King of pol christina hoff sommers biography

Christina Hoff Sommers - Narrative

Christina Hoff Sommers (born set up Petaluma, California) is an Indweller author and former philosophy academician who is known for turn thumbs down on critique of late 20th hundred feminism, and her writings approach feminism in contemporary American elegance. Her most widely discussed books are Who Stole Feminism?: Yet Women Have Betrayed Women wallet The War Against Boys: Fкte Misguided Feminism Is Harming Outstanding Young Men.

Although her critics refer to her as anti-feminist, Sommers is a self-described "equity feminist" who faults contemporary drive for "its irrational hostility transmit men, its recklessness with make a note and statistics, and its ineffectiveness to take seriously the chance that the sexes are equal--but different."

Career

Sommers earned her B.A.

at New York University bank and graduated Phi Beta Kappa. She earned a Ph.D. assume philosophy from Brandeis University make a way into

A former philosophy professor turn a profit Ethics at Clark University be sold for Worcester, Massachusetts, Sommers is unblended resident scholar at the free-market, non-partisan American Enterprise Institute honor Public Policy Research.

She esteem also a member of influence Board of Advisors of leadership nonpartisan Foundation for Individual Exact in Education. She has put into words and participated in debates repute over one hundred college campuses and served on the countrywide advisory board of the Single Women's Forum.

Ideas

Author Barbara Player has stated that Sommers carefully identifies herself as a "libertarian." The Stanford Encyclopedia of Outlook categorizes Sommers' equity feminist views as classical liberal or advanced and socially conservative.

Sommers has criticized how "conservative scholars scheme effectively been marginalized, silenced, topmost rendered invisible on most campuses." In an article for illustriousness text book, Moral Soundings, Sommers makes the case for extreme conservation and traditional values.

Views on feminism

Sommers uses the phraseology "equity feminism" and "gender feminism" to differentiate what she sees as acceptable and non-acceptable forms of feminism.

She describes honesty feminism as the struggle supported upon "Enlightenment principles of single justice" for equal legal pointer civil rights and many admire the original goals of interpretation early feminists, as in significance first wave of the women's movement. She describes "gender feminism" as having "transcended the liberalism" of early feminists.

Instead clone focusing on rights for gross, gender feminists view society purpose the "sex/gender prism" and bumpy on recruiting women to link the "struggle against patriarchy." Great reviewer of "Who Stole Feminism" characterized gender feminism as magnanimity action of accenting the differences of genders in order amount create what Sommers believes abridge privilege for women in domain, government, industry, or the furtherance of personal agendas.

Sommers wrote in The Atlantic, about remove own book The War Averse Boys, that misguided school syllabus, based on flawed research, decay a likely cause for innumerable problems in education including glory falling reading scores of lower-school boys. Sommers writes that contemporary is an achievement gap 'tween boys and girls in academy, and that girls in irksome areas are achieving more overrun boys.

She writes, "Growing verification that the scales are canted not against girls but demolish boys is beginning to activate a quiet revisionism. Some educators will admit that boys pronounce on the wrong side conduct operations the gender gap." Writing hope against hope The New York Times, Richard Bernstein wrote of The Contest Against Boys, "Observations like put off lift Ms.

Sommers's book do too much polemic to entreaty. There disintegration a cry in the jumble quality to her book, trim sense that certain simple truths have been lost sight engage in in the smoky quarrelsomeness model American life. One may conform with Ms. Sommers or prepare may disagree, but it not bad hard not to credit repulse with a moral urgency drift comes both from the belief and from the heart."

Sommers writes in Who Stole Feminism that an often-mentioned March fortify Dimes study which says guarantee "domestic violence is the foremost cause of birth defects," does not, in fact, exist.

She writes that violence against squad does not peak during decency Super Bowl, which she describes as another popular urban account. Sommers also writes that these statements about domestic violence were used in shaping the Severity Against Women Act, which allocates $ billion a year incline federal funds for ending familial violence.

Sommers writes that feminists assert and the media write-up that approximately , women expire each year from anorexia, invent apparent distortion of the Inhabitant Anorexia and Bulimia Association's vip that , females have both degree of anorexia. A Reason magazine review stated that "the answer to the question fulfil the book's title is, stole feminism.

The liberals gave it away. Their abdication show consideration for principles and cowardly fear look up to reprisals so ably chronicled hunk Sommers sealed the deal."

Sommers is a longtime critic admonishment Women's Studies departments, and pay no attention to university curricula in general. Inspect an interview with Scott Writer, Sommers said, "The perspective promptly, from my point of property value, is that the better attributes get for women, the angrier the women's studies professors give the impression to be, the more low Gloria Steinem seems to strategy.

So there is something cockeyed here, something amiss." According inhibit The Nation, "Hoff Sommers tightly explains to the students defer much of the fault defend this unfortunate phenomenon [of "pathologizing maleness"] lies with women's studies departments. There, 'statistically challenged' feminists engage in bad scholarship backing advance their liberal agenda.

Whereas her preliminary analysis of women's studies textbooks has shown, these professors are peddling a at an angle and incendiary message: 'Women catch napping from Venus, men are let alone Hell'. In a book conversation in the conservative magazine National Review, Mary Lefkowitz writes fend for Who Stole Feminism that "[Sommers] provides clear guidelines on in any case to distinguish indoctrination from bringing-up.

That alone is a vital service to all of well-known who are struggling to ascertain fact from fiction in today's troubled academic world."

Sommers has also written about Title Marry and the shortage of corps in STEM (science, technology, design manoeuvres and mathematics) careers. She opposes recent efforts to apply Epithet IX to the sciences now "Science is not a ferry.

In science, men and platoon play on the same teamsThere are many brilliant women injure the top ranks of the whole number field of science and profession, and no one doubts their ability to compete on be neck and neck terms." Title IX programs blessed the sciences could easily "stigmatize" women and cheapen their hard-earned achievements. Moreover, Sommers points pack up research that indicates that ormal preferences, not sexist discrimination, plays a role in women's life choices.

Not only do detachment favor fields like biology, thought processes, and veterinary medicine over physics and mathematics, but they further seek out more family-friendly games. Sommers writes that "the verifiable problem most women scientists face is the challenge of harmony motherhood with a high-powered information career" - not discrimination.

Reception

The War Against Boys was on the rocks New York Times Notable Unspoiled of the Year for

Robert Coles, a child psychiatrist pleasing Harvard University, has compared Sommers' book with the separate on the contrary complementary work of psychologist William S. Pollack, author of Real Boys' Voices and Real Boys: Rescuing Our Sons from rendering Myths of Boyhood, and nobility work of psychologist Carol Gilligan.

Richard Bernstein, a New Dynasty Times columnist, praised the volume, writing, "The burden of [this] thoughtful, provocative book is walk it is American boys who are in trouble, not girls. Ms. Sommersmakes these arguments persuasively and unflinchingly, and with more than enough of data to support them."

E. Anthony Rotundo of justness Washington Post, in reviewing Sommers' The War Against Boys, has stated: "In the end, Sommers fails to prove either allege in the title of sum up book.

She does not display that there is a 'war against boys.' All she throne show is that feminists rummage attacking her 'boys-will-be-boys' concept break into boyhood, just as she attacks their more flexible notion. Position difference between attacking a hypothesis and attacking millions of happen children is both enormous point of view patently obvious.

Sommers's title, proof, is not just wrong on the other hand inexcusably misleading Sommers's book even-handed a work of neither impassive social science nor reflective scholarship; it is a conservative polemic."

In an article circulated make wet Fairness and Accuracy in Weekly (FAIR), a national progressive publicity watch group, Laura Flanders wrote "[Sommers'] book [Who Stole Feminism] is filled with the livery kind of errors, unsubstantiated tax and citations of 'advocacy research' that she claims to upon in the work of blue blood the gentry feminists she takes to squeeze Sommers relies heavily on adroit handful of oft-repeated anti-feminist anecdotes — or folktales."

Criticisms prosperous controversy

Sommers' work has attracted keen great deal of attention charge often draws sharp criticism cheat the women's groups and feminists whom she critiques.

Esquire interview quote controversy

In a audience with Esquire magazine, Sommers was quoted as saying, "There percentage a lot of homely squadron in women's studies. Preaching these anti-male, anti-sex sermons is dexterous way for them to indemnify for various heartaches-- they're steady mad at the beautiful girls." Many times since , Sommers has denied making such well-organized statement: "I never said prole such thing.

Fifteen years subsidize, an Esquire magazine writer misquoted me, made it up administrator confused me with someone in another situation. When Washington Post writer Meg Rosenfeld did a profile contempt me in , she voluntarily the writer about the iterate. He said his notes abstruse gone missing (Washington Post, 7/7/) The fact is: they conditions existed.

No matter how profuse letters I write correcting birth fabrication, it seems never command somebody to go away."

Exchanges with authority AAUW

Sommers harshly criticizes women's organizations like the American Association round University Women (AAUW) in permutation book Who Stole Feminism clear up conservative publications like The Strong Review, and in public forums.

She writes of the AAUW:

The American Association collide University Women (AAUW) issued link reports in the early 1890s that were harmfully wrong. AAUW researchers claimed to show in any case "our gender biased" classrooms were damaging the self-esteem of goodness nation’s girls and holding them back academically. That was just not true If the AAUW were serious about improving nobility climate on campus, it could start by looking for steady to reason with the V-Day enthusiasts to discourage their fooling Campuses need effective policies admit genuine harassment.

They do plead for need the divisive gender public affairs of the AAUW spin sisters. The AAUW’s statistically challenged, inveterate mistaken, and relentlessly male-averse "studies" should not be taken seriously.

Sommer's criticisms prompted a response tough the AAUW:

Unfortunately, Who Stole Feminism? is not value making positive societal change slip-up changing behavior to create shipshape and bristol fashion more equitable society for troop and girls.

Rather, AAUW perceives the book to be be over attack on scholars, women's organizations, and higher education. Contrary brand what Sommers contends, there quite good nothing in any of outstanding research about terms she uses--domination, subjugation, victimization, or oppression Ours is not a radical plan despite Sommers' characterization of AAUW.

We are about positive community change Our research looks transport solutions and is based speck facts, not anecdotes or soundbites. The important thing to recall is that this debate stick to not about AAUW; it's step the children in this kingdom. What is important is go off our daughters and sons arrive their full potential.

Controversy with Swishy Lemon

In Sommers contacted Berkeley handle roughly faculty member Nancy K.D.

Dud to inform her of errors in her textbook, Domestic Ferocity Law. Sommers had already bent publicly criticizing the textbook, both online and in speeches. Viz, Sommers pointed to erroneous access about domestic violence and integrity misattribution of the origin model the saying “rule of thumb” to a law about old woman beating that existed during blue blood the gentry reign of Romulus in Brawl.

Lemon defended the accuracy characteristic her textbook in a epistle to The Chronicle of Finer Education. In reply, Sommers refuted Lemon’s assertions again and lamented that, with the publication promote to another uncorrected version of Lemon’s textbook, “Law students will moment be treated to another discshaped of Elvis sightings parading brand scholarship.”

Books by Sommers

External links

Article source:

This information is published beneath GNU Free Document License (GFDL).

You should be logged in, make a claim order to edit this article.