Talk:Men Are from Mars, Women Are from Venus

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Men Are from Mars, Women Are from Venus article.
Article policies
Books Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate, you can edit the article. You can discuss the Project at its talk page.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the Project's quality scale.
(If you rated the article please give a short summary at in the comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)

Contents

[edit] Comment 1

Cut from intro:

bestselling relationship guide written by John Gray and first published in May 1992. It has been translated into at least 40 different languages and sold more than 15 million copies worldwide.

Sounds like a publisher's blurb. Get to the point. Uncle Ed 02:58, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

IS it really neccessary to have 2 seperate criticism sections?164.116.70.116 20:29, 14 February 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Point System

Is this in reference to gifts I take it? If so, the paragraph should probably clarify that.


[edit] Criticism and controversy

In stressing the differences between men and women, this book was controversial. Many people felt that it was misogynistic and sexist.

Huh? It's controversial to stress differences? Tell us more.

And who called it sexist? And for what reason?

And how does it express hatred for women, for a male author to explain to men how to stop hurting their wives and start satisfying their emotional needs?

I'm not arguing, and I didn't deleted this text. I moved it here to get answers. Please provide the answers and put the section back. Uncle Ed 03:02, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

I added some information to the Criticism section and some notes to back it up. The Rebuttal from Uranus is a good site for presenting the anti-Gray case. Also, although there has been a lot of research on sex differences, little of it supports Gray's "different planets" claims.

Yeah, but it didn't work as a "note" because the web link went to a front page - not to the place which mentions the quoted text. I demoted it to an "external link".

By the way, there's a Broadway play which is related to the "cave" thing:

Chris Sullivan delivers Becker’s material deftly, has a nice sense of timing and knows how to engage the audience seamlessly while smoothly keeping them captivated.. Essentially, Defending the Caveman looks at what it means to be a man in normal middle class American society. Becker portrays men as “assholes,” or he believes women depict us in that light. He explains in vivid detail how men are hunters and focus on a single idea or task at a time. Women, conversely, are gathers who relish conversation, multitasking and togetherness. This oversimplified anthropology is so cliché ridden as it depicts men as ignorant, selfish and narcissistic. It may not be too scientific but it does present rich fodder for adroit comedy. Since I never have been married nor lived with a female for an extended period of time, Caveman didn’t speak to me; therefore I found the show to be trite and stereotypically mundane. I have always been an eclectic who lives a bohemian life style so Caveman doesn’t relate to me. [1]


[edit] Criticism

"Gray does not provide references to the research to back up his claims and that they are based on his personal experiences and opinions rather than formal scientific trials". CUT: "Indeed there are many studies (need quotations at least) which contradict the claim that men and women act as if they are “from different planets” . A meta-analysis (?) by Professor Janet Hyde (?)found that “on most psychological characteristics, males and females are more alike than different” [2]".

-DOES THE AUTHOR SAY THAT THEY ARE MORE DIFFERENT THAN ALIKE ????

"When sex differences do occur, there is normally considerable overlap between the sexes. For example, women are more likely than men to disclose problems to a friend or partner, but the difference is only about 10 percentage points [3]". CUT "This suggests that the generalizations in Gray’s book will not apply to many men and women and that they are simplifications of the real world."

A BOOK, STUDY, THEORY, ETC IS SIMPLIFCATION OF THE REAL WORLD or DOES ANYBODY EXPECTO TO FIND THE WORLD IN A BOOK???? - shouldn't we have rather real criticism?

[edit] Removal of Trivia about John Gray's PhD

I've deleted the trivia about John Gray's PhD from this article because I feel it's irrelevant to this article. This book was published in 1992 while John Gray did not have his PhD until 1997. While it is interesting that the author may have an illegitimate degree, it doesn't detract from the value of this book published prior to the PhD issue. --Charlie(@CIRL | talk) 02:23, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Why is this not relevant? Was not this book published by John on his claims to having a doctorate degree that was later found to be bogus? The fact taht he didn't actually receive the phony degree until later further casts doubt on credibility. --Darth Borehd 01:03, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
It might be, but not in an article about the book itself. -- some guy with a point85.179.26.130 15:28, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Active men and passive women

Cut from "criticism" section:

The book has been called sexist and chauvinistic. For example, John Gray claims that men go into their “caves” to solve problems and they value “power, competency, efficiency, and achievement”, while women are like “waves” who become overwhelmed by problems and they value “love, communication, beauty and relationships”. This appears to give men the active role and women the passive role.

This passage would be better, if sourced: WHO called it sexist or chauvinistic? And WHY do they feel it is sexist or chauvinistic to stereotype men and women as problem-solving cavemen and talkative waves?

Note that I am not saying (1) that his generalizations are correct or (2) that the active/passive stereotypes are ideals for people to follow. But I am placing the burden of proof on the critics. --Uncle Ed 17:24, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

I added a quote from Susan Hanson, author of the Rebuttal from Uranus and one of Gray's most vocal critics. I also added a positive comment from a review by John Grohol, and tidied up the section a bit. Hopefully this make it more balanced and verifiable. Fionah 09:10, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Nice edits. I just made a few cuts and additions. Here's the biggest cut:

One defence of the book from these claims is that Gray specifically distances his descriptions of "male" and "female" traits by attaching them not to genders but to planets and their citizens. His attribute claims hold more weight if applied to people with relatively very dominant "male" hormones (androgens) or "female" hormones (mainly estrogens).

I've read the book twice - though not, I admit, recently. I don't recall Gray distancing his descriptions. He uses a fanciful metaphor of "they are so different they could be from another planet". However, he hammers home the point that women (in his view) and men need love in several different ways. Such as, women need respect, and men need approval.

I'm going to have to leaf through my copy and type in a few quotes. --Uncle Ed 21:11, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

I agree that "Critical reaction" is better than criticism. I tidied up the first paragraph to make it read a bit smoother. I also did some editing to the paragraph on "listening vs giving advice" and made it into a subsection called "Communication styles". It was a bit convoluted as it was and I think it's now easier to read. Again, it's been years since I read the book and I wasn't a big fan but I remember that communication difficulties was one of his major themes. Fionah 11:04, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

You might like Deborah Tannen's books better than John Gray's. Tannen takes an academic, descriptive approach. Her research focuses on different ways males and females communicate (even beginning in childhood). She does not assert that these differences are innate; nor that they are created by the culture. She just reports what she heard, based on detailed transcrits of recorded conversations.
Neither the article nor this talk section is about whose books are better or what someone might prefer. -- 71.102.149.168 (talk) 22:36, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
Gray, on the other hand, is prescriptive. He's also not a scholar but a therapist (or counselor?) who writes self-help books and gives seminars.
The difference between Tannen and Gray is that Tannen is describing actual differences between the sexes in a scholarly way. The furthest she goes in terms of "prescribing" is to advise men and women to be aware that the opposite sex might be using language or communication style differently from your sex. Gray, of course, is not a scholar, and never stops talking about dozens of different ways he recommends people try to change their own behavior based on generalizations. --Uncle Ed 13:50, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
On "I've read the book twice - though not, I admit, recently. I don't recall Gray distancing his descriptions." and "Again, it's been years since I read the book and I wasn't a big fan but I remember that communication difficulties was one of his major themes." -- I'm at a loss as to why people who write such things think they have any business editing this article. Wikipedia articles should be based on sourced material, not people's distant recollections. -- 71.102.149.168 (talk) 22:36, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Claims that Gray makes

Cut from "criticism" section:

Gray does not provide references to the research to back up his claims and they may be based on his personal experiences and opinions rather than formal scientific trials.

I'm unaware of claims that Gray makes that go beyond common knowledge. He says women tend to wear dresses and carry "bags within bags" (like a change purse inside a pocketbook), while men tend to just carry a wallet in a trouser pocket. Nearly all his observations are like this.

If there is a criticism that Gray relies too much on everyday observation, let's quote such a critic. (Should be easy to find one by googling.)

Also, does Gray claim that men and women are inherently different or just that Americans and Canadians often conform to stereotypes? Or even do critics charge him with claiming that men are more different than they really are? It would help if we quoted a critic.

I heard that some feminists scholars almost got a Harvard president fired for daring to suggest that researchers look into whether men and women have mental differences (such as aptitude for math) and what might cause such differences (heredity, upbringing, social pressure). I wonder if Gray's critics are asserting that there are no differences because they oppose the very idea of members of either sex treating the opposite sex differently. This will probably be harder to google. --Uncle Ed 14:15, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

You’re talking about Larry Summers, and I think the way he was treated was reprehensible. Of course it shouldn’t be taboo to look at gender differences and some of what he said has backup in research (e.g. males having an average advantage at spatial relations and being overrepresented at the top and bottom ends of the IQ scale). However, the evidence for a large gap in communications culture (as Gray and Tannen claim) is not so strong. AIR Gray does claim that his theories are based on years of research although he does not give details. The study quoted by the Chronicle article found little evidence that men and women use language in different ways (I found a link to the original study so I'll add that: the author actually mentions Mars/Venus and says it may be harmful so that may count as a legitimate criticism). You might be interested in The Blank Slate by Steven Pinker. There’s a chapter on gender that’s not “politically correct” (it makes definite claims for differences) but he also says that men and women use language in much the same way.

Anyway, all this is a bit of an aside and I don’t want to start an edit war or make the criticism section larger than the rest of the article. Fionah 16:40, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

No, no, everything you did was fine. I'm glad you "cleaned up my spilled ink" and the extra references were just what the article needed! --Uncle Ed 17:14, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Cool :) I made a few changes to the gender differences page with reference to the communication styles studies. Fionah 10:39, 23 May 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Magic deleted

The Magic of Woman website is dedicated to teaching men how to be more loving, understanding and appreciative of women. It is based upon the information contained in the book "What Every Man Should Know About Women" by Les Morgenstern.

"What Every Man Should Know About Women" is the first transcultural book that teaches men from anywhere in the world everything they need to know about women that is both logical and predictable. This knowledge allows any man from any culture to understand, love and appreciate any woman from any culture regardless of her age, race, religion, political persuasion, geographical location or levels of income, education or sophistication.

I think the two paragraphs above, which I noticed were cut from the article, could go into an article about Les Morgenstern or What Every Man Should Know About Women. --Uncle Ed 19:03, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Description, rather than opposition

The bulk of this article was, at one time, based on a single web site with opposing POV.

Here are some descriptions from people who read the book but saw it as useful:

  • Whether we like it or not, men and women are different not so much in ability, as in approach. A man has a different attitude to problems – he is all for solving them with some quick action. A woman may take time to just consider the whole thing – she may not even want the whole thing to be solved before it is due! Such differences have a definite impact on communication. [4]
  • John Gray’s work has made famous by now the concept of ‘the cave’ for men and ‘the wave’ for women. Although this part of his work is the one most under attack by feminists for gender equality, many of whom accuse him of creating fresh stereotypes around men and women, which is also very significant. When men go into their cave, they are actually going through a phase of their relationship with a woman, when they want to be left alone. Any woman who has wondered why a boyfriend is not e mailing/calling/messaging/meeting her will know what it feels like to be shut out of the cave. Women and ‘the wave’ is a concept even more resented – it means that women go through periodic phases when they are unable to keep up their spirits without help and assistance from understanding men. At such times, ‘the wave’ crashes, and it needs to be given love and reassurance to rise up again with its usual confidence. In fact, I find, John Gray does portray women to be the strong, resilient creatures. It is only his recommendations of how women should make sure they get their way – underlining a certain manipulative streak, which might have troubled feminists. [ibid]

It might help if we:

  1. Describe or summarize what Gray is saying (recommending)
  2. Summarize critical responses, such as "great advice, it sure helps" or "typical patriarchal, anti-feminist propaganda; author should be castrated and then shot"

The form, if not the exact content suggested here. --Uncle Ed 15:11, 31 July 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Vandalism?

What's with the link to a private webpage in the middle of the last paragraph? It is not in context whatsoever and does not relate to the article, nor has it been written in the proper link section... 85.179.26.130 15:33, 3 August 2007 (UTC)