Blog Post # 1 -- Are men born are made?

I'm going to cop out. My way of attenuating the nebulous conondrums of the quasi-feminist question stated above. A feeble argument. Provincial. Lazy. Shallow. Ok: What constitutes a man depends on a variety of factors. Culture, religios, class, race, language, etc. If you live in San Franscico, for example, the article would be read with fervid vehemence, where they--you already know-- would hash out the nuances of Sterling's argument. The fault of Sterling's argument, however, is that it can be--although erudite and accurate in many respects-- applied to skewer both sides. She negates herself. One of her points is to critisize the egotistical bravado of a man governed instutition (Hospital decisions) but she fails, like most critics, to provide a proper solution. Her conclusion feels unemphatic, as if her findings were supposed to justify her argument. She ends it open ended, essentially, whereas it would have been prudent to offer something.