Women Who Make The World Worse Paperback – Oct 31 2006
Getting the download link through email is temporarily not available. Please check back later.
To get the free app, enter your mobile phone number.
From Publishers Weekly
The satirical cartoon cover of O'Beirne's book-not to mention the title-is an accurate reflection of the content within: O'Beirne, Washington editor of National Review magazine and a former vice president of the Heritage Foundation, has jumped on the bandwagon of highly politicized books (from both ends of the spectrum) leveling an all-out attack on the American feminist movement. O'Beirne tackles a wide range of issues, from childcare to sports to women in the military, claiming: "Only the French looked to a teenage girl to lead them into battle." She has a tendency to link strong arguments (children born into single-family homes are more likely to live in poverty) with her nebulous central thesis-feminists are responsible for the world's ills-without providing sufficient evidence to reinforce these claims. But are feminists really chiefly responsible for the demise of the American family? O'Beirne does bring up some worthy points, such as the fact that women's salaries are essentially equal to men's when accounting for time/job experience lost while raising children, but she tarnishes even her fact-based arguments with slavish adherence to the book's central focus: smearing powerful, left-wing women. The clever chapter titles and argumentative, lively writing style make this book, even for those not inclined to agree with O'Beirne's politics, readable, but O'Beirne's primary readership will undoubtedly enjoy her rousing take on gender politics.
Copyright © Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.
O'Beirne, an editor with National Review and a former panelist on CNN's Capital Gang, takes the feminist movement to task, charging it with responsibility for assorted social ills from broken families to increased risk to the military with female recruits. She cites some of America's best-known feminists, including Hillary Clinton, Gloria Steinem, Maureen Dowd, Kate Michelman, and Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Despite defeat of the ERA, these women, and the feminist movement in general, have managed to influence American culture to the detriment of women. Lamenting the "totalitarian" methods of the modern women's movement, O'Beirne maintains that advancements for women should not be credited to the women's movement but to intrepid women--including Catholic school nuns--who were hard at work breaking down barriers without celebration or official causes behind them. O'Beirne catalogs all the ways that feminism has weakened families, coarsened culture, and burdened the government. Readers interested in different perspectives on women's issues will appreciate O'Beirne's strongly held viewpoint. Vanessa Bush
Copyright © American Library Association. All rights reserved --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.
Most Helpful Customer Reviews on Amazon.com (beta)
Whether you agree or disagree with the premise of this book, PLEASE at least take the time to read it. Most of the reviews here are uninformed polemics and don't help to further rational dialogue.
Modern day feminism, of course, has nothing to do with equality. It seeks more to elevate women's privileges, rights and interests above and beyond that of what men receive. None of Kates topics are from a time period anywhere near the 50s and I felt the book, and some of its reviews, show how some women are becoming worse than men ever were. These women blatantly discriminate, think they have a right to do so, and are proud of it. There is a big gap between the women's rights movement of the 40s 50s and 60s and of modern day feminism. The negative reviews this book receives has shown how many feminists continue to link today's movement with yesteryears and, somehow, that makes them automatically righteous. These women deserve their own chapter in Kates book `Women who make the world worse'.
It is not difficult to see the effect that these women have had on society. Kate structures her book well and tackles each example with solid, researched information. Government legislation, biased family courts, ignorance towards lagging performance in schools of boys and the feminization of the military, sports, workplace and justice system. The idiocy over the Harvard `incident' was my favorite chapter, illustrating how some women will not accept that men may be better at some things than women, but applaud women who excel beyond boys in a women focused education, work and political system. There's lots of money and jobs out there for women who cry foul when they don't get their own way. Kate is able to highlight just what modern feminists have to lose should men ever get equality. Harvard has been forced to put forward $50 million to fund a new equality department which, headed by a staunch feminist no doubt, will justify it own existence and secure its own funding based on perpetuating female oppression, whether it occurs or not.
Kate does not tackle all of modern feminisms double standards, there certainly are plenty more of them out there, but she does an excellent job of identifying and analyzing the ones that have the most effect on our society. I am glad that some women have a good grasp on the facts of modern day feminism and are able to separate the differences between feminism and equality so effectively. Kate is highlighting not how far women have come, but how far some women have gone. It gives hope for equality....some day.
There is a saying amongst mens rights groups. `Reverse a gender issue and see if it would still be tolerated'. Would women tolerate the treatment men receive in society today?
Of course not. That would be discrimination, wouldn't it?
The author centers on the more radical theorists among feminist academics to illustrate her point. Many of these women attack men in the classroom and berate "the patriarchy." She argues that, since women have the ability to bear children, they have to make choices that men do not. This carries into some interesting discussions about comparable worth and whether women have made strides in their careers and compensation versus men. O'Beirne interviews women who were devoted to their careers and others who were more family oriented. She believes that the only reason women, on average, make less than men is because they choose to leave the work force to bear children.
What O'beirne has done is shown were feminism has gone wrong. That's where the "radical" (from another reviewer) comes in. I have read enough feminist information to know that O'beirne is not portraying that group inaccurately, but she does disagree and proves the foundation of why she feels so and why it should be important to society as a whole.
I thought this book was going to be about bashing particular women which I wasn't interested in (that was one of my hesitations, aided by the illustration on the cover.) This wasn't. It was researched and documented like any other topic would be. She used others, males and females, words, examples, and experiences to support her point of view. That is the right way to do it.
PS. Why has Amazon chosen to put 2 one-star (negative) reviews in it's "Spotlight Review" when the overwhelming reader reviews for the book show 4 - 5 (positive) stars? Interesting.
Look for similar items by category
- Books > Humour & Entertainment > Pop Culture
- Books > Politics & Social Sciences > Social Sciences > Gender Studies
- Books > Politics & Social Sciences > Social Sciences > Political Science > Political Doctrines
- Books > Politics & Social Sciences > Social Sciences > Popular Culture
- Books > Politics & Social Sciences > Social Sciences > Sociology > Women
- Books > Politics & Social Sciences > Women's Studies > Feminist Theory