Book Description
America's leaders say the economy is strong and getting stronger. But ordinary Americans aren't buying it. They see what the rosy statistics hide: We are all struggling under the weight of terrifying economic instability. No matter how well educated and hard working we are, we know that the bottom can fall out at any moment. Meanwhile, the safety net that once protected us is fast unraveling. With retirement plans in growing jeopardy while health coverage erodes, more and more economic risk is shifting from government and business onto the fragile shoulders of the American family. In The Great Risk Shift, Jacob S. Hacker lays bare this unsettling new economic climate, showing how it has come about, what it is doing to our families, and how we can fight back. Behind this shift, he contends, is the Personal Responsibility Crusade, eagerly embraced by corporate leaders and Republican politicians who speak of a nirvana of economic empowerment, an "ownership society" in which Americans are free to choose. But as Hacker reveals, the result has been quite different: a harsh new world of economic insecurity, in which far too many Americans are free to lose. The book documents how two great pillars of economic security--the family and the workplace--guarantee far less financial stability than they once did. The final leg of economic support--the public and private benefits that workers and families get when economic disaster strikes--has dangerously eroded as political leaders and corporations increasingly cut back protections of our health care, our income security, and our retirement pensions. Hacker concludes by advocating an "insurance and opportunity society" that would safeguard economic security and expand economic opportunity, ensuring that all Americans have the basic financial security they need to reach for and achieve the American Dream. Jacob Hacker brings into focus as never before the pressures that the Great Risk Shift exerts on our pocketbooks and on our lives. Blending powerful human stories, big-picture analysis, and compelling ideas for reform, this remarkable volume will hit a nerve, serving as a rallying point in the vital struggle for economic security in an increasingly uncertain world.
Customer Reviews:
A book to avoid out of respect to fellow taxpayers.......2007-07-30
My book came, and I flipped through it to the last chapter--the REAL reason why I got this book.
While I knew this was a whiny tome about how people are being expected to shoulder more and more of their own social burdens, the title did contain a "how you can fight back" clause.
Well, the so-called "fighting back" involves exchanging one set of social programs for another, for example:
Medicare--of course, this would become Universal Health Care.
Retirement--instead of the accounts we have now, there'd be a Universal Savings account invented to take it's place. This account would cover any kind of savings you can imagine--retirement, college, etc., and would take the place of the ailing Social Security program.
Welfare--another magical account would be created to cover "insecurity": periods of unemployment, downshifting or pay cuts, high inflation, death of a working spouse, etc. to take the place of the existing food stamp, AFDC, unemployment, and/or disability. This would become Universal Insurance.
In short, the author proposes turning America into a highly-taxed, highly-coddled state like Denmark, where all is provided at taxpayer expense (up to 80% of people's pay), and only enough is left for housing, food, gas, and fun (like there'd be any fun on THAT plan!). Where would low-income earners come up with the money for THIS plan?
A quick calculation reveals that we couldn't even afford to pay rent on the 20% of our remaining income, let alone eat and commute, on our middle-class income with this plan.
Taxpayers would contribute to the new accounts, and the government would administer them just like it does now, except that your dollars would have your name on them. Personally, my dollars have my name on them now with my own private accounts, and I'm not paying for something I don't want or need.
There are solutions to these problems in existence now, but few are able to (or choose to) take advantage of them. This plan would take the choice out of the equation, and as far as I can see, doesn't account for the entrepreneurial spirit or self-employment.
If you prefer being self-sufficient, self-reliant, personally responsible, and to live below your means, then stay away from this book. There's nothing here for you except anger. This plan is clearly geared for the mindless sheep out there who want something for nothing, only this plan shows how dear the cost of that something would be--we're already paying up to 40% of our incomes in various taxes just to support people and government now!
What got us into trouble as a country is the fact that government borrows against assets--what's to say the government won't borrow against THESE assets as well? I don't want my accounts to be used as collateral by Uncle Sam.
Where oh where is the INCENTIVE to improve one's self, dear author? This is what got the "have-nots" into the position they're in now!! We've been leading horses to water for so long, they now expect us to bring it to them--and we STILL can't make them drink.
Rising Inequality and Anxiety in America.......2007-05-11
This past fall I heard Jacob Hacker speak about his work in The Great Risk Shift, and I just finally got around to reading the book. What I like about Hacker is that he not only critically examines complex political and societal issues, but he beautifully transforms his conceptions into practical solutions. He doesn't just ask, "What can we do?" He shows us how it can be done.
There are points I agree with in his book and other points I still have some reservations about, but his explanations and reasoning is thoroughly engaging nonetheless. For instance, he proposes a health coverage plan that reemphasizes national concerns about health care security. His proposal places more obligations on employers, which in my opinion, is a plausible expectation if the United States is not willing to adopt a universal health coverage plan. Hacker points out that a large contributor to the rise in bankruptcies is a result of healthcare costs. It's clear that health care insecurity poses great risks to countless Americans from all different placements of the socioeconomic spectrum.
I did face some apprehension and concern regarding his "universal insurance" proposal. This insurance would be designed to protect families in the event of a threatening change in finances and security - for instance a drastic pay decrease. Although I can agree that current job market conditions are very unstable (I myself have faced a drastic pay decrease formerly working in the business sector), I also feel as though we generally have a highly exaggerated sense of materialism and pretentious consumption patterns in America. How will these factors be accounted for when claiming instability and who is entitled to what? Is this where federal money should go when much larger issues regarding our nation's schools, health and extreme poverty are being neglected?
In the Great Risk Shift, Hacker identifies significant points of concern for Americans and the anxieties and rising inequality pressing citizens. With higher and higher concerns, these are questions we will be continually readdressing for years to come. This book proves Hacker always has amazing ideas and great things to say. We can contiunally look forward to his new approaches at examining significant social and political issues.
An attempt to ameliorate economic volatility.......2006-12-16
Although Jacob Hacker exaggerates the level of risk shift in the "Great Risk Shift", he makes some public policy proposals that deserve at least debate if not adoption.
Much of the book is a critique of what he calls "The Personal Responsibility Crusade", which he views as the vehicle for the shift. He tends to overreach at times. Much of the talk I have heard regarding "personal responsibility" was directed about teenage pregnancy or fathers who abandon those they impregnate and/or their children. He is right that "personal responsibility" is sometimes invoked as an argument against certain government social programs but those programs also have very real budgetary concerns that feed most of the efforts to constrain them.
Some of his arguments also seem peculiar. On page 66 Hacker quotes some corporate statements to outline what he calls the "new contract" for workers. "The only job security is a successful business" and "if loyalty means that this company will ignore poor performance, the loyalty is off the table". It is strange he would cite these as somehow new, when were they not true? Even under the "old contract", an unsuccessful business could not offer job security, nor was poor performance ignored.
Hacker makes a compelling case that there is more volatility in incomes (although incomes are generally higher) than in the past. His argument that this was essentially by design is a little less compelling. The three decades after World War II is his (and that of many others) reference point for security. That era can't be recreated. Fortunately, he doesn't resort to the easy (but unwise) option of endorsing trade protectionism, rather he recognizes the globalized economy is a fact of life and suggests a series of measures to mitigate the greater risk born by workers.
For health care coverage, he proposes something called "Medicare Plus", which is a variation on "pay or play" coverage proposals, which require employers to cover their employees or pay into the government plan that covered their employees and everyone outside of the employer market. It isn't really clear why this proposal is better than a universal government run system, other than Hacker seems to think the latter can't be enacted.
He also wants to enhance unemployment insurance and introduce "wage insurance" (for those who are displaced and take a new job that pays less than their previous job).
He also makes a proposal that appears to be novel, what he calls "universal insurance" that would cover families from an array of potential vicissitudes. Both this idea and wage insurance do not have a track record (at least not in the United States) and may not work as well in practice as they might in theory, but they at least deserve discussion.
Strong on describing the issue; Weak on solutions.......2006-11-20
"The Great Risk Shift" has much to recommend it. Hacker cogently explains the way risk has been transferred since the New Deal and Great Society eras (when health care, pensions and the like were seen as collective or corporate responsibility) to individuals. Hacker is at his best in describing the issue -- indemnity medical plans replaced with HMOs or medical savings accounts; defined benefit pension plans replaced with defined contribution plans or 401(k)s; secure, full-time jobs replaced with several part-time jobs cobbled together to make a less-than-full-time salary; broken families who cannot be relied upon for support.
Where the book falters, however, is in its view that every risk should be socialized, at least to some extent. When it comes to catastrophic health risks, many would agree that society should assist. I tend to agree with Hacker that one's medical insurance should not depend on one's employer: some businesses cannot afford adequate insurance for their employees. Likewise, adequate health insurance cannot always be purchased in the market: insurance companies "cherry pick" the healthiest candidates. Thus, Hacker has convinced me that we need some sort of baseline national health insurance, at least for significant or catastrophic illnesses (after all, we have something like it today, as those with health insurance subsidize the emergency room visits of those without it). However, we need to beware of a system with Canada-style rigidity or one which leaves no room for innovations.
Fewer would want to subsidize pensions, however, and Hacker fails to provide a real solution. The problem with defined contribution plans is not that they cannot work, but that they must be adequately funded. They can work if employers contribute enough to them so that employees can have a real pension when they retire. Likewise, individuals should be allowed to put greater amounts of pre-tax income into 401(k)s, and companies should be able to match a greater amount dollar-for-dollar. (This is the type of free-market solution that Hacker does not favor, as he believes individuals are not always able to manage their own 401(k) money.) In any event, Hacker provides no advice for those who find themselves in a defined contribution plan, under the present rules, other than "save more and stop spending on luxuries." As for broken families, that is a trend that predates "the risk shift" and will not be solved by the government. Although Hacker wants more risks to be socialized, it is important to ask what this will cost, and whether we will have a Eurpoean-style economy at the end of it.
Hacker has correctly identified the trend to shift risk from government and corporations to individuals. The question is whether the solutions he suggests will be appropriate and cost-effective. The jury is still out.
Unchallenged Assumptions.......2006-11-16
From his comfortable tenure at Yale, Jacob Hacker offers us an analysis of where things have gone wrong with the American economic system. He identifies three traditional pillars of economic security:
1. The family
2. The workplace
3. Public and private benefits
The first two are under siege. The third one is at risk. Hacker argues that the erosion of that third one - public and private benefits - is not inevitable.
Fair enough. But let's start with the family. The decrease in the stability of the family unit over the years didn't just happen. Victims of the Jerry Springerization of the family - as a mainstream example of how far things have gone askew - have no one to blame but themselves. The freedom to treat family relationships as a disposable commodity is bound to come with some trade-offs. Economic security is one of them. While the erosion of family bonds has been widespread, it is not inevitable either.
As for the other two pillars, they revolve around the ability of commerce to fund them. More corporate profits means more tax revenues - and at least the possibility of more jobs. Without corporate profits, we have no corporations to bash, no corporate profits to tax, and no jobs or benefits, public or private.
Yes, traditional jobs are under siege and traditional benefit programs are morphing. Hacker says we have choices. Yes, we do.
We could, as a society, opt to have more stable jobs, even in an era of increasingly worldwide competition. This is a valid choice. Many parts of Europe have opted for lower overall standards of living in exchange for greater job security and more leisure. Many EU citizens appear willing to tolerate double-digit long-term unemployment rates and higher tax rates in exchange for generous social safety nets.
Of course, we in America have always been looking for the free lunch. Look at U.S. savings rates, which are negative. A critical examination across all socioeconomic classes suggests that the personal saving deficit may have more to do with an insatiable appetite for big-screen televisions, $90 a month cable services, frequent restaurant dining, coiffed hair and acrylic nails, rather than for prudent expenditures on basics like food and shelter.
But by all means, we should welcome Mr. Hacker's debate. It will be useful to make explicit the trade-offs that come to light in the process.
Book Description
Not so far back in American history the ideal father was a reliable breadwinner and stern disciplinarian who remained otherwise aloof from day-to-day child rearing duties. But the reality of fatherhood has always been more dynamic than the ideal, and the father's influence on a child's social, emotional, and intellectual development is as profound as it is complex. Over the past two decades, an explosion of research has transformed our understanding of both historical archetypes and contemporary relationships between father and child.
In this third edition of Dr. Michael Lamb's remarkable Role of the Father in Child Development, a team of leading experts provides a complete and up-to-date summary of the current scholarship on fathers and fatherhood, father-child relationships, and the influence of the father on the development of the child. This edition is characterized by a broader view of the social context within which these relationships take place, including ethnicity, marital quality, and the operation of particular ideals of fatherhood.
The book begins with an overview of the father's role, a look at paternal imagery in psychology and religion, and a historical review of the changing ideals of fatherhood. This is followed by an examination of the marital context in which fatherhood conventionally takes place and the different levels, sources, and consequences of paternal involvement with the child. The next four chapters examine the father-child relationship at different stages of the child's development and, taken together, constitute a study in the evolution of this relationship and its effects (both direct and indirect) on child development. The book concludes with explorations of nonconventional or particularly difficult relationships, including those experienced by divorced fathers, stepfathers, gay fathers, adolescent fathers, abusive fathers, and fathers of children with disabilities.
For developmental, family, and clinical psychologists, child psychiatrists, researchers, social workers, and anyone involved in developmental psychology or child custody issues, this book offers rich detail, authoritative analysis, and profound insight into one of the most important relationships that any child will ever have.
". . . provides a much-needed resource for the student and the serious researcher." —Child Development Abstracts and Bibliography
". . . a much-welcomed addition to an emerging literature on the father's contribution to child development . . . an important book deserving a place on the shelves of developmental psychologists." —Contemporary Psychology
". . . a worthwhile investment for all interested in the study of the family and in the current thinking and knowledge about paternal contributions to socialization and personality development." —Child Development Abstracts and Bibliography
"Lamb . . . has done a fine job, both of integrating major perspectives on the role of the father in child development and of taking a critical look at some of the classic literature in the area." —Joy Osofsky, Contemporary Psychology
Download Description
This new edition brings together contributions from a variety of experts in the field to report on the most recent findings in the field. New material reflects advancements in the field, including material on cross-cultural issues of fathering and global fatherhood (e.g. fathers in industrialized vs. non-industrialized countries).
Customer Reviews:
A single-source reference for the most recent findings.......2004-08-09
A single-source reference for the most recent findings and beliefs related to fathers and fatherhood. It helps mental health professionals bridge scientific theories to application and practice that teach fathers how to positively influence their children's development. This book is definitely an excellent resource for the serious researcher.
Customer Reviews:
Which translation of de Tocqueville's "Democracy in America"?.......2007-08-31
I'd like to learn which translation of Alexis de Tocqueville's "Democracy in America" Sarah Pride read in making reference to and commenting upon it in her review of June 1, 2004 entitled: The real story of Mary Pride.
I personally cannot rate this item right now, for I have not yet read it, but I'm buying this book largely because of your review, Sarah, which I thought was very helpful.
Since I apparently cannot leave the item unrated (for Amazon rejects my review without a rating), I shall rate it positively in anticipation that it will match my evaluation of the other books I've read by Mary Pride.
A little too much Pride.......2007-07-23
Firstly, I think any woman who speaks of the blessing of being a mother and wife is to be praised. Many who look at a SAHM (stay-at-home-mom) automatically think of dirty dishes and aprons, not realizing how wonderful it is to raise children and be a life-partner to a man in Christ. Having said this, Mary Pride's book is, unfortunetly, not just filled with praises of the home, but with harsh condemnations of women who don't work at home and people who don't share her often rigid views.
I once heard a person describe another book as "so conservative, it left little room for personality". While I of course respect conservatives and know they have personalities, I think this description fits Mary Pride's book perfectly. To call Pride merely conservative is an understatement; she's really closer to puritanical, in both beliefs and tone. Pride is not only interested in women working at home, but basically doing everything at home: home births, home schooling, you name it. Her extremely old-fashioned mindset is by no means right for everyone, and her extremely judgemental tone of women who dare to work outside the home is often hard to swallow.
Pride's harsh and rather compassionless tone reached its peak when she spoke of family planning. According to her, "Family planning is the mother of abortion." I won't mince words here; that is honestly one of the biggest crocks I've ever read, not to mention the most offensive. How Pride dares to compare the attempt to manage reproduction to the removal of an embryo (or worse, a half-formed baby) is beyond me. It's my opinion that if a person, especially a Christian, is not willing to really consider the position of other people, she has no business writing a book. What of women who have health problems, or God forbid would like to stop having children after giving birth to and raising six? Neither Pride nor anyone else, man or woman, has the right to tell them what they should do! A truly humble woman should be willing to admit that her lifestyle doesn't work for everyone and that people don't appreciate being condescended to, especially with such outrageous overgeneralization and faulty comparisons.
Pride doesn't hold back on giving her one-track opinion on anything, including sex. While unkinky sex (the type that Pride approves of) may be very enjoyable, I agree completely with the woman who said that what people do in their bedrooms is their business and their choice. As long as it's not sadistic, I believe married people have the right to do whatever pleases them without any outside judgement. Frankly, I have no wish whatsoever to know what Pride does in her own bedroom, anymore than I care to have her opinion on what's appropriate.
For a woman who claims her book is the way "Back to reality", Pride seems to have little knowledge of what goes on in the real world. Her definition of reality seems to be stuck in a Victorian or Puritanical society in which women were not allowed to do much more than bear children whether they liked it or not. Sometimes women HAVE to work outside the home and even if they do this by choice instead of necessity, it doesn't mean their children are automatically neglected or loved any less. This may shock Pride and her ilk, but there is more than way to make a family work and a woman's role is not set in stone. Whatever you do, do in the name of God and the rest will follow.
If you're a burned out woman who forgets what worth the home has, this book may help you. However, if you're a staunch family planner or have had an abortion in the past, I don't recommend you read this, as Pride's harsh tone will probably do little to help you.
A Must-Read for Christian Women.......2005-11-27
This book should be required reading for every Christian woman. Mrs. Pride exposes the goals of the feminist movement and points out how many Christian women are furthering those goals. She demonstrates how our current (anti-Biblical) societal norms are destructive to family, and thus to society. Mrs. Pride's claims are well-documented. If you want to remain complacently in your comfort zone, fitting neatly into the world, then leave this book on the shelf. If, on the other hand, your desire is to please God and bring glory to the Saviour by being "not conformed to this world," then let this text transform your mind by its application of Scripture.
ugh.......2005-01-12
my my...not one but TWO family reviews on Amazon. I always get suspicious when amidst many negative to average reviews one finds a glowing review clearly written by family members or people known to have very close ties to the author. it is good that Ms Prides children think so highly of her. HOWEVER that does not erase the fact that her book is loaded with error. she takes a basic fact: she discovered that happiness was not a fruit of radical feminism. then she does such a complete 180. she makes many many things that are not absolutes by any means into absolutes. she turns things that are nothing more than personal choice (although dont EVEN get me going on home birth...as I personally know someone whose life was shattered by a home birth gone wrong I just cringe to see someone spiritualize it as "Gods way") into major issues that I doubt that god even cares about (although Satan sure loves the strife stirred up whenever a new "rule" is created in Christendom to entrap Gods followers). re: the full quiver mindset. I have researched it rather thoroughly and I think they make some huge leaps, making scripture say something is not. I have heard the "children are blessings and who would refuse Gods blessings" so many times I could scream. yet the argument could go both ways: many people DO refuse things that could be blessings, taht are stated in scripture to be blessings because int heir situation right now it wouldnt be a blessing. I have heard the "so and so wouldnt be here if their parents hadnt used birth control argument". well, two words for that: Ethel Waters, the gospel singer concieved by rape. Gods ways are beyond our ways and He can bring good out of bad. if the Wesleys would not be here if Susannah used birth control, Ethel Waters would not be here if it were not for the act of rape. and I dont see anyone calling rape good even if good came out of it.....ditto just about any adopted kid...to follow this line of reasoning of the Prides etc...you would have to say that God wanted unmarried parents to fornicate so that they would bring so and so into the world....some things are just beyond our understanding and disecction and I think thats the way God wants it. the church history argument doesnt cut it because there are many things, anti semitism springs to mind, that have had much support in church history that are absolute lies when argued biblically. much of this radical lifestyle that not just Ms Pride but others like her promote is reaction to the culture rather than real scriptural argument. it is said you can prove anything from the bible and this is no exeption. as for the working mother issue: until the industrial revolution the whole idea of "jobs" for male OR female was different. out of neccessity there was a clear division of labor. somewhere in there careerism for both men AND women assumed a very different meaning than providing for their families. two hundred years ago people didnt even think about their work being stimulating or using their gifts. everyone did hard heavy manual grunt work whether in or out of the home. except for a handful of elitist intellectuals. who would covet the others role? no one, I would bet. unless you escape to join the amish or soemthing (an ideal held by a lot of these types..they seem to worship the amish and groups like them) you cannot escape that our world operates very differently than that of two hundred years ago. it is key to remember that both then and now our world is fallen...trying to go back and immitate another time and place wil not erase the fallenness that permeates society. our world has not and never will be a perfect reflection of Gods kingdom. bringing us to working moms: there were no "outside the home working moms" two hundred years ago BUT these mothers lives were most certainly not filled with child nurturing activities day in and day out. much of it was hard manual labor. children were granted a freedom to wander around and do thier own thing in a way that would make most parents today cringe. I am not saying bad or good: it just was. but the point is that their mothers days were not filled iwth "mothering", they were too busy doing laundry by hand, growing food, making bread from very scratch, making all their clothes etc etc. even todays homestead movement glorifies this and does a few of these things in a dilettantish way to express thier disdain for modern society but the reality is these peoples lives were harder than any person living in todays america can even imagine. Ms Pride attempts to "fix" modern family ills by returning to a simpler (or so she sees) time then filling in the blanks with proof texted scripture to try and prove her point. she gets incredibly legalistic with this working at home vs at a job business. by her standards if say, a woman was a graphic designer and had her business in her home she would be doing it "gods way", but if she had to rent a separate office space and hire a babysitter or (God forbid) swing shift with her husband then she would be rebelling against God. this reminds me of people debating around about hem lenght nad just "how much" makeup God has a problem with. the whole working mother debate really should hinge on where someoens heart is...what is their priority>(something I might add goes for men as well as women: workaholism is very detrimental) i have seen this type of mindset as Ms Pride has encourage a man to put himself in an early grave (not to mention have nothing to do with his kids but provide a paycheck) all so that the wife doesnt "have to work"; unless of cousre her skills run towards hawking tupperware or discovery toys. I have seen, as a fruit of this type of thinking people getting incredibly legalistic over what exactly constitutes a working mother in rebellion and what constitutes an obedient stay at home wife. somehow I dont think htis is what god had in mind. I might echo here too reviewers who find Ms PRides whole tone to be angry, condescending and nasty towards those who dont see things the way she does. it is sadly something I have found to be very very common among people who hold her viewpoints. and for my final complaints about making lifestyle choices which apparently worked for her and her family out to be Gods truth for all I have two words: Andrea Yates. I have to wonder if along with all the happy folks coming up to the Prides at homeschool conventions they can also count Russell and Andrea among those who can say that thier lives were irrevocably influenced by Mary's writings.
Did Mary hurt the feminists' feelings?.......2004-12-23
Some people are only "open-minded" when it comes to views that mesh with their worldview. That's what's going on in some of the previous reviews. For my part, I agree with the message that Mary Pride is teaching, and I admire that she's been able to accomplish what she has accomplished while performing her Biblically-defined duties as a wife and mother.
I think that feminism rejects Biblical standards and, as a result, has left many ruined lives in its wake. "Families maintained by women with no husband present increased three times as fast as married-couple families in the past 10 years." This is occurring as "Between 1994 and 2002 the number of felony convictions increased 20% in State courts." Tell me that changes in our family structure have not brought about negative results!
I am a 33 year old reformed feminist. I'm a college graduate, like some feminist reviewer here bragged about being. In fact, I graduated summa cum laude. Since I've figured out that I need to adopt God's chosen role for me, I've married and become a SAHM. And I've never been happier, even when I was earning a large annual income.
I'm a little confused over statements that women have always worked outside the home. On what planet? "Before the First World War, a non-working wife was the norm as wives devoted themselves to the comfort of husbands and children." "Women working in the 1800's were virtually unheard of".
I am grateful for women like Mary Pride, who tell it like they see it. I don't expect to agree with everything she says, and feel that if you read a book expecting it to affirm your values, then maybe you should only read books written by yourself? Basically, this woman is giving her viewpoint on a subject that can get quite touchy, and she's being denigrated by people who don't agree with her viewpoint. Never mind that it's well-argued and totally affirmed by what I've read in the Bible.
I think that's where the problem is! People who have rejected Biblical principles are reading this book expecting its opinions confirm their worldview. Not possible, I'm afraid. It boils down to this: You think that feminism has enabled you to choose to stay home with your kids. I (and I think Mrs. Pride) believe that I am able to stay with my daughter DESPITE what feminism tells me I should want. Sorry, but my husband is the only one acting like a man in this household, and that's how my daughter and I like it.
Book Description
Beloved by readers and critics nationwide, The Woman at the Washington Zoo collects Marjorie Williams's brilliant writings-from sharp political profiles to witty commentary on gender and family life to tender, intensely personal explorations of illness and loss. A Washington Post columnist and contributing editor at Vanity Fair, Marjorie wrote political portraits that came to be considered the final word on the capital's most powerful figures. She also wrote essays for Slate, the Post's op-ed page and other publications that extended beyond politics to tackle topics at once broader and more intimate, including "Hit by Lightning," Williams's memoir of her battle against fourth-stage liver cancer. In "The Alchemist" Williams paints a heartbreaking portrait of her own mother at middle age that follows a winding path from the culinary arts to love, infidelity, admiration, and sorrow. Throughout the book Williams writes with a blend of candor, humor, and grace that was uniquely her own. This splendid collection provides a window into Washington's political elite, the messy lives that the rest of us lead, and-perhaps most powerfully-Williams herself.
Customer Reviews:
4.5 stars: the best are very, very good.......2007-05-14
I used to read Marjorie Williams in the Washington Post, and was reminded of her work when her exceptionally moving essay "Hit by Lightning" was in a "best of" book by multiple authors. It was so good that I simply had to read this collection of only her work.
The finest essays and profiles here are wonderful. The writing is outstanding, and ranges from great insight to humor and sadness and to the biting remark that takes down somebody famous a notch or two.
My favorites were (besides "Hit by Lightning"):
- "The Alchemist", a previously unpublished profile of her mother. What an exploration of a mother's relationship to her daughter and (presumably) perceptive view of her mother's life!
- "Scenes from a Marriage" - oh, my, how it drills into the relationship between Clinton and Gore, after the 2004 election and back into their time in office. This essay was justifiably well-known.
- "Bill Clinton, Feminist" - Ms. Williams shreds the feminists who defended President Clinton in his sexual escapades, while disregarding the women involved. She doesn't even break a sweat. Brutal and delightful reading.
- "The Halloween of My Dreams" - her final column, about her daughter's Halloween, the last Halloween Ms. Williams would see.
- The profiles of Jeb Bush and Barbara Bush, both of which offered fresh insights and information.
- Of the columns, many of which are first rate, I particularly liked the one on Princess Diana's death (I'm not sure why, to be honest) and one on assisted suicide.
The book actually got off to a slow start for me. The first two profiles were relatively dated and uninteresting, and the third, on Richard Darman, was wonderfully crafted, but I found myself not that curious about someone who moved rapidly into footnote status. However, Darman's profile had one of the best lines in the entire book: "As always, the vapor of self-certainty leaks off him like rocket fuel". Didn't these people know who they were up against in Marjorie Williams?
The short columns included are mostly very good, yet they also suffer from the usual fate of newspaper columns, in that they don't age that well, as the topic in hand often quickly becomes old news. Ms. Williams is far from alone in that fate, of course, so some of these pieces serve as a reminder of past news to reconsider with hindsight and contemplate what has happened since.
Learned to read.......2007-05-13
This book made me realize how painful it could be to at sometimes for the lack of a better word be a " dubmass " It took me a lot of brushing up on my reading skills to fully appreceiate this book and it was very insightfull just as the other books that were recomened to me to be read if I liked this one were. It also taught me that caring=sharing which can cause mass confusion sometimes to people who need to improve there reading skills which in turn = understanding and then ultimatly joy and happiness for many years to come. However this just could be a hopeful thought, but I would like to think it holds true for all readers especially the ones that would enjoy reading A year of Magical Thinking, where I think it says something about country boys being of big hearts are stubborn and rarely give up on anything.
Sharp and sassy, sweet and sentimental--wonderful stories.......2007-03-09
No, this isn't about the typical zoon--but about the "Zoo" that is Washington, D.C.
Marjorie Williams, a journalist for the Washington Post, had a sense of unrelenting refusal to deal with just the surface reality--but find the truth beneath.
Sitting here in the Midwest, some of these stories, some of the people are not players we hear about every day, but some were.
Marjorie and Tim Noah (Senior writer for Slate) were married in 1990. In 2001, happy and healthy, Marjorie discovered a lump in her lower abdomen and after much effort, died in 2005 from liver cancer at the age of 47. Tim has selected what he feels are her most revealing columns written about politicians, the shakers and movers of Washington's social ad business life, and about her family.
As an outsider I enjoyed reading about insiders like Ambassador Lucky Roosevelt and her long marriage, and other characters that made good reading.
Jennifer Senior, New York Times Book Review said, "Williams was a crowbar, prying great quotes from her sources, and she found herself face to face with rather intimate details of their life."
So true, whether she was writing about Bill and Hillary, the couple that always give us something to talk about, her own illness, her mother's illness, or her children--her observations were always sharp and often sweet.
Some of my favorites were her most personal stories, like The Cat Race about how she was "going to raise her children," that is, until she actually had children. This felt very familiar.
The Art of Fake (and Useful) Apology, (in the news again as I write this) used by politicians reminds us that this happens far too often.
With another Presidential campaign heating up, Williams takes us back to 1992 when Al Gore was running for President (without hitching his star to Clinton). Her article, "Scenes from a Marriage" is about that time, and the end of that "marriage" and the not-too-obvious divorce of Clinton and Gore.
Sadly the world will never again read about current events from her.
Armchair Interviews says: This book was a New York Times Bestseller.
Could not put it down.......2006-09-29
Really two books. One, a series of pieces about inside Washington stories, often with characters who are largely off stage but important in how things get done in the seat of empire. Rather than the usual insider's view, Ms. Williams has an extraordinarily keen eye for seeing what is there for all to see, perhaps along the lines of I.F. Stone's insistence on using only attributed sources. The second book is an account of her diagnosis and subsequent experiences with an ultimately fatal cancer, its impact on her life, outlook, work, as well and an account of her medical care.
Touching without being Treacly.......2006-09-16
I bought this book primarily because I enjoy memoir and it was represented in the media as a collection of personal essays by a woman who fought what was eventually a losing battle with cancer.
In fact, the personal essays comprise the smaller part of this collection. Most pieces are in-depth political commentary or profiles of Washington, D.C. personalities. I'm not interested in that subject matter at all.
To correct one of the other reviewers, this collection was compiled after Williams' death by her husband. It contains material that she apparently never intended to publish. But long-time fans of Williams should not fault *her* for what was and was not included in the book, since these decisions were made posthumously.
Williams was a gifted writer -- insightful, precise, and painfully honest. I enjoyed the personal essays immensely (particularly the piece about her complex relationship with her mother) and even found myself reading and enjoying the political essays.
Book Description
Co-winner of the American Political Science Association's 1990 Victoria Schuck Award, given for the best book(s) published in 1989 on women and politics, this is the first feminist critique of modern political theory that in shows why and how in order to include all of us, theories of justice need to apply their standards to the family itself.
Customer Reviews:
One of the most influential books i've read.......2004-05-30
A great thought provoking and stimulating work of deconstructing the division of labor between the sexes. Includes sound arguments and should be a required text in college to expose more individuals to the harmful effects of inequality on women, children, and men.
A Rethinking of Justice.......2003-04-30
Okin is powerful because she extends considerations of justice and civic equality to women and the family in ways that classical and modern political philosphers have not. However, in doing so, she saves and extracts vital elements of these patriarchal theories and traditions to expose their radical potential.
Disappointing.......2002-12-19
This book addresses the inequality of men and women, and there is a problem, but it fails in many respects. First, I find her uses of sources suspect because of her treatment of Homer and the Greek authors. In the Odyessy, Odysseus' desire is to return to hearth, home, and family. Only on Circe's isle did he stay willingly, and then, through bewitching. Most of the female characters are portrayed in a kind light, whatever their flaws. This is so much so that many have thought it written by a woman! However, in her version, Odysseus stayed away deliberately after the Trojan war. This is but one example. The Greeks were hardly models to follow for cherishing women (quite the opposite), but since there are other titles from which she could make her case, and she spends a considerable amount of her Greek time here, it tells me that despite her statements, she's never read most of them and certainly not the Odyessy. Since I am convinced that she's never read the book, or that if she has, she read her personal views into the text in a way that is inexcusable, I find her usage of all sources suspect.
My second problem is that her proposed solution to inequality undermines the same personal freedoms she wants. If the government steps in and dictates personal life and finances to the degree she proposes, the people are not living in a free society, but a dictatorship. For instance, should the government step in on a family's paycheck and dictate how it is divided between members of the household? Not if one believes in private property. Her proposal to bring freedom for women brings instead a tyrannical government without personal freedoms.
Equality between men and women is a laudable goal, but one must look elsewhere for the solution. The approach proposed in the book is counterproductive, and being given in the name of freedom and justice, hypocritical. Before the reader assumes that I'm just a sexist, know that I believe in the absolute equality of men and women in thought and the workplace and have stood for it on many occasions. However due to the nature of this book's propositions, I will oppose them with the same force wiith which Bush wants an immoral war with Iraq.
Book Description
Designed specifically for undergraduate students, Issues in Intimate Violence provides a comprehensive and accessible anthology that prepares the foundation for understanding a wide range of violence that commonly occurs in families and between intimates. This collection of 22 scholarly yet readable chapters represents a variety of disciplines from both a theoretical and an applied approach. Many articles offer a feminist perspective that addresses the gendered nature of violence and the consequences of power inequality in our society. Created to make learning about intimate violence an accessible and cohesive process, each section is introduced by editor Raquel Kennedy Bergen and concludes with discussion questions.
A variety of violence topics are included:
- Violence in heterosexual dating relationships
- Violence in gay and lesbian relationships
- Acquaintance rape
- Wife abuse and wife rape
- Elder abuse
While primarily directed to undergraduate students, this book is also well-suited for similar courses at the graduate level and will appeal to anyone working with survivors of intimate violence as well as the interested lay reader.
Book Description
In this exciting new book John Hamel, author of the ground-breaking Gender-Inclusive Treatment of Intimate Partner Abuse, and Tonya Nicholls go beyond the traditional intervention theories of domestic violence practiced today Offering alternative, unbiased and sometimes controversial views, theories, and current research, they, along with renowned contributors in the field, provide new treatment options that encompass a wide range of gender dynamics. Here are just some of the key principles covered:
* Interventions Should Be Based on a Thorough Unbiased Assessment
* Victim/Perpetrator Distinctions are Overstated, and Much Partner Abuse is Mutual
* Regardlss of Perpetrator Gender, Child Witnesses to Partner Abuse are Adversely Affected, and are at Risk for Perpetrating Partner Abuse as Adults This new gender-inclusive approach to assessment and intervention provides a significant departure from traditional paradigms of domestic violence, and offers a much-needed awareness to effectively prevent violence in our communities today and for future generations.
Customer Reviews:
Breaks The Glass Ceiling On DV Facts.......2007-01-07
There have been many chapters written on domestic and family violence and this book has 28 of the best that have ever been written on the subject. With its broad array of respected contributing authors from such a diverse range of experience it should be required reading for judges, attorneys, mediators and others who work in the field of family and juvenile law. This book is also a must read for any elected official, policy maker and their staff who are making decisions on legislation related to domestic violence policy and training. This book finally breaks the glass ceiling on the subject. I give it a solid 5 stars.
Michael Robinson
Policy Consultant & Lobbyist
Family & Juvenile Law Issues
Sacramento, CA
truth from the best in the BIZ.......2006-12-13
I facilate domestic violence groups.. This is the most comprehensive, up- to-date resource from the best and brightest minds in the field. I so appreciate having all this information in one book.
Very good reference book.......2006-12-11
A very helpful reference book useful for inclusive domestic violence treatment and counseling. It moves us from the former gender-divisive shame/blame approach to much more effective methods.
Customer Reviews:
Scientific analysis.......2002-10-21
Anthro major? You might be surprised how much and how many tools come from Engels, as in Marx and Engels of Capital fame. The same analytical tools they applied to economics (That are used every day) here are applied to anthropological study of the basis of our present day social institutions.
Relevant today, as much as for info as for seeing where the ideas discussed lead to the arguments and theories of today.
Book Description
When the Bolsheviks came to power in 1917, they believed that under socialism the family would "wither-away." They envisioned a society in which communal dining halls, daycare centers, and public laundries would replace the unpaid labor of women in the home. Yet by 1936 legislation designed to liberate women from their legal and economic dependence had given way to increasingly conservative solutions aimed at strengthening traditional family ties and women's reproductive role. This book explains the reversal, focusing on how women, peasants, and orphans responded to Bolshevik attempts to remake the family, and how their opinions and experiences in turn were used by the state to meet its own needs.
Customer Reviews:
great book.......2007-07-15
This book is absolutely great. I had a few problems with my shipement but Amazon Custom Service people were very nice to solve them.
Regards,
Celeste Murillo
Two thumbs up!.......2001-09-06
The book provided an excellent insight as to the troubles facing women, children and families following he Bolshevik revolution. The book is relevant for anyone studying gender issues in the early 20th century as well as those interested in Russian history. The book is extremely easy to read; however, it does at times get bogged down in overuse of statistical data. The data fully supports the author's conclusions, but at times the smooth flow of the book is interrupted by too many examples. Overall, the book was extremely easy to read and provided good historical and analytical coverage of the problems facing women, children and families in post-revolutionary Russia.
Book Description
In this provocative new work, R. Claire Snyder argues that the fundamental principles of American democracy not only allow but require the legalization of same-sex marriage. In addition to explaining the theoretical issues at stake, the book provides a short history of marriage, disentangling its interpersonal, communal, religious and civil components.
Books:
- The Halloween Handbook: 447 Costumes
- The Hello, Goodbye Window
- The Homeowner's Guide to Renewable Energy: Achieving Energy Independence Through Solar, Wind, Biomass And Hydropower (Mother Earth News Wiser Living)
- The Instinct to Heal: Curing Depression, Anxiety and Stress Without Drugs and Without Talk Therapy
- The Little Mouse, the Red Ripe Strawberry, and the Big Hungry Bear (Child's Play Library)
- The Measure of a Man: A Spiritual Autobiography (Oprah's Book Club)
- The Mistress's Daughter: A Memoir
- The New Dad's Survival Guide: Man-to-Man Advice for First-Time Fathers
- The Peacegiver: How Christ Offers to Heal Hearts and Homes
- The Places That Scare You: A Guide to Fearlessness in Difficult Times
Books Index
Books Home
Recommended Books
- Inequality and Prosperity: Social Europe Vs. Liberal America
- A Long Way Gone: Memoirs of a Boy Soldier
- Pass it On: A Practical Approach to the Fears and Facts of Planning Your Estate
- The King's Gambit
- The Edgar Online Guide to Decoding Financial Statements: Tips, Tools, and Techniques for Becoming a
- Apples from the Desert: Selected Stories
- Wave-Swept Shore: The Rigors of Life on a Rocky Coast
- PH Fed Tax 01: Indiv. Student
- Spatial Divisions of Labor: Social Structures and the Geography of Production
- Collins Gem Animals of the World
Economic Conditions
| Economics
| Business & Investing
| Subjects
| Books
The Disposable American: Layoffs and Their Consequences
Off Center: The Republican Revolution and the Erosion of American Democracy; With a new Afterword
The Divided Welfare State: The Battle over Public and Private Social Benefits in the United States
All Together Now: Common Sense for a Fair Economy (BK Currents)
The Global Class War: How America's Bipartisan Elite Lost Our Future - and What It Will Take to Win It Back
