Articles & Letters
 
Letter rebutting Nina Auerbach's review of Who Stole Feminism? by Christina Hoff Sommers
The New York Times Book Review, July 3, 1994

As the membership director of the National Organization for Men, I think The New York Times Book Review used poor judgment in assigning Nina Auerbach to review Who Stole Feminism? The editors were guaranteed a skewed result by choosing someone who is obviously on the other side of the feminist spectrum. Ad hominem remarks--"Christina Hoff Sommers is a wallflower at feminist conferences. In revenge, she attends them obsessively"; "I suspect that the John M. Olin Foundation, which helped finance this book, was...generous, though one wonders why it didn't find a less muddled writer to feed"--expose a reviewer with an adverse agenda. Readers of the Book Review need impartial appraisals, not passionate and amateurish attacks.

Realizing that feminism cannot stand even constructive criticism and that feminist leaders promoting fraudulent claims are exposed by the book, I suspect that the review could additionally have been Ms. Auerbach's attempt at damage control.

The New York Times should not assign books to partisan reviewers who are too ideologically or emotionally involved with the subject matter to give an objective opinion.

Anthony Nazzaro 

Return to Articles and Letters page

Printer-Friendly Version