James Flory's MEMORY-HOLED BOOK REVIEWS

The Majority is Always Wrong.

Category: Women Shall Rule Over You

THE RANTINGS OF A SINGLE MAN by Thomas Ellis

This book, which was published about a decade ago, is about 90% boldly fantastic and about 10% “What-was-he-thinking?” It is indeed a rant, all right. A long series of rants. And it is about time some man wrote this way and asked these pointed questions and hurled these all-too warranted charges at the evil, Marxian ideology of feminism.

The author traveled quite a bit, even globally. He entered into relationships with women around the globe. His anecdotes chronicle the destruction of female virtue and femininity in the modern Western Civilization females he encountered, due to misandric, Marxian feminism. In the way they talk, in the way they act, in the way they think, in the way they sabotage their own lives and happiness and then blame it on any male they can, Ellis dissects the dysfunctionality of modern Western females with equal parts wit and vehemence.

He was also in the interesting position of being employed at a tech firm in the Silicon Valley during the height of the tech boom there, and again, his ranting anecdotes chronicle a long Reign of Kafkaesque Gender-Biased Terror that took place in his workplace at the expense of innocent men and for the unfair benefit of entitled, manipulative females. Official company policy to deprive men of the means of providing for a family and to keep them abased, punished and passed over for promotions by vindictive bull dykes, bawdy “cougars,” and younger professional career whores sleeping their way upward. All of them officially endowed by their employers with greater workplace entitlements than the harrowed men who could be snitched on/falsely accused at a female whim’s notice for “sexual harrassment” and forced to attend “sensitivity training” or else just be summarily terminated outright, only to be replaced by another female, perhaps even the savvy snitch-female herself.

The author’s rants make a helluva lot of sense. He injects some interesting and iconoclastic facts along the way, too, such as when he cuts through the feminist propaganda about the actual accomplishments of feminist heros such as Amelia Earhart that the general public has never been told. He at times gets very factual and less anecdotal.

There are some flaws in this book, such as the author’s hedonistic pursuit of fornication for fornication’s sake, by his atheistic, automatic belief in Darwinism which comes up briefly a time or two; but perhaps the biggest flaw in this book is that too many of the author’s globe-trotting anecdotes, over the course of many years, tell of him too often returning and re-returning to several of the same exact crazy Western Civ individual women who had already screwed him over before (not that he was at all lacking in vaginal variety, however). He seems like a glutton for punishment, or at least he once was.

Bottom line: This guy’s totally unfiltered rants about what Western women have become, and how much the deck really is stacked against Western men nowadays, contain a great many profound observations. This is truly Red Pill stuff, an interesting view of the literal disintegration of a once cohesive society from the vantage point of a man with his boots on the ground when and where the action of disintegration was taking place.

Rating: Δ Δ Δ Δ
7/2015

Advertisements

THE RATIONAL MALE by Rollo Tomassi

I’ve had so many red-pill experiences, so what’s another one, right? Well, this one does hit a little more close to home, so to speak. Rollo Tomassi is the pseudonym of an extremely perceptive individual who for the past few years has maintained a blog of the same name as this book. Indeed, most if not all chapters or essays in this book can be found on his blog site. His pseudonym was taken from the movie L.A. Confidential, in case anyone is wondering. His blog is part of the “Manosphere,” that is, a burgeoning bunch of male bloggers who are (at long last!) sounding the alarm about the rampant MISANDRY in all facets, places, and mediums in our current debauched culture, all those little and not-so-little things which most morons miss. (By the way, “most morons” = the “blue pill” people. Go watch or re-watch the movie The Matrix, only don’t think of it at all as fiction this time, think of it as metaphor.) Rollo Tomassi probably tends to write about more timeless contentions between men and women, but if I read him correctly, I do not think he would disagree when I myself state that those timeless contentions between the sexes have been grotesquely magnified in our modern Western Civilization, and to the detriment of males and females alike, but ESPECIALLY to males.

Rollo Tomassi exposes so many universally held false assumptions our society has taken on about women: what they want, what they need, what they look for in a man, and why, etc. Just about each essay, or chapter, here, explodes yet another universally held modern myth about the real nature of women, and of men. For example, our society condemns men for the “feral” (sinful) male proclivity toward polygamy; Tomassi exposes how our society one-sidedly and unfairly sanctions the proclivity of “feral” (sinful) women towards hypergamy. In other words, a man’s “feral” (sinful) tendency, if he gives in to the lust of his flesh, is to commit adultery on his wife, but not usually to leave his wife. A man is more inclined to “add to his harem,” so to speak. Our society punishes this. Contrastly, a woman’s “feral” (sinful) tendency, if she gives in to the lust of her flesh, is to altogether abandon a husband of a certain societal status if and when an interested prospective husband of a higher social status becomes attainable to her. Our society rewards this. (Here I feel compelled to say: Shut up, blue-pill “white knight” idiot. Our society has long since degraded into rewarding feral, sinful adulteresses for this. Now go back to sleep. Oh, and stop wondering why no one respects you. Just accept it.) That is what the current divorce laws are all about.

Oh, I should add, a very large part of taking the red pill regarding gender relations and reading through Rollo Tomassi’s most fascinating observations is getting to know such terms–terms representing extraordinarily legitimate but little realized concepts–as “hypergamy,” “feral female,” “white knight” and the overarching “feminine imperative,” by which I think (if I am not mistaken) he is identifying our society’s unspoken public policy of condonation and promotion of the most base and “feral” of female lusts. This is the warp and woof of this particularly nasty, and very real, “Matrix” in which we now live (Note: if only this was the only one I had ever encountered in this Twilight Zone episode of a life, but that’s another story, isn’t it?) Yes, “Matrix.” But what is going to really suck for the new, initiate reader and earnest absorber of the facts here–especially if he happens to have testicles–is the realization that this isn’t a movie, this is Real Life. And the man who reads and opens his eyes here, the man who puts the sunglasses on, and takes his red pill or whatever, is bound to be hit with a most profound depression when he too finally sees women as having the relational limitations that they really have. Do not misunderstand. This is not a misogynistic treatise whatsoever. It’s just a realistic treatise.

The “red pill” man who reads this will never again make the ungodly (and sexually counter-productive) mistake of idolizing or “pedestalizing” a woman. The red pill man who digests this will know forever why women inexorably are attracted to “assholes,” and why they invariably give any man foolish enough to “pedestalize” them the dreaded “let’s-just-be-friends” treatment.

Be forewarned: Rollo Tomassi has an affinity for acronyms. This reader has always typically loathed acronyms; however, Tomassi’s acronyms are clever, and they are memorable because they signify such universal sufferings for Western Civ men today in perhaps all of their dealings with feminized, feral (pardon the redundancy) Western Civ women. For example, what man has not been “LJBF”ed (given the Let’s Just Be Friends treatment) at some misguided point in his life by a female and thus kept on the course of being an “AFC” (Average Frustraged Chump”)? Oh, but don’t fret, dummy, because NAWALT (Not All Women Are Like That). Other “Manosphere” vernacular here abounds: admittedly catchy buzzwords representing abnormally meaningful concepts to today’s frustrated men: such words and phrases as “alphas, “betas,” “white knights,” and of course the dreaded “Alpha F#cks/Beta Bucks” stratagem of the “Feminine Imperative.” Have fun with these. One might as well. It is real life. Somebody just assigned some names to these real-life concepts at last. Good for you, Rollo and other “manosphere” alarm-sounders.

This is a singularly Machiavellian outlook of the timeless give-and-take, push-pull mindgames and power plays between the sexes. And like the Machiavellian take on politics, it’s also matchlessly true and real. I would highly recommend that any and all men read a balance of this Rollo Tomassi’s work and that of an equally profound blogger and observer going by the pseudonym of “Dalrock.” Do not look for much wisdom from very many of those who post comments on Dalrock’s website as they tend to be either papists or duped ecumaniacal incorporated churchian types, but Dalrock himself is superb. Now, Dalrock hasn’t come out with a book yet; I sure wish he would. I would like to give my grandson both his book and Tomassi’s. For Tomassi’s book I would wait a bit longer in giving it to him, though, until I felt his faith was ready for it. Tomassi is not a believer in the Messiah of the Scriptures; Dalrock is. It is wonderful to see how they both work together and appreciate each other’s wisdom in working toward a common goal, the goal of sounding the alarm about the rampant and largely ignored misandry in our culture. Their alliance despite their fundamental differences in worldviews is a tribute to men in general. Tomassi gives a nod of appreciation to Dalrock in the tail end of this book. I found this very gainful for Tomassi as well as Dalrock (Note: I myself have noticed that it is much easier for a believer in Jesus Christ to enjoy the company of an undisguised non-believer over the company of a cultist or a heretic, though I do have friends in those camps as well). Both men are correct in their identification of the ubiquitous anti-male bias in our culture. The wisdom of either man should help any young man avoid being walked on and disrespected in this temporal existence; the difference is, the wisdom of Dalrock might also help a young man not lose his soul, for it must be admitted, much of Tomassi’s advice does indeed boil down to sheer, raw fornication, wantonly gratifying the lust of the flesh. And every time Tomassi attributes some “feral” (sinful) trait of females to certain tens of thousands of years of “evolution,” I am very grateful that there is a Dalrock around to better (from my own equally rational point of view) explain this sinful trait of females to the original curses that God placed upon Eve in the account in the Book of Genesis.

Hey, if Rollo Tomassi is correct in his assumed worldview of Darwinism (what he and so many others vaguely call “evolution”) then he will not have to worry about acts of fornication. For me, the trouble is, I’ve read too much of the abysmal “trade secret” weaknesses of Darwinism, even and especially among the leading “evolutionary” paleontologists themselves. It’s a red pill I’ve taken which Tomassi quite obviously has not.

Somebody created us humans. It’s always going to come back to that, and it is going to do so rationally. Which implies that there may be a final Judgment Day. I will leave it at that.

Another flaw of Tomassi is that he automatically dismisses the possibility that at least one major thrust of the modern misandric feminist movement has been CONSPIRATORIAL. He apparently does so without having researched conspiratorial history whatsoever. It was Albert Einstein who had a famous, shaming quotation about those who would come to conclusions about a thing without having done any investigation into that thing. Proverbs 18:13 carries a warning against that also. Well, I have done some investigating; and it turns out there was some conspiracy involved: Sorry, Rollo, but there’s a reason that Gloria Steinem was a CIA asset (source: “Gloria Steinem: How the CIA Used Feminism to Destabilize Society” by Henry Makow), and there’s a reason why women were LURED outside the home and into the workplace, and it wasn’t to “liberate” them, it was to TAX them (source: Aaron Russo, maker of “From Freedom to Fascism.”) This is another red pill which I have taken and for which Tomassi is still a blue-pill virgin. Hey, Henrik Ibsen wasn’t just messing around when he wrote that “The majority is always wrong,” Rollo. He wasn’t just writing a metaphor about men and women. It’s all of life. If it’s in the mainstream, it’s bullsh#t. There. I said it. Complete with the semantically mitigating pound symbol, for whatever reason I just now decided to mitigate my expletives.

A final minor flaw with Tomassi is that, although he all too compellingly exposes the utter shallowness (sinful nature) of women, he never, so far as I can see, gets around to acknowledging the likewise innate shallowness (sinful nature) of men. He is right that women’s “hypergamy” and their concomitant “female solipsism” (Note: This is a concept which this reader more than acknowledges and hastens to warn that it will shatter many a “blue-pill” man’s world, be forewarned) forever prevents them from being able to love a man in the idealistic way that a man is capable of loving her; Tomassi is right in emphasizing that it is a woman’s feral (sinful) nature to always be on the lookout for a prospective mate of higher societal status; he is right in showing that a woman is much more calculating and ironically icily rational than the man with whom she shares a relationship when it comes to anything pertaining to the actual relationship. He is right: This is the ruthless, feral, shallow, sinful core of woman. However, let’s be honest: many of the men who would and do label an overweight female a “fattie” in the comments section on Rollo’s site are not looking for a female to procreate and pass on genetics with: They are just looking for a female companion, and they know for sure they do not want any children, or any more children. And yet, these same men are just as concerned about a female’s attractiveness as a man who DOES seek to have children with the woman he is after. Why? If we are to (rightfully) criticize females, we should be able to criticize men as well when men do things such as behave in a shallow manner.

Perhaps Rollo Tomassi addresses this innate shallowness in men, though I have read a great deal of his writing now and I cannot recall him as ever having done so. I suspect he would admit it without hesitation, though I do not know that for certain. However, make no mistake, I do NOT much fault him for focusing so exclusively on purely female flaws and foibles, because the REST of our misandric society already attacks men and focuses more, more, MORE than enough on flaws that are purely male.

This is not a “safe” book to read. Rollo’s blog is not a “safe” blog to read. It will not make any man feel better about life for knowing this stuff. This man’s advice, if soberly absorbed, could SERIOUSLY take a mousey man and make him worthy of the respect and desire of a plurality of females, but understand, it does NOT make that man any less ALONE in the world–quite the contrary.

Oh, but please do not confuse this advice of Rollo Tomassi with “pick-up artistry.” Tomassi is so very much deeper than that. This wisdom goes to the very core. A man should read this only if he has the maturity to face extremely unsettling core truths about his very existence in this world. For the mature male student of the Holy Scriptures there is much advice from this heathen that will inadvertantly confirm the curses that God placed upon Adam and Eve in a way probably more profound than ever before appreciated; but to fellows without a firm foundation in where this life originated and why–well, let’s just say, I would not want to be in their heads when they finally absorb this stark stuff. They are going to need something to lean on. Somehow, Tomassi has thus far firewalled himself from the staggering implications of what he knows to be true; perhaps being financially successful enough to own six houses as he says he does has a way of temporarily firewalling or distracting a man from the supremely unsettling truths he has isolated and described; I wouldn’t know, but I have my suspicions. At any rate, more than anyone else I have ever read, this man Rollo Tomassi has a level of appreciation for the inexorable state of alienation with which every single thinking man who ever lived must come to terms.

Any man who reads this and “takes the red pill” on it (that is, accepts the fact that it does correspond with his every EXPERIENCE, and not with his social conditioning) will come to appreciate at last the real limitations of a woman’s capability to love: He will have to embrace the fact that there is no woman who can love him the way he would like to be loved. And that man will know WHY, as Tomassi is very adept at explaining such things. So this is not a comfortable book by any means. But hey, if someone has got this far in life and still believes that real truths are comfortable, they are either very, very young, or they are very, very brainwashed.

So if you’re the kind of man who likes to KNOW, who needs to KNOW what the diagnosis is so that you can face and hopefully attack a disturbing dilemma, then this is a must-read book for you. But if you are the kind of man who just wants to remain in ignorance in his misery and distractions, then you’re going to want to stay far away from this book and this man’s blog.

This reader, for better or worse, belongs to the camp of the former.

Lord willing, I can have my male posterity read this someday when they are old enough to confront it–so long as they also can read Dalrock. For rational balance, of course.

In closing, one constant I have found running through the work of both Tomassi and Dalrock: They consistently show how fundamentally vulnerable a man makes himself whenever he consents to marriage–ESPECIALLY in today’s modern, State-worshiping, misandric culture. A man risks so much more than even his assets today. Wow. But I’d better stop here or I’ll never stop.

Despite the aforementioned misgivings, this gets my highest rating. This man really, really understands women (and men) as God made them, women (and men) as God cursed them. Nevermind that he thinks they “evolved.” The conclusions and the advice, especially for men in this misandric society, is the same (except for the advice about fornication), and it totally flies in the face of conventional “wisdom.” Bravo!

Rating: Δ Δ Δ Δ Δ
12/2014

LEGALIZING MISANDRY by Paul Nathanson and Katherine K. Young

This is the second book in an apparent trilogy by these two authors, the first being the exquisitely recommendable SPREADING MISANDRY. Whereas that first book dealt with ubiquitous misandry (hatred of men) in all venues of pop culture throughout the 1990s, this book, LEGALIZING MISANDRY, examines in detail the sundry ways in which the Canadian and American judicial and law enforcement system, along with a complicit major media of course, unfairly vilify and persecute men via, as the title suggests, the legal system itself. Since this second book therefore sometimes deals with legislation and court practices and legalese, it is a bit harder to get through than their first book, but it is nevertheless well worth the effort and I eagerly anticipate obtaining their third installment which continues their uncovering of the general hatred against men in our culture, the only general hatred that is politically correct in our time.

The authors often document herein that the most acute critics of misandric feminism (what these authors call ideological feminism) sometimes come from their own ranks: it seems there are a few renegade feminists out there. They also show that, at bottom, when all the smokescreens are blown away, what ideological feminism really is all about is not only overall hatred of men, but also the inevitable, concomitant promotion of lesbianism. It is about time somebody from academia said that. Actually, Nathanson and Young give credit to feminist Daphne Patai for saying it! Kudos to Ms. Patai.

The statistics these authors give are often shocking. They challenge mainstream misandric gender assumptions repeatedly, and sometimes they demonstrate that the statistics the mainstream media is using–taken unquestioningly from this or that misandrist whom they also take unquestioningly to be a respected “women’s advocate”–oftentimes these statistics which promote ideological feminism and bash men at the same time turn out later to be have been flat-out hoaxes or lies. And yet that still doesn’t stop the courts and media from continuing to use these bogus statistics.

The insights these authors come up with regarding the roles of men and women in a healthy society, as opposed to our sick society, are incisive and desperately needed in our culture. They demolish the misandric dogma of ideological feminism which propagandizes that violent men are the result of men who have been too empowered. Actually, the truth is the complete opposite, as these authors more than explain: men in fact grow more violent when they are disempowered and threatened with emasculation, which is of course the raison d’etre of ideological feminism.

This book is extremely valuable and I could go on and on about what a rare and meritorious service these authors are performing. To understand the plight of men today, and the horrible destruction that ideological feminism causes, there are probably not very many sources of information on the entire planet more worthy and important than this.

I do have one criticism of this book, though. Just one. But it’s not insignificant: The authors get off to a rocky start because they chose to begin by examining the Satanic Ritual Abuse phenomenon of the 1990s until now. Their idea was to show that this phenomenon was/is nothing more than an attack on men. Personally, I never got that impression, not even from the misandric major media, and I am still not convinced of that after having read what these authors have to say in support of this claim. But more to the problematic point: here these authors are writing about something of which they know nothing of much value because they are relying solely upon reports from the mainstream media. So naturally these authors come down on the side of the False Memory Foundation. Never mind that the False Memory Foundation is a shill organization designed to suppress the truth about Satanic Ritual Abuse. I really wish these authors hadn’t gone into this. They are not yet equipped (nor do most people ever equip themselves) to understand “the Pedophocracy,” as Dave MacGowan calls it. They needed to have read the work of authors already deprogrammed in this area; yes, authors such as Dave MacGowan, or William Ramsey, or Alex Constantine, etc., or else they should procure a suppressed book like THE FRANKLIN COVERUP to first deprogram themselves before tackling such a surreal subject as this.

Rating: Δ Δ Δ Δ
7/2013

SPREADING MISANDRY by Paul Nathanson and Katherine Young

This is a fantastic book. Long overdue. It is simply superb. It identifies the problem of rampant, ubiquitous misandry (a.k.a. “male bashing”) in our popular and academic culture over the last two decades plus. This reader has for some time been trying to sound the alarm about this pernicious problem, and this reader has for some time felt very lonely in doing so. Almost nobody else around me seems to notice there’s even a problem; instead, most indoctrinated American idiots still think that misogyny is rampant and represents the only sexist bigotry that ever occurs in our culture. Yeah, right.

Oh, thank the Lord that somebody else finally sees it. And these authors document so, so, so much more than even I had ever noticed—and I had noticed a lot. These authors document the ubiquitous misandric storylines of a multitude of motion pictures, and television programs, throughout the 1990s and 2000s; moreover, they do an exemplary job of interpreting, in depth, the sometimes intricate misandric metaphors involved in the typically “critically acclaimed” and/or “box office hit” motion pictures. When these authors interpret the cinematic metaphors, explaining how this or that plotline is an attack on men, it gets rather obvious that they’ve hit the nail on the head.

The authors document the listed TV shows of a randomly chosen/given week in the TV guide. They do this for one week in the early 1990s, one week in the mid-1990s, and one week in the late 1990s. They list the story lines of all the misandric TV dramas, sitcoms, news pieces, talk show topics, etc. It is astounding how much blatant misandry they dredge up. Our culture attacks men, excoriates them as either evil or inadequate or both, and leaves them nothing with which young men can identify as being decent and masculine and distinct from feminism—nothing except base cruelty and lasciviousness.

This book is written from a secular perspective. That is the only flaw of this book, but it is a small one as these authors do not engage in any attacks upon Christianity but do in fact seek to vaguely defend it on occasion, at least on moral and traditional grounds.

The authors demonstrate plainly that the same sort of derisive prejudice that once was tolerated against women or against blacks or other groups is now only tolerated against men, especially white heterosexual men. They give a myriad of examples which show this. They examine the strange psychological reasons why most people can’t recognize the misandry all around them. Understanding the message of this book is to understand how other bigotries could have gone unchallenged and even florished in bygone days of American history. And these authors show how ridiculous and pathetic it is that most people are so hyper-vigilant to those other atrophied, bygone bigotries, and yet they are ironically almost completely blind to the most obvious and dangerous bigotry of our present day.

This book is apparently one of a series of two or three books by these authors. I can’t wait to purchase the others!

Rating: Δ Δ Δ Δ Δ
3/2012

FASCINATING WOMANHOOD by Helen Andelin

REVIEW: Great and Timeless Advice

Wow, this book should be standard reading material in public high schools for young women. My wife got this book. I read it covertly without her knowing. Holy smokes–everything in it would work. It’s like Ms. Andelin was picking my brain! I can’t believe that women these days have been brainwashed into being unhappily rebellious, unhappily “liberated”, when they could be attracting and keeping more men than they ever believed, if they just chose to follow Ms. Andelin’s advice. Trust me, as a guy, the stuff Ms. Andelin writes about would drive men wild and want to stay with a female like that!
Why do women allow themselves to be brainwashed by modern radical feminism, which is so different from actual FEMININITY? Why do women today, in this culture, want to be unhappy, as they obviously are? Don’t they want to be loved? (That last one was a rhetorical question.) A man would conquer things he never could have otherwise conquered for a woman who followed the advice in this book. Such a woman would be exceedingly rare, exquisitely precious in today’s rebellious, feminist culture. Wow.

Rating: Δ Δ Δ Δ Δ
1/2006

CRUEL HOAX by Henry Makow

Henry Makow is one of the most incisive philosophical thinkers alive on the planet at this time. For young men and women who are looking to be in a loving and respecting relationship, Makow’s words of wisdom are inestimable. This book is a collection of essays which, though available on Makow’s website (http://www.savethemales.ca), are well worth buying and having on hand on your book shelf, for this is information that probably cannot be found anywhere else.

Makow sees through the deception of modern radical feminism. He documents its occultic, elitist, and communistic origins, and he repeatedly gives the reason for it all: The deliberate destruction of Western Civilization by secret satanic societies and elite banksters by way of destroying any and all vestiges of masculine leadership in the middle class in order to facilitate a global oligarchical dictatorship.

Perhaps the most significant thing Makow does, and easily the most striking, is his demonstration of the ubiquity of the psychological attacks on masculinity in the mainstream media, which most every dumbhead, already emasculated and brainwashed westerner sees everywhere in front of his face but cannot recognize it for what it is.

If there is a flaw in Makow’s thought process and presentation it is his assessment of who sits atop the “Illuminati/New World Order.” For Makow, the top of the NWO pyramid is a group of elite Jewish banking interests, comingled with European royal familes. This is the same view held by the likes of Lyndon LaRouche, and that can never be a good thing. How a man as brilliant as Makow could get so far into his research of the NWO and manage to never encounter the footprints and fingerprints of the minions of the Vatican is truly mindboggling to behold. Thus, though he obviously knows a great deal about certain branches of history of “the Illuminati,” his attempts to describe the operation as a whole waxes somewhat puerile.

Makow is at his best when he writes more directly on the dangers of modern radical feminism. In fact, he does this better than anybody. There really is no one else like him.

Rating: Δ Δ Δ Δ Δ
3/2010

THE WAR AGAINST BOYS by Christina Hoff Sommers

How welcome it is to at last witness a modern “feminist” shed her prejudicial misandry long enough to take notice of the longstanding nationwide bias against boys in our current system of education! This was truly a refreshing read!

Ms. Somers documents how boys have been neglected, oppressed, and even systematically feminized by a gang of male-hating elitists with a lot of pull over formation of curriculum in this country. Somers combines cold hard facts with a rapier rhetorical style. She really slams academically esteemed feminist “scholars” like Carol Gilligan and Nancy Chodorow for hysterical claims of oppression against females in schools, at a time when all the research and test results showed (and continues to show) female dominance. She takes a well-deserved shot at other usual misandrist suspects as well–Gloria Allred and her ilk. Great stuff!–makes you want to stand up and cheer. And this gigantic hysterical popular culture lie–put forward by the Gilligans and the Allreds, et al–that we nowadays in America live in an oppressive “patriarchy”!–Give me a break! These lunatic misandrists do not even understand what a patriarchy is, quite obviously.

Somers shows how schools have been swept up by the spectacularly unfounded and grossly erroneous claims of these modern radical feminists, with the result being that schools are now actually teaching in a style which greatly favors the female learning style. In fact, in many cases, our young boys are being deliberately subverted–deliberately <em>feminized</em>. Again, Ms. Somers: Thank you for calling attention to this!

My only small complaint against Ms. Somers’ work comes on but a couple pages, wherein she makes the claim that, though the hysterically inaccurate “scholar” Carol Gilligan prided herself on comparisons between her work and that of Charles Darwin, Gilligan’s work differs from Darwin’s, according to Somers, in that, Darwin’s “main thesis had been confirmed by countless observations of the fossil record.” I must admit I got a little chuckle out of this, since even the astute Ms. Somers misfired here: in fact, she failed to see a huge irony: Darwin’s main thesis has been shown to reflect much the same unscientific bias as does Ms. Gilligan’s main thesis, that girls are “oppressed” today in today’s “patriarchal society.” Neither thesis has been proven; in fact both can be and have been DISproven, for those willing to embrace science only and leave preducial philosophies at the door.

But, other than that minor contention, this was a fantastic and invigoratingly candid book to read.

Rating: Δ Δ Δ Δ Δ
12/2007