Skip to main content

Book Review Policy

I am currently accepting books for review. Please send requests to bookgirl89(at)aol.com

My interests are in science fiction, especially with strong female characters and involving space or time travel. I am interested also in fantasy novels, with strong female characters and elaborate world-building, and historical fiction novels, especially those set in Tudor or Stuart England.

Please understand that it may take some time for me to post a review or that I may choose not to post one. If I choose not to post a review, it is because I feel that I am not the appropriate audience for the book and could not do it justice. If I do review a book, I will include my complete and unbiased opinions and will try to post it as close as possible to the release date (if the review request was sent prior to the release date).

Please do not send unpublished manuscripts or self-published books at this time.

Comments

Anonymous said…
Hi there! How does one submit a book for review?
This comment has been removed by the author.

Popular posts from this blog

Thoughts on Reformist vs. Revolutionary Feminism

In Feminism is for Everybody , I was struck by hooks' sharp differentiation between reformist and revolutionary feminism. If you read the passages below, you can see that hooks identifies herself as one of the revolutionary feminists, whom she refers to as "we," while she refers to reformist feminists as "them." Certainly, hooks makes a salient point when she recognizes that achieving the goals of reformist feminists has not ended sexism. One of the complaints of anti-feminists is that women are trying to be like men, what hooks says of the reformist feminists. Revolutionary feminism, as I understand it at least, would change the system so that there is no longer this perception of women trying to be like men-women are trying to be women, are trying to be people. It is these artificial men/women roles that are the problem, in my mind. And these roles result from what hooks is fighting against, a patriarchal society, a hierarchy of domination. Let's take away

Book Review: The Princes in the Tower by Alison Weir

3. The Princes in the Tower by Alison Weir Weir, my favorite popular historian, concludes that Richard III murdered the eponymous princes in the tower. Even to this day, the mystery has not been definitively solved, nor, Weir argues, will it likely ever be. But she bases her conclusions on the existing contemporary evidence, asserting that it is a historian's job to deal in probabilities. And so, while Richard III could not be convicted in a modern court, she feels comfortable pointing her finger. Weir's evidence and reasoning are strong, but not overwhelmingly so. She bases her conclusions on contemporary or near-contemporary sources, relying most heavily on Italian monk Mancini, Henry VII's Italian biographer Polydore Vergil, the anonymous Croyland Chronicles, and Sir Thomas More's unfinished biography of Richard III. Weir makes strong arguments for the accuracy of these sources, not least of which that they corroborate each other in many places even though the

Reformist vs. Revolutionary Feminism Revisited

28. Sexy Feminism by Jennifer Keishin Armstrong and Heather Wood Rudulph A couple years ago, I wrote a post entitled Thoughts on Reformist vs. Revolutionary Feminism , based on bell hooks' Feminism Is for Everybody . Since then, it's been one of the most popular hits on the blog. It seems that a lot of people are wondering, what is the difference between reformist and revolutionary feminism? I don't have all the answers or know all the history. But, in my understanding, "reformist feminism" aims to give women equal rights to men, as applied in Western democratic, capitalist societies. Reformist feminists are the advocates of equal pay and of more women in CEO positions and STEM fields. Sheryl Sandberg of Lean In and even Betty Friedan of The Feminine Mystique would be considered reformist feminists. these women are aiming to increase women's presence and power in the workforce, aiming to treat women exactly (or almost exactly, save the contentious mothe