So, I have an immediate answer whenever the paparazzi ask what most puzzles me about the gender I am not: "The whole horoscope thing." Of course, I understand that there are many women who reject horoscopes entirely, but still both personal experience, survey data, and perusal of differences in women's and men's magazines all indicate a much greater affinity for horoscopes among women than men.
Last night I was in Barnes and Noble and saw Danica McKellar's Math Doesn't Suck: How to Survive Middle-School Math Without Losing Your Mind or Breaking a Nail. McKellar was Winnie on The Wonder Years. The book is supposed to help girls become interested in math. When the cover promised "horoscope inside!," I thought it was a joke, but, no, there is a section where she consults with an astrologer for a section about how the different astrological signs correspond to different math personalities.
The book cover also promises to answer "do you still have a crush on him?", but I didn't look to see what math it uses to determine that.
BTW, also in Barnes and Noble, a friend and I stood completely engrossed at the graphics novel table for a half hour reading the entirety of Robot Dreams, a book about a dog who wants a friend and so builds a robot, which he then takes to the beach where tragedy ensues. I think I'm going to go back and buy it for my coffee table collection.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Someone--Lance?--posted that cover; I was certain they had done a masterful job of photoshopping.
I'm thrilled that McKellar is using her best skill now, and will be thrilled if this means more tween girls are competitive in math class, or at least demand more Economic theory in their Home Economics classes. But it looks more in the mode of Britney Spears Guide to Semiconductor Physics than Morris Kline or Martin Gardner. I was hoping for at least The Biochemist's Songbook.
Post a Comment