Scan barcode
ayoderable's review against another edition
It started going over stuff I already knew so I slowed down. Then needed to return to library
jmrprice's review against another edition
4.0
Absolutely Fascinating - read it to understand (or perhaps validate your understanding).
Received as a goodreads giveaway.
Received as a goodreads giveaway.
sunrays118's review against another edition
1.0
This book is about women having affairs.
I have strong feelings about this matter and want to give a thorough review of this book. To that end, I will review the book as a break down of several aspects.
The good. I want to recognize that this book is written quite well. The style is easy enough to read, the wording is superb. The author clearly has an excellent style. There is one section towards the middle that feels as though it has been lifted from a college essay. Many others have commented on this so I wont waste much time other than to say it feels a bit sloppy, not engaging and lacks a coherent voice. The rest of the book reads well. Based on writing style, the book deserves a rating of a 4.
Next, I want to go over a few of the research concerns. The author is quick to admit almost all of her interviews lasted an hour. Is that enough to get substantive information? Her own research saw less than 40 people. She has borrowed studies from many others, quite normal, but her conclusions differ wildly from their own or from other papers. I find much of her analysis to be troubling. The conclusions drawn are often so wide of logic it defies explanation. The tragically common survivor ship bias, especially with the author's research into polyamory, is suspect. Based on research quality, I would offer a 2.
Now for the more complicated matter. I believe that her premise is deeply flawed and dangerous. Let me preface this by acknowledging that ethical non-monogamy is a choice many make. Those in a partnership, make the decision together. Having an affair is not the same thing. Having an affair is a selfish, cruel and abusive decision that is made with the belief that your moment of pleasure has more worth than someone else's life. That has to be understood before anything else. Having an affair is not a simple event. It is something that will harm the other person for potentially their entire life. The rates of PTSD after a spouse has had an affair are staggering. The deep trauma an affair can cause can markedly change someone's self worth, personality, sense of safety, even the chemistry of their brain. So while the author writes loads of anecdotes about how wonderfully happy women should be to have an affair, how they deserve it, how much better their lives will be for it, how it's time that women stand up and take the affairs they are owed and stop feeling guilty, she is forgetting something. Consent.
Above all, when you interact with someone else, there is always some level of consent or consent violation. Most of the time, this is not a large issue: we step on someone's foot or sit next to someone on the bus while they hoped to save the seat. However, for this book and this free wheeling journey down a road of happy affairs, never once does the author stop to recognize the place of consent. To have an affair is to violate your partner's consent. There is no way around that. Moreover, to violate someone's consent in this way is sexual assault. Until we can recognize that, until each person understands this, the book is worthless. This book fails to recognize the basic autonomy of each individual and their right to agency and informed consent. This book is a monstrosity specifically because it seeks to deny individuals autonomy and the ability to make decisions about their own body.
I want to highlight a few other points. The author asks several times, 'if monogamy is hard, why should we even try?' Ignoring how juvenile she sounds, the question is ludicrous. Why learn to walk if walking is hard? Why learn to drive a car or do division? Why learn to knit, why learn mandarin, why learn to be a good parent? The truth is, we all look at these options and see some things we want to do and some we do not. We make a choice based on our values and desires for what we think is worthwhile and best fits our goals. Monogamy may well not be the choice for many. For others, it will be and simply because it is hard will not be the reason to run away from it. For some, the fact that it is hard adds some value to it. One thing the author does quite well is to display her own judgements on women who have decided to be monogamous and faithful. The author views those women with contempt instead of with a respect that they might simply have a different desire. Her sanctimonious tones and deafening judgements become a bit hypocritical and tiresome. Worst, the author fails to recognize it.
A couple last pieces I want to share. In discussing why women cheat, the author says, "Not because something is wrong with the relationship. They might do it because they were attracted to someone else and went for it." She says, "Hard as it is to imagine that something that causes so much pain, something a partner does that devastates us so thoroughly, might be unrelated to us." This is the only time in the book the author even bothers to acknowledge the trauma an affair causes. In this paragraph, the author implies that the decision to have an affair is made quickly and with little thought. The woman wanted it and so she went for it, damn everyone else to hell. The callousness in that attitude might well be deserving of scorn.
Lastly, I want to drink in these lines. "(There is) a monthly event called Sip.n.Sketch in DC, where men and women come together to drink cocktails, chat, and sketch nude models. Why are we able to simple appreciate the model's body in this context...when we might objectify her in short shorts on the street."? This bit right here exemplifies the failing of the entire book. The reason why is so simple and so imperative it makes this book unworthy of printing. The difference is consent. That's it. In one example, a woman has made the informed decision to enter into that specific venue, for that purpose. In the other, the woman has absolutely not consented. That is the entire point and that premise is lost on this author. If the author fails to understand consent as such a basic level, it is impossible to listen to anything else she has to say. The author has completely missed the idea of consent and in that, has failed to respect women and men, monogamous and poly households and has continued a horrible and dangerous pattern of thought.
For that reason, there is no way I could recommend this book to anyone.
I have strong feelings about this matter and want to give a thorough review of this book. To that end, I will review the book as a break down of several aspects.
The good. I want to recognize that this book is written quite well. The style is easy enough to read, the wording is superb. The author clearly has an excellent style. There is one section towards the middle that feels as though it has been lifted from a college essay. Many others have commented on this so I wont waste much time other than to say it feels a bit sloppy, not engaging and lacks a coherent voice. The rest of the book reads well. Based on writing style, the book deserves a rating of a 4.
Next, I want to go over a few of the research concerns. The author is quick to admit almost all of her interviews lasted an hour. Is that enough to get substantive information? Her own research saw less than 40 people. She has borrowed studies from many others, quite normal, but her conclusions differ wildly from their own or from other papers. I find much of her analysis to be troubling. The conclusions drawn are often so wide of logic it defies explanation. The tragically common survivor ship bias, especially with the author's research into polyamory, is suspect. Based on research quality, I would offer a 2.
Now for the more complicated matter. I believe that her premise is deeply flawed and dangerous. Let me preface this by acknowledging that ethical non-monogamy is a choice many make. Those in a partnership, make the decision together. Having an affair is not the same thing. Having an affair is a selfish, cruel and abusive decision that is made with the belief that your moment of pleasure has more worth than someone else's life. That has to be understood before anything else. Having an affair is not a simple event. It is something that will harm the other person for potentially their entire life. The rates of PTSD after a spouse has had an affair are staggering. The deep trauma an affair can cause can markedly change someone's self worth, personality, sense of safety, even the chemistry of their brain. So while the author writes loads of anecdotes about how wonderfully happy women should be to have an affair, how they deserve it, how much better their lives will be for it, how it's time that women stand up and take the affairs they are owed and stop feeling guilty, she is forgetting something. Consent.
Above all, when you interact with someone else, there is always some level of consent or consent violation. Most of the time, this is not a large issue: we step on someone's foot or sit next to someone on the bus while they hoped to save the seat. However, for this book and this free wheeling journey down a road of happy affairs, never once does the author stop to recognize the place of consent. To have an affair is to violate your partner's consent. There is no way around that. Moreover, to violate someone's consent in this way is sexual assault. Until we can recognize that, until each person understands this, the book is worthless. This book fails to recognize the basic autonomy of each individual and their right to agency and informed consent. This book is a monstrosity specifically because it seeks to deny individuals autonomy and the ability to make decisions about their own body.
I want to highlight a few other points. The author asks several times, 'if monogamy is hard, why should we even try?' Ignoring how juvenile she sounds, the question is ludicrous. Why learn to walk if walking is hard? Why learn to drive a car or do division? Why learn to knit, why learn mandarin, why learn to be a good parent? The truth is, we all look at these options and see some things we want to do and some we do not. We make a choice based on our values and desires for what we think is worthwhile and best fits our goals. Monogamy may well not be the choice for many. For others, it will be and simply because it is hard will not be the reason to run away from it. For some, the fact that it is hard adds some value to it. One thing the author does quite well is to display her own judgements on women who have decided to be monogamous and faithful. The author views those women with contempt instead of with a respect that they might simply have a different desire. Her sanctimonious tones and deafening judgements become a bit hypocritical and tiresome. Worst, the author fails to recognize it.
A couple last pieces I want to share. In discussing why women cheat, the author says, "Not because something is wrong with the relationship. They might do it because they were attracted to someone else and went for it." She says, "Hard as it is to imagine that something that causes so much pain, something a partner does that devastates us so thoroughly, might be unrelated to us." This is the only time in the book the author even bothers to acknowledge the trauma an affair causes. In this paragraph, the author implies that the decision to have an affair is made quickly and with little thought. The woman wanted it and so she went for it, damn everyone else to hell. The callousness in that attitude might well be deserving of scorn.
Lastly, I want to drink in these lines. "(There is) a monthly event called Sip.n.Sketch in DC, where men and women come together to drink cocktails, chat, and sketch nude models. Why are we able to simple appreciate the model's body in this context...when we might objectify her in short shorts on the street."? This bit right here exemplifies the failing of the entire book. The reason why is so simple and so imperative it makes this book unworthy of printing. The difference is consent. That's it. In one example, a woman has made the informed decision to enter into that specific venue, for that purpose. In the other, the woman has absolutely not consented. That is the entire point and that premise is lost on this author. If the author fails to understand consent as such a basic level, it is impossible to listen to anything else she has to say. The author has completely missed the idea of consent and in that, has failed to respect women and men, monogamous and poly households and has continued a horrible and dangerous pattern of thought.
For that reason, there is no way I could recommend this book to anyone.
nfp's review against another edition
3.0
A good introduction to a topic I have never thought about and somewhat educational. I could have done without the longest chapter (30 pages) about chimps and bonobos though
kathystl's review against another edition
5.0
This is an important work that questions fundamental beliefs that are simply false as well as harmful.
leighwitz's review against another edition
2.0
Pretty enjoyable read, with a lot of interesting research compiled. I sort of read this as an alternative to Sex at Dawn with a female focus, which I think it accomplished. At times it seemed like a somewhat random compilation at research and I would have liked more a focus on current non-monogamous practices rather than a skimming of the different forms (but that’s personal preference). I didn’t like that the author seemed to flip flop between language in support of nonmonogamy and language that inherently made it sound unethical. Rather than “unbiased” she seemed to be unsure and changing her mind.
mikecross's review against another edition
4.0
This is one of those books you wish didn't end, or at least the author had put more chapters in. This is far more than a book about adultery, it's a comprehensive look at modern, and at times historical, female sexuality, well written. I would have like more science in the book, but that's just me.