Recommend you do it as a trade book. I look forward to reading it. As an "old lady" who went to med school, developed a research career, got married and stayed married, raised to kids who are both docs with kids of their own I am dismayed with the nonsensical way gender roles are discussed. Your book could be a great "antidote."
Hi Eleftheria, thanks for the comment! I'm definitely leaning toward a trade book, and that seems to be the consensus among the folks commenting. Noted on the gender roles - I hope my book can serve as an antidote too!
Love the concept. My only suggestion is to consider a way to include “celebrating” or “exploring” gender differences. Otherwise, there’s a risk of being perceived as yet another male authority dictating parameters of “identity”. This might help pre-judgment and subsequent dismissal of your important message.
Hi Michael, glad you like the concept! Yep, I do plan to make clear that the project isn't about trying to tell anyone what they should do. My philosophy is: Let people be themselves! It doesn't matter if they conform to traditional gender roles or defy them, just let them be themselves.
I loved the idea and how you mentioned the elephant in the room (culture war) while keeping an impartial view about sex differences. I guess everyone should have access to this kind of view, but do not know if it would pay off with the current dogmatism around the topic. Perhaps you can publish it as an academic book for now and, depending on the public's response, publish a 2nd version as a trade book later on.
I loved the Ape that Understood the Universe, and I can’t wait to read this one ! Will you be discussing the ideas of conservative figures such as Louise Perry, who root their criticism of the sexual liberation in evolutionary psychology ? Am curious of what you made of it. Good luck !
Hi Samuel, apologies for the delayed response. It's been a busy month!
I've got some notes on these ideas, but I'm not sure if they'll make the final cut.
I agree that, as a result of average differences between the sexes, more women than men are likely to find uncommitted sex to be a raw deal. But I do think that some conservatives talk about this in overly black-and-white terms - e.g., it's good for men but bad for women - whereas in fact the difference is one of degree rather than kind.
And I don't think the solution is to go back to the old social norms. People should be free to do what they want in the romantic arena, in my view. Perhaps we could do a better job of warning people about possible negative effects of uncommitted sex, and of telling them that old-fashioned monogamy is the best option for many. But I'm not sure how pressing a concern this is. Most people seem to muddle through OK.
I'm curious about the story your book intends to tell. I noticed a comment below urging caution about how the content might be misused for political agendas or misogynistic arguments. While I understand the concern, I hope you don't shy away from presenting evidence, even if there is a risk that it will be misinterpreted or misused. Avoiding the truth for fear of how it might be received can lead us down a dangerous path of willful ignorance.
In psychology, gender differences aren't usually controversial, but they become highly charged in public discourse. I hope your book doesn't get bogged down in culture-war issues, but rather makes reasonable arguments that contribute to a healthier social relationship between the sexes.
I also hope you highlight men's issues-such as those discussed by Warren Farrell, Richard Reeves, John Barry and Janice Fiamengo that are often disdained today, especially in areas such as law, health, and education. These issues are only one part of the broader topic of sex differences, but they are underreported and deserve more attention in a balanced and thoughtful way.
It would be beneficial for society if policymakers were open to constructive criticism of the women's rights movement, also known as feminism, from individuals who are not opposed to women's rights but have concerns about the ideological and activist aspects of it. Every engagement from professionals who care about men's issues is needed and highly welcomed!
Thanks for the comment! I think we're basically on the same page with all of this.
"I hope you don't shy away from presenting evidence, even if there is a risk that it will be misinterpreted or misused. Avoiding the truth for fear of how it might be received can lead us down a dangerous path of willful ignorance."
I completely agree. Here's a quote from Chapter 1 addressing this point:
"Given these very real harms, the question many people have is: What the hell are we doing? Why would we want to risk talking about and researching sex differences? It’s a good question, but I think I’ve got a good answer. In fact, I think I’ve got two. The first is that even though the risks are real, the sexes do differ on average, and we can’t just lie about that. What we should do instead is tell the truth carefully. We should emphasize at every turn that the gaps are generally modest, that they’re not set in stone, and that they’re statistical trends rather than life goals or moral imperatives.
"My second answer is that exaggerating and moralizing sex differences isn’t the only mistake on the menu, and isn’t the only mistake that does harm. Minimizing and denying sex differences – or moralizing the absence of sex differences – does as well."
I then go on to list a bunch.
I hope to avoid transient culture war issues, and stick to stuff I think will still be relevant in ten years or twenty or thirty.
And yep, I plan to cover the ideas of people like Warren Farrell, Christina Hoff Sommers, David Benatar, Richard Reeves, and John Barry, among many others - hopefully in a non-polemical and balanced way.
I loved your last book (and never tire of recommending it to friends, family, and strangers on the train), and I’m looking forward to reading this one :)
Now looking forward to this one. I hope you manage to publish it as a trade book as I think if it comes out as an academic book, that might limit its reach.
Content wise I'm interested to see a thorough and fair hearing given to other prominent scholars who are usually critics of sex differences (Lise Elliot, Gina Rippon, etc)
Hi Kennedy - yep, I think you're probably right about publishing it as a trade book. Academic books do have a few advantages. But I've done two of those already, so it might be good to try the trade-book option instead.
And yes, I'm planning to discuss Elliot and Rippon's ideas, as well as Cordelia Fine's. Although I disagree with them overall, I have definitely profited from reading them.
Hi John - thank you! Glad you like the book idea and contents list. Noted that you think it should be a general release. I'm leaning that way myself...
congratulations for starting this new chapter, your approach and goals you set. I'm already excited about your new book.
I read the post, and for now I have two comments.
1. The first one is rather minor, about the following sentence in your 'elevator speech': "The first is to download everything I’ve learned about sex differences over the last quarter century from my brain to the pages of the book, so readers can upload it into their own brains". The 'downloading/uploading' analogy is effective, but it may be inappropriate for readers, specially if they experience the analogy as being passively "uploading" the content written in the book. Probably some other verb related to comprehension, procession or similar, may be more appropriate.
2. The second one is related to the title: again, using the peacock tale's analogy is very effective. I understand that you use it to stress that both sexes have peacock tales. However, I think that using it will create in readers unfamiliar with the topic a pre-set expectation, or bias in reading the book, as 'male-ish". Unfortunately, for now. I don't have better proposal :) If I get some idea, I will definitely write it to you.
Wish you a very fruitful period, and great success with the book.
Regarding the downloading/uploading, my comments refers more on 'uploading' by readers (possibility to be perceived as passively 'taking' the content), not on downloading.
As to title, perhaps either "The Peacock’s Tail: The New Evolutionary Psychology . . ." or "The Peacock’s Tale: The New Evolutionary Psychology . . ."? I think I prefer "Tale," especially if a peacock's tail features on the cover. No criticism intended of "The Peacock’s Predicament," which definitely works.
Hi Michael - great suggestions! I think I prefer "Tale" to "Tail" too. And one advantage of Tail/Tale over Predicament is that it's a much more familiar, everyday word.
I have read some decent concerns of breaking blank-slate taboos of mainstream culture.Imagine that if evo- psych was mainstream,would we see an increase in discrimination against women considering risky leadership roles?Maybe academics can read Murray's bell curve and still judge people individually,but what about the average joe.Probably you have considered some of these aspects already,just pointing it out
Hi Christos - yep, I've considered some of those concerns already, and plan to address them in the book. I do worry about people getting the wrong end of the stick. I'd only add that it's possible to get the wrong stick in both directions - exaggerating sex differences and denying them - and that both could potentially have harmful consequences.
Recommend you do it as a trade book. I look forward to reading it. As an "old lady" who went to med school, developed a research career, got married and stayed married, raised to kids who are both docs with kids of their own I am dismayed with the nonsensical way gender roles are discussed. Your book could be a great "antidote."
Hi Eleftheria, thanks for the comment! I'm definitely leaning toward a trade book, and that seems to be the consensus among the folks commenting. Noted on the gender roles - I hope my book can serve as an antidote too!
Love the concept. My only suggestion is to consider a way to include “celebrating” or “exploring” gender differences. Otherwise, there’s a risk of being perceived as yet another male authority dictating parameters of “identity”. This might help pre-judgment and subsequent dismissal of your important message.
Hi Michael, glad you like the concept! Yep, I do plan to make clear that the project isn't about trying to tell anyone what they should do. My philosophy is: Let people be themselves! It doesn't matter if they conform to traditional gender roles or defy them, just let them be themselves.
I loved the idea and how you mentioned the elephant in the room (culture war) while keeping an impartial view about sex differences. I guess everyone should have access to this kind of view, but do not know if it would pay off with the current dogmatism around the topic. Perhaps you can publish it as an academic book for now and, depending on the public's response, publish a 2nd version as a trade book later on.
Hi Yago - interesting idea! I'll keep that in mind. All the best!
I loved the Ape that Understood the Universe, and I can’t wait to read this one ! Will you be discussing the ideas of conservative figures such as Louise Perry, who root their criticism of the sexual liberation in evolutionary psychology ? Am curious of what you made of it. Good luck !
Hi Samuel, apologies for the delayed response. It's been a busy month!
I've got some notes on these ideas, but I'm not sure if they'll make the final cut.
I agree that, as a result of average differences between the sexes, more women than men are likely to find uncommitted sex to be a raw deal. But I do think that some conservatives talk about this in overly black-and-white terms - e.g., it's good for men but bad for women - whereas in fact the difference is one of degree rather than kind.
And I don't think the solution is to go back to the old social norms. People should be free to do what they want in the romantic arena, in my view. Perhaps we could do a better job of warning people about possible negative effects of uncommitted sex, and of telling them that old-fashioned monogamy is the best option for many. But I'm not sure how pressing a concern this is. Most people seem to muddle through OK.
I'm curious about the story your book intends to tell. I noticed a comment below urging caution about how the content might be misused for political agendas or misogynistic arguments. While I understand the concern, I hope you don't shy away from presenting evidence, even if there is a risk that it will be misinterpreted or misused. Avoiding the truth for fear of how it might be received can lead us down a dangerous path of willful ignorance.
In psychology, gender differences aren't usually controversial, but they become highly charged in public discourse. I hope your book doesn't get bogged down in culture-war issues, but rather makes reasonable arguments that contribute to a healthier social relationship between the sexes.
I also hope you highlight men's issues-such as those discussed by Warren Farrell, Richard Reeves, John Barry and Janice Fiamengo that are often disdained today, especially in areas such as law, health, and education. These issues are only one part of the broader topic of sex differences, but they are underreported and deserve more attention in a balanced and thoughtful way.
It would be beneficial for society if policymakers were open to constructive criticism of the women's rights movement, also known as feminism, from individuals who are not opposed to women's rights but have concerns about the ideological and activist aspects of it. Every engagement from professionals who care about men's issues is needed and highly welcomed!
I really like Bentham's Bulldog's latest post on this topic: https://open.substack.com/pub/benthams/p/two-dogmas-of-feminism
Anyway, I wish you the best of luck in your endeavor!
Hi ABC,
Thanks for the comment! I think we're basically on the same page with all of this.
"I hope you don't shy away from presenting evidence, even if there is a risk that it will be misinterpreted or misused. Avoiding the truth for fear of how it might be received can lead us down a dangerous path of willful ignorance."
I completely agree. Here's a quote from Chapter 1 addressing this point:
"Given these very real harms, the question many people have is: What the hell are we doing? Why would we want to risk talking about and researching sex differences? It’s a good question, but I think I’ve got a good answer. In fact, I think I’ve got two. The first is that even though the risks are real, the sexes do differ on average, and we can’t just lie about that. What we should do instead is tell the truth carefully. We should emphasize at every turn that the gaps are generally modest, that they’re not set in stone, and that they’re statistical trends rather than life goals or moral imperatives.
"My second answer is that exaggerating and moralizing sex differences isn’t the only mistake on the menu, and isn’t the only mistake that does harm. Minimizing and denying sex differences – or moralizing the absence of sex differences – does as well."
I then go on to list a bunch.
I hope to avoid transient culture war issues, and stick to stuff I think will still be relevant in ten years or twenty or thirty.
And yep, I plan to cover the ideas of people like Warren Farrell, Christina Hoff Sommers, David Benatar, Richard Reeves, and John Barry, among many others - hopefully in a non-polemical and balanced way.
Will check out the link; thanks for that...
I loved your last book (and never tire of recommending it to friends, family, and strangers on the train), and I’m looking forward to reading this one :)
Thanks, Jan - really appreciate that! I hope the strangers on the train do too... :-)
Good luck with your new project!
Thanks, Michael!
I’ll buy a copy.
Hi Coel - great! Hopefully you won't have to wait too long...
I read your previous book and greatly enjoyed it!
Now looking forward to this one. I hope you manage to publish it as a trade book as I think if it comes out as an academic book, that might limit its reach.
Content wise I'm interested to see a thorough and fair hearing given to other prominent scholars who are usually critics of sex differences (Lise Elliot, Gina Rippon, etc)
Hi Kennedy - yep, I think you're probably right about publishing it as a trade book. Academic books do have a few advantages. But I've done two of those already, so it might be good to try the trade-book option instead.
And yes, I'm planning to discuss Elliot and Rippon's ideas, as well as Cordelia Fine's. Although I disagree with them overall, I have definitely profited from reading them.
Sounds great. I will look forward to it. That contents list works for me and I think fwiw that it should be a general release. More power to your arm!
Hi John - thank you! Glad you like the book idea and contents list. Noted that you think it should be a general release. I'm leaning that way myself...
Hi Steve,
congratulations for starting this new chapter, your approach and goals you set. I'm already excited about your new book.
I read the post, and for now I have two comments.
1. The first one is rather minor, about the following sentence in your 'elevator speech': "The first is to download everything I’ve learned about sex differences over the last quarter century from my brain to the pages of the book, so readers can upload it into their own brains". The 'downloading/uploading' analogy is effective, but it may be inappropriate for readers, specially if they experience the analogy as being passively "uploading" the content written in the book. Probably some other verb related to comprehension, procession or similar, may be more appropriate.
2. The second one is related to the title: again, using the peacock tale's analogy is very effective. I understand that you use it to stress that both sexes have peacock tales. However, I think that using it will create in readers unfamiliar with the topic a pre-set expectation, or bias in reading the book, as 'male-ish". Unfortunately, for now. I don't have better proposal :) If I get some idea, I will definitely write it to you.
Wish you a very fruitful period, and great success with the book.
Best regards,
Ognen Spasovski
Hi Ognen - thanks for the comments!
It hadn't occurred to me before that downloading is a passive process. I'll have a think about whether that's a deal breaker.
As for the peacock analogy, that had occurred to me as a potential problem. Hmmm... I'll have to have a good think about that too...
Thanks again!
Also, as the author you would be uploading your knowledge into the book, and then the reader would download it.
Oh yeah, you're right! Oops - thanks!
Hi Steve,
thanks for your reply.
Regarding the downloading/uploading, my comments refers more on 'uploading' by readers (possibility to be perceived as passively 'taking' the content), not on downloading.
Best,
Ognen
Hi Ognen,
Yep, sorry - I got that, but somehow used the wrong term when I wrote my reply!
Thanks,
Steve
As to title, perhaps either "The Peacock’s Tail: The New Evolutionary Psychology . . ." or "The Peacock’s Tale: The New Evolutionary Psychology . . ."? I think I prefer "Tale," especially if a peacock's tail features on the cover. No criticism intended of "The Peacock’s Predicament," which definitely works.
Hi Michael - great suggestions! I think I prefer "Tale" to "Tail" too. And one advantage of Tail/Tale over Predicament is that it's a much more familiar, everyday word.
I'll add your suggestions to the list!
I have read some decent concerns of breaking blank-slate taboos of mainstream culture.Imagine that if evo- psych was mainstream,would we see an increase in discrimination against women considering risky leadership roles?Maybe academics can read Murray's bell curve and still judge people individually,but what about the average joe.Probably you have considered some of these aspects already,just pointing it out
Hi Christos - yep, I've considered some of those concerns already, and plan to address them in the book. I do worry about people getting the wrong end of the stick. I'd only add that it's possible to get the wrong stick in both directions - exaggerating sex differences and denying them - and that both could potentially have harmful consequences.