Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Popular Women's Studies 101 Textbook: Lies, Damned Lies, and Statistics
CNSNews.com ^ | November 06, 2001 | Glenn Sacks

Posted on 11/07/2001 4:30:32 AM PST by Stand Watch Listen

Women are under siege and oppressed, while men have it easy. This is the unmistakable message of Margaret L. Andersen's Thinking About Women: Sociological Perspectives on Sex and Gender, one of America's most popular Women's Studies 101 textbooks.

The mischaractarizations and distortions begin in Chapter One on page one, where Andersen speaks briefly of the progress which women have made, but soon cautions the reader that "there's still a long way to go" for women to achieve equality. To support her point, she tells us:

1) "In the 1990s, women college graduates who worked full-time earned, on average, 70 percent of what men college graduates earned working full time";

2) "Each year five million women experience some form of violence, two-thirds of it committed by someone they know";

3) "Employed women" work 13 hours a week more than "employed men" on "household tasks."

All three of these statements are extremely misleading. Yes, full-time employed women do earn less money, on average, than full-time employed men do, but they also: work 400+ hours a year less than men do; work only a tenth as many overtime hours; have 25% less overall work experience; comprise only 5% of workplace fatalities (because they do not do the hazardous jobs which necessarily pay better); and are far less likely than men to work nights, weekends, have long commutes, or to travel for their jobs. Surveys which take these factors into consideration have shown that, for the same job, women earn within 2% of what men do.

The "five million women experience some form of violence" statistic is misleading because it is driven sharply upward by domestic violence studies which lump trivial acts which women do as often as men (such as swearing at or insulting your partner, slamming doors or stomping out of rooms, etc.) with serious violence. Whenever two-sex surveys of domestic violence are taken, women are shown to be just as likely to initiate and engage in spousal abuse as men, and roughly 75% of all violent crime victims are male.

Women may do an extra 13 hours a week of "household duties" but the average full-time employed man works eight hours a week more than the average full-time employed woman. Andersen's survey allows for the inclusion of people who are "employed" but who don't work full-time, and since most part-time workers are female, this pushes the disparity in hours worked between men and women in the survey even higher. Together with the fact that men spend more time commuting and work more physically strenuous jobs than women do, what the survey really tells us is that the overall labor of a household is, in fact, being divided evenly between men and women, a finding consistent with most research on the subject.

The book also spins myths about "deadbeat dads" (actually, over 80% of the men who have jobs and can see their children pay their child support in full), women's supposedly ignored health care needs (the government at every level spends more on women's health than men's, even though it is men who dominate in most diseases and it is women who live longer), and numerous others.

Andersen urges readers to notice women's role both in society and in everyday life--good advice, except that she instructs women to look only for female suffering and male privilege. For example, she counsels readers to look at the "bright lights shining in the night skyline" and see that they "represent thousands of women...who clean the corporate suites."

Fair enough, but what about the thousands of men who risked their safety and even their lives (including yours truly) to build those same skyscrapers?

What about the men who pick up the trash, crawl through the sewers to make repairs, or who work on power lines 50 feet up in the air? In Andersen's book such men are as invisible as she imagines women to be.

Like most Women's Studies textbooks, materials, and lectures, Andersen's text ignores the growing number of strong, articulate female scholars, researchers, writers, activists, and leaders who call themselves "equity feminists" and support feminism's basic goals but oppose the rampant distortions and out and out man-hating of the established feminist movement. These include: Canadian Senator Anne Cools, a former shelter director and a pioneer of the battered women's movement who is now a fathers' rights advocate; author/activist Erin Pizzey, who set up the first battered women's shelter ever in England in 1971 and now advocates for abused men; Camille Paglia, the legendary author and cultural observer; author and '60s feminist icon Doris Lessing, who says that in modern culture men are "continually demeaned and insulted by women without a whimper of protest"; Cathy Young, co-founder of the Women's Freedom Network and author of Ceasefire: Why Women and Men Must Join Forces to Achieve Equality, author and columnist Wendy McElroy, founder of Independent Feminists (ifeminists.com); Christina Hoff Sommers, author of Who Stole Feminism?, former Women's Studies professor Daphne Patai, author of Professing Feminism; crime journalist Patricia Pearson, author of When She Was Bad: Violent Women and the Myth of Innocence; and countless others.

Instead, Andersen chooses to trot out the standard collection of cranks and hate-mongers such as Catherine MacKinnon (who wrote "all heterosexual sex is rape"), and Andrea Dworkin (who wrote "I want to see a man beaten to a bloody pulp with a high-heel shoved in his mouth, like an apple in the mouth of a pig").

Andersen also cites numerous discredited feminist researchers such as Diane Russell, who arrives at high numbers of female victims in her surveys by classifying consensual sex as rape and hugs and horseplay from male relatives as incest, and Carol Gilligan, whose baseless and unscientific research led in part to the myth that girls are silenced and oppressed in the classroom. Ms. Gilligan's scholarly reputation was permanently laid to rest by Christina Hoff Sommers, in her chapter "Gilligan's Island" from her book The War Against Boys. To Andersen's credit, at least she spares students any reference to feminist "researcher" Mary Koss and her infamous "1 in 4 college women has been raped" hoax.

American college students (male and female) need a balanced textbook which includes dissident feminist voices and which looks honestly at the many challenges women face as well as the many advantages they enjoy. Instead, they are saddled with factually-challenged propaganda tracts, which are allowed to exist because of PC intimidation mixed with an unspoken, condescending university atmosphere which says, "don't argue with the little ladies--you can't expect those gals who teach Women's Studies to keep their facts straight."
Glenn Sacks


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial
KEYWORDS: textbooks
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-64 next last

1 posted on 11/07/2001 4:30:32 AM PST by Stand Watch Listen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Stand Watch Listen
"1) "In the 1990s, women college graduates who worked full-time earned, on average, 70 percent of what men college graduates earned working full time";

I guess I am in the 30%. I have a 'man's' job, i.e, engineering management, and the responsibilities associated with that career, including lot's of hours both at work and home. I want to see the data and how they interpreted the statistics. I work with stats for my job all the time, and I can make them say anything I want them to. The difference is, I don't use them to falsify data.

2) "Each year five million women experience some form of violence, two-thirds of it committed by someone they know";

What is considered violence? A rauncy joke? Get thicker skin. If you want a career that earns you similar pay, then quit whining about every comment or action. Do men really like to hear about all the female problems at work? Probably not, but you don't hear them complaining about it.

3) "Employed women" work 13 hours a week more than "employed men" on "household tasks."

Ahem. If you want the pay, work the hours at your career and hire a housecleaner. I refuse to be a slave to my house after working 60+ hours a week. If I'm tired, the house is messy, meals are usually pizzas or weekend leftovers or dinner out. If you can't get the laundry done (can be done while freeping, btw), buy more clothes.

2 posted on 11/07/2001 4:49:27 AM PST by WIMom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Stand Watch Listen
The statistic widely touted at my college was '1 in 4 college women are raped every year'.

It was a four year school. You do the math.

3 posted on 11/07/2001 4:50:30 AM PST by wbill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Stand Watch Listen
Excellent post. Don't hold your breath though if you're waiting for facts from a liberal. It will never happen.
4 posted on 11/07/2001 4:51:00 AM PST by goodieD
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Stand Watch Listen
BUMP for a later read
5 posted on 11/07/2001 4:52:53 AM PST by RnMomof7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wbill
Wow, every women at that campus will be raped sometime during her college career.
6 posted on 11/07/2001 4:54:52 AM PST by WIMom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: WIMom; wbill
Or some will be raped multiple times during her time there--meaning they don't learn what safe behaviour is.
7 posted on 11/07/2001 5:07:11 AM PST by ShadowAce
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: ShadowAce
Good point - based on this statistic, 1 in 256 women will be raped every year of their undergraduate career.

ain't statistics fun? ;)
8 posted on 11/07/2001 5:12:12 AM PST by general_re
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: general_re
...and, of course, you have 81 chances in 256 of not being raped at all. So you have about a 31.6% chance of graduating without being raped.

Anyone see the problem here? ;)
9 posted on 11/07/2001 5:17:23 AM PST by general_re
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: WIMom
It's nice to see someone that hasn't bought into the victim mentality. Demanding jobs require sacrfices.

My personal opinion is that the differences in salary are more from the professions that (most) women choose. Speaking totally in generalities here...the largest percentage of women choose to go into lower paying fields: child care, teaching, nursing, secretarial work. In the current job market, if you compare the salaries of, say, 1000 teachers with 1000 Electrical Engineers, the EE's are going to come out on top by a huge margin every time.

Does this mean that female engineers, techicians, and CEO's are less capable or qualified than males? Absolutely not. There are just less of them in the field.

I've always wondered about this. My wife is the smartest woman that I know (that's why I married her!)...she could study anything, have any job that she wants. She chose child care because she finds it very satisfying. Isn't that what empowerment is all about? The right to do what you want?

10 posted on 11/07/2001 5:19:05 AM PST by wbill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Stand Watch Listen
Instead, Andersen chooses to trot out the standard collection of cranks and hate-mongers such as Catherine MacKinnon (who wrote "all heterosexual sex is rape"), and Andrea Dworkin (who wrote "I want to see a man beaten to a bloody pulp with a high-heel shoved in his mouth, like an apple in the mouth of a pig").

Nothing wrong with them that couldn't be solved with a veterinary tranquilizer dart gun loaded with Haldol.

11 posted on 11/07/2001 5:22:53 AM PST by Petronski
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wbill
Check this out:

Instead, Andersen chooses to trot out the standard collection of cranks and hate-mongers such as Catherine MacKinnon (who wrote "all heterosexual sex is rape"),

Andersen also cites numerous discredited feminist researchers such as Diane Russell, who arrives at high numbers of female victims in her surveys by classifying consensual sex as rape and hugs and horseplay from male relatives as incest,

When I was in college in the mid 90's, I took a class called "Physcology and the Law". Studies that conclude such things as "1 in 4 college women are raped...." were discussed. Just like this article states, the book also stated that these studies classified all types of behavior as "rape", when it wasn't forced intercourse. Things such as "being touched and not liking it" or some guy touching a girls butt in a club were included as "rape". Thats how they get to those numbers. Its all what they define as "rape". Sometimes, it is as simple as asking "Did your date attempt to kiss you and you did not want to be kissed". They answer "yes", and there is one more woman who has been raped.

12 posted on 11/07/2001 5:36:02 AM PST by FreeTally
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: FreeTally
Typical liberal thinking. Broaden the definition to skew the results to what you want.

So many horrible things arise from stuff like this. Men are falsely accused and slapped with undeserving labels. Statistics like these trivialize real rapes, making a devastating crime into a statistic. (how can anyone equate forcible rape with getting your butt grabbed by some punk in a club?)

The thing that bothered me the most is that this kind of thinking 'trains' women to be afraid of men. I used to study late at campus every night (part of the fun of being an engineer!). Walking back to the dorm, women would see me and walk/run away. Speaking for myself, I'd rather be sure that they arrived safely where they were going, than take off at the sight of me. I also always wondered if they ever ran into someone that was truly a threat.

I know this story is going open up plenty of bad jokes. Flame away!

13 posted on 11/07/2001 5:48:27 AM PST by wbill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: wbill
You got that right! Women have choices. I have never had the inclination to be a man nor have I ever wanted to infringe on men. What I enjoy and what I excel at has only to do with me. If it's considered a man's occupation, than so-be-it. I'm not inclined to get greasy and dirty under an old car and it would be stupid of me to attempt to get a job in a garage for equal pay. Most jobs don't call for gender but do call for skill. Charisma and a gift of gab go a long way to fortify any skill. Many of the women I know who are capable of doing what was once considered a man's job are either over-bearing or lack the communication skills to be heard above the noise. An employer, who doesn't know you outside the workplace, makes all his decisions based on what he sees inside his little community. It is not for him to change his attitude but for women to change theirs or think of better ways to be seen in a more favorable light, then men will change naturally as will women who have any common sense at all. The most amazing women I know are the ones who make rearing their children their first priority. They give up money to do so, yet make enough to provide sufficiently so that their children will be afforded opportunity and will have the fortifacation of a stable home environment. Many women forego children in favor of their careers but when the biological clock starts ticking they reassess their goals. The ones who don't remind me of Patricia Ireland and her ilk who seem more inclined to change a woman's perspective than a man's.
14 posted on 11/07/2001 5:59:06 AM PST by Jaidyn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: wbill
"There are just less of them in the field. "

Exactly! The ones that choose a demanding career have similar pay. I had both male and female engineers working for me and their pay was based on how many years of experience and what they contributed to the company. Some men made more and some women made more. It wasn't out of line with the market and I didn't have anyone making outragous salaries compared to the group. On the flip side, compare women in child care to men in child care and I will bet it is the same relationship. I don't even want to compare public school teachers, most of the salary structures are based on seniority, not on ability or proven results.

15 posted on 11/07/2001 6:00:51 AM PST by WIMom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: general_re
Did you consider consensual sex and hugs in those numbers? They did in the article. Also, I would use a confidence interval of 40% just to really make the numbers work!
16 posted on 11/07/2001 6:05:25 AM PST by WIMom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Stand Watch Listen
For an opposing view:

WomensFigures.com
... women; Archives of previous news bulletins; Women's Figures: An Illustrated Guide
to the Economic Progress of Women in America Read about the book that inspired ...

17 posted on 11/07/2001 6:08:21 AM PST by backhoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wbill
LOL! Women running from an engineer. I bet you studied EE! ROTFLOL!!!!! (I just had to, my hubby is an EE) They should be running from the lefty english and econ profs. When I studied engineering the guys were the best! They watched out for us girls (three) like we were their sisters. It was great, you could always count on someone to walk you to your car or across campus.
18 posted on 11/07/2001 6:11:19 AM PST by WIMom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: FreeTally
these studies classified all types of behavior as "rape", when it wasn't forced intercourse.

And, as Christina Hoff Sommers has pointed out (after reviewing the questionnaires used to collect these "statistics"), if a college girl had sex with a guy, and felt bad about it the next day (i.e., wished she hadn't done it), that was rape, too.

Her lack of morality and her refusal to accept personal responsibility means that it's the guy's fault, the guy has performed a criminal act.
19 posted on 11/07/2001 6:12:12 AM PST by NatureGirl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Jaidyn
When I first graduated, I was offered a position in a foundry. I didn't want to be around all that dirt, molten steel, huge sand molds for mine gears and that type of industry. I even said something like, "Thanks, but this engineering position should go to a guy, it's not a girl job at all." I really think they were trying to fill a quota though.
20 posted on 11/07/2001 6:15:20 AM PST by WIMom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-64 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson