Posted on 06/20/2007 2:54:58 PM PDT by 68skylark
A British import called The Dangerous Book for Boys has soared on American bestseller lists. Is it a new beacon for real boyhood—or a throwback to 1950s-style ideas of sex roles, "dangerous" in a different way than its title suggests?
The book, by English brothers Conn and Hal Iggulden—already a big hit in England and Australia—revels in retro, conjuring up a pre-computer, pre-videogame idyll of hunting, skipping stones, making paper airplanes and bows and arrows, and stories of battlefield heroics. Unlike some works in the "boys will be boys" genre, such as The Big Book of Boy Stuff which treats rude gags as the essence of boyness, The Dangerous Book... expects its readers to be gentlemen; it endorses good manners, cleanliness, and knowledge of Shakespeare, Latin phrases, and history. (The U.S. edition replaces culture-specific British material from royalty to cricket with American equivalents, but otherwise keeps the spirit of the book intact.) Many see it as a welcome antidote not only to the narrow and sedentary interests of the digital age but to the safety-obsessed, anti-competitive mindset of "politically correct" schooling and to feminist scorn for all things male.
But are initiative and adventure "male"? Some people who like the call to initiative, adventure, and outdoor fun have asked why the same fare could not have been packaged as "The Dangerous Book for Kids." Yet the gender-specific nature of the message, which includes a chapter on how to deal with the alien creatures known as girls, is quite deliberate. Indeed, The Dangerous Book... is being treated as something of a political manifesto—a repudiation of the idea that boys and girls are basically alike.
Thus, Rush Limbaugh has praised The Dangerous Book... in an rambling rant against "feminazis" ("How to make the best paper airplane in the world, just things that boys do ... for the last ten, 15 years, feminists have tried to wipe 'em out") and liberals intent on denying differences between the sexes: "Nobody can be better than anybody else, nobody can be different than anyone else." The Dangerous Book, Limbaugh suggested, was an answer to this madness.
Christina Hoff Sommers, resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute and author of The War Against Boys, offered a similar if far more coherent take in a New York Post column. Sommers praised the book as a "delightfully instructive anachronism" that "valorizes risk, adventure and manliness," a challenge to modern educators steeped in gender neutrality and a rediscovery of common sense about innate differences between boys and girls, supported by "neuroscientific evidence."
Interestingly, despite this portrayal of The Dangerous Book... as a culture-wars battlefield, it has not been the subject of any significant backlash. What feminist critiques of the book have appeared—including a cogent, balanced, and largely sympathetic review on the Feministe blog—have not disparaged the "boy" activities the book promotes but argued that girls should be included in the fun as well.
On blogs and Internet forums, readers complaining about the book's exclusionary message have been dismissed as angry feminist whiners; a standard rejoinder is that no one is stopping girls from reading it if they want. Yet my friend Dana, a graduate student who holds no brief for angry feminism or political correctness, shares the concerns about the gender-specific focus of The Dangerous Book. "I would have loved this book as a kid, and it really bugs me how people are saying 'this is such a great book for boys, and it's so wonderful that it's aimed at boys,'" she says. "Where is the book for girls who did stuff like make their own chain mail as kids, or cracked rocks with sledgehammers in the driveway both to see what was inside them and to see if you could get sparks?" Dana is not convinced by the argument that girls can read the book too, given that it is geared so explicitly to boys. Indeed, the message to girls seems to be either "This stuff is not for you" or "You can enjoy this cool stuff if you want to be like the boys."
Less attention has been paid to the boys who are not particularly into "boy things," who may be more interested in reading than in catching snails and may prefer art to stories of battles. The fact is that for both girls and boys, biologically based gender differences—which some feminists have been far too dogmatic in denying—are considerably attenuated by individual differences. Moreover, gender-neutral educators notwithstanding, social pressure to conform to "appropriate" norms and interests remains a reality.
Is The Dangerous Book... sexist? While it encourages respect for girls, it does seem to treat them more as "the weaker sex" than as equals. In one grating passage, boys are encouraged to carry a handkerchief, among other things, for "offering one to a girl when she cries." Boys are reminded not to make a girl feel stupid if she needs help, but nothing is said about the possibility of accepting help from a girl, or losing gracefully if bested by a girl at some "boy" activity.
Partly in response to queries about a companion volume for girls, HarperCollins is now bringing The Daring Book for Girls, scheduled for publication in November. There's nothing wrong with having separate books aimed at girls and boys, each with a somewhat different focus. The trouble with The Dangerous Book for Boys is not that it seeks to restore the old-fashioned charms of adventurous boyhood but that it's being treated as a restoration of old-fashioned wisdom about boys and girls. The "free to be you and me" message of 1970s feminism was often naïve in its assumption that all differences between the sexes were the result of social conditioning. But it also had a liberating message of celebrating individuality. And it would be a shame to throw out that baby with the bathwater, at a time when girls and boys have more options open to them than ever.
Cathy Young is a contributing editor of reason.
Personally I'm a big fan of this book -- I got a copy for my 10-year old nephew and he loves it. Last weekend we built the go-cart featured in the book, and it was great fun.
Somebody call the waaaaahhmbulance for Cathy.
Doesn’t she have anything more important to worry and write about?
I wanna play cricket on the green
Ride my bike across the street
Cut myself and see my blood
I wanna come home all covered in mud...
I walked into a book store with some coworkers (guys) after lunch last week, and this book was prominently displayed at the front entrance. One of my buddies asked what it was, and I said that it was a book of fun stuff we used to do when we were boys but has gone out of style with the current trend of pussifying boys.
A younger guy, in his mid-twenties, snapped his head toward me when I said that and gave me a glaring look. I dismissed it, but when I walked around the table I saw that he wasn’t alone—he was carrying a baby bag and pushing a baby carriage.
It is profoundly irrational and utterly self-defeating to try to wish away a natural fact, which is what gender-war feminists have been doing for decades. Miss Young is generally more sensible than this; perhaps she was having a bad day.
Freedom, Wealth, and Peace,
Francis W. Porretto
Eternity Road
Actually, men are more predisposed to taking risks, and are much more skilled at it than women. So yes, initiative and adventure, in that sense of the word, are indeed "male." It is part of our makeup -- and it is counter-balanced, in a healthy way, by other characteristics in women.
I am SO buying this for my grandson.
It will drive his mom bonkers. ;)
It's found in the book called Wild at Heart by John Elderidge. Very,very in-depth and Biblically-based.
ROTFLMAO!
I really want to get this for my boys. Plan on doing it soon.
I’m a woman. Having sons had taught me a lot about boys...and how much they’re not allowed to be who they truly are, thanks to feminism.
I’ll be damned if I let that happen to mine.
“What feminist critiques of the book have appeared—including a cogent, balanced, and largely sympathetic review on the Feministe blog—have not disparaged the “boy” activities the book promotes but argued that girls should be included in the fun as well.”
This torques me. Why can’t the boys just have something for THEM?????
Someone has to say it: Women are the weaker sex.
What you should have said is "Women are the physically weaker sex". Mentally, emotionally, verbally, etc they are not weaker at all.
At the place where I work, I have sitting on my computer a small doll and a scale model Volkswagen Beetle. The other day, a co-worker brought his four-year old son, not yet old enough to be a product of the while-male patriarchal ruling class of America, into the office and the boy made a beeline for my computer, totally ignored the doll, and grabbed the Beetle, squealing in delight. Somehow I doubt very much that his parents spent the last four years training him to like cars and dislike dolls.
There are intrinsic and God-given differences between the sexes, and one can only imagine the pathologies and problems we have created for ourselves over the past few decades that could have been avoided had the social engineers not tried to eliminate those differences.
I’m always admitting I’m not as strong as my husband...he can physically do more than I can (except the giving birth part...I rock at that!). It’s just nature and I have no problem with it. However, I’m the emotional glue that holds our family together.
If the girls are unhappy, let them buy it. Just like they can read the Hardy BOYS mysteries. Only they don’t get to change the names.
I overheard some parents lamenting that their 13 year old son wanted to spend his summer “fishing, playing golf, and hanging out with his friends”. I gave them a very confused look and said “I think I lived that life.”.
No, Cathy, it would NOT be a shame to throw out the baby with the bathwater, re Feminism. The whole thing needs to go. You (we women) got INTO the clubhouse, ok. But you still didn’t like it, did you? You wanted to change it to be YOUR way. “It’s too smokey,” “We want it painted pink,” “We FEEL oppressed,” yadayada. Toss the bath, toss the baby. Shut up and enjoy being a woman.
Lord save us from feminists, especially libertarian feminists writing for Reason.
Raised all boys to be good men. They had a great dad and role model.
They skinned knees, broke arms, slammed fingers, had concussions, fell out of trees, fell off their bikes, were hit with dodge balls, got in fights, made up and went back to playing 15 minutes later, and much more that I can’t even remember from my dotage.
The point is that I heard an overweight 13 year old tell his mother that he couldn’t climb up a rope ladder because it was dangerous and he could get hurt.
God help us. If the boys get anymore wrapped in cottonwool and swaddling and then coddled by the feminists, they will never have courage.
Jnygrl, I also have learned SO MUCH about males by having a boy, now 20, (and a husband). They are so different from us, and really quite wonderful.
I bought this book for the BOYS I tutor — the next generation. (I told them at work, “Give me all the Jr Hi boys that no one wants to tutor.”)I will add it to my collection of ‘Special Ops Military Weapons’ etc. books.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.