Scan barcode
t_shaffner's review against another edition
4.0
Note: I'm using the spoiler tag here to allow collapsing of addition detail/examples in places where they should be optional. In this type of book spoilers don't really matter so ignore the meaning of the tag; just use it as a "more detail" expansion.
This is an important book. As a thoughtful, methodical, and rigorous discussion of our political moment I've rarely found anything this incisive, and in some ways I found it incredibly useful for understanding the topics better as a result.
That is of course ironic because the purpose of the book was in many ways to critique how the movements themselves are actually advocating for these causes, and while I found the issues themselves more important for the reading, I was also fairly convinced that many of the current efforts being made under the guise of supporting the causes of race, gender, orientation, and general identity issues are incredibly lacking in nuance and often actively counterproductive. They work against one another, sow confusion, and come with a degree of judgment and certainty that does a great deal to increase suffering.
Related to this, large portions of this book were, quite simply, incredibly hard to read. A number of them were almost painful. These portions of the book were particular demoralizing as they leave one with the sense that truth or rationality are not recognizable in our world anymore, and that the dynamic Trump displays on the right is actually as actively at play on the left. They also solidify pretty hard the degree to which a core paradigm of our time is in fact the encouraging of new forms of racism as long as they are directed in certain ways, and the examples at play and inherent hypocrisy in them are, at times, jaw dropping. These portions of the book were thoroughly demoralizing and the reason a star is taken away; they make the theme more important but they're so hard to get through it makes the experience rather torturous.
Notes for my future self; the end results here were severalfold but two points in particular jumped out:
The first was a claim that a careful analysis of the current manifestations of many rights movements, seem to imply an underlying effort not to convince but to divide. The claim is that the movements as currently used are being actively wielded as a bludgeon to splinter, sow doubt, and foster division and strife, in particular with a goal of deconstructing the society we live in and to open pathways to offer radically different visions of society as "solutions." This statement immediately resonated with me as often, currently true. I will be paying attention however from now on to see how much this claim rings true in current manifestations of all these issues.
The second point he makes is that the inherent question that is not present and should be introduced into discussions that are critical of our societies is "in comparison to what?" Underlying so much of these critiques is an implicit idealized view either of some past or other society or some unsullied state at birth. His point is that an analysis of the comparison either enables a discussion of where things are in fact better or forces us to face the reality that, for all the remaining faults in our world, the societies being critiqued are often the best humanity has managed to create. These discussions need this anchoring in reality to avoid reasonable critiques of societies destroying the best solutions yet found.
For these two things in particular I'm glad to have read the book as I will continue to reflect on them as useful tools going forward to help understand and keep more grounded in all such discussions. And particularly on the trans issue I'll be glad for a thoughtful analysis as having helped me understand why this matters from someone whose fairness and thoroughness left me convinced I can trust him as an honest broker on the issue.
For the rest of the book and how painful it was at times to experience, I'll be glad when the experience has faded a bit from memory.
This is an important book. As a thoughtful, methodical, and rigorous discussion of our political moment I've rarely found anything this incisive, and in some ways I found it incredibly useful for understanding the topics better as a result.
Spoiler
For example, for all the advocacy recently I have remained relatively uninformed on intersex/trans and found myself rather moved both with a deep sense of compassion for the complexity and difficulty of intersex people and for the profundity with which the trans urge can manifest (I was left particularly interested in reading the book [b:Conundrum|553103|Conundrum|Jan Morris|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1320522156l/553103._SY75_.jpg|540336] as the description of it and excerpts from it alone were powerful and touching). Prior to this I couldn't have told you the difference, and after this I'm left with both an understanding and a sense of both as being important issues meriting more attention.That is of course ironic because the purpose of the book was in many ways to critique how the movements themselves are actually advocating for these causes, and while I found the issues themselves more important for the reading, I was also fairly convinced that many of the current efforts being made under the guise of supporting the causes of race, gender, orientation, and general identity issues are incredibly lacking in nuance and often actively counterproductive. They work against one another, sow confusion, and come with a degree of judgment and certainty that does a great deal to increase suffering.
Related to this, large portions of this book were, quite simply, incredibly hard to read. A number of them were almost painful.
Spoiler
One example was the casualness of trans movement workers actively supporting efforts to convince children they're trans and enabling them to undergo life-changing and irreversible medical procedures while actively working to suppress honest and unbiased discussions of whether this is the right choice. It shouldn't be hard to get on board supporting trans people in many cases, but it should be just as easy to recognize that children do not always jump to the correct conclusion in their very first thought as 8-year-olds, and encouraging irreversible decisions based on kneejerk reactions is child abuse, not wisdom. Other examples were the various outrage mobs/incidents that have occurred, most of which I already knew of but many of which I had somehow missed the extremity of.Notes for my future self; the end results here were severalfold but two points in particular jumped out:
The first was a claim that a careful analysis of the current manifestations of many rights movements,
Spoiler
particularly the choice to focus the trans movement not on intersex first but on the extremes of trans,Spoiler
This of course doesn't, at least in my mind, apply to other aspects of these movements; the traditional women's rights movements up to and including things like [b:Lean In: Women, Work, and the Will to Lead|16071764|Lean In Women, Work, and the Will to Lead|Sheryl Sandberg|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1364250803l/16071764._SY75_.jpg|21865596] and the gay rights movement prior to gay marriage being legalized in the US strike me as prime examples of equality movements that truly were positively focused and well grounded.The second point he makes is that the inherent question that is not present and should be introduced into discussions that are critical of our societies is "in comparison to what?" Underlying so much of these critiques is an implicit idealized view either of some past or other society or some unsullied state at birth. His point is that an analysis of the comparison either enables a discussion of where things are in fact better or forces us to face the reality that, for all the remaining faults in our world, the societies being critiqued are often the best humanity has managed to create. These discussions need this anchoring in reality to avoid reasonable critiques of societies destroying the best solutions yet found.
For these two things in particular I'm glad to have read the book as I will continue to reflect on them as useful tools going forward to help understand and keep more grounded in all such discussions. And particularly on the trans issue I'll be glad for a thoughtful analysis as having helped me understand why this matters from someone whose fairness and thoroughness left me convinced I can trust him as an honest broker on the issue.
For the rest of the book and how painful it was at times to experience, I'll be glad when the experience has faded a bit from memory.
richferret's review against another edition
2.0
Didn't really change my mind on anything although some of the anecdotes (and all of the arguments he made relied almost exclusively on anecdotes) were interesting/entertaining. I think this book was written mostly for the purposes of preaching to the choir. If it aimed to do anything else I dont think it did a very good job
shannonphillipl's review against another edition
3.0
I like a book that forces me to think about fundamental questions about my beliefs. This book earnestly asks questions that would raise some serious eyebrows in most of my social circles. However, the author often takes arriving at questions as the final step of proving absurdity - as if the questions alone are the reductio. Unfortunately, that makes a lot of the book feel partially fleshed out at best and disingenuous at worst. For example, while considering toxic masculinity, the author asks why we don't have toxic femininity without a second thought, as if he could never guess how toxic masculinity plays out a lot differently than toxic femininity, and he seems to consider his point fully driven home.
I felt a similar incompleteness through the race section where rather than explore and ask "how do we fix this major inequality that doesn't seem to fix itself?" Murray notes that "when we try to increase promotion of non-white people etc we do end up pushing numbers in a good direction, but we actually just promote people who were served well by the existing (problematic) system. So the question about what we're doing here is good - are we just making class mobility harder? But the author's takeaway is... Keep the current problematic system in place?
He discusses in great detail his frustration with the fact that intersectionality affords immunity to criticism for saying racist/sexist stuff. There are a lot of anecdotes. What it seems like he's frustrated by is privilege: you can say/do whatever you want but I can't. I found it somewhat frustrating for someone to rail against privilege while ignoring the history and influence of white privilege.
The various claims in the trans section about the dogmatism and lack of humility from trans proponents felt a little ironic given that the section seems to aim at undermining a lot of trans claims from some supposed place of authority, especially with the hunts that future generations won't be able to believe what we do to accommodate trans. The whole section failed to gain traction with me - it felt like someone whinging about kids today rather than considering that kids today aren't any worse off for openly exploring who they are.
Anyway, I respect asking thought-provoking questions, and I'm on board with the goal of dialog instead of closing down discussions before they happen.
I felt a similar incompleteness through the race section where rather than explore and ask "how do we fix this major inequality that doesn't seem to fix itself?" Murray notes that "when we try to increase promotion of non-white people etc we do end up pushing numbers in a good direction, but we actually just promote people who were served well by the existing (problematic) system. So the question about what we're doing here is good - are we just making class mobility harder? But the author's takeaway is... Keep the current problematic system in place?
He discusses in great detail his frustration with the fact that intersectionality affords immunity to criticism for saying racist/sexist stuff. There are a lot of anecdotes. What it seems like he's frustrated by is privilege: you can say/do whatever you want but I can't. I found it somewhat frustrating for someone to rail against privilege while ignoring the history and influence of white privilege.
The various claims in the trans section about the dogmatism and lack of humility from trans proponents felt a little ironic given that the section seems to aim at undermining a lot of trans claims from some supposed place of authority, especially with the hunts that future generations won't be able to believe what we do to accommodate trans. The whole section failed to gain traction with me - it felt like someone whinging about kids today rather than considering that kids today aren't any worse off for openly exploring who they are.
Anyway, I respect asking thought-provoking questions, and I'm on board with the goal of dialog instead of closing down discussions before they happen.
haraldg's review against another edition
4.0
Eloquent defence of democracy, free speech and classical liberalism against latest authoritarian fads from self proclaimed anti-racism, feminism, LGBT+ and trans rights activists.
fyrrea's review against another edition
Jak to miło czasami wyjść z bańki i poczytać książkę, z którą się w dużej mierze nie zgadzam i nie mieć przy tym poczucia że się nurzało w szambie, tylko bardziej rozmowy z człowiekiem który ma inne poglądy, ale po wszystkim rozstajemy się w pokoju (w zgodzie to nie) i idziemy w różne strony.
kdtoverbooked's review against another edition
informative
reflective
slow-paced
3.0
I picked up this book thinking it was going to be something VASTLY different than it was. Most of the book I found myself eye-rolling at him and was annoyed with him and his selection of the extreme left experiences and views and trying to make them seem more commonplace. He does make a few good points and does have some interesting commentary on some societal issues. I think the thing that he says in the conclusion is the best advice in the whole book “Can the spirit of generosity be extended even more widely?” Meaning when we listen to someone who we generally agree with more, we are more willing to not take the words literally and to try to understand their viewpoints. Maybe we should to try to do that more often with people we don’t agree with too.
vikramx's review against another edition
4.0
As an “elderly” millennial and a parent - I was lucky enough to witness the changing landscape of technology and its direct consequences on subsequent generations ; However I still have hard time wrapping my head around what it means to be gender queer or gender fluid and the intersectionality of identity politics and gender ; needless to say things are only going to get trickier and the slope every more slippery which is what piqued my interest in this book .
Douglas Murray – right leaning conservative who for most part in his book oscillates between brilliant and prosaic. Some of the examples to counter feminism are just hyperbole (Nicki Minaj – Anaconda for one comes to my mind ) – is more of a distraction than actually rooted in logic , same goes for LGB arguments and how its politicized .Things start looking promising once we dwell into the T part and an open whole new can of worms .
I though the book could have been better, but it heightened my awareness towards trans and fault lines within the identity sub structures that encompasses these groups, asking some hard questions – What is the end game for Transsexualism? What does it mean to a trans feminist? How does race and gender intersect?
Douglas Murray – right leaning conservative who for most part in his book oscillates between brilliant and prosaic. Some of the examples to counter feminism are just hyperbole (Nicki Minaj – Anaconda for one comes to my mind ) – is more of a distraction than actually rooted in logic , same goes for LGB arguments and how its politicized .Things start looking promising once we dwell into the T part and an open whole new can of worms .
I though the book could have been better, but it heightened my awareness towards trans and fault lines within the identity sub structures that encompasses these groups, asking some hard questions – What is the end game for Transsexualism? What does it mean to a trans feminist? How does race and gender intersect?