Most Helpful Customer Reviews
|
|
10 of 12 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
The fruits of radical feminism, August 23, 2004
Two generations of "gender politics" have finally provoked some response - although it's been halting and somewhat erratic. The early efforts were in academia: Gross and Leavitt's "Higher Superstition" and Koertge and Patai's "House Built on Sand". Christina Hoff Sommers expanded the scope with "The War Against Boys". Neil Boyd has broadened the view to the general social scene with this work. His analysis of how radical feminism has twisted the law and justice is open, honest and fair. Not to mention devastating.
The root of the Big Sister phenomenon lies in the false perception of men as inherently "guilty" - just of being male. "Big Sister" is derived from the Orwellian concept of Big Brother - the overweening force that changes language, redefines what is acceptable and what not in precise, simplistic terms. Values are established by a few strident voices, which become the sole authority on "good" and "bad". Justice readily falls victim to a new dictatorship of "women's rights" as due process is shelved. Boyd argues that laws have been and are being rewritten, often by judicial fiat. The image of Big Sister, then, is that of a restricting force relying on social division, deception and bad science to enforce an agenda.
He surveys four social issues that have been the subject of various legislative actions: pornography, sexual harassment, sexual assault and domestic violence. His demons underlying much of these topics are the University of Michigan professor Catharine MacKinnon and "self-proclaimed radical activist" Andrea Dworkin. These, and other strident voices, are the apostles of a "radical - even poisonous" strain of feminism. Their claims of the "predatory nature" of men are regularly repeated in campus lectures, in lobbying for restrictive legislation and their concept of social conformity.
Boyd accepts they have enjoyed a measure of success, partly because their vehemence convinces the innocent or overwhelms opposition. MacKinnon, nearly single-handedly, drove a significant change in the Canadian Criminal Code with the insertion of the phrase "degrading and dehumanising" in gender relations' legislation. Although the "age of consent" here is fourteen, MacKinnon's efforts made possession of visual material depicting merely nude figures a crime for anyone under eighteen. Boyd further counters their claims that pornography "breeds violence" or "promotes exploitation". Studies, ignored or rejected by the campaigners, show no such relationship, he declares. He argues that the type of censorship laws urged by Big Sister advocates is "hate propaganda" similar to anti-Semitic, racist or anti-Asian demagogues.
In the realms of "sexual harassment" and "sexual assault", Boyd lists numerous cases of special pleadings, selective acceptance or use of evidence and twisted interpretations of "consent". "Harassment" has become a term of such broad definition as to be meaningless. Careers, home life and other social capacities have been disrupted on minimal or spurious claims. "Assault" also lacks clarity, which hasn't prevented harsh interpretation. Some judgements rendered verge on the equivalent of a "Monty Python" skit with demands for clear and unequivocal expression of consent at each stage of an encounter. The onus of proof, of course, lies with the initiator. As Boyd demonstrates, even that identity is elusive in today's environment. The same problems hold in cases of domestic violence, where the aggressor remains unclear or ambivalent. "Zero tolerance" legislation has broken families, cost jobs and induced new stresses in family dealings.
Boyd's conclusion is straightforward, almost simplistic. As a long-term advocate of gender equality, he wishes to "restore the lustre of a tarnished feminism". To accomplish that end, he calls for readers to speak out against injustices, mythologies and heresies. Pornography doesn't incite violence; harassment charges must be substantiated clearly, domestic violence statistics must be realistic, and absurd reconfigurations of the notion of consent must be undone. Mean-spirited intolerance, he urges, must be overcome. [stephen a. haines - Ottawa, Canada]
|
|
|
5 of 10 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
Read and Comprehend. , February 26, 2005
This is actually, despite its title, a very mainstream book. Boyd is not a conservative, and, at least three times by my recollection, he goes out of his way to point out all the ways in which feminism has benefited North America and how valuable it once was [sic]. Yet, despite its supposed past achievements in the areas of pornography, sexual harassment, sexual assault, domestic violence, and societal outlook, feminism is bringing about a new dark age. It is an age where the opinions of women outweigh facts and where a woman is idolized as a bastion of power, yet also viewed, by the law, as a hothouse flower that wilts after hearing a dirty joke or reference.
Boyd has written a thorough and meticulous book that documents the way in which emotion has triumphed over reason when it comes to feminist issues. The legal cases he presents are maddening and outrageous. Of course, the transcendence of Big Sister is most notable in the universities and the author does a thorough job in covering the state of affairs within our radical ivory petri dishes. Yes, of course, the book is particularly depressing if you happen to be a man but discovering the truth is always worth a few deflating moments. A side effect of reading this book is that, should anyone ever be foolish enough to consider moving to Canada, they will quickly reconsider after perusing some of the decisions of The Canadian Supreme Court regarding sexual harassment and the censorship of film. It's a wonder that this fine Northern people has not taken the time to notice that Andrea Dworkin and Catherine MacKinnon are taken more seriously by their government than the truth itself. Let's just hope that Hillary and Big Sisters are kept away from (absolute) power for as long as is possible United States.
|
|
|
11 of 20 people found the following review helpful:
1.0 out of 5 stars
Big Sister's Little Brother, July 5, 2004
Neil Boyd, a feminist, attempts to mitigate the abuses inherent in politics opposed to equality and founded on conspiracy theory and misandry. Boyd offers no insights into the hysterical and anti-democratic foundations of feminism. His apologetics are similar to Trotskyites who attempted to rescue communism. Far preferable are Patai's "Heterophobia," Denfeld's "The New Victorians," Fekete's "Moral Panic," and Farrell's "The Myth of Male Power."
|
|
|
|
See all Editorial Reviews
