Scan barcode
ehershkovitz's review against another edition
4.0
"Women are always guilty, either of having too much human agency, or not enough"
caris96's review against another edition
3.0
My issues with this book have nothing to do with its content and everything to do with how it was composed. I feel like this book would have been better marketed as a loose collection of essays on feminism or cultural critique in general. I don’t really enjoy the journalistic style of Rose’s writing here, although some might. I admit I had to graze through certain parts because the writing was just… abrasive. I love that Rose dedicates two whole chapters to trans issues, but she uses some very outdated or problematic terminology in these discussions. For example:
“Despite much progress, transsexuality, or transsexualism as the preferred term, is still treated today as anomaly or exception” (89).
There are other examples that make me wonder whether she consulted any trans women in the process, with frequent uses of terms like “transgender-identified” or “male-to-female” (outside of clinical contexts).
It seems that most reviews of this book are accurate; that is, Rose’s technical choices detract from her argumentation. I would have preferred to read an entire work of her philosophical ideas regarding violence against women. For example:
“Case after collapsing case in the courts had shown that if you take as your starting point the idea of a pre-existing, God given difference between the sexes, then it becomes much more difficult to prove discrimination, even in cases of harassment. Because men are different, you will be told, they are just behaving as normal (they cannot help helping themselves)” (46).
This is the direction Kate Manne takes in The Logic of Misogyny; and while unlike Manne Rose takes an intersectional approach to violence against women, combining these two outlooks (as one suggestion) would make for a great book.
“Despite much progress, transsexuality, or transsexualism as the preferred term, is still treated today as anomaly or exception” (89).
There are other examples that make me wonder whether she consulted any trans women in the process, with frequent uses of terms like “transgender-identified” or “male-to-female” (outside of clinical contexts).
It seems that most reviews of this book are accurate; that is, Rose’s technical choices detract from her argumentation. I would have preferred to read an entire work of her philosophical ideas regarding violence against women. For example:
“Case after collapsing case in the courts had shown that if you take as your starting point the idea of a pre-existing, God given difference between the sexes, then it becomes much more difficult to prove discrimination, even in cases of harassment. Because men are different, you will be told, they are just behaving as normal (they cannot help helping themselves)” (46).
This is the direction Kate Manne takes in The Logic of Misogyny; and while unlike Manne Rose takes an intersectional approach to violence against women, combining these two outlooks (as one suggestion) would make for a great book.
maddilino_'s review against another edition
challenging
dark
reflective
slow-paced
2.75
I shouldn’t need a master’s degree in psychoanalysis to understand half of what the author is writing about.
temwani_alexandra's review against another edition
challenging
dark
slow-paced
2.0
I am a firm believer that a book no matter the genre or the intent has to be somewhat enjoyable or entertaining. This rule holds true for academic texts as well. As much as I enjoy learning about the violent ways the world fucks women over I do not enjoy reading it through stuff and wooden language.
The topic itself isn’t niche and lends itself to being very much accessible and within the cultural zeitgeist; however something about this book felt gatekeepy without being explicitly so. There certain books and authors you have to have read it seems extensively to even know what she’s going on about for vast swathes of the book. I don’t like this if you’re writing about a topic that is this pertinent to modern day and you want it to reach and affect the masses why write like this??
Personally it’s was mostly a flop except for the part about Oscar Pistorious which was interesting because I remember living through that cultural moment. Everything else was blah blah blah, sorry.
The topic itself isn’t niche and lends itself to being very much accessible and within the cultural zeitgeist; however something about this book felt gatekeepy without being explicitly so. There certain books and authors you have to have read it seems extensively to even know what she’s going on about for vast swathes of the book. I don’t like this if you’re writing about a topic that is this pertinent to modern day and you want it to reach and affect the masses why write like this??
Personally it’s was mostly a flop except for the part about Oscar Pistorious which was interesting because I remember living through that cultural moment. Everything else was blah blah blah, sorry.
miles's review against another edition
challenging
informative
medium-paced
4.5
Content Warnings
Graphic: Violence, Sexual violence, Rape, Transphobia, and Death