Home
| What's New? | Chapter Analyses | Why John Gray? | Ph.D.? | Hailing
Frequencies
Sundry Apologists | Annotated Bibliography
| Features | Links | Comments
|
The Department of Propaganda:
|
Taken from www.marsvenus.com/cgi-bin/chat.cgi?../jbchat (This chat page, by the way, is history.]
TO SUSAN:
Fri Aug 23 16:52:51 1996
The negative attitude in which you present your objection to Dr. Gray's work does not in my opinion warrant a response. The introduction to Men Are From Mars is clear about the nature of the development of his work. Should you choose to adopt a more respectful attitude, I would be happy to discuss your questions with you in the forum of your choice. I am respectful of the fact that everyone is entitled to their opinion. In the meantime, we are trying to develop a place for the respectful discussion of relationship views and would appreciate your cooperation in allowing us to maintain such a form. What you do on your site is up to you and you may continue to do as you please here - just give some polite consideration to my request. Thanks, Michael Najarian - President, Personal Growth Productions
What precipitated this "response?"
I reproduce for you the three posts that I made to the group in response to some observations of Gray's philosophies offered by an individual named Cathy. After reading Mars and Venus in the Bedroom, Cathy acknowledged some of Gray's points to be valid, but she had some very penetrating questions for Gray and/or his associates about the sexism that she perceived in his writing. (For the record, her questions were never answered publicly.) The complete exchange no longer exists, for a few weeks after these posts were made to the group--of which I was the last to post for two weeks--this chat page was very abruptly pulled from the web. So much for being able to stand up to, and answer, your criticism. I have to admit that it was somewhat satisfying to see Gray and Najarain run away from legitimate criticism like frightened rabbits, although I would have much rather had my questions answered.
Susan (The Rebuttal from Uranus)
Sun Aug 18 18:49:34 1996
Well, Cathy has reaffirmed *my* faith in the existence of intelligence out there in the universe! Hey, I'm not saying that Cathy is endorsing The Rebuttal at all (I don't even know if she's read it so I'm not going to presume to put words in her mouth), but the fact that someone is READING and not just digesting material is encouraging to me!! You have READ it and then THINK about it. Kudos to you, Cathy! Brava! And since I'm already here, why not check out the latest addition to The Rebuttal? John Gray has finally been soundly defended by his minions!
Susan (The Rebuttal from Uranus)
Wed Aug 23 11:33:25 1996
I appreciate and respect your desire to refrain from making a judgement on The Rebuttal until you have read all of the pertinent Gray material. Your points about Tom and Mary are well taken--I absolutely agree with your observations. Gray's writing disturbs me for a number of reasons, but it says some pretty discouraging things about our society when this tripe has been on the NYT Bestsellers List since 1992. I am encouraged by the number of men who have spoken out against its insulting generalizations on The Rebuttal, but I am horrified by the number of women who swallow this tripe with nary so much as a question. I am also dismayed by the lack of sound defense offered on behalf of John Gray. Sasha, for all of her apparent ability to articulate her thoughts, did not even come back to soundly defend Gray. And I mean SOUNDLY--not the personal insult of "stop bitching" argument. Even his cronies on this group have defended him with accusations of bitterness on the part of those who question his integrity. This psycho-babble is no better than selling snake oil on the prairie! And why doesn't anyone question his academic integrity? You know, I saw this man on Good Morning America not too long ago plugging yet another seminar ("Marriage Day" or some such nonsense), and he actually had the nerve to assert that "some" behavioral differences that distinguish men and women are indeed "genetic." This is right up there with his statement on Oprah that "women have more cuddling hormones than men." Cuddling hormones? Let's be thankful you can't obtain an M.D. by mail
Susan (The Rebuttal from Uranus)
Fri Aug 23 11:33:25 1996
I am not surprised that three days has gone by without so much as a peep from Gray or his cronies. You can't defend what is not substantiated by credible research. I asked specific questions on The Rebuttal as to how the research for MMWV was conducted and never received an answer (not that I expected to, mind you). Taking a chunk from my own web page, let me ask those questions again. Has this "research" been published anywhere scholarly and critically analyzed by the profession? In what way were your respondent's questioned? What questions were asked? How long did seminar participants have to fill out any surveys (providing there was one)? Were questions distributed before or after the seminar? Does it take into account class, ethnic, religious, national or regional differences? Was age a factor? Are answers separated on the basis of gender, marital status, or length of relationship? EXACTLY HOW MANY INDIVIDUALS WERE QUESTIONED? (Gray's assertions of "more than 25,000" needs some clarification.) Was there any long-term (or, indeed, short-term) follow-up among ALL (or a significant number) of participants? Yes, Cathy, there is a void that needs to be addressed; a void about as big as the universe that lays claim to the planets Venus and Mars.
Hmm, and what did I get in response to my legitimate questions of methodology and education? "The negative attitude in which you present your objections to Dr. Gray's work does not in my opinion warrant a response."
No, Michael. Really. Thank YOU.
After the towels wiped up the last of the sweat off the necks of the Gray group, nothing was posted for a few days. My comment was the last to appear. No one wrote in to condemn or to support either me or Gray.
Then Najarian responded again. Apparent damage control.
To Susan:
Wed Aug 28 01:05:07 1996
When I pointed out your negative attitude it was not made in reference to the remarks you addressed to Cindy but rather the tone of everything you have written. I do, however, feel that the phrase, "not so much as a peep from Gray or his cronies," does indeed reflect a negative attitude. At any rate, should you ever decide to converse on the subject of gender differences in a respectful manner, I am open to doing so. I am not at all interested in trading insults...my work, as well as John's is devoted to improving relationships with the hope of contributing to a happier, healthier world. I am just a regular person Susan doing my best to make a difference.
I am delighted to know that Michael Najarian has read everything that I have written. However, two things remain unchanged. First, as of Saturday, 24 August, Cathy's very sincere inquiry has yet to be answered publicly. (For the record, her name is not Cindy.) Second, fully legitimate questions of methodology, research and education still go unaddressed. Was the phrase that was perceived as "negative" indeed true until Friday, 23 August? Yes. And, irrespective of the attitude perceived by Michael Najarian, have any of my legitimate questions been answered? No. Oh well...
29 August 1996
In retrospect, I suppose Najarian might have answered my questions if I asked him to rephrase them for me (as per Gray's advice in Chapter Five), but I'm more intelligent than that. He offered to answer Cathy's questions not within the group, but through private email (it's amazing how he kept getting her name wrong on the chat page by calling her Cindy; this tells me that he wasn't reading her concerns with a sincere eye). She had some legitimate questions and observations. I've never heard from her and don't know if she ever bothered to contact Najarian, but I do know one thing: none of the questions posed on The Rebuttal have ever been answered by Gray's camp. Why not? Well, I don't know for sure. But I imagine they wouldn't be able to concentrate what with the sound of the cash register droning in the background. 10 June 1997
As of sometime in either late 1998 or early 1999, Michael Najarian is no longer the President of Personal Growth Productions. The former president of Lufthansa is now calling the shots (or so I've heard). Najarian is still doing his own facilitating schtick and booking engagements for John Gray. 24 April 1999
Home | What's New? | Chapter Analyses | Why John Gray? | Ph.D.? | Hailing Frequencies
Sundry Apologists | Annotated Bibliography
| Features | Links | Comments
Copyright © 1996-1998 Susan Hamson. All rights reserved.