Faludi begins by telling us her research began with "an assumption both under-examined and dubious: that the male crisis in America was caused by something they were doing, unrelated to something being done to them, and that it's cure was to be found in figuring out how to get men to stop doing whatever it was".

I call this the fundamental feminist attribution error because it assumes there is something inherently wrong with men, that men need to be fixed and the world would be a better place if we were.



While she wins a couple points for this self-recognition, she is unable to find the proper prescription for her feminist myopia. Everywhere she looks, and everything she sees is sourced or solved through the feminine.



Young men at the Citadel make their own beds, and support each other not out of self sufficiency or camaraderie but because they are "attempting...to find a way to experience maternal femininity.." (pg. 131).



She devotes a considerable amount of time celebrating the independence of an adulterous promise keepers wife, yet in one sentence begrudgingly mentions this "independence" is only made possible through his financial support. And does not mention that this is in fact not independence, but more accurately a parasitic extortion of her husbands abnormally strong marital devotion based on his religious convictions.



I'm going to say this right now so as to allay any misperceptions on this subject. If a woman cheats on her man, we're not threatened by your independence, we're offended by your infidelity. When a person gives their word in the form of an oath, and they keep it, that is the definition of integrity. This standard is universal, and without exception.



The rest of the book is devoted to a gaggle of sad sack men who haven't been able to adapt to the changes of a post feminist society, and does not present or examine a successful post feminist man who has pragmatically accepted contemporary reality.



With all the saccharine sweet sycophantic sentimentality she closes with the hope that we can all come together in unity and harmony and work towards interests common to all MANkind, and thus uses the classic weapon in the feminist (and female) rhetorical arsenal. Deflection. Everybody wants peace and unity and harmony and the common good. That ultimately is not the purpose and motive behind this book.



It is a fine point to make that value and worth are not found through material acquisition; that we've become a consumerist culture, manipulated by the media to seek identity and worth through association with entities whose interests do not coincide with our own; and that this is an empty pursuit. The values of society have changed from utility to ornament as Faludi would put it. For these points, she has received an extra star, because while there are certainly better places from which to receive this message, it is one that isn't stated often enough. However, I do believe this is an oversimplification of the problems and challenges facing contemporary masculinity, and the true purpose of this book is to deflect attention away from, and absolve from culpability the feminist movement.



Let's not forget, Faludi is a feminist, with an interest in the success of the feminist movement. I don't think the gaping omission of divorced men was a mere oversight. Divorce judgements today are preposterously lopsided in favor of women, and absolutely devastating to men. However, the current pathetic condition of the divorce in America is advantageous to women, so Faludi has a motivation not to draw attention to that little doozy right there. And guess who's responsible for that one? That's right, the feminist movement. That's just one example of how we need to consider the motives of the source.



A couple of good points, that could easily (and more eloquently) been made in a book half its size; this book is marshmallow fluff, and meant to embolden the feminist agenda by proving how progressive and open minded they are to consider the concerns of their opposition. Yeah, she considered them, and found a way to blame everything expect herself. It's a duplicitous Trojan horse.



It's society!



It's absentee (or abusive) fathers!



It's the corporations!



The feminist movement had absolutely nothing to do with it. Bull Sheet! Her true beliefs shine through on page 150, where the title of this review is written. "Act like a human being and not...a man."



There are much better books on this subject, for a more even handed perspective, check out "The Myth of Male Power", or "The War Against Boys".



But if you must read this book, don't waste your money. Take it out of the library.