By Kate Thomson, Fall 2009
Given I barely make it through the mounds of assigned readings, extra-curricular reading has become a long lost hobby. My curiosity got the best of me recently, however, when I decided to read, “Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus,” by John Gray, Ph.D.
Although published in the early ’90s, Gray’s ideas are still routinely referenced; the best seller clearly appeals to the masses and seems widely accepted by many as “fact.” It is not uncommon to hear women consoling their girlfriends with statements such as, “I know honey, but he’s a guy, and you just have to accept that all men are just like that.” There is no doubt that gender plays an influential role in behavior, but I was disturbed by the book’s over-simplified “survival guide” approach to dealing the other sex, not to mention its offensive and limiting perspective on what constitutes an ideal relationship.
First, and at best, the book applies exclusively to heterosexual couples (I would have awarded the book some slack had this limitation at least been mentioned). In addition to being heterosexist, the biased and archaic lens through which Gray views sex differences leaves no room to acknowledge cultural norms or the impact of environmental factors. In sum, Gray’s message encourages heterosexuals to forgive their partners for their behaviors and to view their “character flaws” as innate and fixed.
The book suggests that women are essentially irrational, emotional driven (hysterical even), and needy, and that men need to forgive the rise and fall of their “waves.” His depictions of the “opposite” sex are no better; he paints men as barbaric, single minded, and insensitive, and urges women to allow them to retreat periodically into their “caves” where they can be allowed to relish their independence and authority.
As psychologists, we strive to be informed and critical consumers of academic literature, which we all know is not without flaw. But after reading Gray’s theories, it occurred to me that we must also stay abreast with the messages propagated by pop psychology. After all, those are the messages that often reach the public en masse and unfortunately, readers may not be on the prowl for their often offensive and culturally biased per-spectives. So, fellow academics, I encourage you to pick up the book (seriously this “quality read” takes less than an hour). Arm yourself with some witty conversation starters and provocative retorts and let’s get folks thinking beyond restrictive and dichotomous gender assumptions. At the very least, it will help you prepare an educated comeback for the next time Aunt Suzie references the book to explain your dating woes at this year’s holiday party.