Like a week ago some other library returned this book that they'd borrowed. We have a copy of it, and not too many libraries do, so apparently people request it pretty regularly. One of my coworkers took a look at it and all of us read it, shocked. It's a kids book that would never, never, never get published these days. I love gender roles. I really do. But I just know that this would be like, a lawsuit on every page.
It is very much out of print, but if you want your own copy, you can purchase a used copy on Amazon for $300. It's kind of funny because half of the reviews there like "THIS DESERVES ZERO STARS!!!! WORST BOOK EVER!!!!" and half are like "5 stars. We've come so far..."
Anyhow, I'm posting the whole thing. Fair use? And maybe it's like money where you can reproduce it as long as it isn't the right size? Otherwise, you would just be in suspense forever, because you'd never know how it ended.
UPDATE 5/12/09:
- Apparently this book was actually published as satire. A few people have mentioned this in the comments. It was published in 1970, which is late for this stuff, so that makes sense. I guess what happened is, Darrow published this as a joke and reviewers took it seriously. His obituary is here. It sounds like he was a pretty funny guy.
- A couple people leaving comments have been rude to me for not knowing that it was satire when I posted this. This is my personal blog, guys. I thought it was neat, so I posted it for my friends. I didn't expect hundreds of thousands of people to be reading my blog. Similarly: when I said it would be a lawsuit on every page, I was exaggerating. I do that sometimes. No more comments about that, please.
- If you wish to comment, please note: my mom reads my blog. I welcome your comments and discussion about this post and book (whether or not I agree with you!) but I like to keep my blog family-friendly. Please be respectful towards each other. I will delete even clever comments if they contain profanity or are vulgar. This was not initially a problem, but over the past few days it has become an issue. Thanks.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI'm Glad You Found That!
ReplyDeleteOh Emily you never fail to amuse me! I wonder if the creators of "Meet the Parents" read this book when choosing Greg's profession as a nurse?
ReplyDeleteI have totes seen this book before! I think it was at Seagull...
ReplyDeleteWow. That is ridiculous.
ReplyDeleteNo. Words.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteLove it!
ReplyDeleteUhm, it may not have gotten published today, but exactly what kind of lawsuits could possibly arise from it? There's nothing illegal in it.
ReplyDeleteaavarner - I was exaggerating. I do that sometimes. These days it seems like people are extremely pc, and will sue for anything, including things that make them feel unequal. ;)
ReplyDelete@aavarner
ReplyDeleteI think the author implied lawsuits based on gender discrimination would be filed.
It doesn't look good for a children's book to indoctrinate youth into believing in gender roles.
...I have no (other) words...
ReplyDeleteThose were the days, my friends. No ambiguity, no gender identity crises. How I long for that time.
ReplyDelete"Help Wanted Male," and "Help Wanted Female" ads in the classifieds clarified who could do what.
Office girls were told to go home and change if they came to work without their girdles. No jiggling down the aisles of desks back then.
But we can't go back. The dames wouldn't let us!
Screw that man. Where's the book called " I'm glad I'm a girl, I'm glad you're a girl, lets go be lesbians!" or
ReplyDelete"i'm glad I'm a guy, I'm glad you're gay, come here so I can beat the shit out of you!"
Appalling!
ReplyDeleteThe illustrations are really cute though.
ReplyDeleteI think it's funny =] Some of them are kinda true...like, I still call most girls "brides" on their wedding days...
ReplyDeleteBut some just don't make any sense..."girls need things fixed" sooo funny
They've missed out quite a few others that go along with the stereotypes of the time. What about "Boys dress up in uniform to kill other boys" and "Girls can't have a job after they get married".
ReplyDeletewow. i don't even know what to say. what a great book on gender bias and discrimination!
ReplyDeleteman, am i glad i'm a girl.
i wouldn't want any part of that book on my gender's head. terrible. also very typical for the times back then. very ignorant.
this is kind of sexist.
ReplyDeleteamazingly funny
ReplyDeleteEh, I don't see why this is so offensive. Most of it is true.
ReplyDeleteExcept for a couple pages that people probably got more upset over than they should have.
It's cute, and the ending is nice. :\
Well I'm a boy and I certainly can eat!!!
ReplyDeleteNice find.
for those of you having a hard time seeing why this could be interpreted as offensive: the world of rigid gender roles and smarmy, comforting images of yesteryear was misogynist and patriarchal at best. those were the days when marital rape was ok. when gaybashing was only frowned upon. when women were discouraged from being more than pretty concubines. your rosy, selective picture of the past is obsolete
ReplyDeleteGo pandapants jones, GO!
ReplyDeletedid anyone expect to see "boys are heroes" followed by "girls are damsels in distress"? instead it claimed girls could be "heroines". how progressive!
ReplyDeleteps. "girls use things boys invent" drove me up a wall.
I happen to be an incredibly handsome girl... lol this is funny...
ReplyDeleteDO A BARREL ROLL!!!
ReplyDeleteHaha, the best part is that it's mostly true.
ReplyDeleteThose generalizations are generally true.
ReplyDeleteIf you disagree your deluded. Fight against nature all you want.
http://www.glennrowe.net/BaronCohen/MaleFemale.asp
On average men and women tend toward the extremes presented.
That's so amusing. I think its kind of great that at some point this author had no inhibitions whatsoever in writing such a silly and odd little book
ReplyDeleteNice post.. I have stumbled it.. Can you stumble mine as well .. Thanks
ReplyDeletePlanet Atul.
Well...these days you have the stupidity of: "you must be politically correct". Thank you the book is great!
ReplyDeleteWow! Wow! Wow! That is jaw-droppingly shocking! Kinda hilarious, considering how archaic those sexist old stereotypes are. But wow! I guess I'm so shocked 'cause I needed reminding that, as a woman, I'm weak, stupid and useless for anything except cooking, cleaning and decoration. Hahahahaha!
ReplyDeleteAnonymous - I totally expected to see girls are damsels in distress instead of heroines!
ReplyDeleteI can fully understand why women would find this piece of literature sexist. However, let us not be hypocrites. These generalisations are true, not mostly true but true. The author of this piece missed one major stereotype: "boys are heroes" I looked for "girls need heroes" or "Girls are damsels in distress" he said "girls are heroines" which means women are NOT useless, but still you cannot deny that these generalisations are again TRUE.
ReplyDeleteFor the women who find this sexist: Last I checked motherhood is VERY important and MOST women would love to be a bride one day.
Shed your ignorance and view this not as a gender role and as a gender generalisation. And finally, the real lesson of this whole piece is at the last set "We need each other" it seems people are so wrapped up in who's the stronger sex that we're missing the lesson.
I was a girl who could fix things... I had to keep VERY QUIET about it.
ReplyDeleteI think its hilarious to see how many people this book riled up when in reality its quite true. Present day society is full of hypocrisy. Chairs are still expected to be pulled out by the man..the supermarket trolley is still pushed by him. For the most part we still follow the age old equation of man in the field woman in the cave...to deny that is to be silly. I'm by no means sexist and I firmly believe women should have every right that men do...but I don't delude myself and i think its pretty sad that many of you can't see the innocence and truth in the book an prefer rather to focus on the fact that it clearly touches insecurities that you have.
ReplyDeleteI clicked the link for Amazon and discovered that a teacher uses it to explain how ideas - however wrong - can be planted at a very young age, and I was pretty impressed by that.
ReplyDeleteAlso, dude, way to recycle.
This is one of the most sexist illustrations i have ever seen. This cartoon is instilling sexist veiws in young children and is simply continuing what is wrong with this society today.. Terrible.
ReplyDeleteYeah, I'm sure a lot of people would get their feathers all ruffled about it, but I think it's cute. It's not demeaning, even though it is sexist, but I like the end! Cute, I think, even though I disagree with most of it.
ReplyDeleteEven more interesting than the innocent-enough-for-its-1950s-time book is the wild variety of your commenters! There are apparently people who think we're entirely past that generation's narrow view of what women can and cannot do (sadly, we're not past it yet) and there are apparently people who haven't noticed how hard our world has tried to educate itself about the needless cruelty of arbitrary inheirited gender roles. The times ARE indeed changing... but probably not fast enough for some of us.
ReplyDeletei'm glad someone cleared that up for me...i've been so confused. so, by these definitions, if i want to be a pilot or a doctor i need a*****and if i am single and keep up my own place i need to remove it? word removed to protect the innocent.
ReplyDeleteALright fine. You can call this book sexist, outdated, old -fashioned, and behind the times. But all redundancy aside, i can cook a mean chicken cordon bleu, or any other dish AND I'm a boy AND i think im quite graceful thank you very much, so there if its sexist at least it goes both ways and doesn't typefy and demean.
ReplyDeleteIn the animal kingdom, Lionesses go out and do the hunting, mothering, nurturing and overall housekeeping.They get along fine if unhindered by outside interuptions to their routine of survival.
ReplyDeleteI know we arent lions, but there are certain examples dotted all over nature that enforce how as rational, intelligent human beings we should behave and it is ignorant to ignore them just so we can be seen as civilised in our neighbour's eyes.
Stop the bickering over a book and measure things by how they were intended aswell as through our own singular perspective.
Good post.
this is a RAD book! it's almost as good as the gashlycrumb tinies!
ReplyDeleteahh what a great conditioner....what about boys are PIMPS Girls are HOES
ReplyDeleteSeriously? And people think that sexism doesn't exist. Wow. All I can say is that, as a lesbian, I don't need a groom. And most of these things are completely exclusive of anyone who doesn't want the perfectly "normal" life. Please, DON'T show this to your kids.
ReplyDeleteFYI, this is NOT fair use, under current doctrinal jurisprudence. So watch your azz on this....
ReplyDeleteThere's nothing sexist about gender roles. They occur naturally in the wild, why shouldn't they occur in human society. Perhaps some are a little excessive, but you tell me in a contest of strength when an average woman would beat an average man (there are always outliers, but not many).
ReplyDeleteI'm 65. This is the America I grew up in. It's funny only in retrospect. Believe me.
ReplyDeletei am a female and i think it's hilarious! i'm with J. Bellerand, the "we need each other" part is cute and that's the conclusion i think MOST people would come to if they could stop arguing about who is better.
ReplyDeleteAll you have to do is WOW them with the ending...
ReplyDeleteAs a lesbian transsexual transvestite, and a man. I'm thoroughly confused by this book. But the ending is SOOO cute!
ReplyDeletewow way to publish absolute lies and made up entries do all of you liberals have to resort to made up posts to make a point no wonder this country is going to hell. all of you obama worshipers have nerver spent a real day working you've either tought or been tought yet never worked and struggled with the rest of us
ReplyDeleteAwesome book! I LOVE gender roles, and the fact that boys and girls are different. In our house, we celebrate and embrace our differences, as opposed to lumping both sexes into the same category. I'd read this book to my kids today.
ReplyDeleteHey hatemonger, I think the word you are searching for is taught, I learned that one from a teacher. And for Katybeth, I am certain that if you have a partner one of you probably behaves in a more "manly" role while the other is more "feminine". It's O.K., we still love you. We need each other. Also, and most importantly, books for children should be read WITH the children first and the ideas in them discussed with the children so they can understand all the ideas present in the story, so hopefully they will come away from the story with something to ponder.
ReplyDeleteKeep this book. One day it will be an ancient archive of a time when humans procreated using something they called nature. It was crude and it was limited but it did produce offspring....Imagine.
ReplyDeleteThis has been sarcasm and it is not politically correct. You have been warned. You now can not sue!!
Hahahahaha. I'm a doctor with a vagina and my husband is a nurse with a penis. YIKES!
ReplyDeleteWell apparently boys can eat. This ought to settle a few outstanding bets I've got.
ReplyDeleteHow fantastically awful! And the author was a very popular artist too! I think the artwork is great and the book is funny but only in retrospect. It's great that we've come so far away from these ideas... except that our unprecidented president is still a man and we haven't yet elected a woman. Hopefully that will change soon (but, seeing the last two female frontrunners, I hope it's neither of them!)
ReplyDeletebrilliant!!
ReplyDeleteIf you insert some qualifiers - "Most policemen are boys" "Many girls have dolls" "A lot of boys build houses - A lot of girls keep houses," then it wouldn't be too far off base & people wouldn't need to get all bent out of shape. The only one I said "Oh Puhleeze" to was "Girls need things fixed". And shift your paradigm on the inventing one - if it said "girls invent things, boys use things girls invent", and showed a little boy lolling in a hammock while the little girl labored away, there would be howls. And last but not least - nobody is stewardesses any more - dem is all Flight Attendants
ReplyDeleteI've never seen this book before but I'm glad you found it. If I were you I would definitely keep it and pass it down to the kids and make it an heirloom.
ReplyDeleteJust want to point out that this was published in 1970 not 1950. It was still in some public school libraries in the 1990's.
ReplyDeleteI read this post on the book a while back which was pretty interesting, and in the comments there was a link to a google book excerpt: Failing at Fairness. Check it out, it is pretty interesting. :)
Hahahaha... that's hysterically funny! Sadly this is how people used to think.
ReplyDeleteThis is a fascinating study in modern political correctness. I am not the kind of person who encourages gender roles in anyway (a woman can be a skilled surgeon, and a man can be an excellent interior designer, I don't really care, as long as they are doing a good job). That said, none of the roles, either for men or for women are belittled in this book. The people who are disgusted by this book are themselves undervaluing the strengths of both sides.
ReplyDeleteYes, it is possible to be a graceful man, and it is just a possible to be a strong woman, and both of those things are good.
At this point we all know that any person can do any job as long as they are qualified for it, so where is this outrage coming from? Someone needs to take care of children, someone needs to be a doctor, someone needs to be a nurse. In the world that this book is presented in it says that a boy can be one thing and a girl another, but the book never once says that the roles it is assigning are mutually exclusive to one gender.
Those assumptions are yours, not mine.
Amazing how much crap passes for enlightenment nowadays. Zietgiest silliness.
ReplyDeleteAmusing, as a window into an older age, maybe. But, what I cannot understand is as progressive as we are, we still turn a blind eye to horrors and dehumanizing much worse then what is portrayed in that book that's going on in other parts of the world that aren't our wonderful western culture.
ReplyDeleteHumanity isn't cultural. In other parts of the world, women are still abused and treated as property. Where are the PC folk and feminists when it comes to standing up for them?
This book should be passed out at Berkeley College. Liberals are always looking for proof that being natural is ignorant... or that anything that doesn't agree with their "progressive" views is ignorant. I, for one, would take poodle skirts and baking pies over sexting and guns in schools any day.
ReplyDeleteThank you. This ridiculous book completely made my day.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading those comments I only just realized that in America, a woman's career doesn't end with marriage. Philippines is progressive and I believe one day, all women in the Philippines, will have the right to marry, without losing her job.
ReplyDeleteWhat a piece of crap.
ReplyDeleteSomeone even added it to stumbleupon.
Please don't ruin the fun.
Stumbled, funny, shame so many people still view gender roles much the same.
ReplyDeleteFYI, you can reproduce 10% of a book under fair use but since it's out of print you'll probably be ok :)
I find this incredibly insulting, close-mined, and cruel. It's a sad commentary on the gender stigmas and conceptual prisons that we create for the member of our society.
ReplyDeleteThis is a lovely book and mostly true which commenters would realize if they took their heads out of their behinds for two seconds and used their brains for thinking.
ReplyDelete"Humanity isn't cultural. In other parts of the world, women are still abused and treated as property. Where are the PC folk and feminists when it comes to standing up for them?"
ReplyDeleteFilipe, the liberal progressives of America do not care about other people. They only care about making themselves look compassionate. These atrocities remain off the radar. Sadly they will not be as pertinent in America as comparatively frivolous organizations like PETA.
I have read through all these comments and can't believe how many people are so offended by this book! All the author and illustrations are showing is that we may have our little 'roles' we play in life, but when it comes to the real meaning - we still need each other. My husband and I have been married for 27 years. I have the roles I fill and he has his, but there are many times we do things together because - we still need each other. Stop digging for further meaning that you can take offense at. I personally love the book and wouldn't be afraid to pass it on to my grandchildren.
ReplyDeleteLol. Great book. I love it.
ReplyDeleteSimple, light hearted good read. Its not for our times no, but most are still true.
Girls are beautiful, girls are mothers, and girls cook great. Now how insulting is that? I wouldn't call it super sexist or get upset for reading it. Remember, its out of print.
Plus nowadays, there is lots of female doctors, male cheerleaders, female pilots, male stewards, female cops.
I don't know what the fuss is about. What a wonderful book! The only thing missing is: Boys are smart; Girls are dumb.
ReplyDeletewell say what you will about progress, but girls really can't cook anymore... sigh
ReplyDeleteI can cook better than all of my girlfriends (except one, she is amazing).
Seriously, one of them burned rice. Burned rice! in a pot of water! how in the world did she pull that off?
That was a good book. You are right, that would never be published today!
ReplyDeletePeople in this thread are either laughing at how sexism "used to be" or insisting that "there's some truth to that book". The inconsistancy in this thread is hilarious!
ReplyDeleteGirls are still unindated with the message that they must look porntastic in order to catch a man. And of course a woman who displays the same self-centeredness as her male counterpart is still described as "selfish" while he's praised for being independent. Then there's the whole "Hillary is c**t because she wants to be president" fiasco a few months ago.
And we still have a large contingent blogging furiously that of course women should stay in the kitchen and make them a sammich.
What exactly has changed? Sexism is still as rampant as it ever was.
Just a little of "truth" from the old days...
ReplyDeleteWhy do you think this is so wrong (or good, to that end)?
Just remember that the world evolved that way for a reason, through hundreds of generations.. And worked, well, pretty fine.
Why do we think that a change that ocurred in less than 50 years is the real truth, that those ideas were wrong, that our western-style of living is what had to be? What would our grandsons think of this way of living we have?
Would it be fine if we just double the number of pages and copy all the ones about "boys" and put "lesbians" on them (and those from "girls" with "gays")?
If you ask me the world is no better than what it used to be... And maybe even worse, so...
We need each other? Well, in general, yes. Unless we do not want to have grandsons that criticize us!!
Can be easily summarized:
ReplyDelete"Boys earn money for favors. Girls give favors for money"
I wonder if part two is what happens to bad boys and girls that don't follow. It's seems very scary teacherish.
ReplyDeleteI found myself laughing at this book. Despite sometimes feeling like nothing has changed, I guess we have made some progress in some areas.
ReplyDeleteAlthough, I must admit I do like a guy who doesn't mind fixing stuff around the house. Not that I can't, but it's nice when he does.
Love this!! I'm going to embroider and quilt a little soft book for my kids with these pictures and verbiage. I have 12 kids and more to come. The conservative breeders will win in the end!! :)
ReplyDeleteIt's not surprising that outliers on the fringes of society hate this book.
ReplyDeleteOf course, no stereotype applies uniformly to everyone. That's why it's called a "normal curve."
Regardless of what is being measured, When you're two or more standard deviations from the mean, you will rationalize your position as an outlier by attempting to marginalize those in the middle.
Gender roles exist precisely because there IS a difference between men and women.
Quit your sniveling.
I'm teaching a version of Antigone now and we'll be discussing gender. I think this book will be a great teaching tool to talk about gender roles, past/present/future.
ReplyDeleteFor those who say it isn't offensive: anything that limits/prescribes what a person can and can't be based on their gender is offensive, and if you can't see that then I am guessing that you are stuck in the 1950's.
To Mr. P- I don't believe the book once mentions what anyone *can't be" or *isn't*. Yes, my strong groom fixes things and I (his graceful bride) often need things fixed. That doesn't mean I can't fix them myself. It doesn't mean I should ask or allow him to fix them for me. We need each other :)
ReplyDeleteAnonymous at 12:29 said:
“Why do we think that a change that occurred in less than 50 years is the real truth, that those ideas were wrong, that our western-style of living is what had to be? What would our grandsons think of this way of living we have?”
THANK YOU!
This was a mindset that I carried for so. stinking. long. I am eternally thankful to be shed of it. I don’t want to glorify and whitewash the past. History is necessary for us to learn from- good and bad. The mistakes and the achievements of our forebears are equally important.
Thanks to Emily for posting this. Now I have yet another old book to keep my eyes peeled for at every thrift store and yard sale I peruse.
Team Bettendorf- You’re evil and I love you! Keep on breeding!!
Isn't it funny how we always assume that we are correct NOW. . . and that any thoughts or ideas we disagree with from the past were WRONG.
ReplyDeleteIsn't that just a wee bit arrogant?
Great post of the book. Thanks for sharing!
The eleventh image is hilarious.
ReplyDeletePanel 1: Boys are heroes.
Panel 2: ...
Next page: Fine! Girls are heroines! Happy now?
"“Isn't it funny how we always assume that we are correct NOW. . . and that any thoughts or ideas we disagree with from the past were WRONG. Isn't that just a wee bit arrogant?
ReplyDelete”Reasonable people base their ethical philosophy not on cultural relativism, but on principles of justice which are attributed equally to all. Back then, most people were extremely racist -- so in order for your assertion to be valid, then slavery should be legal today.
The obvious problem with cultural relativism is that oppression at any point or place in history including but not limited to our own is always considered as acceptable by the privileged class -- until we remember to ask the disadvantaged group what they think about the situation.
MrsKomorri, "having a choice" to perform gender is quite a different experience from "being mandated or coerced" to perform gender.
We need each other.
ReplyDeleteWow. There are gender roles, and then there's this book. It actually hurt my stomach to read.
ReplyDeleteMy very favourite part of this whole book is the innocent little "University of Utah Library" stamp on the second page. No wonder they're still trying to outlaw gay marriage.
ReplyDeleteI expect anxiously the sequel: "I'm Glad I'm a Muslim! I'm Glad I'm a Jew!"
ReplyDeleteIt gives us perspective and it is somewhat redeemed by the fact that the woman is the one driving the covered wagon as a heroine! That is super cool...
ReplyDeletethis would be the more acceptable version: it should say "Most boys invent things, but some girls do too", or "A lot of girls can't fix things, but neither can some boys"... I bet if you look at the rate of US patents, etc, then you will find more Men inventing things, however, then you run into the problem of stereotypes influencing reality. I'm sure a lot of Women could invent stuff if they were encouraged or brought up in a way that would foster it. True, there are some real differences between men and women, but some of the cultural stereotypes are abitrary and unnecessary.
ReplyDeleteMy first reaction to this book was, aww that is the cutest thing ever. I am so secure in myself and my own role and the roles that other people choose to take that it doesn't matter what this little children's book says. We will all decide what we want to do with our lives, reading this book will not sway anyone's mind as to what they want decide to do. The book tries to make a visual that yes, boys and girls are different and the two can compliment each other. THAT'S ALL. Get over it people, it's not that complicated. Thanks Emily for sharing. I love it.
ReplyDeleteTo all the people saying that defined gender roles are "natural" so humans should have them as well, I just want to say this:
ReplyDeleteFlying isn't natural. Driving isn't natural. Practically everything we do in our daily lives is a "fight against nature."
The only natural things humans still do are eating and having sex. And even those lines have been so blurred. What's natural about processed food? (I am joking of course)
There are differences between genders, but those are not defined by our jobs or our abilities.
I love the argument that people who find defined gender roles insulting need to take "their heads out of their behinds for two seconds and (use) their brains for thinking."
Right. Deconstructing gender roles and examining them is NOT using your brain, but following an out-dated status quo like unthinking sheep is?
Smart!
What's really sad is that no one can declare, "I'm glad to be a boy" or "I'm glad to be a girl" with out the approval of society or a person with a perverted view of sexuality!
ReplyDeleteI always find these antiquated sorts of self-help/self-affirmation books hilarious. I found one at a thrift store once that was about being self-reliant called "Billy Plays With Himself". Now I wish I had scanned it and posted it for everyone to goggle at. Kudos on teh post.
ReplyDeleteTo all of those who commented, "these things are true, though," I think you've missed the point. While many of the stereotypes about gender roles listed in this book do tend to be, for the most part, true, the way it presents these stereotypes is in the rigid gender roles scenario of "boys do this," "girls do that." There is no room for transgressing these roles. That is a dangerous thing to put in children's heads. Boys need to know that it's ok for them to cook or to need things fixed. Girls need to know that it's ok for them to fix things, build houses, or become pilots. So while the gender roles in this book might be for the most part true, it doesn't mean they should be portrayed as strict rules for behavior.
ReplyDeleteGirls are for making the food and having sex with. Anyone who thinks otherwise has clearly missed the point of keeping them around. You go, girl!
ReplyDeleteThey should have a companion book that's like, "I'm glad I'm modern / I'm glad I'm old fashioned".
ReplyDeleteThe first page would be, "I'm glad I'm modern: I can do anything and be anything regardless of how I started out! / I'm glad I'm old fashioned: I don't let trivial nonsense send me into a flying rage over every perceived slight."
:-p
interesting. has anyone read the article in Mclean's or maybe it was time, about how teens are begining to reidealize the nuclear family model? the teens are the future, so it could be that progress is in fact returning to past ideals.
ReplyDeleteI had seen this book before. It shows how people were so stereotyped at one time. I would HATE to see one titled, I am so glad I am White , I am so sorry I am Black, which if you think about it , would be about the same thing. Or one on RICH and Poor, or Able and Handicapped, or Pretty and Ugly. I will stop there. Great artwork though!
ReplyDeleteI'm Glad I'm Racist! I'm Glad You Hate Fat People!
ReplyDeletei don't think this is right
ReplyDeleteEveryone can do everything they want to do or they want to be whether they're boys or girls
What I find troubling (beyond a gut reaction) is that this book was published in 1970, right on the cusp of when traditional gender roles in the United States were beginning to be challenged in earnest. Given that, my sense is that far from an innocent celebration of our differences, this book could be related to a socially conservative backlash against the nascent fight for womens' (and maybe LGBT) equality.
ReplyDeleteAnd as other commenters have said - the problem isn't that these things are or are not statistically true, it's that this presents them, to little kids, as the only right way to be. It's restrictive and exclusionary.
This is extremely sexist
ReplyDeleteTo all the people saying, "the gender roles tend to be true".
ReplyDeleteMany Asians tend to eat a lot of rice. Do they do that because Asians are genetically programmmed to enjoy lots of rice, or is that all that's available? And what about my japanese friends who have lived in this country for a long time and still have rice with every meal -- do they "just tend to like rice"?
In other words, the long-term effects of social conditioning, family traditions and expectations, as well as other economic factors are being completely ignored.
It's pretty dang disturbing how many people posting actually buy some of the shit in this absurd book. Very strange.
ReplyDeleteWhat's funny is I was raised with all of these same morals. This book was published in the 1970s, I was born in the late 1980s. I actually wrote a large paper in college on this topic - in some parts of the world, we've come really far, but this book is reality for a lot of America, which is sad.
ReplyDeleteThe author of this book is a complete idiot. I think it is very sad that this guy would limit me to being a person who uses inventions and not makes them. I may only be in the sixth grade but I know sexism when I see it. Girls are smart, strong, and as a second degree black belt I could beat up any boy in my grade, my friend Callie is just as strong and as athletic as I am and all the boys know it!
ReplyDeletewow to all you IDIOT anonymous ppl (im too lazy to actually make an acct) o.m.g.
ReplyDeleteok this was written way back in the day where it was a socially acceptable practice to GENERALIZE. and the whole point of the book isn't to be SEXIST if any of you noticed, but that boys and girls, people in general are alot better off working together.
when's the last time you saw teams of GIRLS playing football on ESPN and MALE cheerleading squads cheering for them? (im sure there are rare exceptions, but not in the NHL, no sir!)
for the record i thought it was a cute childrens' book, despite a few generalizations.
p.s. i was DEFINITELY LMAO at all these whiny "oh, the horror, im so offended that a childrens book said i *cook* or am a *nurse*" comments.
ReplyDeletelast i checked, alot of guys (and girls to be fair =P) find those to be *attractive* attributes ^.<
I have read some of the comments. For all the people who keep on saying that the things in the book are mostly true, they are true because people decided that they should be true. No, there is nothing “Natural” about what people invented but then we get into the whole thing about what “natural” means. The point is that children should not be told what opportunities in life they have and what opportunities they do no have depends on what gender they come with. Children should be told that they should follow their dreams and not try to make sure they live up to what is expected of their gender.
ReplyDeleteSomeone was also complaining about the fact that today you must be politically correct. Political correctness can get out of hand and I do not think that free speech should be stifled because it may be offensive. Nevertheless, if people are told they must be politically correct it is still not as bad as when people are told that they must fit into their prescribed gender roles.
I am willing to bet that the people who approve of this book do not even know the difference between sex and gender.
ReplyDeleteOkay after reading these comments I feel the need to point out that gender roles have evolved over time to come to the point they were at that time. They weren't ignorant. That is just how they were. People didn't think these things were wrong. I am also if the belief that their are gender roles n ow whether we like them or not(though I do). I have never understood why people complain about gender roles. There are some things men do ewither more or are naturally better at. Same thing goes for women. If anybody who w2ould sue over this bok was published now. I say we should sue them for being a jackass.
ReplyDeleteMany times people try to justify gender stereotypes to me by insisting that there are differences between men and women. Well, there are differences between all individuals. No two people are truly same even if they have the same sex or gender. The question is what differences have to be determined by your sex or gender. I don’t think that any have to be. I don’t think that people should be who they are without worrying about whether it fits in with what is expected of their gender. Furthermore, I don’t think that when people decide what they should do wit their lives it should be based on what their gender is. That would only limit their potentials.
ReplyDeleteWhitney Darrow, Jr. (August 22, 1909 – August 10, 1999) was a prominent American cartoonist, who worked most of his career for The New Yorker, with some 1,500 of his cartoons printed in his nearly 50-year-long career with the magazine.
ReplyDeleteThis is satire - a joke - not a real children's book - a cartoonist's lampooning of traditional gender roles.
You fell for it.
Boys are presidents, girls are first ladies.
ReplyDeleteStill True.
My how times have changed...For the better, I might add.
ReplyDeleteI don't think this is very odd. Granted it might be satire, it might be sexist. Either way it's a time period and a people that had very firm ideas. We can call them wrong or right or true, but at the end of the day it's the past and you can't change that. If you attempt to squash these ideas new prejudices will just come along to fill the void. It is nature, the part where it describes the girl as the house keeper. That has happened since prehistoric times. Women stayed home to care for the children because frankly men can't produce milk... and they farmed/gathered. It is nature, you can argue that we're more advanced as a species than that, but what it really comes down to is survival not gender roles...
ReplyDeleteAh, stereotypes. The cornerstone of any modern society. It's items like this and people's reactions to them that give Stewart and Colbert jobs.
ReplyDelete"Boys are presidents, girls are first ladies.
ReplyDeleteStill True."
Or MAYBE you haven't looked outside of U.S., or wherever you come from?
I just think it is kind of silly that a rediculous amount of people were offended by this book. Personally I believe that if you were offended it is because you are so insecure about yourself that you must protect the only thing you can use to your advantage.. your sex. and as far as looking porntastic? what the hell does that mean? Let me tell you something I work, my boyfriend works, I do all the cooking and cleaning around the house and he always fixes the shit i break. I am perfectly happy. Honestly how many women out there would rather hold a spatula as opposed to a gun? There is absolutely nothing wrong with this book except for the idiots that read it and think "ooh! another reason for me to bitch and moan about my poor poor middle class life" get over yourselfs.
ReplyDeleteThe book is almost 40 YEARS OLD.
ReplyDeleteSo I don't know why the commenters on the blog are getting all butthurt about it or why it was even blogged about it.
It was published in 1970 and at the time, most of what the book says was reality. There are very few actual sexist remarks. Out of 17 there are 4...Doctors, Policemen, fixing things, inventing building houses. And in 1970, those things were true.
It's a cute book that had no malice behind it. It was not a plot to keep women barefoot and pregnant. It's an attempt to make boys and girls appreciate their differences, which is a noble intention no matter what the era.
How Do they even publish stuff like that!!??
ReplyDeleteTo the authorof the book,
ReplyDeleteChange the word's Boy's and Girl's to myself and change the illustrations so both genders were doing each thing depicted and publish it again for todays youth! Gender specifity is dead, but also too sensitive a subject to bring up with some elders. Can't we all just be GLAD we're alive?????
People who say "never show this to your kids" don't realize that reading this with a child is a wonderful opportunity to have a discussion, ask what the child thinks, say what you think and simulate the critical mind on a kid.
ReplyDeleteI find this book very cute, and mostly true. =) Some of it isn't true, especially now in this time period. Things change over time. Instead of being mad at the past, be happy that it's the future. Life is a lot better that way.
ReplyDeleteBut it's very true — we need eachother. The book is saying that neither gender is useless, because for everything that the other does, the other gender is there to support it. That's the overall meaning of this book, not the sexist bias that everybody is talking about.
I don't think there is anything so wrong with this book. It does not in any way indicate that one is better then the other. It is only because of the lies this "modern age" is feeding us, that makes us feel that it is somehow more worthy to "build a house" then to "keep a house." I choose to believe that keeping house is the noblest profession a woman can choose.
ReplyDeleteAnd if you don't like the part about boys fixing things, try being a single mom without a guy around to fix things, and maybe you would agree.
Might look a bit old-fashioned, but my 5-year son gets exactly tought this stuff at pre-k. So what's the fuss about? Kick back!
ReplyDeleteI'm glad you're a girl... WE NEED EACH OTHER!!! ^_^
ReplyDelete"Anonymous said...
ReplyDeletewow to all you IDIOT anonymous ppl (im too lazy to actually make an acct) o.m.g.
ok this was written way back in the day where it was a socially acceptable practice to GENERALIZE. and the whole point of the book isn't to be SEXIST if any of you noticed, but that boys and girls, people in general are alot better off working together.
when's the last time you saw teams of GIRLS playing football on ESPN and MALE cheerleading squads cheering for them? (im sure there are rare exceptions, but not in the NHL, no sir!)
for the record i thought it was a cute childrens' book, despite a few generalizations."
*********************************
Uhm... way back in the day? It was 1970... I was born in 1971. I am only 38. That's not that long ago.
I grew up on a farm, and I hauled my share of wood for the fire, hay for the horses, and water for washing. I rode horses and dirt bikes and snowmobiles. I played with hot wheels cars and tinker toys. I ran 3 miles a day and played basketball.
I also played with dolls and learned to cook and sew and crochet from my mother, since I am a female. I don't think that's the way things really were in the time when I was a child. I think that was the way some people would have liked it to stay.
All I can say is I am glad I had the parents I had.
Oh, and... I would hope that players in the NHL are not playing football... =P
Chill yourselves, people. We are all aware that dudes can be nurses and all that fun stuff. Who cares? The point of the book was to give examples of how the male and female roles compliment each other, making both valid and necessary. Chill out. With all of the war and pestilence in the world why are we quibbling over one little book that really doesn't matter in the long run?
ReplyDeleteNewsflash: society of x years ago had different views on gender.
ReplyDeleteOMGWTFBBQ!
Seriously, it's not like the reanimated corpse of Saddam Hussein has just killed your children.
we'll... its art and art allows expression.
ReplyDeleteit is sexist in my opinion. But I hope there is a lot more than this to say u're glad to be a girl.
Thanks for posting! I for one am glad that men and women are different. That's not a BAD thing, that's great.
ReplyDeleteGenerally, men ARE stronger. That doesn't equate superior, it just equates more strength.
Women are generally much more tender. That doesn't equate emotional weakness, it equates an ability to comfort more easily.
Of course these traits are not set in stone, and neither are "roles" for the most part.
What is hard to understand for people who did not live in the age of extreme gender difference is that it all seemed quite real and natural at the time for most of the people. The lesson to learn is that human beings are the most adaptable creatures on the planet. They can be anything! And believe that is the right way to be. Understand that and you learn true tolerance and maybe a little humility.
ReplyDeleteThough I don't know whether my children will need this information anymore, I still would like to show them the basic man/woman routine that some may find obsolete. When Adam is able to give birth, is Eve still a threat to the human race?
ReplyDeleteGreat book I remember it well...
ReplyDeleteIf only the Fem Nazi's didn't screw things up so much we'd still have the perfect way of doing things. You say no? Woman want to do mans duties and they now refuse to do woman duties that's one of the reasons our children are fat and failing,Woman don't want to equal them want to be the boss.I don't care if woman do mens jobs as long as the still do their own.
Mr. p and others are so wrong Girls have given up their gender and try to be men. It will not work They have given up the care of their children to strangers, cause they want to be like a man and Work? Their is no such real word as marital rape or homophobic just make believe words used to hurt another person. If a woman gets so work up over boys build girls use What has a girl invented? w /o the help of a boy
ReplyDeleteI stumbled this and had to smile. The book is interesting. The pictures are cute and I thought most of it was pretty funny. I don't think any of it is "offensive" but that is because I have pretty mainstream parents and if I had read this book when I was a kid, my mom would have set me straight. I do like the end though because it is sweet.
ReplyDeleteWow. While I recognized that gender roles are indoctrined into youth the moment the doctor says "it's a boy/girl," it is astonishing the progressive reinforcements of apropos gender behavior youth receive. I think it's important to note that the two gender boxes are created by society, not biology. Nowadays, I hope people can move past what society sees "fit" for their gender - as it makes little sense.
ReplyDeletei fix things... but i can't cook... i wish i was a boy...
ReplyDeletetoo biased...
ReplyDeleteThe worst part about this whole thing is the comments here.
ReplyDeleteYou have the "damn right! And we should go back to this way!" people dogfighting with the "this is disgusting and a SLAP IN THE FACE!" people.
The book is well intentioned and the message is supposed to be that we need each other. But I'm thinking after reading the comments that I don't need anyone here.
GENDER SPECIFITY IS DEAD??? It's ignorant comments like that that make people have intolerance towards people who choose a different "alternative" lifestyle. For some people, and you may GASP at this, but sex and gender ARE the same thing. I know. Wild concept, huh?
ReplyDeleteI swear this is the same illustrator as "A Child's Guide to Freud". I didn't know there was more of this out there, but it makes me a little sadder, a little sicker.
ReplyDeleteThank you.
I don't see what's wrong with that. Bish, go make me a sammich.
ReplyDeleteif this pisses off one liberal then it is worth it
ReplyDeleteI'm glad I'm in 2009. That book is hilarious.
ReplyDeleteGuys, I don't see what you're so uppity about here.
ReplyDeleteThis book looks like it totally supports the Bible's position on these matters and the Bible is the ultimate authority on truth.
When was this published?
ReplyDeleteI think Ryan Vaughn's comment is the most reasonable one I've read.
ReplyDeleteThere's a whole lot of hating going on from both sides of this debate... but *don't* we need each other to even have this debate?
The only thing I feel comfortable disagreeing with is those of you who think this book is saying "we all need each other," because it doesn't say that. It shows A boy needing A girl. That's from reading *only* the text, not from interpreting it, projecting my values on it... there are plenty of things this book does NOT say, but working from what it DOES say is entirely different.
What if a boy needs another boy to invent things with, or to cook with? What if a girl needs another girl-doctor's opinion, or another woman to help her clean her house?
I am a girl and I need things fixed and would like to find a guy who would invent things to keep me comfortable -- is there one who would do that and never assume that I am his property?
ReplyDeletehey, I grew up when that was the way it was ... one time I asked my Dad why he and my Mom never encouraged me to go to college and he said 'Your Mom and I raised you to be a wife and mother." I was around 21 and thought I was talking to an alien. Needless to say I was a wife and mother and really good at it ... but did go to college but never did have a career. I'm an artist and pretty good at that too!
ReplyDeleteIt's either funny or it's not funny. This is funny and cute. It's a fun look into history. So many commenters just don't get it. Like little watchdogs of political correctness, they stand ever ready to attack anything that might threaten their perceived anti-dogmatic view. PC people are some of the most knee jerk dogmatic people around.
ReplyDeleteThe insecure pc programmed people out there who see this old book and don't have any historical context in which to interpret it feel threatened and insulted by it, and then they preach about how anything like this must be condemned and burned.
This is the way life should be and what He,Himself intended.
ReplyDeleteA-MAZE-ING. Love it. Love the post.
ReplyDeleteIt's funny to see people getting so up in arms about this. It's not exactly a shocker that people used to think this way, and did for many, many generations. Times have changed, but it doesn't mean we can't have a giggle at something like this. It does no-one any harm! Yes, it's sexist...but most people in this day and age don't think that way. It's purely a little nostalgic reminder of a different set of values.
ReplyDeleteread up on the guy who wrote this he sounded like a decent man and funny too. definitely done more for people than any one here.
ReplyDeleteThe people who are getting upset by this REALLY should not. This was written in 1970 (Amazon). People really have to get over themselves and realize that this was back then. It is not appalling. It is not gender biased or sexist. IT IS HOW IT WAS. SHUT UP and get over yourselves (I said it twice, I know.) Womens movement blah blah blah... suffrage...blah blah blah. Here's a GOOD LITTLE NUGGET OF INFO for you. If women didn't start working, there would be far less if any people unemployed. Half of the workforce would be taken out if women stopped working. No unemployment or maybe a little, in comparison to today's standards. It's a shame we (men) let you start working. Let that fester in your minds for a while. See how long it takes the Author to remove this TRUE comment
ReplyDeleteAnonymous:
ReplyDeleteI have actually only removed one comment since everyone started coming to read this-- it was a one-word comment, and it was vulgar. I see that there are a couple comments deleted from back when I actually posted this, months ago. These comments were from friends, and one deleted his comment because he accidentally posted anonymously, and another had a typo. Both re-commented.
If people want to comment to each other about how much they love/hate this, and how true/untrue or accurate/inaccurate it is, they can have at it. I don't care. It's actually kind of funny, because I made reference to this sort of response in the post.
The only other correction I would kind of like to make is, someone made a comment about it belonging to the University of Utah, and no wonder we're stuck in the past with gay-marriage (or something like that). The University of Utah is in Salt Lake City, which is actually quite liberal. The U of U is very gay-friendly, and has a ton of resources for GLBT people. And our library is pretty big, so I think the only people who ever see this book are people who are already looking for it. I would guess that FAR more people from other libraries request this book specifically than students happen upon it by chance. Anyway, that person's comment was inaccurate.
Thanks for your comments, everyone.
My 6 year old daughter looked at this with me and said, "I can eat AND cook!" We are not threatened by the fact that it used to be true that all doctors were men; we are simply aware that it's not the case any more! Cute book, all things considered, and like it or not, we all do still need each other!
ReplyDeleteI just found this and thought it was hilarious, and a wonderful satire.
ReplyDeleteI don't know if it's been mentioned, because there were too many comments to read them all, but for all of those bashing the author, he wasn't serious. It was written as a satire. Whitney Darrow Jr was a prominent cartoonist and satirist from the New York Times.
If you want to get mad at someone, get mad at the reviews that missed the humor, and pitched it as a book to help children discover their sex roles
Fun book post mate, good job. :))
ReplyDeleteI think there should be balance found between those times and the times now - it's both SAME ridiculous - now and then. Actually now much more for sure!
So many lame PC comments!
ReplyDeleteIf...
"Boys are just 'Boys'"
and
"Girls are just 'Girls'"
...then we cant compare or discuss anything for fear of being condemned as politically incorrect by hypocrites.
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL.
ReplyDeleteI'm curious to know upon what grounds you think someone could bring a lawsuit against a publisher for publishing something like this today. Thankfully, we live in a country that guarantees freedom of expression. So people are free to publish their ideas. Bookstores may not choose to carry a book like that, and schools could be sued if they taught something discriminatory -- I don't think this would fit that bill -- but it could be published. In fact, by putting it on the internet, you have published it. If the copyright holder decided to enforce that, you could be asked to take it down, but that's pretty much the extent of your liability. If they plan to republish it, they could sue for monetary damages. Otherwise, you are free to publish this book which you agree with. As a person who goes to a wonderful female doctor, I'm glad not everyone shares your views. But it's a free country and you are at liberty to express and publish them!
ReplyDeleteIt's honestly just so bizarre that anyone can comment on this saying "why are you so upset, these ideas don't exist anymore" when there are so many comments that say "this is how I'm raising my children" or "this is how humankind is intended to be" or "this is how god made us."
ReplyDeleteWhether you think gender roles are right or wrong, whether you think the book is cute and harmless or dangerous and offensive, intended or satirical, it's completely obvious from the responses to this entry that perspectives like the one in the book still exist.
I just don't understand how people can argue "no one thinks that way" right after someone has specifically stated a point of view that is EXACTLY THAT. Seriously, people.
LOLOLOLOL @ charlotte
ReplyDeletenewbs
Heh. I got taught this kind of stuff when I was a little girl. It turned me into a lesbian, and now I get to do whatever I want. I assure you it never would have occured to me to question my sexuality if boys and men treated girls and women like real human beings.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous said: "also very typical for the times back then. very ignorant."
ReplyDeleteI don't know that times have really changed all that much, unfortunately
I loved the book. I thought it was hilarious. I laughed at it the same way I laugh when I find other stereotypes or discrimination present in old times when we couldn't explain it in any other way. Those were different times and we didn't know better. Besides I took the book as a joke. It's funny.
ReplyDeleteBut then I started to read the comments and I got scared with some of them. They're being written now, right? Or am I supposed to see them as a joke too? There's still people in a supposed educated and advanced society who think like this? Seriously? People who can't see that if the ideas expressed in this book are to be taken serious, it's offensive and just plain ridiculous? With all the information there is. With all we've been learning and the evolutions society went through. WTF!? And it has nothing to do with being politically correct. It's about stop being ignorant 'cause there aren't many good excuses to be dumb any more. Which is why I find some of the comments frightening.
Also it's not about being more correct now than before. It's just that NOW we have more knowledge to help us better question and find out what's CORRECT and what's WRONG. The problem is that, according to some of these comments, some people aren't quite aware of this.
Anyway. I still love the post. Thanks for sharing!
My ex-wife would be appalled at this book. We spent our marriage fighting over who would be the 'dad' in the house.
ReplyDeleteInstead of focusing on the truest line: 'We need each other'.
My current GF and I more closely follow a 'traditional' model.
Way more harmony.
When it comes to lifestyles, there is no 'one size fits all'. The great news is that we can choose.
It may be hard to understand, but for some people, taking gender roles works best.
People should do what's best for them because it's best for them, not because of "gender roles". Anyone who follows gender roles because they think they are the correct roles are weak minded. I find it especially cute how some here claim the stereotypes are true.
ReplyDeleteEmily, you're a worker and a college girl; you're not the kind of girl this book describes and you're too old to believe in gender roles, especially if you're a Christian. Thanks for the humor, this book is pitifully hilarious.
I especially like "boys can eat; girls can cook."
ReplyDeleteDude, you wanna see a girl eat? BECAUSE I CAN EAT.
Haha hilarious, not just the book but the comments as well XD making a fuzz about a book :D sad sad :P but hell we don't live like this anymore so stop whining about the past =)
ReplyDeleteJust my view on all this :) no offense to anyone :)
http://cylinders.library.ucsb.edu/search.php?queryType=@attr+1=1020&num=1&start=1&query=cylinder1789
ReplyDeleteI expected to see "girls are damsels in distress" after "boys are heroes", at least that part made me glad.
ReplyDeletelol the people who keep saying that those are true generalizations, don't understand what is meant by "gender roles," and seem to think they magically sprung from a mystical well somewhere.
ReplyDeleteThis is infuriating.
ReplyDeleteI'm sure i'll find it hilarious in an hour or so, but initially...i don't even know what to say.
Hahaha, this was amusing. :)
ReplyDeleteThanks for sharing it.
To J. Bellerand
ReplyDeleteYou wrote:
"I can fully understand why women would find this piece of literature sexist."
Then you said:
"For the women who find this sexist: Last I checked motherhood is VERY important and MOST women would love to be a bride one day."
Seems like you don't understand after all.
great one!
ReplyDeleteI love how so many people are saying that the stereotypes offered in this book are true to life, since so many people fit into them. While I might take issue with the "so many", I would agree that many people subscribe to gender roles - because those are what they are taught. Maybe "educational" resources aren't quite as obvious as this book is at pushing women into certain pigeonholes and men into others, but the general idea that women are submissive, delicate, and need supervision is still out there. And no, the one page saying something about women being heroines does not make the rest of it okay.
ReplyDeleteI must send this to my sister-- SHE'S a DOCTOR, who used to date a male nurse... HA!
ReplyDeleteSo what's wrong with it.....
ReplyDeleteknow your role.
ReplyDeletebahahahahahaha! This made my day.
ReplyDeleteWow! Someone invented a time machine! I mean, just look: many of the comments on this webpage must have dropped out of the same era that this book did.
ReplyDeleteNow, I must steal the plans to the time machine, so I can destroy all of humanity. Mwuh-ha-ha-ha-ha!
Fools! All of you! Your demise is near!
Amusingly, if someone in 1870 were to see this book, they'd think it shockingly progressive. :) How could you possibly allow a woman out of the house during pregnancy, or let her hold a job of any kind?
ReplyDeletePart of progress is being able to see the mistakes of the past. If it turns out that we have gone too far (as one person posted), then progress will involve correcting OUR mistakes. If you think about it, the whole Green movement could be called going back to old ways- farming without pesticides, cleaning without chemicals, less processed foods, etc. are all things people did years ago. Of course, they didn't have a choice and now we do. I think progress is being able to look at the choices and choose what is best.
It amazes me when people say this stuff is nature. From my perspective it's just indoctrination. Except for some obvious observations like a women who gives birth is generally considered a mother, and a female who gets married is generally considered a bride, the other things presented in this book are things that are taught so how can one say it is nature or natural for people to fall into these roles when they have to be trained to act this way.
ReplyDelete"Boys can eat"
ReplyDelete"Girls can cook"
lol . . . as a women I've managed to stay alive for the last umpteen years by eating . . . go figure, that is a boy's role.