Rating: 
Summary: An Important Piece of Work
Review: Christina Hoff Sommers' research and work on this book was impressive. As the father of a 3 year old boy and a 2 year old girl, I have seen through anecdotal evidence many of the points that Christina illustrates in her book. It was illuminating and enlightening.CHS meticulously breaks down the "science" that those in the "feminist" camp use to justify their positions with respect to, well respecting girls, and shows that rather than basing many of their positions on science, it is often based on "junk science". Junk science is often driven by ideological goals as opposed to scientific objectives, and attempts to make the "facts" fit the ends. Those who take this (junk-science) approach often and repeatedly report facts based on sloppy work that are not scientifically supportable, while labeling their conclusions (which were foregone) a product of "science". The media then carries these "news bites" out to an unsuspecting public. As a result, many individuals begin to accept these conclusions as facts. A final and important component is that the perpetrators of this fraud then attempt to stifle opposing positions (that ironically are based on scientific evidence) through the use of threats or personal attacks. Hoff-Sommers' work is important, for a number of reasons. One, as a woman, she has a bit of a shield (not that that has stopped her detractors) from the "anti-female" venom. This book would have been fodder for the feminist minority had it been written by a man. Secondly, through the use of a scientific approach, itemizing all of her references and building, fact by fact, her theory (that nature has a large part to play in the differences between boys and girls), her position may only be attacked through a rebuttal that is as scientific in its approach. The best approach to rebutting "junk science" is through the use of facts and "real science". Those on the "feminist" camp should do well, should they choose to post a rebuttal, to take the same approach. To my knowledge, none have taken up this challenge. Simply because they facts do not support their ideological biases.
Rating:
Summary: The misandrous feminists
Review: This book shows how easily feminism can slide into radical misandry once women start believing that they have been abused by patriarchy. It is poignant to see this agenda being imposed cruelly against boys in school for being naturally aggressive and competitive, or just themselves, basically. Teachers in some schools have tried to feminize boys by getting rid of recess and spelling bees, forcing them to participate in quilting, advocating that they wear dresses, or switch ... roles with girls all in the name of androgyny. In Britain, they have realized that boys are falling behind girls in academics; they are experimenting with all male classes with male teachers that encourage the competitiveness and discipline that boys need to succeed in the classroom. America is blind to problems of boys because of the crisis writers who have falsely presented girls as victims when they are doing better than the boys.
Rating:
Summary: If you believe all men areanimals, don't read this book
Review: This book is not for those who believe that men are horrible by nature and for those that believe that there are no good men out there. This book is for every man and boy who has felt pigeon-holed and maligned by over-aggressive feminists who claim that they want equality when they really want to give women the advantage. This book may seem biased to those who support the so-called "equality for women" movements, but as someone who has little bias, I can say that this is definitely good reading.
Rating: 
Summary: The War is being lost
Review: I read this book having two boys and two girls. I wondered why my wife said homeschooling was the way she wanted to teach the children. After reading this book she reaffirmed her decision. Christina's book states many of the things I had already seen. It is an easy reading fact filled book. I enjoyed her comments about confronting people in thier fallacies.
Rating:
Summary: Fundamental Problem
Review: Christina Hoff Sommers identifies the fundamental problem that boys in America face today. While there is a vocal, well funded lobbying group for girls, there is no organization that is willing to speak out for boys. Ms. Sommers concentrates on education, however her book would have been enhanced if she had also focused on what is happening in the nonprofit, public service community. For example the United Way of Massachusetts Bay in Boston provides $11 million to 33 organizations to support programs specifically for girls. The only funding they provided to organizations dedicated to helping boys is $230,000 to the Big Brothers. This funding disparity is perhaps the reason that Boston boys are doing worse than girls in every area from education to life expectancy. While an analysis of this problem is missing from her current book, perhaps she will address this situation in a future work.
Rating:
Summary: Sorry, I can't think of a spiffy title right off...
Review: This book says much of what needs to be said about our femaledominated socialization system (aka "school", not to mentionhome and the mass media) and how it can negatively affect boys andyoung men. I see some of the results everyday in the college studentsI teach: some of my intro physical science classes have a 3:1 or 4:1girl:boy sex ratio; many if not most of the boys lack confidence anddirection, seeming to be very unsure about what exactly is expected ofthem. The girls are the exact opposite; for the most part they'vegotten the message that they're capable and valuable to society.Quite primitive societies pay careful attention to the initiation ofboys into manhood (none leave it to women), but we're failingmiserably on this basic task -- kind of like how we hardly know how torun an election any more. While I basically agree with CHS's overallthesis regarding the anti-boy/anti-male/anti-masculinity forcesrampant in our culture at this time, I'm marking this book down onestar for a couple of reasons: 1) All the material on Carol Gilliganand her "In A Different Voice" schtick, and feminism ingeneral, while quite reasonable and plausible, seems like overkill andstarts to reek of a vendetta at some point; 2) I'm no moralist, so theend the book veers off in a direction other than what I would havewanted to see. She might ultimately be right on her points here, andthe several pages on all-male schools are almost worth the price ofthe book all by itself, but I kept waiting for her to get back and doan investigation of, say, the high suicide rate among boys. But itnever came. I just would have done the book a bit differently. 3) Alittle bit of attention to the difference between the needs of pre-and post-pubescent males would have been nice. 4) Many others in themen's lib/rights area have also written on Sommers' topic and it mighthave been nice to see their ideas brought into the picture and perhapsblended in; as it is we're left with the impression that the only wayto make progress is to battle nefarious feminist forces. This ismaybe not a terrible idea, but most people (ie, teachers, parents,school administrators) are not as strident as CHS makes them out tobe. These are not serious enough criticisms to recommend not readinga books which stands very well on its own and makes its points simplyand strongly. The critique of Pollack's work (which I hadn't read buthad heard all about) was both surprising and enlightening to me: Isuppose it's a measure of how low we'd sunk that at some point anyattention to a topic which is crying out for it seems better than noneat all. My fear is that this too will turn out to be a fad and thatwe'll be rediscovering the same things all over again a decade or twolater. Perhaps CHS's book will have hit so high on the visibilityscale that the topic will be impossible to dismiss in the comingyears. At any rate, reading the book made be grateful that I got myown boyhood in just under the wire before things went amuck.
Rating:
Summary: perhaps at last a balance in gender studies?
Review: A few years ago, as I was looking for studies about men on the web, I was appalled by the general bias against masculinity which seemed to pervade this area of knowledge. I also realized it was reflecting a dangerous (typical of our time?) one-sided way of thinking. So it is a relief to see Christina Hoff Sommers very accurately describing the consequences of such a lack of scientific objectivity : heartbreaking violence done to boys and men in the educational area, ie in the very building of their identities. Though I do not necessarily agree with the solutions exposed in the book, and even if the US represent an extreme case, I think some sort of ideological "male bashing" is occurring in the western world (see p211 of the book). It is urgent to rebuild a serene and balanced approach to gender studies.
Rating: 
Summary: A Misguided Argument
Review: Be careful when reading this book; I believe that its central argument about boys in schools is misguided. Much research has been done on sexism and gender bias in public schools, and these studies conclude that our teachers do show bias against girls. All you have to do is watch videotapes of classes or even watch your own classes, and these biases pop out (dozens at a time). As a grad. student in education, I have done some research on masculinity and education (and understand that problems exist for boys, as well), but this should not be grounds to discredit the sexism and bias faced by girls each day in school. I would advise anyone who reads this book to read the other side of the argument (Carol Gilligan, Myra and David Sadker, AAUW, etc.) and then decide your opinion on this issue. I personally do not think that the "war against boys" should be the focus of our attention as our nation attempts to gain equality between men and women (just as we should not focus on the "war against whites" while attempting to achieve racial equality).
Rating:
Summary: A surprising eye-opener
Review: I expected this book to be disappointing, but my expectations didn't work out. As I finished each chapter, I grew more perplexed and unbelieving. Could it really be true that government-funded change agents were spearheading an effort in our public schools to encourage little boys to play with dolls? Didn't we ALREADY go through this in the sixties, people??? Worse than that was the documentation of all the anti-male propaganda, and even more evidence that -- way too often -- the word "multicultural" means "anything but white males." In the end, this book was deeply disturbing to me. It deserves to be widely read.
Rating:
Summary: Finally!
Review: Christina Hoff Sommers has finally articulated what I have felt over the years as I have watched my three sons (I am their father) go through school and now college. The problem with feminism is not that it has fostered achievement for women. Rather it is feminism's attempts to demean the roles and achievements of men and "feminize" boys that are problematic. To the extent that feminism has encouraged girls and women to strive for excellence, it should be lauded. To the extent that it has used our institutions, particularly our schools, as a vehicle to establish a so-called "new feminist order" at the expense of our sons, it is shameful. Hoff Sommers' research demonstrates that our schools , disproportionatly influenced by biased (and all too frequently suspect) feminist theory, are clearly engaged in institutional male bashing. From chastizing boys for engaging in naturally aggressive play, to attacking male oriented sports such as football(unless, of course a girl wants to participate), to denouncing fraternities(while saying nothing about sororities), to frequently ignoring the achievements of boys while sometimes artifically inflating those of girls and young women, to minimizing the role and importance of the male role model (ie fathers) it appears that feminist-influenced educators seem bent not on leveling the playing field, but tilting it towards Venus; and if our sons fall off in the process, well, that's unfortunate. Perhaps this is best seen in the way test results are viewed. When young women achieve higher scores than men in, say, verbal skills (which by the way are much more susceptible to subjective interpretation than tests for math and science), feminists attribute this to women's perceived superior ability to communicate, and there is nary a mention of having to do more to eradicate the disparity. However, when young men achieve higher scores, say, in math, it is attributed to systemic discrimination that must be remedied, and not to any inherently positive male attribute. (This despite studies that many feminists like to ignore showing that men perhaps have innate skills in this area that are superior to those of most women) Similarly, not much alarm is expressed either in schools or by our "leaders" at large at the inordinately high male dropout rate or relatively low level of boys attending college as compared to girls. Indeed,at times one may believe that this is perhaps tolerated, since it is now "the girls's turn", though the boys who are being sacrificed had not a thing to do with past discrimination agains females. Query whether this would be the case if the shoe were on the other foot. Finally, one need only look at how quickly school officials will recommend that a little boy be placed on Ritalin simply because he doesn't pay attention like a little girl does, rather than force the teacher (all to frequently a woman)to deal with the behavior, to see the war against boys in its most graphic terms. Again, imagine the outcry if our institutions tried to medicate a little girl out of a naturally female tendency. Of course, the answer is to encourage both boys and girls to realize their full potential, which Hoff Sommers advocates. More important, though, is Hoff Sommers' frequently stated belief, based on her research, that both genders be encouraged to achieve and develop on their own terms, rather than by transforming one into the other(I do find it interesting that if women engage in aggressive "male type" behavior feminists laud this, but not so for men. Imagine the praise Hillary would have received from women's groups if she had "invaded" Lazio's "space") Hopefully the PC police that currently wield inordinate power in our educational and social institutions will not ignore excellent research such as that presented by Hoff Sommers, or the eventual ensuing backlash may well trim the legitimate and necessary gains that women have made in the recent past.
| 
