Started but couldn’t get into this book. Maybe I will revisit when my boys are older.

As a mother of three boys, I needed a reminder that boys really are a different species and that many of my worries about my boys are actually just the boys acting like boys. Biggest takeaways: boys don't hear as well as girls and actually have an ear that is stronger than another, boys need many strong role models, not just their father, and that there is a constant tension where boys need gradual independence as they grow older.

Having three girls and only one boy, I purchased this book to help me better understand my son. This is a wonderful book and it helps to explain the physiological makeup of boys and how to understand them and parent them in a more effective way. I would recommend this book to everyone.

Probably one of the worst books I've read, which is unfortunate because SOME of the topics might be valid. However the author's blatant hatred of women gets very tiresome and makes one wary to put much weight into the rest of his opinions. A [sarcastic] summary: women ruin everything for boys and men; boys raised by single women are basically doomed to be failures; boys without religion are doomed and will never be able to love or act normal.

I won't waste my time pulling up specific lines (of which there are many to make one roll ones eyes), but there are many damning statements with little back up except his own and other people's opinions (he references a lot of other books). Gurian presents his brash opinions with very one sided biased arguments, rarely if ever, showing full context or relativity. Some of what he speaks to, such-and-such that boys need, are things girls need too. It's just a ridiculous opinionated book, lacking in real facts and is insulting to many people. The best parts are the two small subchapters about accepting gay boys and men - for those chapters I will give him credit.

I'm surprised this was able to go to print and am also surprised by any positive reviews I've read. A more objective re-write could create a decent, worthy read, if the author could get over his own mommy issues.

The only good thing that I got from this book is that fathers need to be more involved with their sons. Parts of this book stunned me in his opinion on boys compared to girls and tho it is now socially acceptable to be gay I was surprised it was mentioned for a child so young.
I was not fond of the babbling? on and on on what he thought a child should be. Very glad I did not purchase this book. It left me more confused on boys and I feel I am blessed to have such an open communication with my own boys and their father.

This book gave me allot of insight about my son and even my husband. It is a clinical look at the evolutionary difference of a mans brain, and how our modern culture doesn't account for those instincts. Also talks about how the focus on women in our culture has exacerbated the problem. Focusing on girls in school (he doesn't say we shouldn't do it, just that equal time and effort should be given to both boys and girls), has caused boys to fall by the wayside. Really a very good book for mothers of sons.

I have about eight different books about boys. My son is 9 years old. Out of the selection I have, I found this to be the most informative and interesting read. Maybe it's because I covered a lot of things that I am going through and it told life from a single father's point of view in single mothers and it was just very inclusive. It seemed very important as well when I compare it to my son's stages. It starts out with Pinocchio's Journey which is a so weird because that was always a special favorite of our stories. One thing I may not fully agree with is and I could be totally wrong but I think the author is a little bit old school and believe in discipline that isn't really current these days and that I don't really go for but I could be wrong because he didn't say that in black and white. It was just little implications. Some of the subjects for each chapter I will give you an idea of in the following. He did what I love when authors give a title to each chapter and then break it up into some chapters which gives you an idea if you want to even buy the book from the beginning so I'll just give you a few chapter titles and subtitles. Chapter 2 is titled the culture boys create it has nine subtitles underneath in a couple of them are competition performance and skill building. Another is the search for independence. And then another is the stages of a boy's life. I'll jump over to chapter 4 love you forever what boys need from their mothers and the subchapters are the right conditions for good mother to son relationships the second one is what boys need for Mom in the first decade of life the next is what boys need from Mom in the second decade of life and the last is does motherhood ever end? Chapter 5 is from Daddy to Dad the father-son relationship and some of those subtitles are the father of boy needs. From Daddy to Dad letting the boy go and when they father gives his son his name. I'll tell you one more chapter and that will be the final one which is teaching boys a healthy male role in life and some of those subchapters are giving boys important work and teaching boys a secret role and a sacred male role for the new millennium I guess it's important to tell you about chapter 9 too it says teaching boys about sex and love because it's always a touchy subject for us parents. And issuing boys to the world of sex and love. Masturbation. What if my son is gay? Sex education in the schools. Love as a spiritual discipline. Sex, love, and the media. Boys and sexual abuse. Practical principles for teaching boys about sex, love and commitment. That's only a couple of things that it touches on because I don't want to go through every single chapter because I think you can do that yourself if you're really interested in it but it gives you a just idea of how much it covers. And I felt like the author was very much on point. He had an honest tone and an easy to read disposition.

I read this a while ago, and I can't remember if it is 4 stars or 5 stars for me. I do remember that I wish I had read this while I was still teaching; it would have given me some great insight for the 5-year-old boys in my class! I will be rereading this as Andrew gets older.

Makes the provocative observation, based on genetics, biology, anatomy, physiology, anthropology and history, that boys are different than girls and that these differences are important to who boys are and how we should raise them. A spiritually searching book--an ode to an unknown god.

The Good

While my review is predominately negative, there were a few redeeming qualities to this book. It calls for fathers to be involved with their children. He also brought up the point that the US is one of the few societies in the world where mom and dad alone are expected to raise their children. Other societies rely heavily on extended family and friends for assistance. He calls for a more communal approach to raising children and has positive things to say about day care as a way of building a village for a child if the parents put the effort in to make the day care workers part of the family. He also calls for the acceptance of boys who are gay.

I also liked his idea of using stories as a teaching tool for moral behavior and development.

The Bad

The science. Gurian maintains that science backs that idea that boys are inherently different from girls. The problem is the research does not support his assumptions. He perpetuates the myth that boys are better at math than girls without realizing that the differences aren't statistically significant. For those who aren't familiar with statistics, when an experiment is run there's a possibility that the results derived from the experiment were due to chance, not correlation. They have a neat formula that they can use to figure out whether or not the results were due to chance. If the number isn't high enough, then the results aren't statistically significant and likely are due to chance. So boys scored 2% higher than girls in math...and it wasn't statistically significant! Meaning it was most likely due to chance! For a more thorough discussion of this, I refer you to Carol Tavris' "The Mismeasure of Women."

Further, more research has supported the contention that environmental factors are at play with the difference in math skills. Just type in "boys are better at math myth" on Google and several research studies will pop up explaining this.

Gurian maintains that testosterone also plays a role in making boys intrinsically different. He cites that people in jail high higher testosterone levels. OK, now repeat this with me: Correlation does not equal causation! Once again, Gurian tries to make an open and shut case for the role that testosterone plays in behavior when that data is rather mixed (look up testosterone studies). Do higher testosterone levels drive boys to behave more aggressively, or does behaving aggressively cause testosterone levels to rise?

He even mentions environmental factors in his book as while dismissing their potential significance for shaping aggressive behavior. He cites evidence that baby boys are cuddled and breastfed less than baby girls. Are boys aggressive because of excess testosterone, or are they more aggressive because they weren't cuddled and breastfed as much as girls? Gurian seems to think it's solely the former rather than the latter. He even includes a quote from a women wondering if it was okay for her four-year-old son to hit her. I doubt that someone would ask if it's okay for a four-year-old girl to hit. I have seen with my own eyes someone excusing the aggressive behavior of a boy toddler away because he was a boy and becoming more boyish. Girls are discouraged from acting aggressively. Yet Gurian completely discounts this.

The third thing he uses to justify innate gender differences is brain structure differences. While there are differences in how mens and womens' brains are shaped and structured, he doesn't provide any proof that these actually result in behavioral or achievement differences. The brain is very malleable. For instance, my husband had a bad seizure when he was 3 that killed half of his brain. The left half of his brain is dead. He only has use of the right half of his brain. Yet he has a Master's degree, holds a job, and no one who knew him would guess that half of his brain is not functioning unless told so. And he's not the only one. Other children have had parts of their brain removed due to seizures or other injuries, and you would not guess it about them unless they told you.

Then he uses evolutionary psychology to justify the notion that men are compelled to spread their seed. Evolutionary psychology is on shaky grounds. Behavior leaves no fossil evidence. Back then there were no written records to tell us what life was like. How can we conclusively say anything about how behavior evolved as a result? We can't.

Based on this misuse of science, he then makes sweeping generalizations that all boys are aggressive, relish competition, and are slaves to testosterone. This is as insulting to boys and men as it is limiting. And to think that something as complex as a human being is relegated merely to the influences of one hormone and brain structure differences is a dangerous simplification. Boys face complex problems today because we live in a complex world. Yet the crux of his argument is that boys face problems today as a result of the feminist movement trying to turn boys into girls.

I really had to wonder if Gurian was at all aware that we currently live in an era mired in the backlash against the feminist movement. He maintains that attacks by feminists against the good old patriarchy is the root of the problem. According to Gurian we live in a world where organized sports are constantly under threat, the Boy Scouts of America has been dismantled, and boys are expected to take sewing lessons or something. Reality check, organized sports are alive and well, as are the Boy Scouts, and boys babies are given clothes with trucks that are blue and girl babies are given clothes with lace that are pink. Go to the toy store where toys are segregated into "girl's toys" and "boy's toys." Where is this system wide extermination of masculinity? I don't see it anywhere. Honestly, here he becomes truly alarmist and preys into our societies fears and misconceptions about the feminist movement.

He blames feminists for the decline of masculinity because we fear it, without realizing that what we object to is not masculinity, but rigid gender roles and the abuse of power that sometimes accompanies patriarchal institutions. He maintains that feminists have labeled men as abusers without realizing that men who abused their power put themselves in the position of abuser. Feminists put a name to their unreasonable actions and asked that they be held accountable for it.

According to him, feminism is to blame for problems that boys face today, without examining other societal factors. He cites that boys are no longer expected to be warriors without taking into account things such as the creation of nuclear weapons and a growing consciousness about the detriments of war. He talks about how boys don't have mentors anymore without taking into account sex abuse scandals and the fears people have about putting their children in the care of a pedophile. He at least mentions America's individualistic nature. Other societal factors he neglects to mention that harm boys is the focus on testing and performance in schools and parents attempting to raise baby Einstein's, leaving no room for free play in children's schedules. Unrealistic expectations of masculinity: what about the boys who aren't competitive and interested in sports who get bullied because they aren't masculine enough? He doesn't even address this, though I guess according to him such a boy does not exist. These are just a few of the things I can think of that are harming boys today, yet Gurian puts the blame squarely on the shoulders' of feminists.

And mothers. He attacks mothers for turning children against their fathers during divorce. Honestly, I only seen one divorce where both parents acted reasonably and didn't use the children against each other. All too often BOTH parents use the children as weapons against their partner. Yet mothers get all the blame. And in his chapter on what sons need from their mothers, he spends most of it discussing single mothers and how boys need male role models. Well, my husband and I are happily married with no plans to divorce, so what does my son need from me?

According to Gurian, a lot of nurture during the early years, and then to let him go and let my husband make him a man. Um, okay. That was so not helpful.

Like some feminists have enshrined the Myth of the Matriarchy, he has created and enshrined his own Myth of Masculinity. He maintains that kings used to understand their sacred duty to their people, and their subjects responded favorably. I don't think history is Mr. Gurian's strong suit, or he'd know that a lot of kings abused their power, cheated on their wives (ever heard of the position of royal mistress?), and had to keep tight control on the nobles to prevent them from revolting against them. He sees the past through rose tinted glasses where communities helped to raise boys who never abused power, when history is replete with just the opposite.

Which makes his solutions to the problem so unsatisfying. Get boys in organized sports. Okay. What about the athletes who steal, rape, murder their wives? Get boys into the military. Is he aware of the high rates of spousal abuse among men in the military? Once again, I don't object to organized sports or the military, but I don't see it as a fix all solution. Especially because he never addresses how to ensure that boys won't abuse power if they find themselves in a position to wield it.

So in essence, Gurian has twisted scientific evidence to simplify a complex problem and offered a simple solution that doesn't even begin to address the complexity needed to fix it. This book was rather unsatisfying. I did not feel as though I got a good picture of the challenges that would face my son and how to help him navigate life. I was very disappointed.

I was a little disappointed in this book. I read this alongside his older "The Minds of Boys" book. I appreciate how he is trying to draw our attention to the differences in boys and generally what they need. It fell short on specific help beyond describing the need for multiple people in their lives to mentor them. I had a few take aways that will help, but I had to read through a lot to get there. The best statement I read in the book was "Adolescent boys are craving to be treated like young men, not boys." That's best remembered when trying to direct them on the right path.

I was fascinated by his attempt to discuss the need for spiritual family (church) without losing anyone but in the process lost most everyone. I was also intrigued by his statement that being gay is in their design and is not a choice. As I dug up this scientific evidence of genetic and chromosomal influence, I was disappointed to learn how controversial this evidence continues to be.

In all, I probably got more out of his other book and will most likely read his latest book, "Saving Our Sons" to get more updated information.

This book had many insightful chapters about boys, the mother son relationship, the father son relationship, how to fulfill their sense of adventure, educational research about learning differences, sex education geared toward the male brain, how boys and girls are different and how to incorporate the boys needs into your parentling style. I own this book and read the highlighted parts when a need a reminder of how to deal with my 2 boys in effective ways.