The syntactical analogy and critical overview of the work of Christina Sommers takes a deep look into the challenges the society presents to its inhabitants. In her mythical analogy, there are several aspects of criticality that are taken into perspective to bring out the agonies of belonging to either sex in the society. She takes special reservation for the destruction of the American culture as asserted by Carol Gilligan.
Christina Sommers is critical of the mythical vulnerability of the girl alleged by Gilligan. Taking into perspective the riding notions presented by the author, she identifies certain notions that galvanize fairness to the girls. She highlights the need to change the perception of the society as well as radically altering …show more content…
She also asserts that there is unquestionable need to change the manner in which the boys are raised. Her special treat to the claims made by Carol Gilligan takes center stage in the beginning. In Gilligan’s 1990 book, she claims that girls were “in danger of disappearing or drowning into the Western culture”. The story is hurriedly picked up by the media without critical analogy. Thus, it creates the wrong perception as Gilligan even declines to offer data to support the allegations. After a short while, Sommers writes about the “allegedly fragile and demoralized state of American adolescent girls achieved the status of national emergency.” The assertions are picked up by various lobby groups that fight for gender equity and by 1994; the Gender Equity Act is brought forward that accords special treatment by value of being “under-served.” It sets a stage for the perceived plight of girls in the society. As a result, the Department of Education rolls out a program to weed out sexual harassment in all schools. The American culture is deemed to be “girl poisoning” as well as “girl destroying.” The scary suggestions that the way boys were raised should change became subject debate across all quarters. …show more content…
As a result, negative news about women was highly welcome by the various groups. With the emergence of AAWU news suggesting that girls grew up with poor self-image spelled hopelessness for the American girl. In their view, schools also shortchanged girls. The raising of the boys in bad ways led to various despicable demeanors in among boys like killing at Littleton High School. Gilligan suggested that the best way to overcome this was “to substitute the roles of boys and girls” by altering the activities that they perceive to be healthy. It could be achieved by changing the gender schemers that boys provided the manipulative doctrines that are passed to adulthood by the younger generations. The education systems have adopted these suggestions when some schools have brought the “structured recess” in the place of “traditional recess.” Sommers is in disagreement with the created perception of improper gender equity issues which are said to be a product of the capitalism and patriarchy. She argues that moral decadence among the boys is squarely a responsibility of schools. In her view, schools have failed to provide boys with the most basic necessities that would help them navigate society with moral values and values recognition. She asserts that schools are not playing their roles in fostering discipline in boys, instilling order as well as providing them with challenges. She
Christina Sommers is critical of the mythical vulnerability of the girl alleged by Gilligan. Taking into perspective the riding notions presented by the author, she identifies certain notions that galvanize fairness to the girls. She highlights the need to change the perception of the society as well as radically altering …show more content…
She also asserts that there is unquestionable need to change the manner in which the boys are raised. Her special treat to the claims made by Carol Gilligan takes center stage in the beginning. In Gilligan’s 1990 book, she claims that girls were “in danger of disappearing or drowning into the Western culture”. The story is hurriedly picked up by the media without critical analogy. Thus, it creates the wrong perception as Gilligan even declines to offer data to support the allegations. After a short while, Sommers writes about the “allegedly fragile and demoralized state of American adolescent girls achieved the status of national emergency.” The assertions are picked up by various lobby groups that fight for gender equity and by 1994; the Gender Equity Act is brought forward that accords special treatment by value of being “under-served.” It sets a stage for the perceived plight of girls in the society. As a result, the Department of Education rolls out a program to weed out sexual harassment in all schools. The American culture is deemed to be “girl poisoning” as well as “girl destroying.” The scary suggestions that the way boys were raised should change became subject debate across all quarters. …show more content…
As a result, negative news about women was highly welcome by the various groups. With the emergence of AAWU news suggesting that girls grew up with poor self-image spelled hopelessness for the American girl. In their view, schools also shortchanged girls. The raising of the boys in bad ways led to various despicable demeanors in among boys like killing at Littleton High School. Gilligan suggested that the best way to overcome this was “to substitute the roles of boys and girls” by altering the activities that they perceive to be healthy. It could be achieved by changing the gender schemers that boys provided the manipulative doctrines that are passed to adulthood by the younger generations. The education systems have adopted these suggestions when some schools have brought the “structured recess” in the place of “traditional recess.” Sommers is in disagreement with the created perception of improper gender equity issues which are said to be a product of the capitalism and patriarchy. She argues that moral decadence among the boys is squarely a responsibility of schools. In her view, schools have failed to provide boys with the most basic necessities that would help them navigate society with moral values and values recognition. She asserts that schools are not playing their roles in fostering discipline in boys, instilling order as well as providing them with challenges. She