Customer Reviews

Does Feminism Discriminate Against Men?: A Debate (Point/Counterpoint (Oxford Paperback))

5 star:		(6)
4 star:		(0)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

This is absolutely the best book I've read for helping men and women better understand each other. To even suggest that feminism discriminates against men is heresy in some circles. If you're willing to leave your prejudged ideas at the door and step into a room of enlightening new thinking, you will find the experience opens your perceptions beyond anything you may have imagined.

In a world where debate is often a nice word for one side trashing the oppposition, you'll find Warren Farrell and James P. Sterba engaging in an unusual dialogue. They offer opposing ideas and they offer them with a great deal of respect for each other as well as the men and women on whose behalf they speak.

Truly the world needs more people who can discuss male/female differences with passion, spirit, integrity, and respect. Farrell and Sterba do a magnificent job. Farrell, in particular offers his ideas in such a unique and persuasive manner that even die-hard femininists can't help but expand their understanding of why men are the way they are.

The title is somewhat misleading and book cover didn't draw me in. There's a lot more to this book than a simple debate about feminism and men. This book is fun to read and offers more surprises per page than most million-seller mysteries.

Jed Diamond, author, Male Menopause & The Irritable Male Syndrome.

As a university lecturer who has taught and written on Equal Opportunities issues, this book is a welcome and overdue addition to the literature on gender relations and sex discrimination.

In this book, one of the foremost liberal thinkers in the men's movement for equality - Warren Farrell - pits his arguments against staunch defenders of feminism. Counter arguments are presented by James Sterba, with input from over a dozen established feminist academics.

The organisation of the book is excellent: both Farrell and Sterba use the same chapter titles to construct their arguments on key topics. This is a useful approach that enables both lecturer and student to study arguments and counter-arguments on a series of contentious issues. The writing style is accessible, and also supported with appropriate academic references.

The value of this book is that for three decades, a men's movement for sexual equality has been gathering and organising arguments for progressive change. In many cases, their arguments are an evolution of, rather than a challenge to, feminist ideas on equality that developed in the 1960s. Despite this, a power shift in the late 1960s radicalised the women's movement and debate shifted (unconsciously?) away from advancing "equal rights" to advancing "women's rights". Those who radicalised the feminist movement have blocked the dissemination of Farrell's work in the mass media (although he has been able to publish six books and develop a strong following for his work).

When I started presenting academic papers using Farrell's perspectives at conferences, it quickly beecame apparent that antipathy to Farrell's work was mostly based on prejudice and not careful reading of his work. This book is, therefore, ground-breaking as it marks a point where the men's movement equality arguments are considered serious enough to warrant serious discussion amongst contemporary feminists.

For those with an interest in philosophy, this book represents a stage in a Kuhnian paradigm shift (a stage where new theoretical arguments are becoming so influential that they can no longer be ignored or disparaged). For this reason, I encourage all lecturers with an interest in gender relations / social science to examine this book and consider its value as a core text to reinvigorate the teaching of gender relations.

Dr Rory Ridley-Duff
Senior Lecturer
Sheffield Hallam University

The book is described as a debate. This is not a debate. James Sterba has an overwhelming advantage because he scrutinizes Warren Farrell's claims without allowing Farrell a rebuttal. Nevertheless, Farrell writes in lucid, to-the-point style, while Sterba cherry picks Farrell's arguments for criticism. Sterba is one of those feminists who cannot fathom that there is any legitimate argument against feminist ideals. He is a follower of these ideals, but he seems to ignore reality. He brings to mind the mentality of a cult member: He will go to exhaustive and tedious lengths to disprove anything that contradicts his beliefs, and he seems to believe that society should take any precautions necessary to prevent any one female from any injustice no matter the expense of others and no matter how many males may suffer injustices because of it. Sterba couldn't possibly have a son nor could he possibly know any divorced fathers with vindictive ex-wives.

As another reviewer pointed out, Farrell makes his case, and then Sterba replies - and pretty much demolishes Farrell's case, IMHO. A better book would have had much more interaction, with more back and forth, and a lot more questions being more completely answered. As it is, I'm left wondering about Farrell's case looking much weaker, after Sterba gets through with it. Would it have looked like that in reverse, had Farrell been in position to comment on Sterba's case?

For instance, and without a particular example in mind, Farrell uses statistics to make certain points. Sterba responds with how those statistics were manipulated and cherry-picked to reach a false conclusion. I would very much like to hear both sides in that kind of example. A concrete example is, Farrell makes the claim that men work a bit more per week (about 4 hours) when all work, both inside and outside the home, is tabulated. He further claims that the UN rigged the stats to "prove" that case for political reasons, even though it's false. Sterba claims that the reverse is true, that Farrell rigs and cherry picks stats for his own political reasons. I'd very much like to know the truth, if there's one to be known.

Another example is about income. Farrell states that women make less for a number of reasons involving choices, with little or no discrimination involved. This makes sense; why would employers higher men for more money, when they could hire women for less? Discrimination. Sorry, but I do believe managers are more likely to want themselves to look good, to show they can get the same job done for a lot less money, much more than I think they'd give other men more money simply in solidarity. Men aren't that generous to other men. Sterba, however, maintains that those stats are cherry picked, that when personal choices are accounted for, women still make about 20% less than men.

I'm sure that I'm not recalling this exactly. But, is there a truth to be had, here? I don't want anybody's opinion or manipulations; I want to know the truth. Is it simply unknowable, with both sides able to spin, and pick and choose, to arrive at the answer it's proponents most desire? (If so, that does say a lot about gender politics, that we've only been hearing one side of it for the last 40 years, when an equally valid rebuttal could be made, but choosing different facts.)

What i'd really like to see is Farrell's response to Sterba - and then Sterba's to Farrell, and so on, until some answer arises that isn't simply the one I most want to believe.

Wow. I am sort of kicking myself for not having gotten into this book sooner. I have so much gratitude to Dr. Farrell for participating in the writing of this very important and timely debate.

I now have a new awareness for issues which concern both boys and men in our institutions of learning and society as a whole, and for the growing need to promote Men's Studies and Gender Transitions Studies curriculum at major universities throughout Western society, among other things.

This book is also incredibly important for women to read as well, as it makes a very good case for why we as a society need to do a better job of understanding the ever changing gender roles in our society.

Regardless of who you are or what you do in life, if you have even the smallest interest for gender issues, this is well worth a read.

As intended this book helps further the debate regarding discrimination against men. Sterba's writing is weak and without feeling. Dr. Farrell's writing is straight forward, enlightening, and refreshing. Sterba gives us the hackneyed arguments of the academic gender studies. Ferrell is interesting. Sterba is boring.

The text is a balanced and evidenced based argument on gender issues which is vitally important in this day and age. Needlessly men and women have been competing and vying for attention for their particular issues with neither gender benefitting.