“Ah, yes, SusanS, you know me so well….”

I think the context makes it quite clear that Susan was using the plural form of “you”.

Ah, yes, SusanS, you know me so well….

There’s a third option between “imposing some canonized view” and letting kids just go out and play, and that’s giving kids some ideas about what else they could do with their free time.

My brothers and I (I’m female) built forts for as long as I can remember without instruction and I’m the oldest, but eventually Dad showed us how to make bows and arrows.

Boys don’t need a manual on how to be boys. They just need you to stop making them feel lousy for being boys. They’re not just “people.” Not in their minds. If a book like this gets them excited, then it’s a good thing.

There’s a lot of political correctness in education today and finding books that motivates some boys to read can be tricky.
My son started out only reading non-fiction. He was fascinated with stories of dinosaurs, battles and ancient history. I was constantly hunting for appropriate books that made him excited to read. Later, he switched to fiction and zipped through many of the writers that boys tend to like, (and some girls.)

There was no “steering” going on. I just got out of his way.

I didn’t know that you could peel open a maple samara and stick it on your nose to make a “beak” until I saw an older kid do it. I wouldn’t have thought to fit my thumbs over an acorn cap and use it to make a loud whistle unless I had seen my mom do it one day when we were out hiking. Again, it’s back to the cultural transmission thing.

I think there also used to be reprints of “The Boy’s Handy Book” and “The Girl’s Handy Book” out there. (In fact, I may HAVE a copy of “The Girl’s Handy Book” somewhere on my bookshelves…I seem to remember it had instructions on how to build a window seat using crates?)

My suggestion would be to get both the “Dangerous” book and the “Glorious” book. There were some “boy things” I liked doing as a kid, and also some “girl things” I liked doing. (And I grew up perfectly OK. Even after handling tadpoles AND making doll clothes. [just don't try making doll clothes for the tadpoles.])

Because, really, we’re all just *people*. Why can’t we let kids figure out who they are instead of imposing some canonized view of who they should be or what they should like to do with their free time? Let’s leave the Victorian era sexual stereotypes back where they belong and let kids go out and play.

My neighbor’s son and a friend figured out how to build a clubhouse all on their own. No plans, no diagrams, no black-and-white glossy photos with a paragraph on the back of each one. Just some kids, some wood, a hammer and some nails.

Seriously, it sounds like a winner, and long overdue.

Wayne, did you mean “two-income families”? If so, what does that have to do with cultural transmission? Can a family not have two incomes and quality interactions with their kids at the same time?

More importantly: Will there be a sequel for girls? Not that I wouldn’t mind using this book with my daughters, but I’d be curious to know what a “Dangerous Book for Girls” would have in it.