What do you think?
Rate this book
Warum Männer nicht zuhören und Frauen schlecht einparken
Allan und Barbara Pease liefern ganz natürliche Erklärungen für eigentlich unerklärliche Schwächen: Sie werfen einen amüsanten Blick auf die kleinen, aber bedeutsamen Unterschiede zwischen Mann und Frau
397 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1998
1043 people are currently reading
13675 people want to read
About the author
Allan Pease
148 books790 followersAllan Pease is an Australian author and motivational speaker. Despite having no education in psychology, neuroscience, or psychiatry, he has managed to establish himself as an "expert on relationships".
Originally a musician, he became a successful life insurance salesman, he started a career as a speaker and trainer in sales and latterly in body language. This resulted in a popular sideline of audio tapes, many of which feature his irreverent wit.
His best-selling book Body Language brought him international recognition. It has been followed by several others. He is quite well known in Australia and during the 1980s he was an occasional TV analyst for political debates where he would analyze the body language and overall performance of the contestants.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allan_Pease
Originally a musician, he became a successful life insurance salesman, he started a career as a speaker and trainer in sales and latterly in body language. This resulted in a popular sideline of audio tapes, many of which feature his irreverent wit.
His best-selling book Body Language brought him international recognition. It has been followed by several others. He is quite well known in Australia and during the 1980s he was an occasional TV analyst for political debates where he would analyze the body language and overall performance of the contestants.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allan_Pease
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 29 of 888 reviews
November 5, 2012
I probably should not be reviewing this book now because I am going to sound like a raging bitch. However, I realized I would never be able to review this book with any amount of respect given its content. So, I might as well review it now. This book is full of “facts” of the modern day sexual clichés popularized by the media - Men are from Mars, women are from Venus. They are different. They THINK different, they ACT different and they WANT different things.
Right. Now, there is nothing wrong with acknowledging that men and women are different, because they are. The problem is when these differences are justified as “natural” and “scientific,” something that both men and women have “biologically” inherited. It sounds almost like women are biologically incapable of reading maps, so deal with it. It takes no account of the social conditioning. It ignores the fact that our experiences are not individual and fixed, but social and processual. The book addresses this nature versus nurture debate in just a page and concludes that scientists have found out that “we are born with much of our brain software already in place.”
There have been much debate about it and no firm conclusions have yet reached. Scientifically, the concept of “evolution” explains how living organisms adapt their body and behavior to fit the environment. This is of course influenced by our social conducts and what we define as socially acceptable. Even if we refuse to talk about evolution, there have been many studies that drew from past societies which show how men and women used to behave differently in those societies. For example, unlike present day, in ancient Greece it was considered acceptable (and natural) for young men to perform fellatio on older men. My point is that categories of social analysis do not transcend time and place. Our behavior, values and moralities depends much more on our social environment than it does on our biological inheritance.
Since the writers are trained in neuroscience, one can probably forgive them for their thick-headed conclusions about the social environment. [Although, they themselves claim to be sociobiologists.] However, the writing style in this book is also not the least bit scientific. At one point they have concluded that “women with large breasts prefer men with small noses and men with large noses usually hang out with flat-chested women.” Actually, this is where I gave up. It reminded me of a recent study, which found that there is a positive correlation between countries’ chocolate consumption and the number of Nobel laureates. Moral of the story:
CORRELATION DOES NOT ALWAYS EQUAL TO CAUSATION.
I am not a relationship expert but I know my science and arts well. This book is a disgrace to both of the disciplines. Moreover, if your man’s penis has affected his hearing ability then the relationship is probably not worth it. You would be better off finding a man who does listen. Believe me, there are plenty of men who have learnt to listen like there are plenty of women who have learnt to read maps.
Right. Now, there is nothing wrong with acknowledging that men and women are different, because they are. The problem is when these differences are justified as “natural” and “scientific,” something that both men and women have “biologically” inherited. It sounds almost like women are biologically incapable of reading maps, so deal with it. It takes no account of the social conditioning. It ignores the fact that our experiences are not individual and fixed, but social and processual. The book addresses this nature versus nurture debate in just a page and concludes that scientists have found out that “we are born with much of our brain software already in place.”
There have been much debate about it and no firm conclusions have yet reached. Scientifically, the concept of “evolution” explains how living organisms adapt their body and behavior to fit the environment. This is of course influenced by our social conducts and what we define as socially acceptable. Even if we refuse to talk about evolution, there have been many studies that drew from past societies which show how men and women used to behave differently in those societies. For example, unlike present day, in ancient Greece it was considered acceptable (and natural) for young men to perform fellatio on older men. My point is that categories of social analysis do not transcend time and place. Our behavior, values and moralities depends much more on our social environment than it does on our biological inheritance.
Since the writers are trained in neuroscience, one can probably forgive them for their thick-headed conclusions about the social environment. [Although, they themselves claim to be sociobiologists.] However, the writing style in this book is also not the least bit scientific. At one point they have concluded that “women with large breasts prefer men with small noses and men with large noses usually hang out with flat-chested women.” Actually, this is where I gave up. It reminded me of a recent study, which found that there is a positive correlation between countries’ chocolate consumption and the number of Nobel laureates. Moral of the story:
CORRELATION DOES NOT ALWAYS EQUAL TO CAUSATION.
I am not a relationship expert but I know my science and arts well. This book is a disgrace to both of the disciplines. Moreover, if your man’s penis has affected his hearing ability then the relationship is probably not worth it. You would be better off finding a man who does listen. Believe me, there are plenty of men who have learnt to listen like there are plenty of women who have learnt to read maps.
June 5, 2009
I received it as a gift. I hated it! If I could give it zero stars I would.
The husband and wife who wrote this book claim to be social scientists. Their style of writing is not in the least bit scientific. They do the reader the grand favor of presenting "facts" backed up by hard science and sifting through the information on gender differences so the reader doesn't have to.
In my opinion, what they really did was start out with a theory and discard anything that didn't agree with it. Some of the physiological gender differences they refer to might actually be backed by scientific data. But the Peases fail to footnote any of the so-called facts with documentation of actual scientific publications or studies.
And they also do the reader the great favor of telling him or her that if they disagree with their conclusions, it is only because the reader has been "victimized" by idealization.
I don't think their conclusion that men and women are different is nearly as shocking as they think it is. In fact I agree that there are differences between the genders, and some of it is based on biology. However, the Peases discard theories of socialization to explain some gender differences and instead insist gender differences are mostly based on men and women evolving differently.
And while they claim that they support women's rights to equality and working outside the home for equal compensation, they simultaneously advance the theory that relationships were happier when women got their self-esteem from providing a happy home for their hardworking husband and offspring. Their theory is pretty easy to challenge. After all if women were really so happy historically being homemakers, why would so many of them risked bliss on the homefront to join the workforce, fought for the right to vote, etc.
I found this book as pandering to stereotypes and managing to insult both genders. Gender based humor shows up in a lot of entertainment. The reason I find it so angering in this book is that the Peases claim their information is all backed by science. And yet most of their conclusions are not backed by much data. They will do things like cite "a recent study" or throw out a statistic without actually giving any information about who performed the study, was it peer-reviewed, how was the study set up, etc.
I also find it comical when they make claims that girls are mainly motivated by cooperation and you can't tell a leader in a group of women. It makes me question whether the Peases ever set foot in a grade school. I certainly recall there being a pecking order with the girls that was at least as clear, if not more defined than that of the boys.
The husband and wife who wrote this book claim to be social scientists. Their style of writing is not in the least bit scientific. They do the reader the grand favor of presenting "facts" backed up by hard science and sifting through the information on gender differences so the reader doesn't have to.
In my opinion, what they really did was start out with a theory and discard anything that didn't agree with it. Some of the physiological gender differences they refer to might actually be backed by scientific data. But the Peases fail to footnote any of the so-called facts with documentation of actual scientific publications or studies.
And they also do the reader the great favor of telling him or her that if they disagree with their conclusions, it is only because the reader has been "victimized" by idealization.
I don't think their conclusion that men and women are different is nearly as shocking as they think it is. In fact I agree that there are differences between the genders, and some of it is based on biology. However, the Peases discard theories of socialization to explain some gender differences and instead insist gender differences are mostly based on men and women evolving differently.
And while they claim that they support women's rights to equality and working outside the home for equal compensation, they simultaneously advance the theory that relationships were happier when women got their self-esteem from providing a happy home for their hardworking husband and offspring. Their theory is pretty easy to challenge. After all if women were really so happy historically being homemakers, why would so many of them risked bliss on the homefront to join the workforce, fought for the right to vote, etc.
I found this book as pandering to stereotypes and managing to insult both genders. Gender based humor shows up in a lot of entertainment. The reason I find it so angering in this book is that the Peases claim their information is all backed by science. And yet most of their conclusions are not backed by much data. They will do things like cite "a recent study" or throw out a statistic without actually giving any information about who performed the study, was it peer-reviewed, how was the study set up, etc.
I also find it comical when they make claims that girls are mainly motivated by cooperation and you can't tell a leader in a group of women. It makes me question whether the Peases ever set foot in a grade school. I certainly recall there being a pecking order with the girls that was at least as clear, if not more defined than that of the boys.
January 4, 2018
What a fun book! This book by the well-known authors Barbara and Allan Pease is controversial perhaps, but well-grounded in new research. Parts of the book are absolutely hilarious, but they all ring true. The basic hypothesis in this book is that the brains in men and women are organized differently. While morally, men and women are equal, they are not identical. The wiring of our brains and the effects of hormones determine how we think and behave.
The corpus callosum, the bundle of nerves which connects the left and right sides of the brain, is thicker in women's brains, and handles perhaps 30% more inter-brain connections. In addition, some brain functions, like speech, are distributed between both sides of women's brains, but are isolated in one side of men's brains. As a result, a woman's brains handle speech better. Also, women can perform true multi-tasking and multi-tracking, while men find it difficult.
The book is illustrated with numerous cartoons. While many of the cartoons are exaggerated, each one points out a truism about differences between the way men and women think. Men's brains have evolved to help men with their main job; catch lunch. As a result, their think is more focused, and they have better spatial reasoning abilities. This is especially true when a man's system is flush with testosterone. On the other hand, women's brains have evolved to aid their main job; to be nurturing. They are much better at communicating, and are better at multi-tasking. Women are also better at multi-tracking; keeping track of conversations about multiple topics simultaneously.
One of the best aspects of this book, is that not only do the authors point out the differences between men and women, but a lot of very practical advice is given. Both men and women are given advice about how to make allowances for the opposite sex. You see, people have been instilled with the idea that men and women are identical, and people think that others think along the same lines as themselves. But this just isn't true. Men have big advantages (spatial thinking, problem solving) and women have big advantages (communications, observation and intuition), simply due to the wiring of brains.
I highly recommend this book; it is so fun, and contains so many pearls of wisdom that ring true.
The corpus callosum, the bundle of nerves which connects the left and right sides of the brain, is thicker in women's brains, and handles perhaps 30% more inter-brain connections. In addition, some brain functions, like speech, are distributed between both sides of women's brains, but are isolated in one side of men's brains. As a result, a woman's brains handle speech better. Also, women can perform true multi-tasking and multi-tracking, while men find it difficult.
The book is illustrated with numerous cartoons. While many of the cartoons are exaggerated, each one points out a truism about differences between the way men and women think. Men's brains have evolved to help men with their main job; catch lunch. As a result, their think is more focused, and they have better spatial reasoning abilities. This is especially true when a man's system is flush with testosterone. On the other hand, women's brains have evolved to aid their main job; to be nurturing. They are much better at communicating, and are better at multi-tasking. Women are also better at multi-tracking; keeping track of conversations about multiple topics simultaneously.
One of the best aspects of this book, is that not only do the authors point out the differences between men and women, but a lot of very practical advice is given. Both men and women are given advice about how to make allowances for the opposite sex. You see, people have been instilled with the idea that men and women are identical, and people think that others think along the same lines as themselves. But this just isn't true. Men have big advantages (spatial thinking, problem solving) and women have big advantages (communications, observation and intuition), simply due to the wiring of brains.
I highly recommend this book; it is so fun, and contains so many pearls of wisdom that ring true.
January 17, 2015
In our modern society, it is not politically correct to assume that men and women are anything but equal, and equality is defined as exactly the same. Same desires, same goals, and same needs. Allan Pease and his wife Barbara write that this is anything but how it really is. Neither sex is superior to the other, but they assert we are unquestionably different. From an evolutionary psychology perspective, our brains have been wired for different priorities based upon thousands of years of unique responsibilities while ensuring the survival of the next generation. Pease cites empirical research along with illustrative anecdotes. While mostly focused on heterosexual relationships, it also devotes a wonderful chapter to the biological basis for homosexuality as a natural phenomenon. While many may find this work controversial, I bet anyone in a marriage or heterosexual LTR will have a hard time reading this book and not identifying with the male/female dynamics described. Once we can logically explain these differences as the result of hardwired neurological developments, we can lessen the pressure on ourselves and our partner and accept one another as we are. Also, reading this, it's critical to remember much of what is discussed is generalization and not indicative of every man and every woman. Even if it's not their natural proclivity, men can learn to listen and be more sensitive with the women. Likewise, a woman can better learn to enjoy the male tendency to interpret "romance" as doing something practical for her.
June 9, 2013
It looks like the comments on this book are two-fold: people who hated it or who loved it. Personally, I think it was OK but does not deserve all the fuss about it. Some parts of the book ring true, some others don't really and a small portion of it sounds like unjustified bold statements.
However, what justifies my choice of a 1-star rating is the lack of serious data behind it. Overall, although the way of thinking in this book may be right and some of the advice is quite sound, I was expecting that each statement, each survey result shown in the book would be backed by accessible conclusions that would allow the reader to check by him/herself. As none of the arguments is linked to accessible results, as far as I am concerned, the author can raise any statement as truth without challenge. Some items are presented as logical by the arguments but with a bit of thoughts, you can quickly realise they do not add up at all.
Funnily enough, reading this book helped me understand something totally different from its main topic: how some people can be made to believe anything if they do not challenge the author of the statements. By constantly hammering the same statements, even without any proven serious data, the authors can make credulous people believe in this statement. This is not called information, this is called brain-washing, fundamentalism or religion.
No mater how true the conclusions may be, the method used to write this book is wrong and is the same as the one used by the advocates of creationism or the absence of human-caused global warming. As such, I would not recommend this book.
However, what justifies my choice of a 1-star rating is the lack of serious data behind it. Overall, although the way of thinking in this book may be right and some of the advice is quite sound, I was expecting that each statement, each survey result shown in the book would be backed by accessible conclusions that would allow the reader to check by him/herself. As none of the arguments is linked to accessible results, as far as I am concerned, the author can raise any statement as truth without challenge. Some items are presented as logical by the arguments but with a bit of thoughts, you can quickly realise they do not add up at all.
Funnily enough, reading this book helped me understand something totally different from its main topic: how some people can be made to believe anything if they do not challenge the author of the statements. By constantly hammering the same statements, even without any proven serious data, the authors can make credulous people believe in this statement. This is not called information, this is called brain-washing, fundamentalism or religion.
No mater how true the conclusions may be, the method used to write this book is wrong and is the same as the one used by the advocates of creationism or the absence of human-caused global warming. As such, I would not recommend this book.
March 11, 2024
A lot of information here although I wouldn't take it too seriously to be honest. I'm not sure these things are as straight forward as they would like us to believe.
Three stars.
Three stars.
March 4, 2010
wew, cepet juga ternyata bacanya. kurang dari sehari udah kelar. tanda2 kepulihan dan membaiknya napsu membaca kah? :D
Men forget everything; women remember everything.
Inti dari buku ini adalah... laki-laki dan perempuan itu beda!
ya iya lah, nenek-nenek juga tau soal itu mah
Secara keseluruhan bukuna lumayan menarik. buku ini mencoba mengurai perbedaan2 mendasar antara laki2 dan perempuan dari sudut ilmiah . kenapa laki2 suka begini? kenapa perempuan begini? seperti itulah.
bacanya sambil cengar cengir sendiri sambil kadang2 bergumam "oh, iya yah" ato "oh, gitu yah" terutama pada pengungkapan fakta yang dirasa "kena". misalnya kenapa laki2 selalu kesulitan mencari benda kecil seperti kaos kaki ato baju dilemari. Ingetna kalo pagi2 bokap selalu treak2 nyari kaos kaki di tempat kaos kaki kalo mau tenis. Meskipun sudah ngaduk2 itu tempat kaos kaos kaki yang dicari tetep aja kaos kaki yang dicari gak ketemu. biasana disini emak suka "turun tangan". dalam hitungan detik biasana itu kaos kaki yang dicari langsung ketemu dan biasana emak langsung memberi "petuah".. "kalo nyari barang itu pake mata, jangan pake mulut." :D
Dan banyak lagi hal2 seperti kenapa laki2 suka ngoprek remote, gengsi menanyakan arah dll. Dan masalah komunikasi antara laki2 dan perempuan yang sering menimbulkan "masalah" karena masing menginterpretasikannya secara berbeda. Yah tak heran jika ada yang mengatakan kalo laki2 itu berasal dari mars & perempuan dari venus, hehehehe.
oke, ini ada beberapa jokes tentang miskomunikasi antara bahasa "mars" dan bahasa "venus" yang sering membawa "masalah". Ingat, just joke aja, jangan ditanggapi terlalu serius yah..
How the Fight Start
I asked my wife, "Where do you want to go for our anniversary?"
It warmed my heart to see her face melt in sweet appreciation.
"Somewhere I haven't been in a long time!" she said.
So I suggested, "How about the kitchen?"
And that's when the fight started...
My wife sat down on the couch next to me as I was flipping channels.
She asked, 'What's on TV?' I said, 'Dust.'
And then the fight started...
When I got home last night, my wife demanded that I take her someplace expensive.
So I took her to a gas station.
And that's when the fight started...
My wife was hinting about what she wanted for our upcoming anniversary.
She said, 'I want something shiny that goes from 0 to 150 in about 3 seconds.'
So I bought her a scale.
And then the fight started...
Intinya, joke diatas itu mengungkapkan kekurangpekaan laki2 dalam berkomunikasi dengan perempuan :D
satu lagi deh, merujuk kejudul awalnya "Why Men Don't Listen" ada joke lain tentang laki2 yang berusaha "mendengar"
To Be 6 Again
A man asked his wife what she'd like for her birthday.
"I'd love to be six again," she replied.
On the morning of her birthday, he got her up bright and early and off they went to a local theme park.
What a day! He put her on every ride in the park: the Death Slide, the Screaming Loop, the Wall of Fear, everything there was! Wow! Five hours later she staggered out of the theme park, her head reeling and her stomach upside down. Right to a McDonald's they went, where her husband ordered her a Happy Meal with extra fries and a refreshing chocolate shake.
Then it was off to a movie, the latest Star Wars epic, a hot dog, popcorn, Pepsi, and M&Ms.
What a fabulous adventure! Finally she wobbled home with her husband and collapsed into bed.
He leaned over and lovingly asked, "Well, dear, what was it like being six again?"
One eye opened. "You idiot, I meant my dress size."
Moral dari cerita diatas: meskipun laki2 sudah berusaha mendengar tapi kadang2 tetap salah mengartikan apa yang didengarnya :D
Jadi terlepas dari perbedaan2 tersebut, sayah tetap beranggapan:
It's not true that men are from Mars and women are from Venus
The truth is.. Men are from earth. Women are from earth. So, deal with it.
We Can Work It Out
The Beatles
Try to see it my way,
Do I have to keep on talking till I can't go on?
While you see it your way,
Run the risk of knowing that our love may soon be gone.
We can work it out,
We can work it out.
Think of what you're saying.
You can get it wrong and still you think that it's all right.
Think of what I'm saying,
We can work it out and get it straight, or say good night.
We can work it out,
We can work it out.
Life is very short, and there's no time
For fussing and fighting, my friend.
I have always thought that it's a crime,
So I will ask you once again.
Try to see it my way,
Only time will tell if I am right or I am wrong.
While you see it your way
There's a chance that we might fall apart before too long.
We can work it out,
We can work it out.
-------------------------------------
baru inget pas bongkar2 tas, ternyata beli buku ini pas pameran kmaren
Perempuan menggunakan toilet sebagai tempat untuk bersosialisasi
laki2 nggak, mereka pake toilet hanya bener2 untuk urusan "panggilan alam"
sepertinya iya, kalo laki2 lagi di toilet mereka gak pernah saling bertegur sapa, pandangannya lurus kedepan gak pernah larak lirik :D
seperti tercantum dalam "unofficial man code" yang salah satu poinnya
*Never talk to a man in the bathroom unless you're on equal footing: either both urinating or both waiting in line. In all other situations, a nod is all the conversation you need.
*If a man's zipper is down, that's his problem. * You didn't see nothin'.
:D
segitu dulu ah
Men forget everything; women remember everything.
Inti dari buku ini adalah... laki-laki dan perempuan itu beda!
ya iya lah, nenek-nenek juga tau soal itu mah
Secara keseluruhan bukuna lumayan menarik. buku ini mencoba mengurai perbedaan2 mendasar antara laki2 dan perempuan dari sudut ilmiah . kenapa laki2 suka begini? kenapa perempuan begini? seperti itulah.
bacanya sambil cengar cengir sendiri sambil kadang2 bergumam "oh, iya yah" ato "oh, gitu yah" terutama pada pengungkapan fakta yang dirasa "kena". misalnya kenapa laki2 selalu kesulitan mencari benda kecil seperti kaos kaki ato baju dilemari. Ingetna kalo pagi2 bokap selalu treak2 nyari kaos kaki di tempat kaos kaki kalo mau tenis. Meskipun sudah ngaduk2 itu tempat kaos kaos kaki yang dicari tetep aja kaos kaki yang dicari gak ketemu. biasana disini emak suka "turun tangan". dalam hitungan detik biasana itu kaos kaki yang dicari langsung ketemu dan biasana emak langsung memberi "petuah".. "kalo nyari barang itu pake mata, jangan pake mulut." :D
Dan banyak lagi hal2 seperti kenapa laki2 suka ngoprek remote, gengsi menanyakan arah dll. Dan masalah komunikasi antara laki2 dan perempuan yang sering menimbulkan "masalah" karena masing menginterpretasikannya secara berbeda. Yah tak heran jika ada yang mengatakan kalo laki2 itu berasal dari mars & perempuan dari venus, hehehehe.
oke, ini ada beberapa jokes tentang miskomunikasi antara bahasa "mars" dan bahasa "venus" yang sering membawa "masalah". Ingat, just joke aja, jangan ditanggapi terlalu serius yah..
How the Fight Start
I asked my wife, "Where do you want to go for our anniversary?"
It warmed my heart to see her face melt in sweet appreciation.
"Somewhere I haven't been in a long time!" she said.
So I suggested, "How about the kitchen?"
And that's when the fight started...
My wife sat down on the couch next to me as I was flipping channels.
She asked, 'What's on TV?' I said, 'Dust.'
And then the fight started...
When I got home last night, my wife demanded that I take her someplace expensive.
So I took her to a gas station.
And that's when the fight started...
My wife was hinting about what she wanted for our upcoming anniversary.
She said, 'I want something shiny that goes from 0 to 150 in about 3 seconds.'
So I bought her a scale.
And then the fight started...
Intinya, joke diatas itu mengungkapkan kekurangpekaan laki2 dalam berkomunikasi dengan perempuan :D
satu lagi deh, merujuk kejudul awalnya "Why Men Don't Listen" ada joke lain tentang laki2 yang berusaha "mendengar"
To Be 6 Again
A man asked his wife what she'd like for her birthday.
"I'd love to be six again," she replied.
On the morning of her birthday, he got her up bright and early and off they went to a local theme park.
What a day! He put her on every ride in the park: the Death Slide, the Screaming Loop, the Wall of Fear, everything there was! Wow! Five hours later she staggered out of the theme park, her head reeling and her stomach upside down. Right to a McDonald's they went, where her husband ordered her a Happy Meal with extra fries and a refreshing chocolate shake.
Then it was off to a movie, the latest Star Wars epic, a hot dog, popcorn, Pepsi, and M&Ms.
What a fabulous adventure! Finally she wobbled home with her husband and collapsed into bed.
He leaned over and lovingly asked, "Well, dear, what was it like being six again?"
One eye opened. "You idiot, I meant my dress size."
Moral dari cerita diatas: meskipun laki2 sudah berusaha mendengar tapi kadang2 tetap salah mengartikan apa yang didengarnya :D
Jadi terlepas dari perbedaan2 tersebut, sayah tetap beranggapan:
It's not true that men are from Mars and women are from Venus
The truth is.. Men are from earth. Women are from earth. So, deal with it.
We Can Work It Out
The Beatles
Try to see it my way,
Do I have to keep on talking till I can't go on?
While you see it your way,
Run the risk of knowing that our love may soon be gone.
We can work it out,
We can work it out.
Think of what you're saying.
You can get it wrong and still you think that it's all right.
Think of what I'm saying,
We can work it out and get it straight, or say good night.
We can work it out,
We can work it out.
Life is very short, and there's no time
For fussing and fighting, my friend.
I have always thought that it's a crime,
So I will ask you once again.
Try to see it my way,
Only time will tell if I am right or I am wrong.
While you see it your way
There's a chance that we might fall apart before too long.
We can work it out,
We can work it out.
-------------------------------------
baru inget pas bongkar2 tas, ternyata beli buku ini pas pameran kmaren
Perempuan menggunakan toilet sebagai tempat untuk bersosialisasi
laki2 nggak, mereka pake toilet hanya bener2 untuk urusan "panggilan alam"
sepertinya iya, kalo laki2 lagi di toilet mereka gak pernah saling bertegur sapa, pandangannya lurus kedepan gak pernah larak lirik :D
seperti tercantum dalam "unofficial man code" yang salah satu poinnya
*Never talk to a man in the bathroom unless you're on equal footing: either both urinating or both waiting in line. In all other situations, a nod is all the conversation you need.
*If a man's zipper is down, that's his problem. * You didn't see nothin'.
:D
segitu dulu ah
June 26, 2008
According to this book, I am "more likely" to be a lesbian because I have a masculine brain. This book also supports evolution but says that "Nature wants us to procreate and uses powerful drugs to do so." Yuh-huh, okay and what is "nature"? And why does it have wants? The advice in this book is stupid. The female author claims that she still has trouble finding her way home - yeah maybe because she is stupid not because she is female. None of the authors are psychologists or psychiatrists or even sociologists. This book relys heavily on the caveman theory. I cant believe the kind of books that become #1 nowadays.
July 4, 2014
Ugh, where to begin with this one? The title was sexist, but I hoped it was ironic. It's not. Men and women are different. Did you know this? Women talk too much and men don't show their feeling. It's all biological. Let's name-drop some studies to back it up, but not give footnotes to actual papers or studies should the reader wish to investigate further. The authors are supposedly for equal treatment of the sexes, but they certainly like to constantly reference that life was so much easier when we just accepted our roles as given. I wanted to slam this against the wall a few times, but refrained, as it's a library book. And if you're curious, that is the only way I would suggest reading it. Don't waste your money on this drivel.
September 24, 2020
Всички сте забелязали, че мъжете и жените се различават по доста повече отколкото това, което е в гащите им. Най-повърхностно погледнато, 99.9% от заварчиците са мъже и 99.9% от медицинските сестри са жени, повечето мъже се кефят да гледат футбол а жените да си купуват обувки. На какво се дължи това и какво да правим и как Войната за вдигнатия капак на тоалетната чиния отговаря на тия въпроси?
От време оно в етологията (науката за поведението) и по-специално поведението на хората, има две течения, с които мисля до болка са ви проглушили ушите – условно наречени nature и nurture.
Според едната страна, всички разлики са генетични и вродени: мъжкият мозък е еволюирал така че да е приспособен към заниманията на мъжете при развитието на човешкия вид – лов, битки, занимания на открито, затова мъжете имат по-добро пространствено мислене, по-агресивни са и са по-често индивидуалисти, докато жените са седяли в пещерите, гледали са децата и са си приказвали, затова постепенно са унаследили качества като социалност, креативност.
Учените от другото течение пък смятат, че момчетата и момичетата се раждат умствено еднакви, а „мъжкото“ и „женското“ поведение са само резултат от средата в която мъжете и жените растат и живеят, от традициите и възпитанието им, от обществото. Примерно, момченцата от малки ги зарибяват с колички и ги възпитават да са самостоятелни и да „се държат като мъже“, докато на момиченцата им дават кукли, наричат ги „на мама принцесата“ и ги учат да са мили и да се подчиняват – и логично, момчетата израстват по-често активни, волеви и се интересуват от технически неща, докато момичетата се интересуват от дрехи, гримове, завършват „пиар“ или нещо такова.
Всъщност, оригиналното заглавие на книгата Войната за вдигнатия капак на тоалетната чиния е Защо мъжете не слушат като им говориш и защо жените не могат да се ориентират по карта. В нея двама съпрузи, занимаващи се в САЩ от дълги години със семинари, консултации и т.н. в сферата на семейните отношения, развиват тезата, че ВСИЧКО е генетично – мъжете са такива, жените са онакива, мъжете разбират от това, жените от онова и така 300 страници.
Аз, разбира се, съм забелязал известни вродени разлики между мъже и жени, но съм много далече от мисълта, че те са токова много и толкова изразени, колкото двамата автори се опитват да ни убедят. Първо, че в книгата липсват каквито и да е доказателства и референции, с които би трябвало да изобилства една книга, която прави подобни обобщения на едро (дори да е предназначена за широката аудитория като тази).
И второ и по-важно, докато описва какви „са“ мъжете и жените, за чуждестранния читател става пределно ясно, че авторите описват мъжете и жените в САЩ и се опитват да обяснят техните характеристики и поведение с гените и инстинктите. Което за чужденец звучи доста смешно, щото вижда как мъжете и жените в неговата държава се държат различно в описаните ситуации – т.е. очевидно това поведение не е вродено, а се ръководи от вродени характеристики, но зависи от местните традиции и възпитание.
От време оно в етологията (науката за поведението) и по-специално поведението на хората, има две течения, с които мисля до болка са ви проглушили ушите – условно наречени nature и nurture.
Според едната страна, всички разлики са генетични и вродени: мъжкият мозък е еволюирал така че да е приспособен към заниманията на мъжете при развитието на човешкия вид – лов, битки, занимания на открито, затова мъжете имат по-добро пространствено мислене, по-агресивни са и са по-често индивидуалисти, докато жените са седяли в пещерите, гледали са децата и са си приказвали, затова постепенно са унаследили качества като социалност, креативност.
Учените от другото течение пък смятат, че момчетата и момичетата се раждат умствено еднакви, а „мъжкото“ и „женското“ поведение са само резултат от средата в която мъжете и жените растат и живеят, от традициите и възпитанието им, от обществото. Примерно, момченцата от малки ги зарибяват с колички и ги възпитават да са самостоятелни и да „се държат като мъже“, докато на момиченцата им дават кукли, наричат ги „на мама принцесата“ и ги учат да са мили и да се подчиняват – и логично, момчетата израстват по-често активни, волеви и се интересуват от технически неща, докато момичетата се интересуват от дрехи, гримове, завършват „пиар“ или нещо такова.
Всъщност, оригиналното заглавие на книгата Войната за вдигнатия капак на тоалетната чиния е Защо мъжете не слушат като им говориш и защо жените не могат да се ориентират по карта. В нея двама съпрузи, занимаващи се в САЩ от дълги години със семинари, консултации и т.н. в сферата на семейните отношения, развиват тезата, че ВСИЧКО е генетично – мъжете са такива, жените са онакива, мъжете разбират от това, жените от онова и така 300 страници.
Аз, разбира се, съм забелязал известни вродени разлики между мъже и жени, но съм много далече от мисълта, че те са токова много и толкова изразени, колкото двамата автори се опитват да ни убедят. Първо, че в книгата липсват каквито и да е доказателства и референции, с които би трябвало да изобилства една книга, която прави подобни обобщения на едро (дори да е предназначена за широката аудитория като тази).
И второ и по-важно, докато описва какви „са“ мъжете и жените, за чуждестранния читател става пределно ясно, че авторите описват мъжете и жените в САЩ и се опитват да обяснят техните характеристики и поведение с гените и инстинктите. Което за чужденец звучи доста смешно, щото вижда как мъжете и жените в неговата държава се държат различно в описаните ситуации – т.е. очевидно това поведение не е вродено, а се ръководи от вродени характеристики, но зависи от местните традиции и възпитание.
August 27, 2007
Well, because I am a woman, so I learned lot of things about men from this book. And I got so much explanations why sometimes women (like me) just couldn't understand men. Hahaha.. I think, men should read this book too. If they were reading this, good for them. With this book, men would much more understand us. Like my boyfriend, he finds so much familiar things (that happened between us) in this book, and he said : "I understand you better than before, cause this book gave me how-to-think-women-way." :)))
July 16, 2015
I don't know if reading about 20 pages of a book before throwing it across the room counts as "reading" it, but I just couldn't do any more. As a psychologist, my bullshit radar was off the charts from page 1. It's clear that the writers are more concerned about hyperbole, gross generalisation and oversimplification than facts and complexities. for instance, they list a bunch of differences between men and women, and conclude that it's all due to biological differences (no matter that we have known for a while that human behaviour is roughly 50% nature and 50% nurture, but two dimensions were obviously one too many for the Peases). These are just a few reasons this abomination is not worth anyone's time, but I'm sure you could find plenty more if you had the stomach to wade through the whole thing. No stars. Not even a tiny one.
March 23, 2018
An entertaining attempt to explain different but ever closer together worlds
Please note that I put the original German text at the end of this review. Just if you might be interested.
First of all, one should not expect a well-founded, too seriously realistic or even politically correct and from the gendering point perfect entertainment book, but should be prepared for a light and not very serious reading. Moreover, then it is a frivolously innocent and winking reading fun from the springs of two seminar sales professionals.
All the clichés and stereotypes that are portrayed and illustrated with more or less severe studies and examples serve in addition to the provocation to achieve a polemical counter-reaction of militant groups, the noble ideal of better understanding between the sexes. Without paying much attention to scientific or psychological reasoning, things are presented as they are in many ways real. For prejudice and general publicity are not always based solely on evil slander and unjustified claims, but in this particular context often carry a few truckloads of granules of truth.
The predestination for specific talents or shortcomings is not only the result of unforgivable and stupid lies from times before the wave of emancipation. It is a fact that gender-specific abilities, inclinations, likes, and behaviors exist, and as long as these are lived out in the context of equitable, peaceful coexistence, there is no need for echoing.
Again and again amazing how easily by the not deliberate irritation of equality and feminist initiatives that can be carried away to increase the level of awareness of various publications, branding them as old-fashioned to sexist. This may well be justified in an appropriate context if it concerns misogynistic and primitive machinations. However, what precisely this, when looking at the title, cover, and caricatures should have done humoristic work, remains to be a mystery. Defining abuses and advocating democratic equality are lofty ideals, only with just such overreactions will the seriousness and credibility of entire activist groups be significantly reduced. The conscientious examination of the potential point of contention for legitimate factors of great excitement to anger should be done before it becomes glowing.
Each person is allowed to represent their personality and opinion, but as soon as it comes to gender, the highest caution is required in the formulation. Hormones cause certain things in the body, for the consequences of which one would not be ashamed and just as little as their effect can be extinguished as tens of thousands of years of development to today's modern humans and set all the same. Diversity in combination with lived tolerance is just as desirable as equality.
Moreover, as a basis serve the understanding and approach of the strange, difficult-to-understand worlds of life of the opposite sex, as the authors demonstrate entertaining. Furthermore, looking at one's love-joyous joy and, perhaps luckily, a little suffering, the option of laughing and not being so severe is probably the most sensible one given all the conflict-suffering and conflict potential in all forms of human partnership approaches. Moreover, anyone who does not find himself in any of the clichés he has portrayed has lingered on to the next level of human evolution. Alternatively, supposedly means to be there.
Ein unterhaltsamer Versuch zur Erklärung verschiedener, aber immer näher zusammenrückender Welten
Vorab darf man sich kein fundiertes, allzu realitätsnahes oder gar politisch und vom Genderingstandpunkt korrektes Unterhaltungssachbuch erwarten, sondern sollte sich auf eine leichte und nicht ganz ernst zu nehmende Lektüre einstellen. Und dann ist es ein frivol unbedarfter und augenzwinkernder Lesespaß aus den Federn zweier Seminarverkaufsprofis.
All die Klischees und Stereotypen, die dargestellt und mit mehr oder minder seriösen Studien und Beispielen illustriert werden dienen, neben der Provokation zur Erreichung einer polemischen Gegenreaktion militanter Gruppierungen, dem hehren Ideal des besseren Verständnisses zwischen den Geschlechtern.
Ohne Augenmerk auf allzu wissenschaftliche oder psychologische Fundiertheit zu legen, werden die Dinge dargelegt, wie sie in vielerlei Hinsicht wirklich sind. Denn Vorurteile und Allgemeinplätze beruhen nicht immer nur auf bösen Verleumdungen und ungerechtfertigten Behauptungen, sondern bergen in diesem speziellen Kontext häufig einige Lastwagenladungen mit Körnchen von Wahrheit. Die Prädestinierung für bestimmte Talente beziehungsweise Mankos ist nicht nur aus unverzeihlichen und dummen Lügen aus Zeiten vor der Emanzipationswelle entstanden. Es ist eine Tatsache, dass geschlechtsspezifische Talente, Neigungen, Vorlieben und Verhaltensmuster existieren und solange diese im Rahmen gleichberechtigter, friedlicher Koexistenz ausgelebt werden, besteht kein Anlass zur Echauffierung.
Immer wieder erstaunlich, wie leicht sich durch die nicht wirklich vorsätzliche Reizung von Gleichberechtigungs- und Feministeninitiativen jene dazu hinreißen lassen, zur Steigerung des Bekanntheitsgrades diverser Publikationen, diese als altmodisch bis sexistisch zu brandmarken. Dies mag in einem passenden Zusammenhang durchaus berechtigt sein, wenn es sich um frauenfeindliche und primitive Machwerke handelt. Nur was genau dieses, bei Betrachtung von Titel, Einband und Karikaturen eindeutig humoristische Werk verbrochen haben soll, bleibt mir schleierhaft. Missstände aufzuzeigen und für demokratische Gleichberechtigung einzustehen sind hehre Ideale, nur mit genau solchen Überreaktionen wird die Seriosität und Glaubwürdigkeit ganzer Aktivistengruppen wesentlich gemindert. Die gewissenhafte Durchleuchtung des potentiellen Streitpunkts auf berechtigte Faktoren heftiger Erregung bis Wut sollte vor Aufglühen selbiger erfolgen.
Es wird jedem Menschen zugestanden, eine eigene Persönlichkeit und Meinung zu vertreten, sobald es allerdings um das Geschlecht geht, ist höchste Vorsicht bei der Formulierung geboten. Hormone bewirken nun mal bestimmte Dinge im Körper, für deren Konsequenzen man sich eigentlich nicht zu schämen bräuchte und genauso wenig wie deren Wirkung kann man wie zig Jahrtausende andauernde Entwicklung zum heutigen modernen Menschen einfach auslöschen und alle auf gleich setzen. Diversität ist in Kombination mit gelebter Toleranz genauso erstrebenswert wie Gleichberechtigung.
Und als Grundlage dienen das Verständnis und das Näherbringen der fremden, schwer nachvollziehbaren Lebenswelten des jeweils anderen Geschlechts, wie es die Autoren unterhaltsam demonstrieren. Und wenn man auf das eigene liebestechnische Freud und, vielleicht mit viel Glück, wenig Leid blickt, ist die Option es mit Lachen und nicht so ernst zu nehmen, angesichts all des Konflikts- Leids- und Streitpotentials in allen Spielarten menschlicher Partnerschaften vielleicht eine der vernünftigsten Herangehensweisen. Und wer sich in keinem der dargestellten Klischees selbst wiederfindet ist einsam auf die nächste Stufe der Evolution des Menschen weitergeklettert. Oder meint sich vermeintlich dort.
Please note that I put the original German text at the end of this review. Just if you might be interested.
First of all, one should not expect a well-founded, too seriously realistic or even politically correct and from the gendering point perfect entertainment book, but should be prepared for a light and not very serious reading. Moreover, then it is a frivolously innocent and winking reading fun from the springs of two seminar sales professionals.
All the clichés and stereotypes that are portrayed and illustrated with more or less severe studies and examples serve in addition to the provocation to achieve a polemical counter-reaction of militant groups, the noble ideal of better understanding between the sexes. Without paying much attention to scientific or psychological reasoning, things are presented as they are in many ways real. For prejudice and general publicity are not always based solely on evil slander and unjustified claims, but in this particular context often carry a few truckloads of granules of truth.
The predestination for specific talents or shortcomings is not only the result of unforgivable and stupid lies from times before the wave of emancipation. It is a fact that gender-specific abilities, inclinations, likes, and behaviors exist, and as long as these are lived out in the context of equitable, peaceful coexistence, there is no need for echoing.
Again and again amazing how easily by the not deliberate irritation of equality and feminist initiatives that can be carried away to increase the level of awareness of various publications, branding them as old-fashioned to sexist. This may well be justified in an appropriate context if it concerns misogynistic and primitive machinations. However, what precisely this, when looking at the title, cover, and caricatures should have done humoristic work, remains to be a mystery. Defining abuses and advocating democratic equality are lofty ideals, only with just such overreactions will the seriousness and credibility of entire activist groups be significantly reduced. The conscientious examination of the potential point of contention for legitimate factors of great excitement to anger should be done before it becomes glowing.
Each person is allowed to represent their personality and opinion, but as soon as it comes to gender, the highest caution is required in the formulation. Hormones cause certain things in the body, for the consequences of which one would not be ashamed and just as little as their effect can be extinguished as tens of thousands of years of development to today's modern humans and set all the same. Diversity in combination with lived tolerance is just as desirable as equality.
Moreover, as a basis serve the understanding and approach of the strange, difficult-to-understand worlds of life of the opposite sex, as the authors demonstrate entertaining. Furthermore, looking at one's love-joyous joy and, perhaps luckily, a little suffering, the option of laughing and not being so severe is probably the most sensible one given all the conflict-suffering and conflict potential in all forms of human partnership approaches. Moreover, anyone who does not find himself in any of the clichés he has portrayed has lingered on to the next level of human evolution. Alternatively, supposedly means to be there.
Ein unterhaltsamer Versuch zur Erklärung verschiedener, aber immer näher zusammenrückender Welten
Vorab darf man sich kein fundiertes, allzu realitätsnahes oder gar politisch und vom Genderingstandpunkt korrektes Unterhaltungssachbuch erwarten, sondern sollte sich auf eine leichte und nicht ganz ernst zu nehmende Lektüre einstellen. Und dann ist es ein frivol unbedarfter und augenzwinkernder Lesespaß aus den Federn zweier Seminarverkaufsprofis.
All die Klischees und Stereotypen, die dargestellt und mit mehr oder minder seriösen Studien und Beispielen illustriert werden dienen, neben der Provokation zur Erreichung einer polemischen Gegenreaktion militanter Gruppierungen, dem hehren Ideal des besseren Verständnisses zwischen den Geschlechtern.
Ohne Augenmerk auf allzu wissenschaftliche oder psychologische Fundiertheit zu legen, werden die Dinge dargelegt, wie sie in vielerlei Hinsicht wirklich sind. Denn Vorurteile und Allgemeinplätze beruhen nicht immer nur auf bösen Verleumdungen und ungerechtfertigten Behauptungen, sondern bergen in diesem speziellen Kontext häufig einige Lastwagenladungen mit Körnchen von Wahrheit. Die Prädestinierung für bestimmte Talente beziehungsweise Mankos ist nicht nur aus unverzeihlichen und dummen Lügen aus Zeiten vor der Emanzipationswelle entstanden. Es ist eine Tatsache, dass geschlechtsspezifische Talente, Neigungen, Vorlieben und Verhaltensmuster existieren und solange diese im Rahmen gleichberechtigter, friedlicher Koexistenz ausgelebt werden, besteht kein Anlass zur Echauffierung.
Immer wieder erstaunlich, wie leicht sich durch die nicht wirklich vorsätzliche Reizung von Gleichberechtigungs- und Feministeninitiativen jene dazu hinreißen lassen, zur Steigerung des Bekanntheitsgrades diverser Publikationen, diese als altmodisch bis sexistisch zu brandmarken. Dies mag in einem passenden Zusammenhang durchaus berechtigt sein, wenn es sich um frauenfeindliche und primitive Machwerke handelt. Nur was genau dieses, bei Betrachtung von Titel, Einband und Karikaturen eindeutig humoristische Werk verbrochen haben soll, bleibt mir schleierhaft. Missstände aufzuzeigen und für demokratische Gleichberechtigung einzustehen sind hehre Ideale, nur mit genau solchen Überreaktionen wird die Seriosität und Glaubwürdigkeit ganzer Aktivistengruppen wesentlich gemindert. Die gewissenhafte Durchleuchtung des potentiellen Streitpunkts auf berechtigte Faktoren heftiger Erregung bis Wut sollte vor Aufglühen selbiger erfolgen.
Es wird jedem Menschen zugestanden, eine eigene Persönlichkeit und Meinung zu vertreten, sobald es allerdings um das Geschlecht geht, ist höchste Vorsicht bei der Formulierung geboten. Hormone bewirken nun mal bestimmte Dinge im Körper, für deren Konsequenzen man sich eigentlich nicht zu schämen bräuchte und genauso wenig wie deren Wirkung kann man wie zig Jahrtausende andauernde Entwicklung zum heutigen modernen Menschen einfach auslöschen und alle auf gleich setzen. Diversität ist in Kombination mit gelebter Toleranz genauso erstrebenswert wie Gleichberechtigung.
Und als Grundlage dienen das Verständnis und das Näherbringen der fremden, schwer nachvollziehbaren Lebenswelten des jeweils anderen Geschlechts, wie es die Autoren unterhaltsam demonstrieren. Und wenn man auf das eigene liebestechnische Freud und, vielleicht mit viel Glück, wenig Leid blickt, ist die Option es mit Lachen und nicht so ernst zu nehmen, angesichts all des Konflikts- Leids- und Streitpotentials in allen Spielarten menschlicher Partnerschaften vielleicht eine der vernünftigsten Herangehensweisen. Und wer sich in keinem der dargestellten Klischees selbst wiederfindet ist einsam auf die nächste Stufe der Evolution des Menschen weitergeklettert. Oder meint sich vermeintlich dort.
May 7, 2015
I cannot adequately express (at least, not without swearing my head off) how much I loathe this genre of books which claim that all men are this and all women are that. Patronising, offensive, stupid BS.
March 20, 2017
Overall this is a light read based on evolutionary psychology (almost only!!!) about how men and women differ.
The good things: It's lighthearted and if i hadnt already been exposed to all of this, I would have been much more impressed. It's a nice read to get some facts about our species and how we differ.
The bad things: It's just too much cherrypicking of selected arguments and no discussion whatsoever. The magic formula of everything coming from our genes or ancestors past is applied and voala! - everything is explained. But this branch of biology and psychology (powerful as it is and me agreeing to it) is not the only explanation. Plus there are no studies cited, causation and correlation seem to be often mixed, or at least not discarded which is annoying.
The writing style is a drab affair - it's not the most exciting thing you'll read, it's repetitive but better than most pop psychology books.
So overall some "truths"
- If a girl likes a guy, she talks to him
- Women talk for the sake of talkig
- Women want to be listened to because that is how they think and solve issues
- Women are better at communicating, organizing and bringing social value; they like cooperation; building a family environment is fundamental for most
- Men like hierarchy, want power and strength, they bring the "food" and value work. They need solitude when faced with issues.
- Men are problem solvers and that's why they offer women advice which they actually dont need
- Men dont like failing
- Men dont like unwanted advice
- Men want appreciation of their work, women want love
- Men dont multitask but women do for some activities
- Exercise to flush excess testosterone
- Being gay depends on genes, gene expression, environmental triggers, whether the fetus received the right amount of hormones. A stressedmother increases her chances of having a gay son
- Women want love and affection first then sex. Men the opposite
- Women perceive orgasm as a bonus not a must
- Friendship and values > everything else
- Lust (physical attraction passion( emotional idealisation and attraction) and attachment (decision to be together) Passion lasts 3-12 months. You can recreate passion and lust with your partner afterwards.There are different hormones for each hence can be each with a diffr person (sleep with one but be committed to another)
- Men distinguish bn sex and love but women dont
- You can always feel sexy/unsexy about smb if you brainwash yourself
- A partner is what you have after lust and passion go away. Hence you need common values and interests
- Touch her gently but also grab her
- Romantic triggers for women: Setting, food, flowers, dance/touch, chocolate
- A guy will see a girl prettier if he likes her as a person. Not the same for girls
- Men look for: Individuality(authenticity/sincerity), Brains, Good looks, Sense of humor
- Women look for: Individuality(authenticity/sincerity), Sensitivity, Sense of humor, Brains, Good looks.
-Women are arouses by: Romanticism, Commitment, Talking, Intimacy, Touch
- Men: Nudity, lingerie, sexual diversity, how reachable the woman is.
- Conclusion: It is prisoners dilemma: the common good is greater than individual but at the risk of vulnerability. Vulnerable- compromise - greater good.
The good things: It's lighthearted and if i hadnt already been exposed to all of this, I would have been much more impressed. It's a nice read to get some facts about our species and how we differ.
The bad things: It's just too much cherrypicking of selected arguments and no discussion whatsoever. The magic formula of everything coming from our genes or ancestors past is applied and voala! - everything is explained. But this branch of biology and psychology (powerful as it is and me agreeing to it) is not the only explanation. Plus there are no studies cited, causation and correlation seem to be often mixed, or at least not discarded which is annoying.
The writing style is a drab affair - it's not the most exciting thing you'll read, it's repetitive but better than most pop psychology books.
So overall some "truths"
- If a girl likes a guy, she talks to him
- Women talk for the sake of talkig
- Women want to be listened to because that is how they think and solve issues
- Women are better at communicating, organizing and bringing social value; they like cooperation; building a family environment is fundamental for most
- Men like hierarchy, want power and strength, they bring the "food" and value work. They need solitude when faced with issues.
- Men are problem solvers and that's why they offer women advice which they actually dont need
- Men dont like failing
- Men dont like unwanted advice
- Men want appreciation of their work, women want love
- Men dont multitask but women do for some activities
- Exercise to flush excess testosterone
- Being gay depends on genes, gene expression, environmental triggers, whether the fetus received the right amount of hormones. A stressedmother increases her chances of having a gay son
- Women want love and affection first then sex. Men the opposite
- Women perceive orgasm as a bonus not a must
- Friendship and values > everything else
- Lust (physical attraction passion( emotional idealisation and attraction) and attachment (decision to be together) Passion lasts 3-12 months. You can recreate passion and lust with your partner afterwards.There are different hormones for each hence can be each with a diffr person (sleep with one but be committed to another)
- Men distinguish bn sex and love but women dont
- You can always feel sexy/unsexy about smb if you brainwash yourself
- A partner is what you have after lust and passion go away. Hence you need common values and interests
- Touch her gently but also grab her
- Romantic triggers for women: Setting, food, flowers, dance/touch, chocolate
- A guy will see a girl prettier if he likes her as a person. Not the same for girls
- Men look for: Individuality(authenticity/sincerity), Brains, Good looks, Sense of humor
- Women look for: Individuality(authenticity/sincerity), Sensitivity, Sense of humor, Brains, Good looks.
-Women are arouses by: Romanticism, Commitment, Talking, Intimacy, Touch
- Men: Nudity, lingerie, sexual diversity, how reachable the woman is.
- Conclusion: It is prisoners dilemma: the common good is greater than individual but at the risk of vulnerability. Vulnerable- compromise - greater good.
Read
July 31, 2019Искрено се забавлявах с тази книга. Като цяло е пълна с обобщаващи подробности, но аз лично намерих за себе си обяснение защо, аджеба, съм толкова неориентирана, защо представите ми за габарити на колата се различават токова от действителността и защо мойтУ мУж не може да намери маслото в хладилника, въпреки че му е под носа :)
По- долу споделям едно от най- яките видеа, които съм гледала за женския vs мъжкия мозък. Смяла съм се с глас. Дълго е, но есенцията е във времевия интервал 16-29 мин.
https://youtu.be/kErvOo44a_M
По- долу споделям едно от най- яките видеа, които съм гледала за женския vs мъжкия мозък. Смяла съм се с глас. Дълго е, но есенцията е във времевия интервал 16-29 мин.
https://youtu.be/kErvOo44a_M
October 17, 2013
Asal muasal saya menemukan buku ini sebenernya karena aki hippo yang udah ngereview duluan. Ngek, baca review dia kok merasa tergugah (ceile bahasanya) untuk menamatkan buku ini juga. Kenapa?
Soalnya ada kasus yang sama persis kejadiannya dengan saya dan Si Ayah.
Me : "Yah, makan di luar yuk."
A: "Nanti sore ya."
Me: "Yes..", (kegirangan)
-sore datang-
Me : "Katanya mau makan di luar, Yah?"
A : "Ya udah digelar aja sana karpetnya deket kolam, nanti Ayah bantu usungin piringnya."
Me: "Lah.. deket kolam?"
A: "Kan katanya makan di luar.."
Me: "......." (sambil puntir puntir lap piring)
Tuh, entah kenapa kadang saya sebelnya bukan main kalau udah mulai ngga nyambung gitu.
Maka mulailah saya membaca buku ini...
Terus isinya apa?
Duh, saya berkali kali tepuk jidat sambil ngakak saat baca buku ini. Banyak banget fakta di dalamnya yang membuat saya sadar, ternyata memang begitulah karakteristik Kaum Pria. Udah dari sononya.
Jadi begini menurut si Penulis.
Wanita itu : memiliki mata yang tajam, ia juga dapat melihat secara luas (keseluruhan) saat sedang mengedarkan pandangannya, ia juga mampu mendengarkan dengan baik. Wanita itu perasa dan sanggup melakukan beberapa pekerjaan bersamaan, meski ia tidak dapat membaca peta.
Laki-laki itu : memiliki kemampuan ruang yang baik, logikanya terstruktur, pembaca peta yang lihai, handal di bidang matematika dan rancang bangun, meski ia tidak mampu melakukan lebih dari satu pekerjaan secara bersamaan.
Ini karena alam sejak dahulu telah membentuk lelaki sebagai seorang pencari makanan dan pelindung bagi keluarganya. Sedangkan wanita bertugas menjaga rumah (sarang) dan membesarkan anak-anak mereka.
Perbedaan lainnya muncul saat mereka sedang menghadapi masalah, Wanita biasanya akan lebih suka curhat kepada orang lain, sekadar berbagi untuk meringankan bebannya. Ngga perlu dikomentarin dan dikasih saran, ia cuma perlu didengar.
Sedangkan pria, jika memiliki masalah, mereka cenderung menghindar dan malah berdiam sendiri seakan merenungi bagaimana solusi yang tepat untuk masalah yang ia hadapi.
Hal-hal yang istimewa ada di masing-masing, baik pria dan wanita, demikian pula dengan kelemahannya. Tuhan sudah menciptakan kita dengan sempurna, mungkin dengan perbedaan itulah kita bisa saling melengkapi. :)
Buat yang berasa masih ngga ngerti sama pola pikir cowok, entah itu pacar atau suami, kayaknya cocok deh baca buku ini. Demikian juga buat para cowo yang terheran-heran dengan kemampuan wanita untuk multitasking atau bergosip seharian, nah baca aja buku ini.
Semoga mendapat pencerahan kaya saya XD
May 14, 2015
saya beli buku ini untuk lucu-lucuan saja, menyelingi buku lain yang makin bikin bingung...
tapi memang buku ini ditulis denga lucu, dengan menyenangkan, sehingga kita ingin terus ingin tahu.
terus terang,
banyak yang baru saya tahu tentang hubungan laki-laki dan perempuan, perbedaan dan persamaannya [`same species, different worlds` demikian judul salah satu babnya:], di usia yang sudah senja ini.
cara menjelaskan perbedaan dan persamaannya itu si penulis mengandalkan informasi dari dunia psikologi [psikiatri?:], biokimia, neurologi...dsb yang konon ilmiah dan obyektif itu.
jadi,
buku ini mengajak kita mengapresiasi tubuh dan segenap cara bertindaknya, termasuk hal-hal yang subtil seperti perasaan2, dengan cara ilmiah. hasilnya, kita bisa lebih paham. bisa mengerti mengapa perbedaan2 itu kita jumpai dalam pergaulan sehari-hari.
lucu dan menarik.
baguslah..
tapi memang buku ini ditulis denga lucu, dengan menyenangkan, sehingga kita ingin terus ingin tahu.
terus terang,
banyak yang baru saya tahu tentang hubungan laki-laki dan perempuan, perbedaan dan persamaannya [`same species, different worlds` demikian judul salah satu babnya:], di usia yang sudah senja ini.
cara menjelaskan perbedaan dan persamaannya itu si penulis mengandalkan informasi dari dunia psikologi [psikiatri?:], biokimia, neurologi...dsb yang konon ilmiah dan obyektif itu.
jadi,
buku ini mengajak kita mengapresiasi tubuh dan segenap cara bertindaknya, termasuk hal-hal yang subtil seperti perasaan2, dengan cara ilmiah. hasilnya, kita bisa lebih paham. bisa mengerti mengapa perbedaan2 itu kita jumpai dalam pergaulan sehari-hari.
lucu dan menarik.
baguslah..
April 24, 2013
This book is full of contradictions, stereotypes and pseudo-scientific mumbo jumbo weaved skillfully into a few basic scientific facts to make an impression of real science and professionalism. Second thing, it's so strongly arguing that women are better at everything, that one cannot help but think, that it was in the most part written by the female author (and not by her husband) and that she must have some sort of inferiority complex. Honestly, I was hoping for some real "revelations", as loudly claimed by the authors, but didn't learn anything useful from this book and the "scientific" bollocks it is packed with.
January 31, 2016
This was a gift from a family member, ostensibly to help me navigate marriage successfully (though I rather suspect "traditionally" is a better word). I'd hoped at least for some new/interesting science, but this was not to be. The book merely recycles cliches ("men aren't designed to multitask" sort of thing).
Sure it's no shock for you that my advice is to save your time and money...unless your relationship is really falling apart. In which case, maybe you've forgotten some of the obvious points & it's worth a scan...but get it from the library.
Sure it's no shock for you that my advice is to save your time and money...unless your relationship is really falling apart. In which case, maybe you've forgotten some of the obvious points & it's worth a scan...but get it from the library.
April 6, 2011
Well...I'm about halfway through this and honestly, I'm struggling to continue.
Can you say "Confirmation bias", kids? I thought so.
Outdated data (even though this is a fairly recent book), strikingly broad over-generalizations, and a condescending tone have led me to create a "mansplaining" shelf.
We'll see if I can make it through.
...
Nope, couldn't handle it.
Can you say "Confirmation bias", kids? I thought so.
Outdated data (even though this is a fairly recent book), strikingly broad over-generalizations, and a condescending tone have led me to create a "mansplaining" shelf.
We'll see if I can make it through.
...
Nope, couldn't handle it.
July 16, 2021
One star minus for the cringy, boomer comics and jokes, which were interlacing the whole book and for a couple of info, by which I'm not so sure, if they were even true. However the book is 22 years old, so whatever, just check on these. Other star for weird stereotypes, which hasn't been true for a long time. I hate getting a bunch of cut flowers and I love to orientate and travel by a map and I know, that this book was about an average man and woman, but even this I hate stereotyping and labeling people. It's been 22 years and I believe that even if we are nor man or woman, we are still an individual souls, which doesn't fit into these boxes anymore. Anyway, beside that I learned a couple of interesting things and even if some of them weren't so pleasurable to read, I now understand these differencies much more than before. So, yeah, a good book, but please be careful with it and check on those information.
November 24, 2012
This book is very useful. It is a must for every person to read this book in order to learn about differences between men and women. This book talks about different tastes between men and women in cloths, social activities and other things. The author shares real life and practical examples that you can see in yourself and your partner in everyday life. There are explanations about men/women differences that if you take them into account you can learn a lot about your partner and improve your relationship. At the begging of each chapter the authors present some cartoons and funny quotes that make the beginning of each chapter interesting and inspires you to start the chapter.
October 13, 2019
The book is more of a guide of "how to live with men" than highlight differences between the genders in a useful manner. In an attempt to be funny, the authors repeat ad infinitum some stereotypical anecdotes about how the genders are different. Unfortunately, it's rather irritating than funny. I did not finish the book (got to right past 1/3rd) as I did not really find the first chapters of it useful. No footnotes at all did not make the science referred in the book seem less dubious.
June 28, 2019
I am sorry for saying this but I could not get past the first pages because I thought that this books is so stupid. I hate it as much as I hated "Eat, pray, love."
April 12, 2018
معارك قيس وليلى – ألان بيز
ألان بيز من مواليد 1952 وهو أخصائي في لغة الجسد من أستراليا.. نشر أول كتبه في لغة الجسد عام 1981 ومن وقتها وهو يتنقل من نجاح إلى آخر. تزوج من باربرا بيز عام 1992 ليشكلا معاً ثنائياً مهنياً ناجحاً للغاية مع 18 كتاب من الأكثر مبيعاً.. 10 منهم احتلت المراكز الأولى.. ولهما محاضرات في 70 دولة.. وتباع كتبهما في 100 دولة وهي مترجمة إلى 55 لغة وبيعت منها أكبر من 27 مليون نسخة.
اسم هذا الكتاب الأصلي؛ لماذا لا ينصت الرجل ولا تتمكن النساء من قراء الخرائط ؟ وقد نشر للمرة الأولى عام 2000 وهو الكتاب السادس للكاتب.. ونستطيع أن نرى بأن المترجم آثر على تغيير الاسم الأصلي بالاسم الذي نراه؛ معارك قيس وليلى.. وسآتي للتعليق على الترجمة.
المترجم هو غزوان الزركلي، وهو عازف بيانو سوري محترف، أستاذ دكتور في الموسيقى، يجمل الجنسية الألمانية ويعمل بصفة خبير بيانو في الكونسرفتوار بالقاهرة.
من معرفتنا بخلفية المترجم، نستطيع أن نتفهم السبب الذي دعاه يغير العنوان، فالاسم الأصلي لا يتفق مع الحس المرهف لأستاذ البيانو.. ويمكننا أن نتفق بأنه عنوان مزعج.. ويغلب عليه الأسلوب التجاري. أما الاسم المختار من قبل المترجم فهو أنسب إلا أنه شرقي أكثر من اللزوم. فلا يمكنني الإفتراض بأن ألان وباربرا بيز يعرفان شخصوص قيس وليلي.
ومن أهم ما يمكننا أن نلاحظ عن الكاتب والمترجم هو عدم الإختصاص. فالأول أقرب، وأكثر اختصاصا بلغة الجسد. والثاني بعيد تماماً عن مجال الترجمة.. ومن السهل لأي قاريء أن يقدم مثل هذا الانتقاد. ونستطيع هنا أن نقول بأن هذا وجه صحيح تماماً. ولكن، لننظر إلى الأمر من جهة أخرى؛ إن عدم الإختصاص لن يتيح للكاتب أن يأتي بشيء جديد؛ بمعنى أن يقدم طروحاته الخاصة نتيجة بحث ودراسات خاصة قام بها هو. بينما نجد أن الكاتب لم يفعل ذلك في كتابه هذا. إنما جمع لنا هذه المادة من عدة مصادر علمية ذات اختصاص تام ومتصل بموضوع الكتاب وقام بصياغته بأسلوبه الخاص. وقد يقول قائل: ما هذه السخافة ؟ فلو كان هذا الكلام صحيحاً لوجدنا قائمة بالمراجع موجودة في آخر الكتاب كما هو الحال مع أي كتاب علمي رصين آخر. ونقول بأن هذا صحيح أيضاً. فقد افتقرت النسخة العربية لمثل هذه القائمة ولا أدري ما السبب في ذلك. ولكن، إذا ما بحثنا في النسخة الإنجليزية من الكتاب.. سنجدها موجودة كاملة غير منقوصة وحسب الأصول.
الترجمة، كانت جيدة إلى حد كبير. مع شعوري بأنه كان يتوجب إضافة هوامش إضافية تتحدث أكثر عن الكتب المذكورة وتعرفنا بالعلماء المذكورين فيه وغيرها من الإضافات التي كانت ستفيد الفاريء بكل تأكيد. إلا إنه إجمالاً، كانت جيدة جداً.
أستطيع أن أتفهم تماماً مدى الإزعاج الذي يستطيع كتاب كهذا من أن يخلقه في نفس فئة من القراء. وهنا، أجد أنه من المهم بأن نقول بأن هذه النوعية من الكتب لا تعني قطعية ما هو مكتوب فيها.. إنها تشبه الكتب التي تتحدث عن تاريخ النشوء. إنها مضطرة أن تختزل النظريات التي تتحدث في الموضوع وتتحدث فقط عن تلك الأكثر ترجيحاً في الوسط العلمي. ونجد الكثير من أمثال هذه الكتب ككتاب تاريخ الأحداث الكبرى – سينثيا بروان، وكتاب البدايات – نيل تايسون، وكتاب البدايات - إيان تاتيرسول وغيرها.. لقد قدم لنا الزوجان بيز ببساطة، النظريات الأكثر ترجيحاً من تلك التي تتحدث عن الفروقات البيولوجية بين الرجل والمرأة فقط لا غير. وهذا بكل تأكيد، لا يعني قطعية ثبوت صحتها. وإن كان الأمر كذلك فعلاً مع بعضها.
الأمر الآخر ��لذي أستطيع أن أتفهم حجم الإزعاج الذي يولده في قلب القاريء، هو موضوع الجبرية. فالكتاب يتحدث عنا وكأننا عبيد للبيولوجيا.. أي أن كل حيواتنا وقراراتنا وسلوكنا محكومة بالبيولوجيا والكيمياء.. وهذا موضوع جدلي في الأوساط العلمية. ونعم، السائد هو أننا محكومون لكيمياء الجسد. وقد تحدثت عن هذا في روايتي عن ظهر قلب. ولكن، مرة أخرى.. إن هذا لا يعني قطعية ثبوت صحة الجبرية. فمسألة الجينات مثلاً لا تعني حتمية اتخاذ المرء لسلوك معين ولعلي هنا أقتبس: وهذا يذهب إلى ما وراء الحقيقة، ويتم التأكيد عليه بشكل لا متناهي من العلماء؛ بأن الجينات ليست أكثر من تصاميم خطة عامة، ومفتوحة للتأثيرات البيئية، أكثر من كونها خطة عمل جاهزة وملزمة. "الحرب في حضارة الإنسان" – عزار غات. إذن، فهناك مجموعة علماء أخرى محترمة تقول في عدم الجبرية.. وأن للظروف البيئية قيمة أكبر على عكس ما هو موجود في هذا الكتاب. وكي لا يساء فهمي، إن ما سبق لا يعني عدم وجود ما ثبت صحته فعلاً مما قيل في هذا الكتاب.. ولكن ما يهمني هنا، هو أن تقرأ برحابة صدر بعض الشيء. فرفض موضوع ما.. لن يجعله يختفي من كل كتب الدنيا.. إنما الإستزادة في القراءة فيه قد تجعل الأمور أكثر قرباً من الفهم.
على خلفية الكتاب بالنسخة الإنجليزية كتبت هذه الفقرة: إن هذا الكتاب واجب القراءة لكل الرجال والنساء الذين يحبون بعضهم البعض، يكرهون بعضهم البعض، أو يتعايشون ببساطة. ستتعلم عن نفسك، وكيف تطور علاقاتك، كما ستتعلم عن الجنس الآخر. يجب ألا تترك بيتك من دونه. د. دينيس ويتلي. كلية علم النفس لجامعة وينينغ.
هو كتاب مفيد بحق، قد يبدو الدكتور ويتلي مبالغاً بعض الشيء أعلاه. إلا أنه قد لا يخلو من الصحة في حقيقة كونه صادم للكثيرين وإن تمكنوا من تفهم ما فيه.. قد يتمكنون فعلاً من تحقيق تقدم في سبيل فهم أنفسهم، وفهم الآخرين.
بقي أن أعلق على بعض النقاط:
إن هذا الكتاب معني بتفصيل ما هو مرجح في الأوساط العلمية من نظريات علمية بخصوص الفروقات البيولوجية بين الرجل والمرأة وهو غير معني بالتقييم الأخلاقي أو تبرير سلوك قد نراه سيئاً. وهنا أجد أن الإقتباس التالي معبر جداً: إن موضوع تقييم شيء ما على أنه غريزي أو طبيعي، لا يعني على أنه مناسب أو مفيد لنا. انتهى الإقتباس. وهنا، يتوجب علي التعليق؛ بأنه من المهم لنا أن نفهم هذا التقييم الغريزي أو الطبيعي ثم نقرر بشأنه ما نشاء.
من أهم ما يقوله هذا الكتاب هو: قد يكون من قبيل الموضة القول بأن الإختلافات بين الجنسين تبقى في نطاق الحد الأدنى أو أنها ليست ذات أهمية، ولكن الوقائع تثبت غير ذلك. نحن نعيش الآن للأسف ضمن نظام إجتماعي يعتقد ويصر على تساوي الرجل والمرأة، على الرغم من وجود ب��اهين دامغة بأن الرجال والنساء مجهزون ومبرمجون على مر العصور بمواهب وميول متفردة وواضحة. انتهى الإقتباس. وبالتالي، فإننا نجد كل دعاوى المساواة بين الرجال والنساء هي دعاوى لا تستند على حقيقة علمية، إنما تخدم أهدافاً سياسية أو مجتمعية قيمية لا يوجد دليل علمي على أنها مفيدة حقاً.
تقوم النسوية على مباديء تعتبر بأن معايير النجاح هي تلك التي يعتمدها الرجال.. وهذا بحد ذاته غير عادل للنساء. وسأقتبس: إن الفكرة القائلة بأن المرأة تفشل بالنجاح مثل الرجال لا تكون صحيحة إلا إذا انطلقنا من أن النجاح أو عدم النجاح يقاس، أو يجب أن يقاس انطلاقاً من المقدرات الذكرية. ومن يستطيع القول هنا إن أعلى مراحل تحقيق الذات في هذه الحياة تكمن في أن يصبح الإنسان مديراً لشركة أو قبطاناً لطائرة أو مبرمجاً لكومبيوتر مركبة فضائية ؟ الرجال يقولون ذلك ويقيسون كل شيء بمقاييسهم التي لا يمكن أن تكون سائدة بشكل مطلق. انتهى الإقتباس.
هناك مبالغة شديدة في تنحية الأثر المجتمعي على السلوك الإنساني في الكتاب.. فقد ذكر مثلاً بأن النساء هي التي تميل إلى انهاء علاقتها بالرجال.. ونحن نعلم جيداً في شرقنا أن العكس هو الصحيح. ولأسباب مجتمعية؛ خوفاً من الطلاق والصيت السيء الملتصق بالمطلقات، مصلحة الأولاد، عدم وجود معيل، الخوف من البقاء وحيدة. وغيرها من الأسباب المجتمعية. إذن، فالكتاب قد وضع في اعتباره مثال المجتمع الغربي على الأغلب كما هو واضح على امتداد الكتاب.
كان الأسلوب أكثر من مميز، كان مضحكاً.. ورغم ذلك، كان يستشهد بالإحصائيات والنظريات العلمية التي كنت قد اطلعت على كثير منها في أماكن أخرى. لقد قام الزوجان بيز بعمل جيد هنا فعلاً.
الخلاصة، الكتاب جيد ومفيد لمن يتمكن من تجاوز أخذ الأمور بشكل شخصي، ويحاول النظر إلى الصورة الشاملة كخطوة إضافية في سبيل فهمنا لأنفسنا.
December 18, 2016
كتاب مضحك الان اقتنعت ان النساء من المريخ و الرجال من الزهرة كل طرف يعامل الطرف الاخر بالطريقة التي ينتظر منه ان يعامله بها في حين انه في حقيقة الامر يزعجه بتصرفاته. الرجل والمراة مختلفان لا احد منهما افضل من الاخر فقط مختلفان لكل منهما قدرات خاصة. لذا يجب توفير حقوق مناسبة لطبيعة كل منهما المراة ليست مضطرة لتتحول الى رجل لكي تكون ناجحة والرجل ليس مضطرا لكي يصبح امراة. المراة لديها قدرات خاصة ( تعلم اللغات القيام بالعديد من المهام في نفس الوقت التعامل مع الاخرين وتربية الاطفال...) المراة تحتاج الى الحب العاطفة والى تبادل الحديث وفي المقابل الرجل لديه قدرات خاصة في تحديد الاتجاهات ويحتاج الى تحقيق الذات والجنس
.....
.....
February 1, 2011
Só não digo que bati o recorde (li o livro em 1 dia) porque o recorde foi um livro da Agatha Christie que li em pouco mais de 2h, sem parar)!
Muito divertido, adorei!
------------------------------
Comecei a ler esse livro sem muitas expectativas e me surpreendi! Tem vários dados científicos e biológicos, de forma bastante bem humorada, que explicam as diferenças entre homens e mulheres e os conflitos que essas relações envolvem.
Algumas passagens falam sobre habilidades típicas de cada sexo, diferenças no cérebro, enfim... eu gostei muito, devorei o livro e recomendo à todos!!!
Muito divertido, adorei!
------------------------------
Comecei a ler esse livro sem muitas expectativas e me surpreendi! Tem vários dados científicos e biológicos, de forma bastante bem humorada, que explicam as diferenças entre homens e mulheres e os conflitos que essas relações envolvem.
Algumas passagens falam sobre habilidades típicas de cada sexo, diferenças no cérebro, enfim... eu gostei muito, devorei o livro e recomendo à todos!!!
September 17, 2017
Sure, let's provide more fodder for why men are excused from being decent listeners and why women are presumed to be worse at the sciences and apparently also spatial reasoning than men. Yeah that's great. Why was this book recommended for twenty-something women? It's degrading and damaging to the feminist movement, both for men and women. This book is listed often alongside Nora Ephron, Lena Dunham and Amy Poehler's books, which is a disgrace to those amazing women/writers.
Displaying 1 - 29 of 888 reviews