Rating: 
Summary: deceptively simple and ingenious,I think?
Review: << Deceptively simple and ingenious. If by relationships you mean heterosexual then getting the sex in some reasonable context is the most important thing according to this book. After all, nature draws the opposite sexes together expressly for the purpose of having sex or being sexually intimate. If not for sex we would prefer someone of the same sex with whom we have more in common, exactly the way children do until they reach puberty.(that was in the book) Sex is the glue that nature gave us, but it must be used properly; almost like food. The 91% Factor is all about what happens when couples fail to understand the meaning of sex in heterosexual relationships. More importantly, it is about how to use sex to create a loving long term relationship. This should be a given but we just don't know how to do it despite a flurry of books on sexual pleasure and techniques that miss the point completely. A very believable theory based on intimate first person sexual accounts of 30 couples on the way to divorce. Sort of like the Mars/Venus book in that it deals with the difference between men and women, but different in that it deals with intimate sexual/romantic differences rather than with why men like TV and women don't. The chapters on sexual frequency are fascinating. They go into great depth on the biological reason why men pursue sex while women grant it, and how the human family would not be possible if not for this precise evolutionary development. More importantly, it details how fighting this basic phenomena of nature can destroy heterosexual relationships, while seeking harmony with it will build a relationship. As a woman this all strikes me as a very new sort of "feminism in the bedroom" whereas in the past we have been concerned mostly with feminism in the boardroom. But, it is a feminism that men can like too since they tend to like sex in any context;even a context that includes a sexually aware woman.
Rating: 
Summary: Bizarre conclusions that usualy result from poor thinking
Review: .This potentialy good book ilustrate what any good thesis supervisor knows: poor thinking, failing to consider all the relevant variables involved in a problem, can lead to the most ludicrous, bizarre, absurd conclusions (not to mention recomendations). The authors' recomendations, well covered by the other Amazon.com readers, have this artificial, twisted, demented quality, to anyone with half a spoon of common sense, not because they lack logic. By the contrary, they are the logical consequence of there line of investigation and analysis. The problem is they tried to analyse such a complex phenomenom as the modern heterosexual marriage through the narrow angle of the sexual component and, even this single subject is reduced to an over-simplified model of "male seeks intercourse with female, which controls the 'flux' of sex". Lots of questions highlight the poverty of this framework of analysis. Here are just three: * Why have divorce rates increased after women started providing free sex before marriage? Actualy, how could the institution of marriage survive such a blow, as free pre-nuptial sex, if the author's perspective is relevant? * The sexual drive of women is significantly (and biologicaly sensibly) reduced, after the birth of a child. Instead of strengthening the marriage, this is tipicaly a period of stress for the relationship. How can this be explained by the authors? * How about the male perspective and expectations, about marriages? Aren't men less prone to end marriages beacause it is easier for them to have satisfactory extra-marital sex and relationships? Are men sexualy over-satisfied within marriage or are both -- man AND woman -- frustrated, in terms of sex and relationship? Isn't it probable that extra-marital affairs mitigate the man's frustration but not the woman's? In this case, isn't the man's frustration more probably linked to sexual fulfillment, while the woman's stems from more relationship-related problems? If so what would be the results of the author's recomendations, less or more divorces? Better or worst marriages?
Rating:
Summary: Finally, an actionable theory
Review: A fascinating theory based on the notion that heterosexual relationships are 1) primarily sexual (certainly from an evolutionary viewpoint this is true) and 2) fade, 50% to a female initiated divorce, because a woman's sexual power diminishes from the first date forward. The author claims, with much scientific support and measurement that on the first date a woman knows to withhold sex until the male has proved himself a worthy, long term lover, but in time, assuming a marriage or long term relationship, she comes to believe that sex is a free marital good which the male successfully demands and receives too much for his own good. Rather than being on his best and most affectionate "first date" behavior he is like a child served his favorite meal to often to the point where his appreciation of the thing he is programmed to value most is lost. Then, both feel unloved and eventually a divorce is the result. The author's statistical claim is that a female's sexual communication skill is best and most purposive on the first date, due to fundamental evolutionary forces, and fades thereafter as she slowly comes to believe, or is persuade by her mate, that her obligation is to provide sex on demand rather than in return for "first date" affectionate and loving behavior. An ingenious and actionable theory, based on much fact and observations of the sex life of many couples on route to divorce, to hopefully stem the 50% divorce rate. Who knows of a better theory,especially a better theory that can be remembered and acted on?
Rating: 
Summary: One Man's Theory of the Honeymoon and the 7 -year Itch
Review: A provocative and informally written book without bibliography, notes or index. The original research consisted of looking at courthouse records (which is actually quite a smart idea) and talks with married friends (at least no interview technique or method of obtaining the sample is described). The 91% figure comes from Shere Hite, and the sources quoted in the text are at that level - which is not meant as a sneer just to warn that, for better or for worse, this does not contain impressive statistics and analysis of variance and is not up there with Wolf and Faludi and the rest as a literature review. Read and enjoy and think.
Rating: 
Summary: A man's perspective.
Review: Another Guru who's Out to Lunch: 1) don't give your man too much sex; this is the opposite of what the pursuit oriented male was bred for by the forces of evolution and it is certain to kill his sexual interest in you; if not his entire interest in you and the outside world. (Try this at your own peril! A hungry person will look for food elsewhere) 2) if you insist on a lot of sex, learn to be more orgasmic so you too will have a resting phase that perhaps will coincide a little more with his. (I don't get this one, but O.K.) 3) learn how to masturbate or to have sex with him in different ways that do not always involve an orgasm for him. This will keep his interest high, but not satiated, the way it generally is from puberty to marriage, and the way it was during the long period when humans evolved without the benefit of constant marital sex.(Just what I want, Frustrating Sex! Perhaps the author would have us chew our food and not swallow so we won't get complacent about eating. I'd rather be put on a schedule. See 1. above.) 4) remember that too much free sex is actually opposite to the expensive biological sex that men must purchase or earn with various kinds of good or impressive behavior. (The author has conveniently forgotten that the "forces of evolution" did not require a man to be monogamous. Monogamy is a social phenomenon, not a genetic one. Prehistoric man had no restrictions on the NUMBER of women he could have sex with!) A big draw for married partners IS the guarantee of regular sex. What person in their right mind would promise to forsake all others and then be put on a leash like this? This advice is abusive and will drive a wedge into the relationship.
Rating:
Summary: One of the WORST relationship theories ever.
Review: Here's a one-sentence summary of this book's advice: A woman needs to withhold sex from her husband so he'll behave well. Such emotional *blackmail* cannot possibly be the foundation for a good relationship. I've been quite happily married for almost six years now--thanks to *communication* my husband and I can get exactly what we want, both inside the bedroom and out. Don't waste your money on this puritan dreck.
Rating:
Summary: Fresh & Provocative
Review: I am a 47-year-old woman, widowed after a happy 15-year marriage, and now in another satisfying partnership with a man. Neither the title nor the contents of this book offend me -- far from it -- I think it's time American women took some responsibility for our decision-making powers. As the author points out, and my experience validates, we women choose the relationships we want, nurture them, manipulate them, feed them or starve them, and untimately decide whether they thrive or die. Women want sex in a loving context. Men want sex to soothe, comfort, and reassure them. It's up to women to demonstrate to our men the power they have to turn us on or turn us off. I agree with some of the other reviewers that there's a fine line between sexual blackmail and honest, immediate communication about the sexual climate in a relationship. I would not recommend (as the author does) that you start making love and then stop in the middle with an admonition that you will not culminate the act until you feel loved. But there is nothing wrong with an instance rebuke of bad behaviour and an immediate move into the spare bedroom until it changes. These are issues that must be explored prior to marriage & kids --- for the sake of both genders. As the author also points out, it's men who suffer when women decide to terminate a marriage so men should welcome straight talk from a woman about her requirements for on-going sexual interest. As the author says, most men want to please us; they start out loving us and only resort to loveless sex if they are led to believe we don't care.
Rating:
Summary: Too simple
Review: I read this book with some interest, and I conclude the author makes some good evolutionary points, but the question remains in my mind: do women really need a man to make them happy? Happiness comes from many different sources, and it is unrealistic to think that, even with the "sex for flowers" trade, a woman can get all of her emotional and/or instinctual needs met just from sex and marriage. No one person can fulfill all of anothers' emotional needs.
Rating:
Summary: Blame Women
Review: I went through the reviews and thought that this book must be daring...and it is. The one thing that I agree with is that you shouldn't have sex unless you are being treated right, not just right before, but after and in between and in daily life...if not you'll fall into loveless sex and left feeling cold and used and eventually you'll leave him. I buy that completely. The rest of the book (the parts I could get through) basically say that whatever it is..anything at all wrong with the relationship, including being treated like dirt..is the womans fault. It is our fault because we hold the power but are too stupid to see it... and on top of that, men are too stupid to see it or anything else for that matter but are blameless because they are men. (no advice to men about being decent human beings who are worth a womans time...because no matter what they are faultless...this book is about blaming rather than healing, loving, relating and growing together in life and love) If you didn't already know to hold out for someone that treats you good...know it now and don't waste your time with this book. If you want to read that you are a moron and men are even bigger morons (and it's your fault anyway you look at it) then DO read this book. If your lifes ambition is to kill your personality and life in order to "get" someone to father a bunch of kids, then this book is definately for you. I for one don't believe that men are this stupid...though the author certainly is. It assumes that your calling is to have children, which isn't for everyone. It also assumes that we don't have many orgasms and prefer to be on the bottom (and this is suppose to be a good thing)...this part stunned me, I've had very few non-orgasmic love making or romps. The movie version of this book is The Stepford Wives...watch it, cringe and thank God you are who you are. I love men, but if I were to believe this garbage I would opt for a vibrator and give up on men completely...maybe try to find myself a girlfriend. The BEST relationship book I have ever read is Extraordinary Sex Now (it's about the relationship that leads to great sex, not about technique..it is about people, our personality traits and how to get along and be close). I have read Extraordinary Sex Now several times with great reward. I got 91% today, read most of it and will put it in the trash first thing in the morning.
Rating:
Summary: I heard this guy on the radio he is right on!!
Review: I woke up this morning hearing about this book in a radio interview. He has nailed it! As a 25 year old in my fourth year of marriage i can say sex is certainly vital and knowing that things will change when you marry is too! The bottom line is everything changes, if you think it, you, or he won't..then never marrry because as he says...it will!
| 
