Re: Atlantic Monthly: Girls Rule

Date: Mon May 08 2000 - 10:57:36 EDT

  • Next message: "Title IX and NWLC"

    Jody, thank you for bringing up this article! I've been a long time
    admirer of Dr. Sommers and am waiting in great anticipation of her book
    "The War Against Boys" which is due out in July. For the convenience of
    other list members, let me provide an Internet link to Dr. Sommers'
    There are also Parts 2, 3, and 4 which can be accessed from this page.

    One of the reasons that I have such respect for Dr. Sommers is because she
    questions the assumptions that underly actions. I suppose that comes from
    being a philosophy professor. Too often today anything that might even
    possibly remotely tend to maybe suggest that girls are underprivileged is
    accepted unquestionably as Gospel by feminists, and the leaders in society
    and government are afraid to question this blind acceptance for fear of
    being labeled 'misogynist.' If Dr. Sadker were to come out with a report
    that says "Grass is blue, and therefore, because blue is traditionally a
    boy's color, girls are falling behind" it would be blindly accepted that
    grass is, in fact, blue. Probably several government agencies and task
    forces would be established to investigate why grass is blue, and at the
    insistence of feminists in Congress millions upon millions of dollars would
    be heaped upon genetic-engineering projects to color grass pink.

      Dr. Sommers does not accept that girls are falling behind just based on
    blind following or fear, and
    digs deeper to find what is really behind all of these reports. She finds
    a great deal of jumping to conclusions, to invalid logical processes being
    used, and in the case of Dr. Sadker finds the actual research missing. I
    don't know how it was when Dr. Sadker was in school, but if I had told any
    of my professors this semester when they asked for my research paper that I
    did the research but didn't keep a copy or some other type of excuse that
    Dr. Sadker has used on occasion, I would have received a grade of F. Maybe
    the good Doctor had more lenient professors than I.

      I think Professor Kleinfeld (who probably would not accept that "the dog
    ate it" either) did a thorough job of exposing the myths and unsound
    conclusions contained in the AAUW's work, so any means by which Dr. Sommers
    would address that would merely be reinforcing the Kleinfeld findings. The
    AAUW reports contain nothing meaningful, rather a lot of unsound advocacy.
    Nothing new there.

      I found this quote interesting: "Gender-equity activists like Sadker
    ought to apply their logic consistently: if the shortage of girls at the
    high end of the ability distribution is evidence of unfairness to girls,
    then the excess of boys at the low end should be deemed evidence of
    unfairness to boys." Who was it on this group who said "What's good for
    the goose is good for the gander?"


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon May 08 2000 - 10:57:52 EDT