I expected this to be another antifeminist book, and started reading it with unfavourable expectations. However, it turned out that my expectations were wrong. Although it is critical of some feminist claims, the book is supportive of others, and discusses fairly all the pros and cons. The author took upon himself a difficult task - proving that Western philosophy is not inherently androcentric (proving the opposite would have been easier, probably) - and seems to have succeeded in his task. The book is original, very clearly written, makes some interesting points, and made me reconsider my views about the androcentricity in philosophy and in other disciplines.

This is an excellent book that covers and evaluates all the main arguments for the androcentricity of philosophy. The author distinguishes between pervasive androcentricity and non-pervasive androcentricity, and argues that contrary to many feminist claims, philosophy is only non-pervasively androcentric. The book is written clearly and presents many examples, so it's very easy to follow. It's very informative, and is worthy of re-reading. I highly recommend it.