I bought this book out of my interest in foreign policy. I was very surprised by the stupidity of the title. Well, once you read it it just becomes more stupid. Its amazing that it was published and that this lady ever got a contract and a PHD. This probably shows how useless and pointless current historical debates are. Don't buy it!!

Kristin L. Hoganson's Fighting for American Manhood does an interesting job of walking the thin line between gender definitions, interpretations of discourse and traditional explanations of behavior in two fields that have been difficult for many newer historians to break into, international relations and military history. Although primarily a work explaining American motives in the first, Hoganson does bring some new insights on the latter to light. The work is a somewhat successful attempt to synthesize the various answers historians have previously put forward to the question, "Why did the United States go to war in 1898?" Hoganson suggests that by understanding the very real phenomenon of cultural perceptions of "manliness," and how these perceptions affected the nation as a whole and those in power in particular, we may reach a more well defined answer.
Acknowledging the validity of many of the previous explanations put forward by historians, Hoganson weaves many of them together. For example, while acknowledging that annexationist aspirations were relevant to the political actors of the day, she points out that many of the underlying reasons for these aspirations may be ascribed to gender fears. Politicians wanted to appear "manly," and there was no better way to appear this way to the voting populace than to adapt a "jingo" platform. With a similar stroke she places explanations revolving around Social Darwinists in a broader picture by illustrating that at the root of many of the fears of social degeneracy and racial competition were definitions and discourse which is clearly painted with gender based pigments. In these areas Hoganson hits her stride and in large part succeeds in redefining the scope of our understanding to include gender.
She does not, however, hit the mark in a few areas. Primarily because it appears that she never really aimed in that direction. Specifically, her treatment of the economic and strategic explanations for the Spanish-American War appear to be missing. While she does make a series of valid observations about the gender biases of several of the key actors in these areas, these observations are not relevant as causation. Naval strategist Alfred Thayer Mahan was almost certainly extremely gender biased, and in all likelyhood was also a racist, but neither of these were central to his reasoning. As evidence that the strategists carried little weight she points to the fact that the Army was not expanded in conjunction with the massive naval expansion of the period. One is left wondering why naval officers and supporters would have pushed for a large army when their whole theory of geostrategic influence and security rested not upon the occupation of land, but on the domination of sea lanes. Many of the same problems apply when she addresses economic factors. Overall, her dismissal of geostrategic and economic factors rests primarily upon a loose scaffold of secondary sources and the very real gender biases of the primary actors.
This is a moderate work of synthesis that potentially serves as the starting point for a new generation of interpretation. Hoganson has met her goal, she set out to lay a new cornerstone for the interpretation of American imperialism at the turn of the century and she has largely succeeded. Gender is a valid lens through which we may view many of the factors contributing to the American imperialist experiments. What now remains is for Hoganson or others to follow this up with a valid and in-depth gender based analysis of the factors she dismissed or glossed over, military and economic.

This book has offered a very insightful twist to understanding American foreign policy and congressional thought during the Spanish-American and Phillipian-American wars. Hoganson has given a nice view of how manliness and the fear of losing it contributed to war ideas and how the rise of women's suffrage movements pushed a male dominated political cirle into thoughts of war in order to maintain their manhood. Very well written and her sources are extensive and flawless.

I may not be the first person to bring this matter about Mr. Alfred W. McCoy's book, particularly about the book cover. I do not know how authoritative he is about Philippine setting, but the display of the Philippine Flag on the book cover is WRONG. I have not read the book because I just chance upon it when I was browsing for another book. I hope this matter will be brought to the author's attention and that of the publisher as well. Joey G.....

Professor McCoy has made hmself one of the handful of scholars with a deep understanding of fhe forces governing politics in a country of 70 million people who seem much easier to understand than others in Southeast Asia but who are influenced by Malay as well as Spanish and American customs and ideals. Today, as the Phililppine Armed Forces play another decisive role in their nation's history, this analysis is of immediate importance to those seeking to explore the role of armed, trained military leaders in countries whose democracies require support.

A review of Jose Rizal: Life, Works and Writings of a Genius, writer, Scientist and National Hero, by Gregorio Zaide.

I was required to purchase and read this book for a class in the University of the Philippines, and boy was my money and time wasted! This reads not so much as a sober historical biography, but as a gospel of Jose Rizal, a hagiography of a deified savior of the Philippines. There is a paucity of critical analyses of historical data, and an overly credulous acceptance of anecdotes and unsubstantiated stories.

As is quite common of early Filipino historians like Zaide (Agoncillo is another example), their methodology is nothing more than creative story-telling and recounting legendary embellishments as though they were fact. To them, the historico-critical method of modern historical scholarship does not exist, or if it does, they definitely did not to use it.

And what's with all this overly religious language? Anything that Rizal ever possessed is God-given, and he rarely makes mistakes, and if reported, the author is quick to make lame excuses as to why he was wrong, or was unsuccessful (he would make a good Christian apologist, IMO). His family name had an auspicious beginning, and it was said that he even prophesized his eventual greatness where people would build monuments in his honor. Maybe Zaide should have read Joseph Campbell to see the numerous mythological motifs his portrait of Rizal has, and maybe, just maybe, he would be skeptical of even a few of the things he read about the Great Hero.

And there was even a passage in Zaide's book of Rizal's success being due, for the most part, to divine providence (p. 19). Is this what passes as scholarship back then? Aside from the fact that it is unverifiable, it is nothing but crass proselytizing. For shame!

And there is even a tidbit about "heredity influences" on Rizal. Words cannot express the sheer superficiality of Zaide's scholarship in Biology, so I will quote his entry at length:

"According to biological science, there are inherent qualities which a person inherits from his ancestors and parents. From his Malayan ancestors, Rizal, evidently, inherited his love for freedom, his innate desire to travel, and his indomitable courage. From his Chinese ancestors, he derived his serious nature, frugality, patience, and love for children. From his Spanish ancestors, he got his elegance of bearing, sensitivity to insult, and gallantry to ladies. From his father, he inherited a profound sense of self-respect, the love for work, and the habit of independent thinking. And from his mother, he inherited his religious nature, the spirit of self-sacrifice, and the passion of the arts and literature." (p. 18)

I wonder, does Zaide believe in the pseudoscience called phrenology? He had said on two different occasions about Rizal's big infant head. While not saying explicitly, he seems to put much weight into the size of Rizal's head. Was he trying to connect it with Rizal's intellect?

If you're looking for a good introduction to Rizal's life, this book is definitely not it. Nor are the alternatives any better. Jose Rizal studies is in a stagnant condition, and that is quite a shame. Let us hope that future historians would not sully Rizal's name with such fetid junk passing of as scholarship. He would definitely turn in his grave.

This masterpiece work of literature written by the famous asian historian Gregorio Zaide, tells us of the contribution of Doctor Jose Rizal in shaping and awakening the entire nation from the pit of corruption and injustices. For those of you young Filipinos there....read this book. This will ignite a flame in your heart...the flame of patriotism. Because of the hellish political instability, poverty uprising in our country, I think patriotism and love for country will solve our countless

problems...for if we have love...we will not only think of our own good but we will be directed to the thought of serving the country FIRST before our own interests. The book will indirectly teach you how to destroy that greed in your heart and love your country...

I find it very suspicious that this book is so similar to Alfred Weinstein's "Barbed Wire Surgeon".

A short story showing the dedication of an American doctor's fight for the welfare of POWs. A wonderful human triumph over an evil and sadistic enemy. The cruel and uncaring Japanese were unable to destoy the spirit of these men held captive as conveyed by Dr. Shabart's book. Furthermore the survival of POWs under Dr. Shabart's care speaks about the graditude of patients from enlisted to general.

This Globetrotter map does not show the provinces of the Philippines. That's like not showing the states on a USA map. Periplus has the best map of the Philippines that I have seen so far.

This map is an excellent guide for tourists who like island-hopping in the Philippines. On one side there's a detailed map of the whole country with the main highways, the most poular touristic spots, some good pictures, weather charts and an index of the place names. The other side gives you details of the capital Manila as well as other touristic places, some more beautiful pictures, a little Tagalog words and an overview of the main fiesta-events. This map will surely satisfy most tourists.

Despite a new batch of authors, the listed places were almost a direct lift of Jens Peters' work (including the ommission of Bulacan). What is different is the condescending way it is written. After reading the guidebook, you would think the Philippines is there with Afghanistan, Liberia, Rwanda and other wartorn countries. Although there are dangers, the risk level in Manila is about the same as any other major city in the world.

Just as the cover photography of the 6th edition is far superior to the cover of this 7th edition, the bulk of the material in the 6th edition is far more informative and much more intelligently written than the 7th edition, with the added bonus that the 6th edition was not written primarily to promote the author's political viewpoints.

If you can still find the 6th edition, buy it, and bypass this political diatribe disguised as a travel book.

Contradictory to the last reviewer, I believe that the book did a good job of warning people of the dangers in certain areas of the country, which of course, happen anywhere and everywhere you go in the world. But it did not deter anyone from entering those areas. The book does have a certain reponsibilty to its readers and even after reading the guide, it did not put me off the trip. What a wonderful country. And extremely affordable. Prices were accurate in the guide. I spent three weeks this past February at a time when Army Helicopters where crashing off the coasts of Minandao and the Americans had sent in more troops to aid the Filipinos in capturing the terrorists. 60% of the countries tourism has disappeared. But I felt so safe. I thank the book for warning me of being cautious. As a woman travelling on my own, the book actually encouraged in many areas. The guide did a good job of explaining how to get to many destinations, although I wouldn't be so brave as they had indicated. One of the bus depots that they suggest departing from in Manila, is in one of the poorest poverty striken areas of the world. Where theives and beggars hang about. So this is where the book goes wrong in explaining details. But it keeps straight to the facts... Boracay's details were accurate, especially when it came to hunting down a hotel and as they explained, there was no problem in finding lodging. I only give the guide a three because I do believe the country has made such great progress since the books published date of October 2000 and is in well need of updating. Filipinos travel quite alot by plane now and there are many more destinations on the list. The guide was correct in saying that internal flights where extremely cheap. I wish that the guide would have gone more into detail about the many festivals in the Philippines. After all, this counrty has the greatest number of festivals of any country in the world and amoung the most colourful! There is no other guide that I have read better than this one! The country is so enormous that it is not possible to cover everything in it's entirety. The guide is in need of a challenge.

The book was originally written in 1983, and updated in 1985 as the anti-US movement grew due to US support to the Marcos regime. An obviously slanted version of history, it lends creedence to it's conclusions with a bevy of footnotes, however, the author fails to identify when he is stating fact, or drawing his own conclusion; many of which are based on an erroneous interpretation of documentation used for exercise planning scenarios or other "unofficial-official" documents. This book, in spite of it's factual shortcomings, was a watershed in the anti-US, anti-base movement in the Philippines and did serve as a rallying point for Filipino nationalists to convince other Filipinos of the obtrusive problems the Americans caused

I felt this book gave a good understanding of the traditional versus modern life i the Phillipines. I felt this book could have been written better but it wasn't so, I only gave it 2 stars

The book just contains a brief description about the food and people she encountered. The book is more like a travel log or journal. There is nothing significant about how the food come to be and the history behind the devolopement of cuisine culture.

While it is nice to see the birds in the flesh with real-life pictures of them, it is certainly not pratical for use in the field.

Some of the pictures are poorly taken and it is highly difficult if not impossible to identify certain birds. Some of the images are back-lit, giving a silhouette of the bird!

There is no proper classification and very little info given of the birds - how the juveniles look like, breeding plumage, male/female plumage etc.

I suppose it is a good book for the casual birder who would like to know what's chirping outside his apartment window or chalet in the wilderness. It also comes with some interesting information on where to go birding to catch wetland or passerine birds etc.

I must commend Strange though for all his efforts into going into the field to capture these pictures - all pictures in the book were taken by Strange - good job Strange!