Sisters of the Yam: Black Women and Self-Recovery

Rating:
Summary: Sisters of the yam
Review: bell hooks makes you think! which is a hard process to do

Sisters & brothers should read this material-there is no color barrier here but provoking thinking material.

Rating:
Summary: Sisters of the yam
Review: bell hooks makes you think! which is a hard process to do

Sisters & brothers should read this material-there is no color barrier here but provoking thinking material.

Rating:
Summary: hooks' writes with honesty and courage!
Review: I loved this book. I think every African American woman should read this book at least once a year, as an annual celebration of self. hooks is reflective and honest. It is also a good reference for mental health therapists working with African American women.

Rating:
Summary: hooks' writes with honesty and courage!
Review: I loved this book. I think every African American woman should read this book at least once a year, as an annual celebration of self. hooks is reflective and honest. It is also a good reference for mental health therapists working with African American women.

Rating:
Summary: UPLIFTING
Review: I READ SISTER OF THE YAM AND FOUND IT TO BE VERY UPLIFTING. IT PROVIDED ME WITH THE HELP I NEEDED TO HEAL MANY ASPECTS OF MY LIFE. SISTERS SHOULD READ IT AND EMBRACE IT

Rating:
Summary: The new feminist test of male virtue
Review: This book has altered my thought process in ways I never thought possible. bell hooks has spoken with clear and simple words about black women and our individual and collective need to self-recover--from racism, sexism, of course--but also from our own (often) self-imposed 'isms carried from childhood. She's brutally honest in a book that sits unmoved from my bed-stand. A recommended read for black women. Period. Regardless of background and circumstance. A must read for those on the never-ending journey of self-introspection that eventually encourages self-recovery.

Rating:
Summary: The new feminist test of male virtue
Review: This is worth buying just for the essay in which Hooks compares two of her male lovers, a good one and a bad one. The distinction between the two is the manner in which they respond to Bell's quirky little habit of initiating sex but then, once having aroused her partner, shutting the guy down and sending him away without his cookie. She does this on a regular basis. Now the bad partner is bad because he used to get out of sorts over this behavior, but the good guy is good because he's all understanding about it. He knows that this is what Bell needs to feel "safe" in a relationship, don't you see.

Don't misunderstand me here: a woman is entitled to press the "disengage" button at any point during a sexual encounter. No means no, ,no matter what the circumstance, etc etc. That's a different issue, however. What we have here is the psychosexual equivalent of Lucy, Charlie Brown and the football. No psychologically healthy person of either sex runs trips like this one someone they love, and no psychologically healthy person would put up with it past the second repetition.

Second only to Mary Daly, Hooks is the leading feminist crank of our day.