Rating: 
Summary: Informative
Review: After just graduating with a degree in elementary education, I was surprised how much of how I was told to teach is actually the result of this "misguided feminism." (To be honest, the book made me feel a little validated--I thought the teaching techniques all sounded a bit hokey!) Sommers makes legitimate points with good supports. I found it well paced and very involving. The only thing I wish she would have done differently is to give us perhaps an ending chapter with specific things that we can do to actively make things more equal for boys. Books like these certainly encourage me to be more aware of the spin the media and special interest groups put on the truth.
Rating: 
Summary: Just Sit Right Back and You'll Hear a Tale
Review: Are young girls at risk in American schools? Are girls getting short-changed and left out in the field of academia? Do teachers favor boys and view them as more intelligent than they do the opposite sex?Author Christina Hoff- Sommers wrote this book, "The War Against Boys" as a warning to all Americans about the plight of boys at the hands of unruly feminists. Feminist leaders are constantly trying to convince the world that girls get the short end of the stick when it comes to academic opportunities and that the educational system in the U.S. is biased in favor of men. They also feel that violence is inherent in all men and that the only solution is to get men in touch with their feminine side, to expel the threat of violence. Sommers, and most other professionals, know that these claims and solutions are complete hogwash. As she points out in her book, it is actually boys, not girls, who fare more poorly in school. It is boys, not girls, who are in need of additional guidance. You would never know this by listening to the outcries from feminist leaders who still want you to believe that girls are not getting a fair deal in the world of education. Sommers did a pretty good job in writing this book, but I wish she had made an extra effort to propose possible solutions to the problem. Political leaders usually avoid the issue of boys and the possibility of spending public funds to help them because they fear being attacked by feminists and labeled as being sexist. So, without the help of political leaders, who can we count on to find a remedy to the problem that boys face in America's schools? Feminists try to say that the solution is to make boys more like girls by encouraging them to play with dolls, wear girl's clothing, etc. We all know this is crazy and so does Sommers. But she doesn't offer any concrete solutions to the problem in her book. Sommers spends a lot of time countering the absurd views of feminist Carol Gilligan, a woman with a distinct political and social agenda. Gilligan wants to eliminate the desire among boys to be competitive, and part of her reasons for this include a political belief that we should abandon capitalism as our economic system in the United States and embrace a more socialistic/Marxist system. Her reason for targeting young boys is simple: get them while their young, when they are the most impressionable and the easiest to influence. I don't feel that this threat from feminists is as strong as the author does. But it's nice that she took the time to write this book, exposing some of the wild and wacky proposals from feminists to re-engineer young boys and make them more like girls. Sommers has a lot of courage, and she has undoubtedly added some more names to her professional enemies list by writing this book. She does a good service to everyone in exposing these outrageous feminist agendas.
Rating: 
Summary: Good job as far as it goes
Review: As a black man, I find that the trepidations from a white female dominated education system are hardest felt by our young black males. The truth of the matter is that the educational system has little input from any males let alone a black male. The female perspective is important but should not be a monopoly today any more than the male viewpoint once dominated.
Rating:
Summary: Very informative
Review: As a mother of 2 girls and 1 boy I was looking for answers. This book provided insight and analysis I found very enlightening.
Easy to follow dispite the deeper analysis and the statistics are explained in detail.
This has to be one of the better "sociology" type books i've read this year.
Rating:
Summary: Lie Revealed; Reality is ... Boys need our attention!
Review: As a social worker that works with at-risk teens (98% of them are boys), I have found Sommers reporting to be accurate and concurs with issues I find each day I come into contact with a male teen. It is egregious to think that a well-respected feminist such as Carol Gilligan has used her status to write unfounded, unsubstantiated facts about the lives of boys and girls. According to Sommers, Gilligan has failed to use empirical data in her writing; has refused to publish her findings; and, continues to write more and more about what and who boys are and need without a shred of evidence from well documented studies. The facts revealed in this book will undoubtedly anger many people who have put their trust in Gilligan. More to the point, Sommers has revealed the reality that boys do need our attention. Many teachers, from my perspective, fail to recognize the power they have in their role as teachers and the influence they have on the lives of boys, in general. Sommers is correct to state we need to begin to have REAL equality in education (which has been sorely missing) and begin to teach and treat boys and girls as people who have individual and collective goals, who express and experience life sometimes the same, but often in different ways. We need to appreciate the special natures of both boys and girls, and allow them to develop in a way that is true to themselves. Some will refute Sommers for her lack of self-studies on the issue, but she has certainly given substantial food for thought from those who have done studies that support her thesis while failing to support the purported findings of Gilligan and others. It does seem a simple solution that Sommers would suggest that boys just need moral guidance and discipline to help them navigate their lives; it's nothing new, but it does speak to the fact that we've thrown out the baby with the bath water when it comes to certain things that have worked in the lives of boys. I was disappointed, however, to note that Sommers didn't come to realize that boys need to learn interpesonal and intrapersonal nurturing skills, as well. Sommers would do well to do an expose of the reality that the lack of good father role models in the lives of boys has had a greater degree of damaging impact on their son's (and daughter's)lives. Revolving substitute boy friends as fathers in the lives of so many boys hasn't been working; men (fathers) need to work on their interpersonal and intrapersonal nurturing, communication, and problem solving skills that they might "stay" in the lives of their children where the greater "fatherly love" can affect the lives of their sons (and daughters). Thank Christian Hoff Sommers for a great book, it speaks with a thunderous roar!
Rating:
Summary: Solid research that should be required reading
Review: Christina Hoff Sommers is largely denounced by mainstream academia. Her views are seen as radical. Her conclusions are often seen as wrong-headed. Scholars often cite her studies with derision and scorn. Those are the things that give me hope that she's on the right track. As a Ph.D. student, I can say that those are often the signs of someone who has made a true contribution to a field.
Sommers does something that many people will never do. She looks into the "facts" and statistics that so many feminists and education scholars pull out to justify female-centered education policies and sees how they were collected, what they asked, and what conclusions we can draw from the results. Not surprisingly the "facts" are often gross exaggerations, not very credible, draw conclusions that are not supported by the data, or simply false. What she unearths is an ancient debate that many people would love to have settled. Specifically, Sommers allows the "nature versus nurture" debate the opportunity to be played out. Gloria Steinem et al have made an important stand against the nature argument. If there are, indeed, physiological reasons we are different, then we may be physiologically best suited for different roles in society. This inevitably leads to subjugation, hierarchies, inequities, and (in their opinion) paternalism. Thus many feminists have settled the arguments and based a daunting amount of research on the assumption that nature is completely bogus. Thankfully, they aren't the only ones who conduct research. Sommers points out conflicting research that shows some reason we might consider the nature side of the argument once again. She does not subject this research (in writing) to the same rigorous examination...and I completely understand why. Tell me, which sentence sounds more interesting to you..."this study failed to examine men as well as women, failed to take precautions to control for variables, and its conclusions cannot be believed" versus "they found a representative sample of the population, took necessary precautions to control for extraneous variables and drew logical conclusions." Telling someone that research was conducted well is about as exciting as telling someone that the atmosphere has enough oxygen for their next breath. However, telling someone that research wasn't conducted well is every bit as interesting as telling someone that their next breath will be hindered because of lack of oxygen.
Sommers also notes that the plight of the American woman is highly exaggerated and that it's not politically correct to be "pro-masculine." Being "pro" men (particulary white men) doesn't generate the revenue. The overriding assumption is that because many legislators are white men, then surely they will watch after the interests of men. Obviously not. Sommers points out that it is men who are suffering academically. Men are the ones who drop out of school. Boys are losing their fathers, and thus their male role models. The feminist response to this is that masculinity, by its very nature, is bad. Aberrations of male behavior (such as the shooting at Columbine) are seen as men in their natural condition, while aberrant female behavior is seen as unusual and/or psychopathic (e.g. Susan Smith drowning her children). Do men commit more crimes? Undoubtedly. But what percentage of men are committing the crimes? And even more specifically, what are the common traits among these felons? Further, is it logical that this minority of male felons is representative of "most men?" The feminist answer to the male problem is to have men become women. Sommers, however, says it's time to reintroduce morality into the classroom. Encourage boys to be boys. Allow them to use the inherent strength of masculinity and channel it in productive ways. In other words, we really are different and pointing the finger at socialization is akin to trying to fix a broken fuel injector by painting the car blue.
Many of Sommer's arguments sound like a common sense that was abandoned in the late '60s. She definitely has conservative leanings. This will undoubtedly blind many to any of her findings and skew their interpretations of her conclusions. She is taking a reactionary position against left wing feminism (particularly against Carol Gilligan). Granted, I am extremely convinced by her conclusions and agree heartily with almost everything she says. What she doesn't address, however, is the decline of the American family, which is a true shame. Family is a word that has begun to mean everything, which in turn makes it meaningless. Likewise, she doesn't address how fathers should instill masculinity in their sons. Instead we are left focusing on mothers and how feminists aggrandize them to the point that children (especially sons) should essentially never leave their maternal roots.
In the end, Sommers gives us a disturbing picture of men that are simply not allowed to (politically) fight for themselves and then offers a re-installation of morality into the classroom as a solution. Again, I agree. As a male, I am sick to death of having to apologize for being born with testosterone. Sommers shows what the "oppression of a patriarchal hegemony" has succeeded in doing...including developing a democratic society, increasing efficiency and industry, and giving voice to women. She shows us that (perhaps) despite ourselves, we continue to advance, and that many of our largest achievements have come because of gender differences. However, in my opinion, Sommers needed to go further and examine the plight of the family and the loss of fathers. I'm sure others will pick up where this book leaves off, though. In the end, this is a book well worth reading.
Rating:
Summary: A cautionary tale for every man and every boy's mother.
Review: Next time you see a man holding open a door for a girl, remember that according to feminists women/girls are one of America's most oppressed groups. They are dissed in the schools, bounced agains the glass ceiling in business and raped, beaten, riduculed and ogled nasty by men in the streets. Now Sommers balances the scale by showing how feminism's big lies have become the bedrock of an unjustified war against males that begins in the elementary school, if not earlier. Read this calm, well-reasoned book and you will learn how society has been turned against men. How it's been done with millions of dollars in government support for "gender education" materials and how real lies and false, unsubstantiated statistics have been used to justify attacks on any and every manifestation of malesness whenever and wherever found. Everyone should read this book just to learn how persistence in lying can create an aura of truth. In short, real statistics show that men are not nearly as bad as the feminists paint them.In fact, little boys and young men are even more in need of help when it comes to self-esteem etc. in school than girls. The real statistics will, well, shock you.
Rating:
Summary: An Outstanding Book
Review: Sommer's book is a powerful antidote to the crap emanating from Carol Gilligan and other academics. These pundits insist that gender differences are not innate, but are imposed on children by a patriarchial society. The natural masculinity of normal boys, they say, is pathological and must be corrected by feminizing boys, by putting them through anger management, esteem-building and other programs. But where such programs exist, they have caused great misery among boys and impaired their performance. Clearly this is not the kind of help that boys need.
What boys need, Sommers argues, are stable families with a father present. They also need love, respect, discipline and moral guidance. Wherever these needs are met, boys are happier and their performance improves dramatically.
In this well-documented book, Sommers debunks the theories of Carol Gilligan, William Pollack, Mary Pipher and others, proving that they go far beyond the bounds of all common sense. Her book is never boring. It is engrossing, eye-opening and maintains the reader's interest throughout. It is a must read for all parents and educators.
Rating:
Summary: compelling,disturbing and frightening
Review: Sommers certainly paints a rather bleak and contrastingly different picture from what many institutions would have us believe. Namely, that girls have been getting short-changed in schools. It would seem the contrary is true. By focusing on girls more and more since they may be getting short-changed educators have neglected boys to the point of many boys being semi-literate, and academically behind. Sommers goes into factual detail about how she is in stark disagreement with noted feminists writers on education like Carol Gilligan. She also disagrees with many other institutions and the Government when they center their education programs around the idea of "short-changed girls". She lists a myriad of facts that all point to the conclusion that you can't overthrow a supposedly defunct patriarchal order and proclaim equality for all while putting in its place an equally bad matriarchal substitute. Later Sommers elaborates on more philosophical themes. She goes into some detail of how data and research seem to show that boys are the way they are because of their innate natures and and less because of socialization on the part of society. I would for the most part agree with her that there are just basic neurological differences that do make men and women inherently different. This isn't necessarily a bad thing-it's just the way it is. Lastly, the author goes into a little more explanation on how progressive forms of educating children simply do not work because they create an amoral environment where children do not learn basic moral values. Ineptness on the part of teachers and schools to teach more directive forms of moral education to children can have horrible consequences as we have seen in such cases as the Littleton, CO disaster. I think this book presents an interesting thesis and one that I would agree with for the most part. I think there has been too much emphasis placed upon specious data that is leading to a negative environment for men and boys. However, I don't really feel that men have been denied opportunity to thrive or prosper in society at the expense of girls. At least not yet. This book for the above reasons will maintain your interest but one gripe I did have was I thought the book got extremely dry in parts. Too many facts ushered out one after another will have you shaking your head to clear the cobwebs after a while. Anyway, see what you think.
Rating: 
Summary: Save your money
Review: Sommers has put forward a book based on flawed arguments.
For example, Sommers argues A: Boys are failing in school and society and she says B: in part because of feminism, women are becoming more successful in both areas
She claims that B causes A. In the words Of Robin Tolmach Lakoff(2004) in response to this book, "No reputable philosopher would support an argument based on logical errors. I'm not a philosopher. (I don't even play one on TV.) But I can detect a logical flaw when it is big enough to drive an SUV through."
The fact is there are SO many other possible explanations for A and B, but she explores none of them! That's highly suspect scholarship at best!
Using Columbine as a defining moment for American men in the face of thousands of male achievements all around us is just simplistic, especially when she compares this low point for men with the high point of the women's soccer team! Let's turn it around and look at men's high points (THOUSANDS!) and women's low points (need I say more????)
I'm a man, but I say don't waste your money on this book.
|
