I Love This Woman
Sean Kinsell recently forwarded me an article I wanted to share with you all. Feminist Fatale by Christina Hoff Sommers is a fairly devastating review of a book about Gloria Steinem, chock full of observations and insights that probably make it more worth reading than the book itself.
Sommers is, of course, regularly pilloried as a "right winger" and a "reactionary" and an "anti-feminist." Predictably so, for someone who, like Camille Paglia, frequently challenges Gender Feminist orthodoxy. What a great woman. I love her. And, for the record, I generally despise her (usually) mean-spirited, chauvinistic, and illiberal critics.
* Update * In the comments, Robin Roberts mentioned what I think is probably the most important book I've read in the last five years: The War Against Boys. I urge anyone--especially anyone female--who has at least one son college aged or younger to read it. Honestly. I'd buy copies for every mother I know if I could afford it.
I haven't read that one, but her "The War Against Boys" is important reading.
I haven't read the book, but I have long observed that K-6 schoolteachers are often guilty of what I call "girlism", which is the practice of assuming that girls are superior to boys. I came to this conclusion after watching how my son's teachers behaved during the years when he was in elementary school.
You must read the book Ara. You will be astonished at the scope.
While I agree with a number of Sommers’ points, in some ways her analysis is just as lacking as the original, familiar (pro-boy bias) argument. A number of times, she speaks about specific (and ridiculous) examples, but gives no indication of how common it is. It's interesting and relevant to talk about teachers who favor girls, but that doesn't mean it's universal. As an ex-elementary teacher, I know plenty of teachers who "prefer" boys, not necessarily from any bias, but because it's easier-- loud boys do demand, and get, more of their attention. There are teachers on both "sides" of this, and both groups need to reevaluate their behavior. Point is, Sommers book is important, but it's not the definitive answer. Just as in what you call the "Gender Feminist orthodoxy" (???) an author is trying to prove her theory—useful, sure, but certainly not comprehensive. On a personal note, I'm terribly annoyed by folks speaking of feminists as some homogeneous group, or as if we should be. When there’s no disagreement, you know the field is dead. I could go on about this forever-- but I'll shut my yapper for now.
thanks for the note, Dean, I didn't mean for my fondness for her earlier book to swamp out your endorsement of her latest.
Ms. Lovejoy,
You've touched on the one reservation I often have about Sommers's writing; she doesn't always make it clear when she talks about "gender feminists" that she's speaking of women whose conclusions about different individual issues frequently disagree. But what you think is not the only thing that matters; how you get there is important, too. It's hard to avoid conceding that gender differences are first principles to a lot of professional feminists, wherever they may happen to arrive from those points of departure.
I love Camille Paglia.
I love both Paglia and Sommers, and I admire your (Dean's) fearlessness and honesty.