Rating: 
Summary: Interesting, but not that revolutionary
Review: I found the book interesting, but not all that revolutionary. It was well written, but a bit too whimsical and seemingly self-serving to me. Perhaps if I was a woman and had felt that much of society tried to shape or suppress much of my nature, I would appreciate this book more. From my own point of view though, most of the information has been readily available the last decade, and the issues most of the reviewers have been concerned with are more societal than scientific. It is the constant intertwining of the two that bothers me the most about this book, and wish the author had spent more on the societal than the scientific, because , at least to me, her science is marginal and seems to be in place mainly to justify, rather than support her conclusions. It was a good book, i just wish it had been better.
Rating: 
Summary: A well-written delusion
Review: The author expends her energies on a diatribe against science, specifically evolutionary psychology, because the social constructs in her head cannot accept that some things just ARE! Evolution shaped human behavior and neither the cant nor the barbed wit can change that. Join the author and deconstruct yourselves into the past of myth and superstition. A big step backwards, the author would rank with the famous "debunkers" of Darwin, except that she is not of this caliber.
Rating: 
Summary: More of the same feminist perspective "science" -Boring
Review: Yes, I read it all, as boring as it is. This woman needs to get a refresher course in scientific methodology. As bad as it gets no one seems willing to critize the book: After all it's feminist ideology and literary reviewers have to pay their mortgages too.
Rating: 
Summary: Groundbreaking book -- can't wait for the ensuing revolution
Review: Woman: An Intimate Geography, by Natalie Angier is the book I've been waiting for my whole life.It always seemed that the more I reveled in being female the more I was called manly, the more I lusted for men the more I was called masculine. This never made sense to me. I cannot see the female body, with its bloodletting and birthing, as dainty, pure, or weak. My libido has never been mute. When I embraced my body, my animal nature, I was told I was being unnatural. Women don't have an "aggressive nature", we are told, unless they are defying their biology. But I've always been loyal to my femaleness while negating the idea that I was innately feminine. It has been depressing to me to see that other women who have refused to knuckle under and conform to imposed gender expectations have done so by shunning science, biology, and evolution. They assume that science is just rotten men out to prove that we are weak, retiring, and in need of male shelter, therefor, the sciences are to be ignored, mocked, and socially deconstructed until all that is left is the male's gaze and his delusions. "Nature is just another social construction," they would insist in the light of Donna Haraway. "Subjectivity destroys any possibility of science being truly objective," the Sandra Harding school would say. "Gender is just performance," says Judith Butler. "Looking for the biological basis for gender will simply pathologize those of us who don't conform," is the concern of gender activists like Pat Califia. The answer to bad science is better science. Science with adequate and representative populations. Science without an agenda. Science that does not negate that which women experience on a daily basis. Science that remembers the basic tenants of mathematics and statistics -- there can be more variations with a single group than between groups in comparison. Before you attempt to "prove" that there is a gene for making women are less intelligent, demure and more sociable, first you are going to have to prove that women ARE less intelligent, demure, and more sociable. That scientific inquiry begins, though certainly does not end, with this book. Without ignoring the profundity of the body, or claiming that the body defines us completely, Angier both celebrates that which is innate to the female body and with the grace of queen, shakes off that which is not. She poetically and accurate discusses the biology of the vagina, clitoris, ovaries, breasts, the cycling of the menstrual hormones, and the undeniable experiences that come with them, and confidently scoffs at the idea that these things somehow prove that we are simple, dainty, submissive, or have only a weak pulse of a libido. She manages to do this without reducing us to our parts. She does not insist we find beauty in our menstrual blood or peace in suckling our babies. Nor does she limit her discussion of womanhood to only the pure genetic female; she includes the experience of women with Androgen-Insensitivity Syndrome (those born with XY chromosomes), women who were born intersexual (with ambiguous genitalia) and Turner's girls (those with only one X chromosome). She discusses the nugget of truth in the both statements, "Women are made, not born" and "Women are born, not made." Her critique of evolutionary psychology is done with such aplomb I want to anoint her feet with oil. She exposes how evolutionary psychologists seem not to fully grasp scientific thought, but pick and chose from their observations to assert their own belief systems. One minute they are discussing gay men as Ubermen, men without fetters, truly living out their untainted manliness with each other so that they may claim that the promiscuity of gay men is innate to all men. The next minute they are describing gay men as half-women, so that they may attribute their less gender conformist activities to something other than themselves. The only thing wrong with this book is that I didn't get to write it. But I'm glad someone did. also recommended: The Mismeasure of Woman, by Carol Tavris
Rating:
Summary: I must reiterate my enthusiasm
Review: Excuse me for weighing in twice on this book, but I have actually *read* it twice, which perhaps now earns me a second vote, and I must say that one need only count the number of misspelled words and grammatical errors in the two-star review below, and tune in to its anti-intellectual leanings, to get the message that, yes, those who are unwilling or unable to entertain a smarter vision of what feminism can be are going to have a hard time with this book. By contrast, anyone truly willing to explore the nature of womanhood with an open intellect and with a hunger for refreshing perspectives will be thrilled to read WOMAN. Simply the best book on the subject of everything female that I have yet seen.
Rating:
Summary: The 999th version of " I Am Woman Here Me Roar",
Review: but the pop song of 30 years ago was more rationale than this 400 page book. What an incredibly ridiculous book, and yet so loved and so hyped by the NYC intellectual crowd. I was sucked in, having been told that it was a brilliant reassertion of feminism in the face of recent losses imposed by biologists and evolutionary psychologists who have been quietly presenting data for a decade or so to the effect that, surprise, men and women not only have different names but they are different too. What is obvious to parents and kindergarten teachers and biologists and those who run dating services (4 year college grad women stilll all request a taller man who pays for the first date) is simply ignored in this book. The introduction promises a frontal assault but by the end of the first chapter the reader senses quite clearly it will never materilize. Sensing a need to be on topic and political as the first chapter ends, the reader learns that women need not feel inferior to men just because they produce only a finite number of eggs at one point in time while men produce an infinite amount of sperm throughout their entire lives. To polish man off for sure and to rejuvenate vanquished woman the book administers the coup de grace by comparing sperm to cancer or a viruses in its ability to replicate. All things considered the pop song: "I am woman hear me roar" was more of an intellectual argument, but hey maybe very very deep in their psyche men do feel superior because of their prolific sperm, and women inferior because of their scarce eggs, but if you believe that......I would say, "OH MY GOD". It is really a sight to behold that after all these years the NY intellectual elite is still critically overdosing on feminism and male bashing while socially constructive books like "The 91% Factor" which rationally accepts the obvious biological differences between the sexes and proposes a way for the sexes to love each other given the differences, is very very politically incorrect. In this case war is better than peace and love among the liberals. You think chapter two is better? It is, in that much of the book's underlying motive is revealed. Incredibly, the author reveals that her father was a frustrated biologist and male chauvinist who argued that men are more interesting and dominant because they have two different chromosomes (X,Y) while poor women only have two chromosomes(X,X) but they are the same. So the reader gets treated to 400 pages of neurotic refutation of arguments that at there very best were patently ridiculous to begin with. Serious refutation of biology and evolutionary psychology is nowhere to be found. Sensing a desperate need,again,to salvage a chapter, chapter two ends informing the reader that testosterone and libido are not linked. Doctors who give men testosterone shots to stimulate libido would surely wonder about this conclusion. But the book boldly refutes all of biological history. The reader learns, anecdotally, of a tiny worldwide support group that meets only in England for women with an extremely rare(1 in 20,000 ) disease(AIS)that makes them testosterone insensitive. They say they are sexual nevertheless; so presto chango, history stops; testosterone and libido are not linked. And, these women, anecdotally at least,are aggressive too; so testosterone and aggression are no longer linked, despite all of history . Darn, all those eunuchs lost so much and now it turns out it was just a mistake? In the end there is no serious argument or science here; just woman celebrating women which is fine but when a woman promises to do such intellectually, she should.
Rating:
Summary: original and thrilling
Review: Angier does things that have never been done before. Writing from the standpoint of a biologist and natural historian, she shows what a marvel the female is. For the first time, we see females not in compariosn to males, but as a wonder on their own. We feel we are learning about a new species. Another contribution Angier makes is to meld the scientific and the personal, using science to deepen a personal vision. And she does it all in knock-your-socks-off prose.
Rating:
Summary: Mindblowing
Review: I was reared by a woman who hated everything female. Men wanted sex, women that wanted sex were depraved and deserved ostracism. This was the 1980,s and I was trapped in the era of witch trials and fallen women. After all no decent women would violate her "innate nature" and actually consider sexual fulfillment essential to her sense of womanhood. But then my belated parent was a evangelical christian and sexual intercourse, periods and childbirth were all dirty human failings to her. Ms Angier's quickly debunks and exposes all the flaws in evolutionary psychology, biology and religious text that have tended to reinforce the image of the male as sexually active and the woman as a vessel of pliable flesh. This book is so exciting and invigorating that my husband and I both wanted to read this book at the same time and battled over who would get it first. He won and would tantalize me with extracts. And what incredible extracts they were some like the chapter on sexual selection were simply mind blowing. This is no ordinary dry science book about female anatomy and procreation instead it is a tour de force of revelations regarding womens sexual and physical stamina. If like me you sat through hours of sex education classes and wondered what role the woman played in all this? Then this is the book for you. In the sex education classes they repeatedly understated the importance of sex to women. Because scientific propaganda does not want woman to step beyond childbirth as her ultimate fulfillment in life. Scientific myths regarding womens bodies and sexual purpose are shattered and trodden back in to the mire of their own cliches. After all if women are so sexually passive. Why are there endless laws and religious codes governing their sexual conduct and dress proliferating throughout the globe? Perhaps for that reason this is a very sexy book all the cobwebs are blown away lifting woman out of the biological determinist quagmire of passive breeder in to a sexual partner who rocks ! Ms Angier has done the world and women a great favor. Some of the life stories are excruciatingly painful to read. Not least Ms Angier's own journey back from seeing the man as having it all to realizing that being born a woman is not quite the booby prize of the gene pool she once beleived. When it came to my turning the final page I felt a huge sense of responsibility to keep myself sexually active It suddenly hit me that the celebration of sex for pleaure was seriously undermined by many religions and cultures. Which is peculiar since sex is essential for inner peace. Far from being trite and not a serious subject sex is essential because it is how we connect to each other. Ms Angiers reminds us that sex is an evolutionary gift to woman and so we owe it to ourselves to remain sexually active until the day we die. This is a must read for young women who are anticipating their first sexual experiences. Because here they will find facts about thier bodies so that the "lie back and think of America" maxim will no longer prevail. Get active and be strong. This is the type of book that you share with a loved one and return to again and again.
Rating: 
Summary: Powerful and uplifting
Review: Women fighting for equality have distrusted the science of biology (and its applied sibling, medicine) with some reason: though it has vastly improved their quality and length of life, it has also been used, like religion, to codify their inferior status. The discipline sometimes enshrined the preconceived notions of scientists and their era, instead of exploring theories or facts which disagreed with the status quo. Natalie Angier's book shows that good, bias-free science is actually a friend and ally of both feminists and women. Ms. Angier argues persuasively that biological facts -- especially recent ones from molecular, cellular and field biology -- conclusively show that women are not incomplete men and that "by nature" they are neither helpless nor submissive. Her book is an excellent guide for anyone who has been led to believe that women are biologically hardwired to be timid, monogamous, vulnerable, passive and dim (evolutionary psychology has been particularly guilty of promoting this view by presenting the old, tired platitudes of social Darwinism as brand new, shining "discoveries"). Ms. Angier goes from the small to the large, from eggs to societies, weaving literary references and puns (both good and bad) throughout her narrative, as well as the occasional case study. She lays many cliches to rest and often illuminates things from unexpected angles. She points out repeatedly that women's unhappiness and lack of fulfillment come not from wanting to have it all nor from role confusion but from stark inequality -- and that inequality is neither innate nor ordained. This is a refreshing change to any reader who has slogged through the recent books of several young, privileged women who have chosen to forget -- or worse yet, denigrate -- the struggles of their predecessors. The amount of information in the book is quite detailed and astounding, and may be slightly intimidating to lay readers unfamiliar with the technical jargon of the many fields that Ms. Angier ranges across. My other reservation, besides the technical level of the science, is that the book is too long to be read by someone who doesn't already agree with the author. However, these are minor caveats. The overall effect is of an invigorating tonic -- especially since the surge of strength comes not from wishes or exhortations but from hard facts. I believe that this book deserves to be taught as a textbook not only in college biology, but in anthropology and sociology as well. I salute Ms. Angier for both her courage and her erudition.
Rating:
Summary: This one is fantastic
Review: I never knew how little I knew about women until I read this fantastic work by Natalie Angier. I could not put the book down. It was a virtual roller coaster ride through the wonders of being a woman. It covers all the bases, and never lets up the pace on dispensing information about the rites of being feminine. It covers every aspect of female sexuality, and how it affects the female body and the female mind. This book teaches in way that makes learning about sex both fun and wonderfully exciting. Where was this author when I went to school. In fact, where was this book, or any book like it when I was being raised. This is the way we all should be taught about the women that we try to really love. This book makes a sexual relationship between man and woman something special. It also removes all the misinformation you ever heard and replaces it will facts and the truth. Thank god it has been published. The author takes a scapel to female biology and the results are awesome. I always knew that women were complicated, but now I know why respecting them is so important. Ms. Angier writes with a wry sense of humor that makes all of this seem almost fun; if it weren't so serious. Everyone living in or near a female body must read this book. This book is the perfect combination of hard sceince, humor, and common sense. Last, may I add, what a wonderful way to learn how your female partner is put together. I am a 60 year old man who has just learned a whole new way to love a woman.
|
