22 of 29 people found the following review helpful
A most frustrating book.,
Verified Purchase(What is this?)
This review is from: The End of Men: And the Rise of Women (Paperback)
The title of this book is misleading. The author in no way proves her thesis that the end of men is anywhere near. She does show that some men have difficulty adapting to the 21st century. The whole premise is just wrong.
On the back cover of the book it is stated that 50% of those in jobs in the UK are women. So what? Over 50% of the population are women. It also states that women dominate professional schools on every continent except Africa. While women may be the majority of students in faculties such as law and medicine in some developed countries, they are in a tiny minority when it comes to professors and those who are in the management of education and in control of the finance which is allocated to education. She doesn't mention at all the number of women who are denied education completely in some parts of the world. She also doesn't mention the fact that only 14% seats on the boards of European companies which are quoted on the stock markets are occupied by women. Anybody who doubts the dominance of men on the world stage should have a look at the photographs of the get-togethers of the countries of the United Nations.Count the women leaders.
I think the problem with this book is that the author concentrates on a small set of people in a certain socio-economic position, and ignores the plight of poor women, single parents and those on welfare. Even those women she writes about in relation to their so-called sexual liberation have adopted stereo-typical male standards of behaviour in their work and in their love lives, and are not particularly fulfilled in either.
I could go on, but will finish with the observation that if you wish to read an academic book which is based on a wide sample of different societies, and which give a comprehensive view on gender today, this is not the book.
Tracked by 2 customers
Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-4 of 4 posts in this discussion
Initial post: 1 Dec 2012 06:52:23 GMT
I agree with your review. I couldn't read more than twenty pages of this book I picked up in the library. It is totally unscientific, and her use of statistics is highly suspect. I believe that she has put the cart before the horse, she has started with the conclusion she wants to be true, i.e. that women have surpassed men in terms of money and power in our society, and then works backwards, cherrypicking the evidence that seems to back up this thesis. Her extrapolation from ONE woman's story she met in a supermarket in Virginia is unintentionally hilarious. She never seems to have heard that anecdotal evidence is the weakest form of evidence there is, it isn't even evidence, really. You can prove that the moon is made of cheese with just anecdote. Her almost total lack of footnotes or citations to back up her claims and statistics put me off reading any more of this book. I don't know, maybe women have overtaken men in our economy and men are in terminal decline. This book certainly doesn't prove it, though. My hunch is that the vast majority of workers, male and female, are seeing a terminal decline in their wealth and purchasing power, and have been for the last thirty years, since Reagan/Thatcher took power. Its the End of Men AND Women who don't belong to the wealthiest 1% of our society.
In reply to an earlier post on 5 Feb 2013 07:16:16 GMT
J. Potter says:
'The author in no way proves her thesis that the end of men is anywhere near.'
You somehow sound like you WANT it to be.
Posted on 24 Feb 2013 17:17:32 GMT
Last edited by the author on 24 Feb 2013 17:17:56 GMT
Mr. M. A. Warren says:
Sounds like you're just using this section to push your hate-filled feminist agenda, and are only annoyed that no book currently exists which can prove men to be as redundant as you'd like them to be. I love the way you get on your high horse and go off on one, quoting 'statistics' which paint an 'oppressed' picture of women, which are not actually relevant to the book, at all. If you know these 'statistics' to exist, beforehand, what do you expect to have happened, in the writing of the book? Them to be eradicated?
I will add that the areas you mention are cherry-picked, and that there are plenty of areas where men fare worse than women (healthcare, parental rights, control of world wealth, suicide figures, homelessness); unlike you, however, I will resist the urge to go off on one.
Posted on 26 Jul 2014 12:34:55 BDT
Mr. Vincenzo Politi says:
I haven't read the book (I was just reading the description and skimming through customers reviews before deciding whether to buy it or not), but something in your review got my attention. You say that the author of the book "I think the problem with this book is that the author concentrates on a small set of people in a certain socio-economic position"; but this is exactly what you also do when speaking about women in high academic positions, or in the stock market or in the United Nations. Obviously, there are not enough women in the very high levels of power. But what about lower levels? Without speaking only of the very rich and powerful and of the very poor and marginalised, how do women and men score in the middle levels of society? The number of employed "average women" is now almost equal to the number of employed "average men".
Looking at things from the perspective of "average" people can shed a new light on older problems - i.e., the infamous "pay gender gap". The traditional and legittimate complain is that women with very high profile jobs earn less than their males peers. For example, women working "in the city" are likely to receive a smaller bonus (but we are still talking of mega big bonuses, by the way). At the average levels of society, however, the pay gender gap is reduced or inexistent - i.e., a female shop assistant and a male shop assistant will earn the same. In those cases, however, it is likely that males are expected to do more physical demanding jobs - i.e., although female and male shop assistants are payed the same, the latter will be asked to lift heavy weights, moving the deliveries to the stockroom, and so on (for the same amount of money). On the other hand, average women are more likely to get jobs which are not physically demanding: the majority of restaurant receptionists are girls, whereas busboys are mostly... well, boys.
I am not denying that there are disparities in the high levels of power, but things are changing, although slowly. Some changes are necessarily slow! Speaking about the ration of male professors over female professors: academia is not hiring professors every other week and one cannot possibly expect that departments change their staff overnight. Academia is a place where careers are very long and very slow, and this influences the speed of change. These factors must be taken into consideration, instead of constantly repeating the mantra for which "there are more male professors than females". On the other hand, there is more to society than the high levels of power... I would like to know what you all think about this.
‹ Previous 1 Next ›