Scan barcode
foxxie52's review against another edition
slow-paced
1.0
I started reading this book believing it would be a thoughtful investigation of how men and women relate to each other and how this is affected by the ways we think. That is what it sets itself up to be, and that is what it appears. But as the chapters wound on I became increasingly suspicious and, in the end, irate with the book.
Basically, this book uses new science to back up old cliches. This book sets out to tell you that women can't parallel park, read maps or put up flat-pack furniture, but love to gossip and get upset about imagined slights, and, just as insultingly, tells you that men are monosyllabic, emotionally stunted and sex-crazed. The agenda of the book becomes increasingly clear towards the end, as sentences like "the con of political correctness" creep in. To put it bluntly, this book is anti-feminist in the worst possible way.
And it's bad science at that. The studies are picked very selectively, as other reviewers have said, so many of the things this book tells you have been "proved" by scientists do, in fact, remain debated areas. Secondly, and more importantly, I feel, no debate is raised as to whether or not the results are biased by social conditioning. What they are essentially doing is using men and women who have grown up in a culture of gendered difference to prove the differences of gender. I don't think the phrase "learned response" is used once. That is the perennial problem with trying to establish differences of gender- there is no control subject, no boy in a bubble, who is isolated from outside influences. There is also no mention of generational patterns- for example, it seems likely that anyone under the age of 20, the generation known as "technology natives," will have less trouble programming their video machines in than someone over the age of 40, no matter what their gender.
Most insultingly, this book tells you what most scientists would abhor: that what you start out with is all there is to you. Even if there are differences between the genders as described in the book, they would not provide a limit to what men and women can achieve. There is no excuse use for a woman being petty and incompetent, and no excuse for a man ignoring you or cheating on you. But this book sets out to provide you with them.
By the end of the book I just felt a bit "ick" and more than once I thought"what is this drivel?" Possibly this was considered groundbreaking when it was first published back in 1999 but now it comes across as simplistic, sexist, derivative, incorrect and extremely dismissive the LGBTQ community.
Basically, this book uses new science to back up old cliches. This book sets out to tell you that women can't parallel park, read maps or put up flat-pack furniture, but love to gossip and get upset about imagined slights, and, just as insultingly, tells you that men are monosyllabic, emotionally stunted and sex-crazed. The agenda of the book becomes increasingly clear towards the end, as sentences like "the con of political correctness" creep in. To put it bluntly, this book is anti-feminist in the worst possible way.
And it's bad science at that. The studies are picked very selectively, as other reviewers have said, so many of the things this book tells you have been "proved" by scientists do, in fact, remain debated areas. Secondly, and more importantly, I feel, no debate is raised as to whether or not the results are biased by social conditioning. What they are essentially doing is using men and women who have grown up in a culture of gendered difference to prove the differences of gender. I don't think the phrase "learned response" is used once. That is the perennial problem with trying to establish differences of gender- there is no control subject, no boy in a bubble, who is isolated from outside influences. There is also no mention of generational patterns- for example, it seems likely that anyone under the age of 20, the generation known as "technology natives," will have less trouble programming their video machines in than someone over the age of 40, no matter what their gender.
Most insultingly, this book tells you what most scientists would abhor: that what you start out with is all there is to you. Even if there are differences between the genders as described in the book, they would not provide a limit to what men and women can achieve. There is no excuse use for a woman being petty and incompetent, and no excuse for a man ignoring you or cheating on you. But this book sets out to provide you with them.
By the end of the book I just felt a bit "ick" and more than once I thought"what is this drivel?" Possibly this was considered groundbreaking when it was first published back in 1999 but now it comes across as simplistic, sexist, derivative, incorrect and extremely dismissive the LGBTQ community.
dsoreads's review against another edition
3.0
It's an interesting read. Funny, however, not sure if it's entirely accurate or representative.
allimae's review against another edition
2.0
The first half of the book is interesting, but watered-down and repetitive. It could’ve been significantly cut down and it still would have had the same depth of information. The second half of the book contains much more evidence, fewer unsupported sweeping generalizations, and less repetition. Overall it is interesting, but not well-structured or well-written.
julaxo's review against another edition
5.0
Loved the book, it explains the differences very clearly. Sometimes it can come up as little harsh but those are the facts. Loved it and I recommend for everyone to read it.
nanas_bookish_obsession's review against another edition
5.0
Am Anfang des Buches wird man gewarnt, dass man an einigen Stellen das Verlangen haben wird das Buch in die Ecke zu werfen.
Mir hat das Buch wirklich sehr gut gefallen und auch wenn ich ab und zu den Kopf schütteln musste, weil ich mit den Autoren nicht einer Meinung war, so wollte ich doch nicht aufhören es zu lesen.
Mir hat das Buch wirklich sehr gut gefallen und auch wenn ich ab und zu den Kopf schütteln musste, weil ich mit den Autoren nicht einer Meinung war, so wollte ich doch nicht aufhören es zu lesen.
sve100's review against another edition
3.0
Забавна книжка, която прави доста големи генерализации, но казва и верни неща :)
odland's review against another edition
É un po' scienza becera con dati e ricerche, anche apparentemente scientifiche e ben messe ma senza una vera fonte e possibilità di verifica, un bel po' manipolati per dire abbastanza spesso cose un po' molto tendenziose semi-spacciate per stato effettivo delle cose. Non sempre eh, è cmq un libro a tratti conscio della propria ironia e leggerezza quindi molte cose le espone volutamente da bar per rendere rapidamente i concetti, però non molto spesso fornisce le info in modo "scientifico". Nonostante questo l'ho molto apprezzato, perché penso di essere tendenzialmente riuscito a capire quali fatti esposti potevano essere prova di una certa tendenza e quali erano totalmente fini a se stessi e prendere in modo molto largo.
stephaniedws's review against another edition
4.0
I understand that this book isn't for everyone. I personally don't see this as a serious scientific book. But reading it made me understand what man and woman in mind. It's a fun book though.