MY HEAD JUST EXPLODED

There's a review up of The Dangerous Book for Boys over at Ask Moxie, and the comment thread has just about PUSHED ME OVER THE EDGE.

A sampling of comments:

"I still don't see a problem with marketing it to boys. The problem I see is with the book for girls. I agree that treehouses and morse code and making crystals should go in the girl book. But table football, timers and tripwires, famous battles, the golden age of piracy, tanning a skin...I just don't see it. Hustling pool is something I'd put in the girl book."

"I think y'all are making too big a deal about this. If a girl finds the stuff in the book interesting, ultimately, that's all that matters, and she will pick it up and read it. I read books that were geared to boys when I was a kid. Maybe it's the way I was raised, but all that mattered to me was that it was good and I was interested in it. I think assuming a girl won't read a book because it says it is "for boys" is the greater problem."

Mother of two boys, reporting in. I don't care that "boy" stuff is marketed to boys and "girl" stuff is marketed to girls. I truly believe that there are definitely innate differences in the genders, and it doesn't bother me one bit. ... It would bother me if someone raised an eyebrow to any child playing/gravitating to "the wrong" kind of toy/activity/interest."

"I have two boys, and I am also bothered by the book's title. I really want to raise my sons to believe that woman are just as smart and capable and interesting as men, and I would worry that giving them this book would send them the message that girls are too timid or boring to like stuff that they might enjoy."

"As a teacher of young children for the past 10 years (ages 8-12 mostly) and most recently an instructional coach in many classrooms k-5 I have to say there are not nearly enough books out there targeted to boys who do not enjoy reading. And it is more common in my experience to have to encourage boys to read than not. I'm not saying "all boys don't like reading"....I have had many MANY boys who couldn't put books down. I'm saying though that the majority of my struggling readers were boys, and the trick was to find books that caught their imagination and ignited a passion for reading. This sounds like a book I KNOW many of those former students would be dying to get their hands on."

"And my thoughts on this issue of "most books" having girlie topics or covers or whatever .... that may or may not be true, but this book is different. It's a book that teaches things to *do* and explore, which makes it especially aggravating that it excludes girls in its title."

"A big black marker, people, that's all that's needed to politically correct an unfortunate choice of title -- and wouldn't "A Dangerous Book" sound more intriguing to a child anyway? -- especially one with big black marker scribblings on it!?!"

A quote from the author's blurb at Amazon, posted by another commentator:

"I think we've become aware that the whole 'health and safety' overprotective culture isn't doing our sons any favors. Boys need to learn about risk. They need to fall off things occasionally, or--and this is the important bit--they'll take worse risks on their own.

You only have to push a boy on a swing to see how much enjoys the thrill of danger. It's hard-wired. Remove any opportunity to test his courage and they'll find ways to test themselves that will be seriously dangerous for everyone around them."

Yeah, because God knows, my girls never want to take risks, be thrilled by danger, or feel like they're flying on their fucking swings.

Here's my manifesto, people:

Yes, there are differences between boy children and girl children.  Yes, those differences are hardwired and socially reinforced and related to brain structure and hormonal make-up and the goddamn fucking patriarchy.

The differences between boys and girls follow bell curves, just like so many other aspects of human society, so that there are plenty of boys who like "girly" activities and plenty of girls who like the opposite, and frankly, it's easier for girls to cross the frontier than it is for boys.

We do the best we can with the materials at hand, and we understand that both boys and girls are getting screwed by their gender-policing environments, and we trust that they will struggle through and find their way with God's grace, the strength of their families, the power of their own amazing selves, and more than a little bit of luck.

In my perfect world, adults give children permission to define their identities for themselves as much as possible.  Adults don't present them books or toys or fast-food meals that tell them "boys do this and girls do that."  Because children should get to decide for themselves, as much as possible (and it's not very much people, not even in the perfect world, I'm not a raving idiot) what it means for them to be boys and girls.  For themselves.

And anyone who thinks that labeling a book "for boys" or "for girls" isn't an exclusionary boundary-enforcing message from the patriarchy is living under the biggest rock in all creation.  You're okay with marketing certain toys for one sex or another, but you don't expect or want the children actually to take those messages to heart?  My God.

Now I'm off to get dressed, haul my ass to the lake, and go fishing with my husband on this pleasant Monday morning.

Stick that in a book for girls.

Comments

[Jody]

Oh yeah: my vote for title? "The Dangerous Book." And you can keep the boy-coded font and mock up and even the marketing strategy if you want, because if the issue is finding a great father's day gift and a great book to give to reluctant readers, none of that is going to affect your success.

GI Joe didn't need "FOR BOYS" on it to send the message that it was a boy toy, anymore than My Little Pony needed to stick a giant "FOR GIRLS" label on its ass.

These are fucking books we're talking about, people. If we can't talk about the POWER OF WORDS when we're talking about BOOKS on BLOGS, then I give up, and I'm never ever coming back from the lake.

[Mrs. Coulter]

Here here! I was a tomboy as a girl--my friends were largely boys, and we burned things, roamed through the woods with sharpened sticks, built tree forts, and played army in the woods. I had little girl friends, but I often wished they were less girly. I hate the constant messaging that girls are one way, and boys are another. I remember going to a moms' group when Lyra was a teeny tiny infant, and already the mothers were talking about how much more "active" the boys were than the girls. Hello, these were 8 week olds. YOU ARE PROJECTING!!!

The other thing that I hate about these books is that it suggests that little boys who like to read or play quietly are somehow not "real boys". And that's a damaging message, too.

Lyra is a very, very active little girl with a taste for danger and adventure (eek!). I try not to discourage it, even as my heart leaps into my mouth when she climbs to the top of the monkey bars.

BTW, I'm glad you enjoyed HDM. Lyra is an awesome heroine

[Courtney]

I saw all this over at Ask Moxie's a few hours ago, so when I saw you had updated I was hoping you were going to address this.

I could not agree with you more. I'm expecting my first baby - a boy - and during all the preparation for the upcoming baby I haven't yet thought that much about the fact that it's a boy as opposed to a baby. But this book did make me think about that, and all I could come up with is that all the people who claimed that it was nice to have something marketed directly to boys (because, you know, most toys are marketed to girls) are about two dangerous steps from the people who complain that boys don't do well in school because it's geared towards girls. You know, all that having to behave, and ask for instructions, and do book work - it's all so girly.

Of course, I admit I'm still five months away from actually being a parent, so what do I know?

Happy fishing.

[Courtney]

I forgot - yes, your title would have been much better. And simpler than my idea - to have a book for Boys, and a book for Girls, and a book for Kids, and make them all exactly the same.

[maggie]

And anyone who thinks that labeling a book "for boys" or "for girls" isn't an exclusionary boundary-enforcing message from the patriarchy is living under the biggest rock in all creation. - YOU ROCK! Great post.

I think I'll get the book for my husband for father's day, for him to share with our only child - a girl - AND take a sharpie to the cover to rename it "The Dangerous Book".

[Phantom Scribbler]

Well, you just trumped me, so we're even. I've been sitting on a post about this one for several day, for fear of giving offense. Time to hit publish...

[Meira]

Yes, yes, yes! I've been seeing reviews of this book all over the place, with only the barest mention of the inherent sexism -- thank you for this post! Moxie says she thinks it's parents of girls who have a problem with the book/title, but the fact of the matter is I don't want my boys thinking this sort of stuff is exclusive to the GoldenPenis. Bravo to your vote for title, too!

[Sara]

Oh, yeah.

I'm so conflicted, but I think I would love this book. I think the me-that-was would have grooved on this book. But I think the me-that-was would also have felt a little weird about that title, even then.

And now - what? My 7 year old son would delight in it, I know... but so would his little sister. And that title would give him license to tell her, "No! This is a BOYS book, see?" At least I didn't have a brother to tell me that. I just had a mother who gave me "STories for Free Children" from her Ms. Magazines and told me girls could do anything they darn well pleased.

[Denise]

Good post.

I have 2 boys, no girls, but I feel like I have just as much a responsibility to raise feminists as those of you with girls. I try to be conscious of all the messages I send and let through.

My husband is already ruined, though, so maybe I will buy him the book.

[parodie]

I have noticed, over and over, that the mothers who've reviewed this book mostly absolutely love the book. It's clearly well-made, solid, well-written, and appealing.

But doesn't the fact that every single one of those mothers is enthralled by it (obviously in a "I'd have loved this back then" sort of way) suggest that the gender-exclusivity of the title is problematic?

Thank you for this post, Jody, and for voicing your anger. Amen to that.

[Swistle]

Now that it's been published, I like the Sharpie marker idea. But for the next edition, I think they should make it The Dangerous Book--not even "For Kids," since as a kid I would have been less interested in something that was for kids.

[Emma Jane]

Thank you, thank you, thank you for posting this.

'Cause my head was working its way to exploding the same way, as I meandered down Bloglines this morning.

[Sheila]

I've been stewing about this one since I got the ARC, which is still sitting on a shelf in my house. I was hoping that the book would just vanish into the dark publicity well and I wouldn't have to stock it at the bookstore.

I feel the same way about this book as I do about Tonka's website, which is all about boys needing to be boys. I LOVED Tonka trucks as a girl and Z. loves construction vehicles. But I can't get a Tonka for Z. seeing the way they're being marketed. (Don't worry, Tonka isn't the only toy truck maker out there.)

How the heck can we know what's hardwired when we dress 'em in pink and blue from the day they're born? It's not about making sure they know what they are, it's so everyone they meet is reassured about how to gender-train them.

(Also, the thing about boys and guns doesn't fly with this Yankee city-dweller. Just saying.)

Rant away, Jody!

[SheilaC]

Amen, Jody! I've read about 6 reviews of this book in the past couple of weeks, and everyone (parents of at least one boy) has been very excited about it, not least Moxie in her review post.

I am very curious to read it for myself. But I'd hesitate to give it to my 7 year old triplets, because (like yours) they are one boy and two girls, who are interested in many of the same things. Yes, they are at that age where the girls don't want to do "boy stuff" and the boy doesn't want to do "girl stuff", based on what they read and hear at school, and silly stereotypes from TV shows and toys. We're working hard to teach them to question those labels, and encourage all three of them to learn about anything that's interesting and worthwhile.
I hope that with time they'll figure it out.

All three would want to read and learn about all the topics in the Dangerous Book (they are voracious readers). But I am not happy with the message that somehow these topics are secret, dangerous things that only boys and men are supposed to understand or want to do. I saw too much of that kind of thing when I was growing up and reading books in the 70s.

I like some of the topics suggested at Ask Moxie for a possible Dangerous Book for Girls. But I would far rather that all of it were included in one omnibus "Dangerous Book" for kids, with no labels, as you suggest.

I think there are other very good books available for young people to learn about camping and woodcraft, tools and repairs, sports, cooking and baking, household maintenance and social skills. We'll find them at the library, and we'll try to do lots of those activities as a family.

This weekend we're all building a "clubhouse" fort in the backyard, an addition to the swingset (we don't have a big enough tree to make a tree house). The kids helped draw up the plans, helped shop at the lumber store, and they love helping out with the wood and the tools! I'd better get out and do some more work on it, to show them that Mommy knows how to wield a hammer and screwdriver just as much as Daddy. To hell with the laundry and vacuuming for today - hooray!

[Jess]

Thank you for this post. I saw a review of this book elsewhere, and it totally bulldozed over the gender issue, and essentially said that if you care about that kind of thing you are an overly-PC idiot.

Well, I disagree. I live with a little girl who wants to be a boy. She likes boy stuff, she hates girl stuff. And SOMEHOW, despite the fact that she lives with three strong, non-traditionally-feminine women, boy stuff includes skateboarding and sports, and girl stuff includes dresses and make up. Well, just try to tell me that gendered stuff in the media doesn't have an impact on her! Please!

So while the book sounds really awesome, I would NOT buy it for her. She would love it, I'm sure...but she would also be reinforced in her thinking that boy stuff is cool, and girl stuff sucks. It does matter. It does impact her, and she does notice it. I'll look for a non-gendered book of cool stuff, thank you.

Great post!

[rachel]

Thanks. That's kind of it, really, but I really mean it.

[Libby]

Great post, Jody! I agree: your title is better. I haven't read it (despite joining the "dangerous" blog tour--note I left out the whole gender thing altogether, because I am a wuss) and don't want to own it with that title. Sigh.

[Libby]

Actually, I lied--I talked about gender a bit but only sideways to the whole title issue. Back to fix that, actually.

[bj]

"In my perfect world, adults give children permission to define their identities for themselves as much as possible"

Mine too. And, I struggle with this in every way. I want my girl/boy child to be defined by their wants and dreams, and not by their labels, and not what I or any of the rest of the world desires.

But, I think that we may not actually be the majority in this thought. I think that there are those out there, who see our point of view as being a form of liberal parenting that prevents them from socializing their children the way they think is right (from gender norms, to religion, to ideas of right and wrong). That may be why these ideas produce such sharp arguments.

bj

[Linda]

Yes, this has bothered me to no end as soon as I saw the first review. It's along the lines of "He's all boy!" and "Boys will be boys!" that make MY head explode. Ug. And sigh.

[K]

Got here via Phantom's post and I think you are spot-on.

I assume it was a marketing ploy to package the information like that.

But I'm afraid that it is backfiring for some of us - especially those of us who are parenting both boys and girls.

I was mostly annoyed when I read the glowing NYTimes review on Sunday...and it didn't once mention a problem with the fact that the book's title said it was for "boys." It was full of lots of information about how wonderful the content of the book is.

I won't be buying this book, no matter how wonderful it is.

[Madeleine]

Thank you, thank you, thank you. I was livid when I read those comments.

Just last night, I had to google how to tie a lasso. I found the knot-tying instructions but not "how to twirl." I wonder if it is in that book -- but I'll never look to see, because I have a girl. Who really wants to twirl a lasso.

[Linda]

Oh my gosh, I just read the commenters suggestions for a girl book. Why on earth does it have to be so different?! I think I may go vomit now.

[Shandra]

Just - yes.

[jo(e)]

Well said.