Scan barcode
meme_too2's review against another edition
3.0
I have never been able to call myself a feminist. This book explains the different waves and areas of feminism. The author is not a radical feminist, but she has decided to call herself a freedom feminist because that allows a woman to choose home and family where any other kind of feminism does not allow that freedom of choice.
I agree with a lot of things this author says, but I still can't call myself any kind of feminist.
I agree with a lot of things this author says, but I still can't call myself any kind of feminist.
reeniecrystal's review against another edition
1.0
1/28/2023: REVIEW MAY BE OUTDATED IN SOME REGARDS.
Although Sommers brings up several valid critiques of popular modern feminism and its tendency to narrow the roles of women just as much as patriarchal culture, she either doesn't understand or doesn't spend as much time as she should have on exploring why those feminists think the way they do, largely dismissing it as pure stubbornness instead of acknowledging the underlying legitimate fears (if not very legitimate response) about culture's influence on supposedly free choice. For example, she denigrates the way suffragettes denigrated what they called "the cult of domesticity," the glorification and worship of the mommy-wife role as the ideal in the 1800s, for the way it failed to acknowledge the feelings of the women who identified with it and thus drove them away from the arms of feminism; while that certainly is a valid point to consider, it itself fails to consider the actual point the suffragettes themselves were trying to make, which is that many of these women would never have even identified so strongly with that cult in the first place if they hadn't already been raised in an environment where they were encouraged to do so. How freely can a choice really be made when the world is watching you, cheering you on towards one specific goal?
Given this whole book is about the pressure on women to be careerists and the need to emphasize free choice in any path, I don't think Sommers is unaware of the aforementioned pressure coming from the traditionalist side, but I do think she spends woefully little time talking about it largely in an attempt to avoid alienating her hard conservative readers who want to have their cultural nostalgia justified without feeling too bad about themselves. This tends to be a problem with modern American conservatives in general—they may occasionally make good points about the unfair way other people are behaving, but they utterly fail to recognize their own role in causing those people to behave that way in the first place. They make symbolic efforts to correct the mistakes of the past, but then they go straight back to glorifying the very ideas and behaviors that gave birth to those mistakes, showing they haven't really learned much of anything about what the other side was really upset about. Again, I don't think Sommers is unaware of this, but I do think she purposely downplays it in order to pander to the right.
The one big unforgivable fuck-up I'd assign to this book was it trying to portray Phyllis Schlafly in a positive light. While Schlafly is certainly relevant to the discussion of how to incorporate conservative women into feminism in that she's a spokeswoman for many of that group's fears and trepidation and demonstrates the dangers in not addressing them, she was certainly a force to be taken seriously, she was also a rape apologist (stating multiple times that she didn't believe spouses could rape each other because "marriage is consent") and openly championed the ideal of a husband being the boss of his wife, even when that wife is significantly more accomplished than him (all details Sommers conveniently ignores). She does not deserve to be bulletin listed in the same way as the likes of Susan B. Anthony or Mary Wollstonecraft, and framing her "concerns" as if they were coming from a place of good argument instead of just outright misogyny is shameful. Sorry Sommers, Schlafly was a genuinely disgusting human being and you trying to paint her as a feisty, hardworking mother with such admirable language brought down my esteem for you considerably.
Overall, I found this book not hateable (except for the part about Schlafly) but rather disappointing. The main point Sommers is trying to make is a good one but she tends to be tone deaf to the potential liberal audience when delivering it, something she can simply not afford to be when popular liberalism is increasingly championing the idea that there's something legitimate and constructive about deliberately refusing to listen to opposition. I'm not sure whether this is because she just wants to keep the sponsorship of conservatives since she's long since been ousted from mainstream liberalism (as has been gleaned by others and is suggested by the small steps she does make towards those points) or she genuinely doesn't get these things, but either way it's not a good look. Sommers: Good at picking apart the arguments of others, not so much at crafting alternative solutions herself.
Although Sommers brings up several valid critiques of popular modern feminism and its tendency to narrow the roles of women just as much as patriarchal culture, she either doesn't understand or doesn't spend as much time as she should have on exploring why those feminists think the way they do, largely dismissing it as pure stubbornness instead of acknowledging the underlying legitimate fears (if not very legitimate response) about culture's influence on supposedly free choice. For example, she denigrates the way suffragettes denigrated what they called "the cult of domesticity," the glorification and worship of the mommy-wife role as the ideal in the 1800s, for the way it failed to acknowledge the feelings of the women who identified with it and thus drove them away from the arms of feminism; while that certainly is a valid point to consider, it itself fails to consider the actual point the suffragettes themselves were trying to make, which is that many of these women would never have even identified so strongly with that cult in the first place if they hadn't already been raised in an environment where they were encouraged to do so. How freely can a choice really be made when the world is watching you, cheering you on towards one specific goal?
Given this whole book is about the pressure on women to be careerists and the need to emphasize free choice in any path, I don't think Sommers is unaware of the aforementioned pressure coming from the traditionalist side, but I do think she spends woefully little time talking about it largely in an attempt to avoid alienating her hard conservative readers who want to have their cultural nostalgia justified without feeling too bad about themselves. This tends to be a problem with modern American conservatives in general—they may occasionally make good points about the unfair way other people are behaving, but they utterly fail to recognize their own role in causing those people to behave that way in the first place. They make symbolic efforts to correct the mistakes of the past, but then they go straight back to glorifying the very ideas and behaviors that gave birth to those mistakes, showing they haven't really learned much of anything about what the other side was really upset about. Again, I don't think Sommers is unaware of this, but I do think she purposely downplays it in order to pander to the right.
The one big unforgivable fuck-up I'd assign to this book was it trying to portray Phyllis Schlafly in a positive light. While Schlafly is certainly relevant to the discussion of how to incorporate conservative women into feminism in that she's a spokeswoman for many of that group's fears and trepidation and demonstrates the dangers in not addressing them, she was certainly a force to be taken seriously, she was also a rape apologist (stating multiple times that she didn't believe spouses could rape each other because "marriage is consent") and openly championed the ideal of a husband being the boss of his wife, even when that wife is significantly more accomplished than him (all details Sommers conveniently ignores). She does not deserve to be bulletin listed in the same way as the likes of Susan B. Anthony or Mary Wollstonecraft, and framing her "concerns" as if they were coming from a place of good argument instead of just outright misogyny is shameful. Sorry Sommers, Schlafly was a genuinely disgusting human being and you trying to paint her as a feisty, hardworking mother with such admirable language brought down my esteem for you considerably.
Overall, I found this book not hateable (except for the part about Schlafly) but rather disappointing. The main point Sommers is trying to make is a good one but she tends to be tone deaf to the potential liberal audience when delivering it, something she can simply not afford to be when popular liberalism is increasingly championing the idea that there's something legitimate and constructive about deliberately refusing to listen to opposition. I'm not sure whether this is because she just wants to keep the sponsorship of conservatives since she's long since been ousted from mainstream liberalism (as has been gleaned by others and is suggested by the small steps she does make towards those points) or she genuinely doesn't get these things, but either way it's not a good look. Sommers: Good at picking apart the arguments of others, not so much at crafting alternative solutions herself.
betogzz's review against another edition
5.0
Relevante es estos tiempos saturados de narrativas teóricas
absentminded_reader's review
4.0
Eye Opening
For years I knew that I was out of step with modern feminists because I felt their beliefs were too radical. I couldn't stand behind their positions on abortion, their ugly misandry, or their demand for radical regime change. Yet I still supported equality of the sexes, women's rights, and I wanted a better world for my daughters. Sexism is ugly, and I fight against it with my girls, but we never felt like we were "feminists". The word was too toxic. I didn't realize that there was more than one school of thought on feminism. Maternal feminism, or as Sommers puts it, freedom feminism is a different kettle of fish entirely. I would like to see a return to less radical feminism. I feel that by polarizing the sexes, feminism has lost momentum in the past few decades despite all its hot fury.
Now, these are just my feelings, and you may wonder why they belong in a book review, but because of this book I have new words to describe these feelings. I found the book very factual and informative. I enjoyed the history, and I now finally understand the different waves of feminism and why I found modern feminism so off putting. Sommers took forgotten events and made them relevant, filling in the blanks in my mind with verifiable historical events that helped shape the world I blissfully lived in. She provided context for events that happened within my own lifetime. She made history come alive. I highly recommend "Freedom Feminism". I look forward to sending a copy to my daughters for them to read as well.
For years I knew that I was out of step with modern feminists because I felt their beliefs were too radical. I couldn't stand behind their positions on abortion, their ugly misandry, or their demand for radical regime change. Yet I still supported equality of the sexes, women's rights, and I wanted a better world for my daughters. Sexism is ugly, and I fight against it with my girls, but we never felt like we were "feminists". The word was too toxic. I didn't realize that there was more than one school of thought on feminism. Maternal feminism, or as Sommers puts it, freedom feminism is a different kettle of fish entirely. I would like to see a return to less radical feminism. I feel that by polarizing the sexes, feminism has lost momentum in the past few decades despite all its hot fury.
Now, these are just my feelings, and you may wonder why they belong in a book review, but because of this book I have new words to describe these feelings. I found the book very factual and informative. I enjoyed the history, and I now finally understand the different waves of feminism and why I found modern feminism so off putting. Sommers took forgotten events and made them relevant, filling in the blanks in my mind with verifiable historical events that helped shape the world I blissfully lived in. She provided context for events that happened within my own lifetime. She made history come alive. I highly recommend "Freedom Feminism". I look forward to sending a copy to my daughters for them to read as well.
jersy's review
4.0
Really interesting. This is showing another perspective in a concise way, backed with lots of sources.
I would suggest reading this as supplementary reading material, since I think you'll need some basic knowledge on feminism history and modern feminist to really get something out of it, but most readers will probably have that.
I would suggest reading this as supplementary reading material, since I think you'll need some basic knowledge on feminism history and modern feminist to really get something out of it, but most readers will probably have that.
More...