Customer Reviews

The Politically Incorrect Guide(tm) to Women, Sex and Feminism

5 star:		(25)
4 star:		(9)
3 star:		(4)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(13)

 

 

I really enjoyed this book and yes, this book is conservative, but a lot of the points it makes, while not "PC" really are true.

If you have children who are young, get this book and read the chapters on sex and relationships. It makes excellent points about how "sexual liberation" really led to a lot of our girls getting used and tossed out and it doesn't speak much for our boys either if they are the ones doing it. And maybe some of the boys are getting used and tossed out too. Hey, a lot of parents fear for their children when they turn on the TV and see genital herpes treatment ads all over.

The section on fertility is also not PC, but sorry to say it is true. Women may have a lot more opportunity but that just doesn't change biology. Read this while you are young because you just cannot deny that you are less fertile at 40 than at 25. I wish the author had mentioned that when older women have to use fertility drugs due to late pregancy it often leads to multiple births of babies who are born premature and this is a heartwrenching situation for babies and parents alike. Remember NOW's outrage at the fertility awareness campaign in NYC? The problem was brought forward by fertility clinic workers noticing how many women were coming to them thinking they could get pregnant in their upper 30s-40s-50s, only to find out they had missed their chance. NOW's reply was that "women don't need anymore reminders about their fertility slipping away." Apparently they do. Why is NOW trying to deny fertility facts to women?

Other points that were very interesting were commentary on the "wage gap" (contrary to popular belief, the wage comparisons to do not compare men and women in the same jobs. They compare OVERALL earnings. Women do not make as much overall because many take lower paying jobs that are more flexible, leave the workforce for a while to have babies-some for many years-and have interests in fields that don't pay as well (ie: elementary school teachers.) The author also points out that a lot of women out there only work because they have to (Although don't forget a lot of men only work cause they have to, too!). Sorry, no matter how hard feminists try, there are still millions of women who want to raise their own children. Not eveyone, of couse, some people love to work. But hey, don't feel bad about yourself if you like to stay home and take care of your family. Consider youself privledged to be born a woman and get the opportunity to stay home. Men carry a heavy responsibility to support their families in one-income families. This book will assure you you are not "weird" if you are a woman who wants to stay home and take care of a family and feel you are missing nothing by not working.

It is hard to sort propaganda from fact, but really I thought this book was well balanced. It listed plenty of facts from the left side. It certainly didn't omit the finidings of studies that didn't agree with author's right-wing preference. It doesn't tell you your kids will end up horrible if they are in daycare or that you are a horrible woman if you work. It even states that childbirth is more risky than abortion in terms of mortality for women! This book is not trying to hide stats that the left uses.

The women's movement has done some good things. I love being able to vote. It's done other good things, but it's not perfect by any means. This book just encourages you to look at the facts and not just blindly follow a group that has "women's rights" in the title. If you really look at all the agenda, you will see that some of the things are really anti-woman, anti-men, anti-child and anti-society too.

The information in this book is very solid and needs to be heard by women AND men -- especially those in high school and college. However, the book is full of very distracting typos that make it look like it was spellchecked instead of proofread. Sometimes it's even hard to interpret some of the sentences unless you stop and analyze two or more typos to try to get to the intended meaning. I hope the publisher comes out with a revised, corrected edition soon.

Lukas has one weird contradiction in the book, where she outlines devastating pitfalls of premarital sex, and then says none of the information should be construed to suggest that women should abstain until marriage. With the case she makes against premarital sex, it ends the chapter on an incoherent note, and she needs to make a case FOR premarital sex, if she wants her conclusion to make sense.

The "Politically Incorrect Guide to Women, Sex and Feminism" was the fourth book in that series, whose aim is supposedly to counter liberal bias in the media.

The book's essential argument is that women today have been duped by radical feminists into believing that they were the same as men and that they should aim for the traditional goals of family and a married life. The book, unlike most other Politically Incorrect Guides, does a very good job in this respect. It gives some quite reasonable statistic about how women who marry are happier than those who do not, and that there are a great many dangers from the casual sex so much supported by Sixties liberals. It also shows that many women do not want to work outside the home and that few are happier because of having to do so.

It also, though not to the extent that might be desired, shows that there is a lot of scientific evidence for innate sex differences. It is a pity that these biological differences are not related to societal considerations because there simply cannot exist doubt that belief in sexual identity is triggered by situations like those in Europe today where valuable resources are non-existent. In fact, the effects of these societal situations on sex roles may well explain why women in Europe or Canada probably do not have the same desire as women in the US. (The book never considers differences between the US and other countries and this constitutes a big fault of the whole PIG series that greatly dims its potential).

The book also has one strange lost opportunity because during Europe's own "culture war" during the early twentieth century - as shown by the childhoods of many people born back then like Simone de Beauvoir or Albino Luciani - women were far more socially conservative than men. Indeed, as a student of personality theory I know very well that this would be expected and it is a pity Carrie Lucas fails to even think of this possibility. The radical left's argument for extreme masculinisation of women (already achieved in Europe), for all its ability to permit social change with otherwise impossible ease, has great drawback on a personal level. Women who are as individualistic and independent as the Left wish generally have great trouble raising children because they lack the ability to relate on an emotional level. They are also often, as my own personal experience as well as surveys shows, very unhappy because they tend to be very angry.

Whilst there are few unsound arguments, one needs much better sourcing to verify most of them, and as with the guide to Capitalism, these are largely absent. Still, even for those on the Left, this book offers many sound arguments and is by far the best in the PIG series. Real rating would be 3.5 stars out of five - women is the topic on which the Right is most effective because it is most scientific there.

Thank you, Carrie Lukas! Thanks for coming out with an overview of feminism that "The Today Show", that liberal cable news channels, that public colleges, and that even women socializing with their friends will not admit: feminism is dangerous and deceitful.

Mrs. Lukas has the courage to say things like.... men and women's brains work differently (Chapter 1); casual sex is damaging to women both physically and emotionally (Chapter 3); safe sex is not so safe (Chapter 5); children of divorce suffer serious consequences from being raised by a broken family (Chapter 8); postponing childbearing may make the proposition of having children difficult or impossible altogether (Chapter 9); and - my personal favorite - research suggests that children with parents as primary caregivers are better off than those in full-time daycare, and that the government pushes families into using institutional daycare, which has been proven to be the worst form of childcare. Mrs. Lukas does not simply spew her opinions: a well-educated writer, she backs up her points with plenty of statistics and factual support. And she even pays props to opinions which oppose hers.

I wish I had Mrs. Lukas' courage to speak-out as unapologetically on issues in which I believe. I see so many women my age - in their mid 30's - buying into the lies that are detailed in this book. These women suffer, their husbands suffer, and their children suffer on a daily basis. Granted, bosses and professors and news anchors are happy. But consequences are being felt by families who choose to accept feminist rhetoric. I would highly recommend "The PIG to Women, Sex, and Feminism" to any sound-minded, truth-seaking woman.

I wish this book would've been around when I was in my 20's. I enjoyed reading a more balanced approach to feminism. Lukas is not anti-woman, stuck in the '50's, or patriarchal as her critics have described. She's not telling women what they can or cannot do either. She's done her research and put the fact out there for your review. The biggest drawback for me was that it looks like a 3rd grader proofread the book.

One of the major reasons why radical feminism remains such a destructive influence on the lives of Americans is that it claims to speak for women when it really only represents a minute percentage of them. The feminista activist has proved quite adept at obscuring this fact by labeling their critics as "patriarchal, anti-woman" and "sexist." The irony lost on many is that no social movement in history has so thoroughly undermined the constituency they pretended to represent.

As always, the opinions of males are discounted, and whatever words men write are deemed compromised, so let us be grateful that Carrie Lukas came along. She is an equity feminist in the mold of Christina Hoff Sommers and Daphne Patai, and what many readers already know is that equity feminist is to gender or radical feminist what the Green Berets are to terrorists. Lukas's new book is an insightful answer to the pervasive lies so often told about men. Her main theme is that differences between the sexes exist, and there's no reason to label them as good or evil. Viva la difference should be the order of every day. By the end, you'll be pleased that she took the time to pen such an eloquent refutation of the alleged, and fictional, patriarchy.

Lukas rationally cuts through the lies and distortions which so poison our ether. You'll find skillful refutations to canards like men being the primary cause of domestic violence, that divorce is beneficial to women, and that being born with a particular kind of genitalia enables one to "have it all." The real problem with gender feminists is that their need to dominate and control others is far more important to them than their supposed goal of bettering the lives of women. Behind their hysterical passion hides a collective of dominatrixes. The only thing that their politics uniformly promote is an increase in their own status and increased feelings of self-righteousness.

On aggregate, Lukas's narrative voice is outstanding as she is the possessor of an analytical and dispassionate mind. In my opinion, she even provides a more balanced assessment of radical positions than they actually deserve. The only negative thing I can say about this book is that I suspect few women will read it. My guess is that this is due to its not being feel good or warm-fuzzy enough for them. What those who habitually avoid the non-comforting forget is that knowing the truth is an end in itself, and that a hard chair made of wood is still more soothing than one made wholly from imagination.

Although there were a several things in this book that I disagreed with, the basic premise is that women (as well as men) need to be exposed to all the information that is out there in order to make an informed decision. The author believes that in many woman's studies courses, much important information is being withheld.

It is unfortunate that it takes a whole book to point out several rather simple inconvenient truths: women and men are (gasp!) different from each other, that sexual promiscuity in women has led to MORE, not less, sexual exploitation and that marriage DOES have a role to fill in society (and not simply to form an economical unit).

My favorite part is a sidebar in the book called "Lifetime Television's Line-up of Fear," which lists three typical movies aired by that channel with their description. I remember Lifetime and what I used to call "Lifetime's Man-Hating Movie of the Month." "Tonight on Lifetime: 'I Married a Stinking MAN!' A small-town woman is exploited by a male in an unhealthy relationship called a marriage. When the man attempts to convince her to allow herself to become biological host to some sort of growth ("preganancy") she eventually detaches herself from her right-wing, homophobic "husband," goes to law school, becomes and honorary lesbian and is eventually appointed a Supreme Court Justice by President Bill Clinton. Starring Jessica Simpson and Ted Danson."

Lukas does an excellent job in explaining the conservative viewpoint on sex and feminism and yes, you can be pro-woman without being a feminist regardless of what the media says.

I was leery about buying this book when I saw some of the nasty reviews from offended readers. But the raves from others convinced me to give it a try, and I am glad I did. Lukas sets 'em up and knocks 'em down when it comes to some of the most sacred pillars of feminism. More than just an ideological rant, it lays out in facts and figures the effects of the politically correct agenda on women, their children and society as a whole. It makes me wonder whether those nasty reviewers even read the book and, if so, what part of Lukas' conclusions they take exception to? The truth can be scary, I suppose.

Feminism has been responsible for some of the most oft repeated and believed lies of the second half of the Twentieth Century, ever since the second wave of feminism arose as part of the New Left. Women make 70 cents to a man's dollar? A lie. Women are shortchanged in medical research and medical care? A lie. Girls are being shortchanged at school? A lie. One in four college women will be the victim of rape? A lie.

Yet feminism did not propogate these untruths by simply stating them once. Rather feminists repeated them ad nauseam, usually with the type of spite in their voices and hard looks on their faces that revealed a pathological personality underneath it all, but which nonetheless served its purpose of shouting down dissent.

The attempts to get the truth out have to take the same avenue. Repeat, repeat, repeat. And that is where WOMEN, SEX AND FEMINISM comes in handy. For those already informed about the issues addressed here, there is not a lot of new ground. But each book reaches a slightly different audience, even if there is a lot of overlap. So WOMEN, SEX AND FEMINISM surely is someone's cup of tea to learning such things as biological differences between boys and girls, rates of violence against both sexes, marriage, divorce, and the like. The Politically Incorrect Guides do not try to break new ground, but rather to take the knowledge already out there and serve it up in a presentable format.

Sure, there is the usual griping from feminists that not all feminists are the same and that not all are man haters. Maybe. But few true believers of communism would personally support the gulag and mass firing squads. The issue is what the ideological beliefs are, not whether an ideology's adherents claim to disagree with the clear and direct consequences of those ideas. WOMEN, SEX AND FEMINISM addresses those beliefs and their consequences, paying little attention (appropriately so) with whether any individual feminist agrees or disagrees with this or that take on things.

Give the book to any young lady going off to college. She will probably need it a lot more than she will ever need the help of a counselor at any women's center on campus.