Has it really been 33 days? I'd say I'm sorry, but, um, I was awfully busy. Semester screeching to a halt (with extra disciplinary hearings—I got to be accuser and arbiter, at different times of course, but never, thank goodness, the accused). Miss T. adjusting to the Toddler Room—anyone want to guess the first new word she learned from hanging out with a bunch of nearly-three-year-olds? Negotiating summer travel plans with collaborators, spouses, bosses, relatives, friends, and of course the child. Et cetera.
I've been reading more than I should, though. Check out the lovely takedowns of The Dangerous Book for Boys and its mommyblog proponents (oh Moxie! You too?) by Jody and Phantom Scribbler and by Jody again. Wheeeeee!
I feel guilty that I am linking favorably to posts by people who I think haven't read the book, and negatively to someone who has. But: I don't think anyone is saying that they think certain types of "old-fashioned" games are bad, or that the "technical" content of the book is inappropriate. It's all about the box it came packaged in. Can boys only become boys by excluding girls? Is excluding girls all that boys really want to do? Do adults playing in to such assumptions end up making them true?
Flea read it and reviewed it at Feministe (and cited some particularly objectional parts in the comments.
http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2007/05/17/dangerous-book-for-boys/
Basically, the boys vs. girls ideology of the authors sucks, but the how-to parts are mostly great and capable of entertaining a child for hours.
Hers was the first review I read of the book and I thought it set up the basic issues fairly well. (Commenters took her to task for assuming most girls wouldn't be put off by the title, though.)
Posted by: luolin | Tuesday, May 22, 2007 at 12:41 AM
I would be all for the book if the title was "The Dangerous Book for Boys and Girls." Would that be so hard? Rough and tumble play is about celebrating being a KID, not just being a BOY.
grrr
Posted by: PA | Tuesday, May 22, 2007 at 12:37 PM
Mine?
Posted by: Elizabeth | Tuesday, May 22, 2007 at 02:33 PM
Bingo, Elizabeth!
At first it translated as a general "I want...," but I think she's narrowed the meaning quite a bit...
Posted by: Emma Jane | Tuesday, May 22, 2007 at 05:35 PM
If it helps ease your conscience, I did scan the book for a longish period of time in the bookstore. It wasn't just the title, by far -- the editorial content about "what boys want" and "who boys are" and "how you're different from girls" could have been extracted wholesale from a 1950s boys' magazine.
Elizabeth is much more clever than me. Of course "I want/mine" makes perfect sense in retrospect, but I was clueless.
Ah, I miss toddlers....
Posted by: Jody | Tuesday, May 29, 2007 at 10:08 PM
Hey, I recently added a news widget from www.widgetmate.com to my blog. It shows the latest news, and just took a copy and paste to implement. Might interest you too.
Posted by: Mark Vane | Monday, June 25, 2007 at 08:43 AM