Raising Boys Without Men: How Maverick Moms are Creating the Next Generation of Exceptional Men[Bargain Price] [Paperback]
List Price:$14.95
Price:$5.98 & eligible for FREE Super Saver Shipping on orders over $25. Details
Editorial Reviews
From Publishers Weekly
Single or gay mothers-whom Drexler dubs "maverick moms"-are "real" parents, in case anyone needed reminding. The families they create are "as real and as legitimate as any other." The author, an assistant professor of psychology in psychiatry at Weill Medical College of Cornell University, bases her book on an extensive research study she conducted. Though she's curiously cagey on numbers, she does reveal that she interviewed a variety of lesbian mothers, single mothers, sons of single moms and sons of two-mother families. The results of her survey serve as a refreshing antidote to critics who insist that family life today is on the verge of being atomized. In an upbeat but never preachy tone, Drexler retells anecdote after anecdote illustrating her point (namely, that female-headed households may be better for boys than households with men). The book is mostly narrative in structure, with bulleted points at the end of each chapter explaining what "maverick moms" do that makes them successful parents (they encourage their sons to participate in a wide variety of activities; they actively recruit male figures from their families and the community to be in their sons' lives; they model the behavior they want their sons to emulate, and set examples of strength and compassion; etc.). This important work will serve as a beacon to the country's nearly 10 million single mothers.
Copyright © Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.
Review
"This important work will serve as a beacon to the country's single mothers."-Publishers Weekly"
"Truly a cutting-edge book . . . important for everyone who cares about the future of the American family." —Carol Gilligan, author of The Birth of Pleasure
"This important work will serve as a beacon to the country’s nearly 10 million single mothers."—Publishers Weekly
“As I read this book, I could almost hear the sound of the flying monkeys swooping in from out on the right. Books like this are attacked for the truths they tell. And there is no greater truth you can tell to the nation's single mothers than 'Relax. If you love him, support him, listen to him—your boy will turn out just fine.'” —Bette Midler
“This is a wonderful book—a very necessary book. We live in an age of labels: you’re normal, you’re not. For the so-called non-traditional families that want only to make their way in the world, labels can do incredible damage. Boys Without Men makes a convincing and empathetic case that very good things come from outside the bounds of our worn-out assumptions.” —Henry Louis Gates W.E.B. Du Bois Professor of the Humanities at Harvard University
"This is the answer to those who believe they can attach limits to the idea of family. It’s part guide, part affirmation, part eye-opening proof that family is far less about composition, than it is about the power of its love and support." —Jann Wenner, editor and publisher, Rolling Stone Magazine
“Peggy Drexler is such a perfect guide to parenting in the 21st century, of what makes the most basic institution of society click, I wondered: How did she get so smart about life? Decades of research, of course, but also an uncanny knack for seeing inside the human heart. Pull up a chair and read this book. You'll be a better parent for it.” —Margaret Carlson, first woman columnist, Time Magazine, political columnist, Bloomberg News, and Washington editor of The Week magazine.
"This highly readable, well researched, groundbreaking, myth shattering book should lay to rest all unfounded ideological opposition to nontraditional families. Everyone who wants to see the best interest of children served must read and act on this book's wisdom and research. " —Alan Dershowitz, Author and Felix Frankfurter Professor of Law at Harvard University
“Once a decade, it seems, there is a book that suddenly makes it all clear that what we have been led to believe about ourselves, gender roles and expectations is nothing more than hooey. This is such a book. A well-researched and clearly written testament that people are people and families are not nuclear but functional.” —Rita Henley Jensen, founder and editor in chief, Women's eNews
"I've always been in the idea business. So it's exciting when I see something blow away convention. This book creates controversy. And that's good. Controversy means people are thinking instead of assuming." —Donny Deutsch, Chairman and CEO of Deutsch, Inc, Host of CNBC’s hit show "The Big Idea with Donny Deutsch”, author of "Often Wrong, Never In Doubt"
"Raising Boys without Men changes the terms of our fractious national conversation about how we can raise boys to become good men. Peggy Drexler's thoughtful, engaging book demonstrates that fine parenting comes in various shapes, sizes, and genders." —Judith Stacey, Professor and Director of Undergraduate Studies, Department of Social and Cultural Analysis, Professor of Sociology, New York University
Product Details
- Paperback: 240 pages
- Publisher: Rodale Books (October 3, 2006)
- Language: English
- ISBN-10: 1594865388
- ASIN: B001G8WL66
78 of 107 people found the following review helpful:
1.0 out of 5 stars The facts don't lie, August 24, 2005
By
tastycake (Atlanta) - See all my reviews
This review is from: Raising Boys Without Men: How Maverick Moms Are Creating the Next Generation of Exceptional Men (Hardcover)
Drexler claims point blank that boys do not need fathers. This is a significant claim to make, and, if true, would have enormous consequences for the way we think about family. Therefore, it is imperative to investigate what her research actually says, and more importantly, what it does not and cannot say. Accordingly, there are two things wrong with Drexler's book - the methodology and the argument itself.
First, the methodology. These are the three most glaring errors in her methodology:
1) The control group for her study is made up of one person - herself (page 28). She sets herself up as a "one woman control group" to make comparisons to her group of 90 fatherless families. Anyone with even a cursory understanding of research methodology knows that this is completely unacceptable, and that the control group has to be as similar in size and attributes as possible to the group that is being investigated.
2) She uses a small, unrepresentative sample - 30 lesbian moms, 30 single moms by choice, and 30 single moms by circumstance - (page 27) to make inferences about the population as a whole. Again, a cursory understanding of statistical and research methods shows that unless you have a sufficiently large, random sample, you simply cannot make inferences about the whole population. But Drexler uses her research to claim that ALL boys do not need fathers. For more of her bias and elitist sample, see pages 24 and 25.
3) She does not measure outcomes using a well-tested instrument with which to determine how the children are doing across measures of child development and well-being. Instead, she relies on interviews with young children (primarily from the lesbian moms) to make the broad determination that these boys are "better off" without a father. The self-reporting of children is notoriously unreliable for the purposes of academic research.
Second, the argument itself. Three principle flaws in her argument:
1) Over the past 25 years, an enormous amount of social science research has shown that across measures of economic, educational, health, emotional, psychological, and behavioral well-being, children with involved fathers fare better, on average, than children without involved fathers. These two and a half decades of research cannot be overturned by one flawed, small-scale study that does not even measure outcomes over a long period of time.
2) If Drexler's research was reliable, the implication would be that when men get women pregnant, their children are actually better off if the father leaves. But Drexler also claims that male involvement is important for boys, and that boys will seek out this male involvement on their own. This means that fathers should not take responsibility for their own children, but should make sure that they make themselves available for someone else's children, who were presumably left behind by their father. This is illogical.
3) Based on her biased sample, Drexler's research tells us nothing about the vast majority of fatherless homes. The vast majority of fatherless homes are produced by divorce and out-of-wedlock childbirth, where, by circumstances beyond the single mother's control, she is left to raise her child on her own. They are often living in poverty. But, again, the majority of Drexler's small sample was of well-off women raising children fatherless, by choice, which would produce an entirely different environment for the children than the vast majority of single mother households.
In conclusion, it is borderline fraudulent for Drexler to claim that her research is a reliable tool to infer that boys do not need fathers. Her research method and her argument are deeply flawed and need to be addressed in front of a national audience that has been exposed to her faulty publication. We need to send the message to boys that they need to be involved, responsible, and committed fathers and that girls need to value and uphold the importance of the future fathers of their children for the sake of their children's well being.
I would encourage all to read Father Facts by the National Fatherhood Initiative, Fatherless America by David Blankenhorn, and Fatherneed by Kyle Pruett for the TRUTH!
Shoddy research, January 14, 2007
By
Jonathan Crane - See all my reviews
This review is from: Raising Boys Without Men: How Maverick Moms Are Creating the Next Generation of Exceptional Men (Hardcover)
Drexler seems to forget that anecdotal evidence cannot be used to justify the type of claims she's making in this book, which is riddled with biased sample and hasty generalization fallacies. Drexler makes sweeping statements about the efficacy of single mother parenting without even attempting to clearly define her definition, let alone establish a double blind study or make any other attempt whatsoever to compensate for her bias. Instead, she relies on anecdotal evidence supplied by individuals who were clearly selected based on whether or not their stories support her conclusions.
could we have a balanced review?, February 15, 2007
By
This review is from: Raising Boys Without Men: How Maverick Moms are Creating the Next Generation of Exceptional Men (Paperback)
I'm more stunned by the reviews than by the book. I think the book has interesting information and a valid perspective that isn't heard often.
But to understand that, one needs to actually read the book and also to understand sociological methods of study - studying human experience is not like studying cause and effect in a lab. One also needs to hear and grasp the difference between studies on boys with fathers who have abandoned them - the studies most often cited and associated with stats about the negative effects of not having a father - and this study which is on boys who do not have a father in the picture and never have. In this way, this is new research.
The book doesn't, to me, say that men are not necessary to boys - in fact the author spends a great deal of the book talking about how boys who do not have fathers get access to (and are encouraged by their "maverick moms" to get access to) men and male role models. She finds this to be of benefit for the boys.
She does also say that, based on this research, she sees boys being raised in this specific circumstance (boys without fathers who have abandoned them and who are being raised by a mom or moms) doing very well and developing in a very balanced and healthy manner.
My issue with the book is two-fold. I'd like to see more research and a follow-up with the subjects of her research - I think that would lend itself to a stronger work.
