Propaganda surrounding feminism and feminist ideas is so pervasive that for probably 70% of the population cognitive dissonance will leave them cognitively incapable of processing the message of the book.
The title isn't aggressive enough.
You should have called it: Feminism Is Bad and Feminists Are Worse: The Lies You Believe About Economics, Politics and Social Ethics.
It's not clear why you should have to defend yourself against accusations that your book will make you liked by right wingers. Most intellectual content caters to left wingers, and there is never the expectation that authors should be required to apologize for this bias. Why this should be different for a book that at least ostensibly leans right?
You've had a lot of success with provocative titles and theses. Your books have been anti-education, anti-parenting, anti-democracy, and anti-national borders. Refuting sacred cows is your trademark. Why stop?
Sorry, this comment is pretty hostile. Feel free to ignore it.
The title seems to be framing for heat instead of light. I think you know its going to cause conflict, turning the book into a new mini-front in the culture war. It annoys me a little, because I think you knew that the title was going to cause lots of people to spend that much more time hating each other over their opinions on the book, but you don't care because you think that is on them and not you. Even if you knew it would happen.
A title chosen for being non confrontational might have spread the idea in a more useful manner.
The problem as I see it is that the title "Don't Be A Feminist" engages just as much wordplay as the misguided "feminism" you seek to discredit.
You say, "The version of “feminism” that I target is extremely widespread, and my central claim is that it is grossly mistaken."
OK, but your title lumps in all the other versions of feminism in with that one. Even your own. Because, really, this book and your advice to your daughter constitute your own brand of "feminism" in the practical sense.
Better to sidestep the whole thing and offer your positive vision of how a woman should live a just life. Like, "A Letter to My Daughter, and other essays on living a just life in an unjust world."
I think your friends were right. You may stick to your guns, and perhaps if it catches the right breeze, it'll get traction amongst some groups. However, I am convinced that if your objective was to persuade the largest number of people, you needed to have picked a less inflammatory title as this is going to filter out too many people who might have changed their minds. As it stands, the title is indistinguishable from one that'd be used by a staunch misogynist and it'll probably be used to offhand label you as such.
I assume you make an economic case defending rape and wife-beating? Because if you aren’t a feminist, you have to be in favor of rape and wife-beating.
Among normal people, the title of the book won't be a big deal. For the vast majority of people - even most self-identified feminists - it is understood that feminism, like most 'isms,' is a debatable topic, and won't be peculiarly alienating.
Among academics, it will absolutely be alienating. In my experience, not identifying as a feminist in academic circles is often taken as equivalent to being a misogynist and generally bad person. So as far as general readership goes, the title is fine; as afar as academic faculty lounges go, it'll be taken as discrediting.
Propaganda surrounding feminism and feminist ideas is so pervasive that for probably 70% of the population cognitive dissonance will leave them cognitively incapable of processing the message of the book.
The title isn't aggressive enough.
You should have called it: Feminism Is Bad and Feminists Are Worse: The Lies You Believe About Economics, Politics and Social Ethics.
It's not clear why you should have to defend yourself against accusations that your book will make you liked by right wingers. Most intellectual content caters to left wingers, and there is never the expectation that authors should be required to apologize for this bias. Why this should be different for a book that at least ostensibly leans right?
You've had a lot of success with provocative titles and theses. Your books have been anti-education, anti-parenting, anti-democracy, and anti-national borders. Refuting sacred cows is your trademark. Why stop?
Sorry, this comment is pretty hostile. Feel free to ignore it.
The title seems to be framing for heat instead of light. I think you know its going to cause conflict, turning the book into a new mini-front in the culture war. It annoys me a little, because I think you knew that the title was going to cause lots of people to spend that much more time hating each other over their opinions on the book, but you don't care because you think that is on them and not you. Even if you knew it would happen.
A title chosen for being non confrontational might have spread the idea in a more useful manner.
+1 Go Caplan
If there is one thing we need more of, it's not caving to women's tears.
Its a catchy title, gets right to the point. I am a fan of keeping it.
The problem as I see it is that the title "Don't Be A Feminist" engages just as much wordplay as the misguided "feminism" you seek to discredit.
You say, "The version of “feminism” that I target is extremely widespread, and my central claim is that it is grossly mistaken."
OK, but your title lumps in all the other versions of feminism in with that one. Even your own. Because, really, this book and your advice to your daughter constitute your own brand of "feminism" in the practical sense.
Better to sidestep the whole thing and offer your positive vision of how a woman should live a just life. Like, "A Letter to My Daughter, and other essays on living a just life in an unjust world."
I think your friends were right. You may stick to your guns, and perhaps if it catches the right breeze, it'll get traction amongst some groups. However, I am convinced that if your objective was to persuade the largest number of people, you needed to have picked a less inflammatory title as this is going to filter out too many people who might have changed their minds. As it stands, the title is indistinguishable from one that'd be used by a staunch misogynist and it'll probably be used to offhand label you as such.
Does it bother you that you are beloved by misogynists? Angry men who truly loath women?
I'm not making an argument about your case on the merits. Just that the company you attract might be worth ... considering.
I assume you make an economic case defending rape and wife-beating? Because if you aren’t a feminist, you have to be in favor of rape and wife-beating.
> “Don’t be a lawyer,”
Isn't your wife a lawyer?
As a father of daughters, in no small part because of your Selfish Reasons to Have More Kids, I am excited to buy this book.
Among normal people, the title of the book won't be a big deal. For the vast majority of people - even most self-identified feminists - it is understood that feminism, like most 'isms,' is a debatable topic, and won't be peculiarly alienating.
Among academics, it will absolutely be alienating. In my experience, not identifying as a feminist in academic circles is often taken as equivalent to being a misogynist and generally bad person. So as far as general readership goes, the title is fine; as afar as academic faculty lounges go, it'll be taken as discrediting.