In this study, the author attacks prejudice, arguing that feminism - the most influential social ideology of our age - has fostered a perverted orthodoxy, poisoning relations between men and women. Feminism, he argues, restrains change and confirms gender stereotypes. Rather than being an emancipating force, sex war is hopelessly outdated and against the interests of most men and women, which the author argues are mostly identicial and always symmetrical. To advance those interests and promote happiness, we need to shake off the shackles of feminism and adopt new attitudes and policies towards sex, family and men.
| |||||||||||||||
Book Description
Product Details
Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images?
|
More About the Author
Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.
Customer Reviews
|
Share your thoughts with other customers:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
6 of 8 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Brilliant and revolutionary analysis of the feminist betrayal,
By theantifeminist (Spain) - See all my reviews
This review is from: No More Sex War (Paperback)
This remains the only British men's rights book that I know of, yet was first published nearly a decade before Farrell's 'Myth of Male Power' and Tiger's 'Decline of Males' and, in my opinion, ranks as the equal of both of those great works in its startlingly revolutionary anaylsis of second wave feminism and as a clarion call to arms for the ever growing army of dispossessed men.
Lyndon applies what must be described as a Marxian analysis of second wave feminism, seeing the rapid change in the position of women in the 60's and 70's to be nothing more than a response to the demands of capitalism and the requirements of a modern labour market. The development of technologies such as the contraceptive pill and in utero abortion were introduced in order to facilitate the fulfilling of these economic needs, themselves of course having unforeseen social and cultural effects. According to Lyndon, feminism quickly claimed the credit for the social changes that were happening when in fact the second wave was itself no less a product of the deterministic tide - a new dominant capitalist ideology fulfilling the intellectual and emotional needs of men and women who had suddenly been forced to live in ways that no other generation prior ever had, and of course, ironically justifying itself through appeals to (pseudo) Marxist theory. What is so important about Lyndon's work is that it completely pulls the rug from under the sanctified feet of the second wave feminists. Their feminism was not a rational, purposeful struggle that successfully achieved equality for women but rather simply a blind, emotional and extremely vicious response to events that were under the control of nobody (and certainly not the likes of Germaine Greer). The similarities with Lionel Tiger's theory of second wave feminism as a largely subconscious response to the contraceptive pill are absolutely striking. Many people know that the publication of No More Sex War had a terrible cost upon both Neil Lyndon's career as a successful journalist and also his personal life. This, despite the fact that the book reads as a model of how to conduct a crtique of feminism whilst pointedly making clear you are not attacking women. In fact, one of the text's many powerful and oft repeated messages is that feminists have shamefully betrayed not only the hopes and ideals of an entire generation, but above all the mass of ordinary working women, still largely bound by economic servitude. A brilliantly original classic, this should be essential reading not only for men's rights activists but also for anyone seeking a fresh insight into the extraordinary social changes begun in the 60's.
3 of 5 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
Biased, contentious, and brave!,
By "kiwimuzo" (Auckland, New Zealand) - See all my reviews
This review is from: No More Sex War (Hardcover)
Lyndon must have received an awful lot of hate mail after this was published, as it would have to be one of the most politically incorrect books of the 90s. Which is not to say it isn't good. In fact, it's possibly one of the more revealing essays written since feminism became a buzz word in the 60s. Basically, the author seeks to dismantle some of the feminist 'myths' that have pervaded western societies. He blames Germaine Greer (and others of her ilk) for actually destroying the issue of women's rights by going too far - proving this by arguing (sometimes with conviction and accuracy; other times not) that Greer recanted some of her earlier statements regarding issues such as bra-burning and the protests against house-bound mothers. Interestingly, he lays the seeds of feminism (and ultimately of it's failure) on the invention of the contraceptive pill. What will be interesting to see is whether some of his predictions are fulfilled. While he makes sense on the whole, it is not always comfortable (or even worthwhile) agreeing with his outlook.
3 of 6 people found the following review helpful:
1.0 out of 5 stars
Arrogant and confused,
This review is from: No More Sex War (Paperback)
Now, this is a confused and confusing book which may well reflect the author's own confusion both about changes that occurred during his youth and what happened as he hit middle-age.
His basic argument is that 'feminism' is not itself responsible ever for positive changes in women's lives which are due to economic changes and contraception availability. I doubt if anyone would deny the influence of economics and contraception. One thing that seems to not be asked is why women 'become' feminists in spite of everything in fact being 'equal' or, at least, mutually agreed which is what the author says is the reality of the relationships between the sexes through history. This book is about the author's radical 60s youth and his expectations of that time that were not fulfilled. And this, he blames, largely on feminism. Though the men also, he says, threw away the opportunities of the sixties for change, he feels that the women somehow were more to blame though it is not clear why - apart from perhaps not being what the men (or he) wanted them to be. Lyndon very much also believes that the sexes are the same and interchangeable which seems to be at odds with his hatred of feminism as a large sector of feminism also is about this very same thing and is now generally opposed. But it is a particular type of feminist Lyndon is really hating - those that say negative things about men. The other main aspect of his confusion regards the contraceptive pill. Obviously welcomed in his youth he seems to have a mixed love/hate relationship with it now. It allows him sexual freedom (he nonchalantly mentions elsewhere the scores of affairs he had during his second marriage, in which he was also a father) yet it removes from him that control over the potential to impregnate a female. So here we have the basic conflict in the male of wanting promiscuous sex without consequences while at the same time wanting to have control over fertilizations that he does want. Ummmm..... On page 185 there is a very telling tale of himself at 24 reading about the potential for females to reproduce without males which "scared me near to death". He got over this by thinking that without the male there can be no female. He is wrong about that as the many parthenogenetic species that do exist - some lizards, some sharks, and many invertebrates - are in fact females without males. There is a very big section of evolutionary biology which attempts to explain why males continue to exist when they carry what is called a 'twofold cost'. Anyway, his sheer terror at the thought of not actually being necessary leads to him waxing lyrical about sex bringing men and women together to create life together, as if this accurately reflects male sexuality and relations between the sexes. (He also talks about male 'seed' when, in fact, 'seed' would be the eggs if anything and sperm the pollen - a common error of thinking which tends to inflate the importance of the male gamete. Nor does he realize that females have gonads too ie both testes and ovaries are gonads.) He seems to think that women forced non-marriage on men, while previously he complained about women still wanting commitment etc even after they got the pill when the point was meant to be sexual freedom and not being forced into marriage. Definite confusion. He also states that feminism declares the interests of men and women are naturally antagonistic. Well, that turns out to be supported by evolutionary biology but few people view feminists and evolutionary biologists as bedfellows. As I've already noted, Lyndon seems to be very much like the 'no difference' feminists which he strangely never mentions. If he wants to know more about the differences between men and women which put men in a negative light - which declare aspects of masculinity he denies (along with many feminists) - then he need only look at the more recent perspectives from evolutionary biology which are written by men and are often opposed by feminism eg Demonic Males: Apes and the Origins of Human Violence The Dark Side Of Man A Natural History of Rape: Biological Bases of Sexual Coercion Sexual Coercion in Primates and Humans: An Evolutionary Perspective on Male Aggression Against Females This book boils down to a disillusioned 60s hippie who is looking for something specific to blame ie feminism (or his narrow portrayal of a sector of feminism). He wanted to have his cake and eat it, melding sexual promiscuity with 'happy' family life. And he blames feminists for his 60s dreams going wrong.
Share your thoughts with other customers: Create your own review
|
|
Tags Customers Associate with This Product(What's this?)Click on a tag to find related items, discussions, and people.
|
Sell a Digital Version of This Book in the Kindle Store
If you are a publisher or author and hold the digital rights to a book, you can sell a digital version of it in our Kindle Store.
Learn more
