voice heard doesn't mean it's silenced. Anyway, read this book with your critical thinking caps on, and don't let it be the only think you read about feminism. If you don't agree with feminism, fine, but base your opinions not just on what anti-feminists have to say about feminism, but what feminists have to say for themselves. Read works by real feminist scholars, again with your critical thinking caps on. If you agree, you agree, if you don't, you don't, but at least you'll know your opinion wasn't formed by a misleading, polemical, and in many ways seriously uninformed book.
Rating: 
Summary: great book
Review: Who stole Feminisim? shows how feminsm has changes from simply seeking equal rights and equality to promoting an ideology that women are helpless victims in society. It deals with how the New wave of feminism is promoting this idealogy which is contains truth but also contains questionable research and statistics that Hoff-Summers brings into question. The book provides a great counter argument to modern feminsm.
Rating:
Summary: interesting, thought provoking book with some flaws
Review: "Why are certain feminists so eager to put men in a bad light"? This is one of the first questions asked by Christina Hoff Sommers, philosophy professor & equity-feminist (as she calls herself) in the preface of the book "Who stole feminism?". Sommers makes many interesting points in her book, mainly that gender-feminists are different from equity-feminists: the latter are more mainstream, don't hate men, believe women have come a long way, & oppose the "male hegemony" talk that gender-feminists believe in. So far, so good....Sommers continues by putting in the spotlight certain studies & reports, all produced by gender-feminists, & proves (or attempts to prove) their fallacy. Good examples of biased studies are the March of Dimes study, the "women self-esteem" study, the depression study & some others, which all prove to have fatal flaws in their reasoning. One valid point that Sommers makes is that radical feminism is a little bit like religion- it tends to accept no criticism, & it tends to see all things through a specific, coloured lense. This is the lense through science itself is seen, as is literature, & even art (which thrives, necessarily, through freedom of expression & cannot & should not be stifled, whatever the reason). Sommers mentions linguistic reform (a funny example is the ludicrous word "ovular" in place of "seminar"), women's studies classes, & - most importantly- the dangerous idea that western civilization itself, & scientific thinking has something inherently "masculine" about it, whereas "feminine" thinking is "emotional" & "connected". What certain gender-feminists propose, in a word, is that there is a "female way of knowing" which seems dangerously close to phallocentric beliefs: "women think differently, are made for different roles, so they should stay home & raise the kids" etc. So, Christina Hoff Sommers has a point: every social movement has to be able to take criticism, both from within & (most importantly) from outside. On the other hand, Sommers mostly mentions only extreme cases of gender-feminism, & I'm sure there are voices of dissent within the feminist movement, which she fails to aknowledge (except in cases such as Camille Paglia's opinions, which are hardly orthodox feminist opinions). My major complaint with the book is this: at some point, Sommers mentions how Susan Faludi (a good example of her own definition of gender-feminim) has "painted herself into a position that allows no room for criticism". But how guilty is Sommers of the same sin? Her whole book is full of evidence of one, & only one central thesis. Yes, she says she's a feminist, but she never talks about real problems of real women: she mostly points out how far women have come. It's not enough to just mention that equity feminists have different, more mainstream opinions. She should be able to point out how equity feminists go about achieving change, what their activities & plans are when it comes to fighting for even more equality for women. Unfortunately, Sommers never really gets into this issue. Also, parts of her own statistics & arguments are flawed, as flawed as some of the gender-feminists' reasoning. For example, she mentions "probably 100 women dying from anorexia a year in the US" (as opposed to the much higher numbers that Naomi Wolf had cited in the Beauty Myth- numbers that she later admitted were wrong): 100 women is definitely not the correct number either though, since most women who die of anorexia complications have a different etiology in their death certificates. So, sadly, Sommers also "overlooks evidence that does not fit her puzzle", as she accuses most gender-feminists of doing. "Who stole feminism" is a well-written, well-researched book, which, yes, has a political goal, & no, does not present the whole picture. I refuse to accept that gender-feminists (as Sommers calls them) have black & white ways of thinking, as I also refuse to accept that the same is true for any group of people. I'm sure there are different ways of thinking within the feminist movement, & I'm also sure that there must also be extreme, radical feminists who tend to alienate maistream women: but these radical feminists do not represent today's women's movement, as Sommers seems to imply, nor do they have nearly as much power as she shows them to. The book is interesting but in parts exaggerated, probably to prove a point & to leave no room for doubt. Sadly, this is exactly what the author accuses the gender-feminists of doing, & she falls into the same trap herself.
Rating:
Summary: Ms. Sommers vs. Goliath
Review: Michel Foucault is the left's Goliath. Surrounding him are hundreds of thousands of midget feminists bludgeoning anything in their path with Maoist "facts." Into this fray comes CHSommers, wielding nothing more than common sense and the willingness to investigate leftist "facts." She has some facts, too, and she slings them. She hasn't delivered a knock-out blow here, but it's amusing what one woman can do. Foucault, surrounded by his army of Philistines, is pretty much run off the field by this one woman, wielding the tiny weapon of clear and responsible fact checking, combined with an occasional funny remark. History repeats itself, the second time as humor.
Rating: 
Summary: I would like it, but...
Review: I will not 'trash' this book because no book (other than those meant to be considered trashy) deserves a berate of verbal/written assault. No one, anywhere, should EVER die of self imposed starvation. Numbers or not, it's a frightening epidemic and should not be viewed as mere female hysteria. Statistics that are documented are different than those that are true. Quoting Naomi Wolf out of context was just wrong; because prior to the 'statistic' of 150,000 deaths she did say it was an estimate because most doctor's don't label cause of death 'anorexia', or at least didn't in the early '90s. Issues of self esteem are different; you can't really determine self esteem as a statistic. It's a state of mind depending on mood, age, etc...so I don't buy any arguments attempting to substantiate who 'feels' more oppressed today (as opposed to who may feel oppressed tomorrow, or next Tuesday...)regardless of any statistic, I think she only reiterated what I believe to be a moot point. Also: in discussion of the 'fringe' feminists: Susan Faludi wrote a book called 'Stiffed'. Most, if not all, of these so-called 'fringe' feminists have been extremely involved in gaining rights for women in other countries... This book does well to attempt to place labels on feminists. But unfortunately, the labels fall incredibly short from the reality.
Rating:
Summary: A true feminist's work of courageous journalism
Review: Feminism is a word that means different things to different people, which is why some people support equal rights for women but criticize feminism, but why on the other hand some feminists take criticisms of feminism as attacks on women. Sommers tries to give us new terms. On the one hand, there are "gender" feminists who fabricate data, blame men for almost every ill, and have an uncanny ability to interpret almost anything as oppression of women. She differentiates them from "equity" feminism, a feminism that respects and likes men, deplores portrayals of women as helpless victims of patriarchy, and seeks sane equity between the sexes, recognizing that there are issues on all sides of questions involving gender. In lucid, carefully researched and documented prose, Sommers als lays out how the former group of extremists have damaged the cause of gender equity, created a wholly unnecessary war against the sexes, and often debased academic standards and made for some genuinely terrible laws. The worst part about criticism of Sommers is claims that she's a "right winger" (she isn't), that she trashes the idea of equality for women (she doesn't), or that she's polemical and mean(she isn't). What she is is a fair-minded and thorough researcher who tells the truth and documents her research in ways that can be verified. And in doing so demonstrates just how logical, competent, and capable women can be. This is a must-read for anyone who cares about sexual politics, or just the relationships between men and women.
Rating:
Summary: Backlash BS
Review: A textbook example of of the truth of Molly Ivans' adage of "ya got to dance with what brung ya!" This book, fyi, was funded by a right-wing cabal, so it figures that it would act as an apologist for patriarchal Western "civilization" against the "femanazi" barbarians. Earns a star because the nice folks at Amazon.com require me to use it....
Rating:
Summary: Reasoned attack on the hijacking of feminism
Review: Once upon a time, there was a feminist movement that stood for things like equal pay for equal work and an end to various discriminatory practices that prevented women from taking their places as equal citizens in the United States, alongside men. Then, somehow, the feminist movement became corrupted. Suddenly, the issues of the day where unrestricted abortion access, "ecofeminism", tearing down recieved religious traditions, etc. To this was added a bizarre hatred for men, tons of pseudo-scholarship, and a fascistic intolerance for diversity of opinion within the movement. And that is how feminism came ot be the laughingstock that it is today, a movement that can endlessly defend Bill Clinton's "right" to seduce a girl young enough to be his daughter into acting as his concubine while hardly being able to find the energy to denouce the worldwide trade in girl-prostitutes that consume the lives and souls of who knows how many thousands of young girls each year. If you want to know how and why feminism went insane, this is the boof to read.
Rating:
Summary: Now THIS is feminism!
Review: This book is for anyone who suspects that hardcore feminists have gone too far. As Ms. Sommers points out, gender feminists have done women everywhere a disservice by stretching, misinterpreting, or just plain creating facts to support their cause. On the way, they've given all women (and particularly those who claim to be feminists) a reputation as being whiny, obsessive man-haters. In misrepresenting statistics, they've downplayed the great strides made by feminists of the past. I'm a proud feminist, like Ms. Sommers. I salute women who have worked for our rights in the past, and I believe there is still a long way to go. But I do NOT believe we'll accomplish anything by screaming "rape" every time a man touches us, or by leading once-a-year campus marches, or suing everyone who checks out our legs. If you agree, in any part, you NEED to read this book!
|
