Big Sister: How Extreme Feminism has Betrayed the Fight for Sexual Equality. Neil Boyd. Vancouver, British Columbia: Greystone Books, 2004; 215 pages; ISBN 1-55365-001-8; $22.95 (paper).
According to Neil Boyd, Big Sister is equivalent to George Orwell's Big Brother: "the supreme leader of the 'party' who effectively created conformity and stifled freedom of speech, thought, and action"(4). Relying on mostly anecdotal evidence - largely gleaned from his experience as a male chair of the Simon Fraser University harassment tribunal, as well as his interactions with the "overtly political" character of certain feminists - Boyd claims Big Sister can be found in virtually every university in North America, especially in departments of sociology, law and women's studies. He attests she manipulated the law, courts, psychiatry, psychology, academia and

social work in the 1980s and 1990s and fundamentally changed the laws that control sexual conduct on our continent. In a nutshell, Boyd believes radical feminists have undermined the quest for true gender equality.
This being said, it is not necessary to read further than the following five chapter titles in the table of contents section to grasp Boyd's agenda: 1) Pornography: It's All About Masturbation; 2) Sexual Harassment: If You Feel Uncomfortable, You're a Victim; 3) Sexual Assault: Collateral Damage; 4) Domestic Violence: Fact and Fiction; and 5) Tolerance: Reclaiming the Future. My suspicion that this book would not amount to anything more than unfounded anti-feminist rhetoric was confirmed upon reading the chapters and then re-reading them to determine whether or not I actually missed any pertinent information or productive analyses. Unlike the analytical prowess and provocative arguments demonstrated by Catharine MacKinnon in Towards a Feminist Theory of the State, Boyd's book is whimpering and impotent in comparison, not to mention poorly researched and completely devoid of a comprehensive analysis of masculinity, the unequal distribution of power between men and women, and the gender blindness of the law.
To explicate, regardless of extensive feminist research and analysis to the contrary, Boyd insists "the law of sexual harassment, unknown a generation ago, is now well established, but with a frighteningly inadequate burden of proof and a dangerously vague test of liability"(6) and "Big Sister has mischaracterized the nature and exaggerated the extent of domestic violence in our culture"(6). Given the most recent Statistics Canada findings in Measuring Violence Against Women: Statistical Trends 2006, it is preposterous for Boyd to claim that sexual harassment legislation has become an "industry"(56) and the extent of domestic violence has been exaggerated when, according to this Stats Can report, in 2004, 52,127 women and 36,840 children were admitted to shelters for abused women across Canada, and only thirty-six percent of female victims of spousal violence and less than ten percent of victims of sexual assault reported these crimes to police (Statistics Canada - Catalogue no 85-570 2006, pg. 14).

108

Atlantis 31.2, 2007 PR www.msvu.ca/atlantis

More so, even in light of the fact that ninety percent of the offenders of spousal violence are male and that women are more likely than men to be the victims of the most severe forms of assault (Statistics Canada - Catalogue no 85-570 2006, pg. 13), Boyd devotes an entire chapter arguing that sexual harassment, even rape, is not sexual discrimination! Rather, Boyd seems more content focusing on certain sexual harassment and domestic violence cases in which he can paint the women involved as jaded and conniving lovers seeking revenge for relationships gone sour.
Boyd does an even greater disservice to the issue of the status of female professors in academe. According to him, "there is no systematic exclusion of women in the halls of higher learning or from any other important avenue of social or intellectual life in North America"(6). Considering he does not base this statement - among others - on any data or research, how can he say this when, for example, of the 478 tenured professors in the Faculty of Arts and Sciences at Harvard University, less than 19% are women (http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=515123)? Ironically, it is precisely his conclusions about the status of women in North American academia and society in general that illuminate the dire need for more women's studies departments in universities and for a louder Big Sister's voice in all other areas of life.
Elizabeth Majic York University