I like the companion volume to Choice Theory which is entitled The Language of Choice Theory.

Glasser takes the basic elements of his Control Theory and fits these in with Deming. Some very very common sense approaches to management. Management involves people most of all, and Glasser's approach is focused on people. This little book is one that a manager should keep on his desk for a careful read and a re-read. Common sense approaches to working with people to get things done, instead of "working" people to try to get things done..

In The Secret Vietnam War USAF in Thailand, the author toes the bureaucratic line. For 1975, he believes historians when they tell him the C5a that was destroyed (by guerillas who wanted to discourage the extraction of Vietnamese refugees) not by "structural damage" i.e. they were practically brand new aircraft. I sat through the security/intelligence brieifing. As a result he misses the fact that Security Police had to pull the repugnate duty of sniper on off loading refugees because the brass was afraid the North Vietnamese would use refugees as cover to do suicide attacks on Thailand air bases. The author misses the fact that Security Police were escorts on US C 130s to help with the early refugee extraction during Operation Babylift. The author misses the threat of student, communist querrillas, and RTG mercenaries against US military installations. I had to endure sniper harrassment on the perimeter and I was ordered to not defend myself. The author got right the assassination threat against the base commander, but missed the fact that theives and others attacked, beat, and stole equipment and weapons of SP gate guards. This is partly inferred in "Rituals of National Loyalty." He missed the fact that bases in Thailand were used by US diplomacy to smuggle herion, when I tried to stop a shipment on a KC 135 tanker the base commander relieved me of duty and put me on the next "Freedom Flight" home. I did find a book that talks about the CIA's involvement in such activities, they paid off Thai military authorities by shipping out local leader's herion.

I was there during the same time frame as Jeff, and I still learned a lot. Reading this book was like a step back in time. It was good and informative. Todays youth should read it and others pertaining to the Vietnam War. I only have one critisim though. As with all other books that are in print about the Air Was in Vietnam, one very important unit has been overlooked yet again. This was DET 2 TAWC (Detachment 2 Tactical Air Warfare Command), Project Rivet Top. This was the unit I served with during the Vietnam war and having been a Top Secret unit it has been ignored again.

I bought this book several years ago and was amazed at the point the author made. Simply put, emotioanl and other reactions are really and truly concious responses. We've just trained ourselves to rely on those "reactions" as the default. Thought is still required even if for a split-second.

This makes the phrase "He made me mad" illogical.

At least that's what I remember.

This small book gives a wide range of examples of "languaging" with reality therapy (control theory). It is amazing how "languaging" can make a huge difference in how communication is understood or the context of the words. This book is especially useful for parents of teens in applying reality therapy kinds of practical approaches to their kids. Natural consequences, taking responsibility and making useful choices. The mere reading of the difference between conventional and habitual phrasing .. and the control theory type of speak gives insight. This book is best as a companion to Glasser's other books.

Instinctively, most decent people don't like to see anyone singled out and denigrated unfairly. To most, it seems particularly distasteful if the denigration is on the basis of race, gender or (to many, at least) sexual orientation. Yet the authors of this book, all of whom are active in campaigns for equality as well as for civil liberties, see codes on US campuses which prohibit and punish such speech as a threat.... Why?

Their book examines the arguments for and against such codes and the issues that underlie them. Objections to these codes include that :

They are a threat to basic free speech principles. In particular the idea that speech should be protected regardless of its content or viewpoint -- a principle intended to prevent the law from favouring one interest over another.
 
They have a chilling effect on wider discourse. Nadine Strossen points out that : Regardless of how carefully these rules are drafted, they inevitably are vague and unavoidably invest officials with substantial discretion in the enforcement process; thus, such regulations exert a chilling effect on speech beyond their literal bands. (1)
 
They put us on a "slippery slope". Ideas not originally intended to be the subject of the codes will be penalised. Throughout the book examples are given of this happening. Strossen points out that in Britain the "No Platform for racists and fascists" was extended to cover Zionism (whereby its victims included the Israeli ambassador to the UK). (2) In Canada the victims of restrictions of free expression have included the black feminist scholar Bell Hooks, and a gay & lesbian bookshop in Toronto. (3)

Much the same issue was raised from the floor of an LM sponsored conference in London at which one of the authors (Nadine Strossen) spoke; it was pointed out that the UK Public Order Act of 1936, which was ostensibly introduced to control the followers of British Fascist leader Oswald Mosley, had been invoked time and time again to ban demonstrations by leftists and trade unionists. Similarly, police tactics used against the National Front in the 1980s to prevent their coaches from reaching demonstrations were later employed against striking miners.

The book's authors note that the codes give power to institutions and government. Can we trust them with these new powers? As David Coles, a law professor at Georgetown University, wrote :

...in a democratic society the only speech government is likely to succeed in regulating will be that of the politically marginalised. If an idea is sufficiently popular, a representative government will lack the political wherewithal to supress it, irrespective of the First Amendment. But if an idea is unpopular, the only thing that may protect it from the majority is a strong constitutional norm of content neutrality. (4)

Donald E. Lively questions how new powers will be exercised :

Reliance upon a community to enact and enforce protective regulation when the dominant culture itself has evidenced insensitivity toward the harm for which sanction is sought does not seem well placed. A mentality that trivialises incidents such as those Lawrence relates is likely to house the attitudes that historically have inspired the turning of racially significant legislation against minorities. (5)

But perhaps Ira Glasser puts it best in her introduction to the book :

First, the attempt by minorities of any kind -- racial, political, religious, sexual -- to pass legal restrictions on speech creates a self-constructed trap. It is a trap because politically once you have such restrictions in place the most important questions to ask are: Who is going to enforce them? Who is going to interpret what they mean? Who is going to decide whom to target?
The answer is : those in power. (6)

Another condemnation is that the codes are an exercise in self-indulgency, a trivialisation of real racial imperatives by the pursuit of relatively marginal and debatable concerns....
Donald E. Lively states :

As a method for progress, however, protocolism (1) seriously misreads history and disregards evolving social and economic conditions, (2) is an exercise in manipulating and avoiding racial reality; and (3) represents a serious misallocation of scarce reformist resources. (7)

Speaking of Race, Speaking of Sex doesn't just put the arguments against speech codes -- it also deconstructs the arguments put in their favour. The three most interesting arguments in favour of such codes are, in my view, (1) that racist expression is not about truth or an attempt to persuade and so is not worthy of protection; (2) that racist declarations are in fact group libels; and (3) that racist expression is akin to an assault.

All three arguments are dismissed by the authors. In the first case, Justice Douglas is approvingly quoted :

(A) function of free speech under our system of government is to invite dispute. It may indeed best serve its high purpose when it induces a condition of unrest, creates dissatisfaction with conditions as they are, or even stirs people to anger. Speech is often provocative and challenging. It may strike at prejudices and preconceptions and have unsettling effects as it presses for acceptance of an idea. This is why freedom of speech, though not absolute is nevertheless protected against censorship or punishment, unless shown likely to produce a clear and present danger of a serious substantive evil that rises far above public inconvenience, annoyance or unrest. There is no room under our Constitution for a more restrictive view. For the alternative would lead to standardisation of ideas either by legislatures, courts, or dominant political or community groups. (8)

The second argument -- that racist, sexist or homophobic statements are group libels -- is likewise dismissed. The authors point out that libel involves the publication of information about someone that is both damaging and false. Apart from the obvious fact that group libel doesn't refer to an individual does it fit the definition? Henry Louis Gates Jr. states that it does not. He points out that racist statements may be right or wrong but cannot in many forms be judged true or false. they are often statements of what the individual thinks should be or an expression of feeling. As Gates points out : You cannot libel someone by saying 'I despise you', which seems to be the essential message of most racial epithets. (9)

The last argument -- that such speech represents an assault or words that wound -- is examined, and also dismissed. The authors accept that words can cause harm. Their concern, however, is that no code can be drawn in such a way as to punish only words which stigmatise and dehumanise. They point out that the most harmful forms of racist language are precisely those that combine insult with advocacy -- those that are in short the most political. (10) Attempts to deny that racist speech has a political content also deny that they are part of a larger mechanism of political subordination.

So, can we combat hatred on grounds of race, gender or sexual preference whilst cherishing and nurturing civil liberties? Can we encourage a diversity of thought as well as of population and lifestyle? The answer given by the authors of this book is an emphatic 'yes'. They don't see equality of opportunity and freedom of expression as being at odds. As such, their ideas are refreshing in contrast to the many who seem to have quite unthinkingly accepted that we must sacrifice our freedom on an altar of (faked) equality...

This book now out of print may be available through libraries or as a special order. The late Naomi Glasser (William Glasser's wife) presents cases in which a variety of individuals such as teachers, social workers and psychotherapists used the basic principles of Reality Therapy on very difficult cases. Some of the stories are very amazing in terms of the turn around possible when people work hard on positive principles of caring while making the troubled person responsible for their own behaviour. This book is a remarkable testament to how people can be helped by support of their being worthwhile, at the same time that they are made to be accountable for their choices. William Glasser's concept of reality therapy is so simple and sound in principle, it is amazing.. one of those things that someone looks at and says, "why didn't I think of that?" "Owning" it personally takes practice and this book shows how well it works.

Can a book about psychology bring a new measure of personal freedom to the reader? Indeed it can! In his latest book, psychiatrist William Glasser offers freedom from widely accepted ideas that play havoc with good relationships. This is a book about relationships. It shows how all of us can improve every personal relationship in our lives, and, thereby, help us solve many of the problems that plague our times.

Best of all, this is a wonderfully readable book. The reader gets acquainted, up close and personal, with real people who present real problems-problems all too familiar to most of us. Within the privacy of the counseling room, we are treated to word-for-word accounts that demonstrate how Dr. Glasser sets the stage for those who are troubled to open new and liberating doors for themselves. We are even treated to a view of the psychiatrist-writer counseling literary characters, such as Francesca in THE BRIDGES OF MADISON COUNTY.

The book, REALITY THERAPY, published in 1965, brought Dr. Glasser to international prominence. A book about counseling, it pioneered a movement, now widely followed. The current style of counseling is no longer aloof and mysterious, no longer rooted in futile attempts to re-live the past, but rooted in the here and now and directed toward need-fulfilling involvement with others. This new book demonstrates, in a most persuasive way, the startling idea that we choose all that we do. What a liberating idea! We even choose misery at times, but usually we have better choices, and the author shows us graphically that we are free to make these.

Much of the unhappiness that most of us endure-at least, periodically-stems from the widespread belief we hold that people can be forced, through threats or rewards, to do things they do not want to do. Glasser refers to this massive tendency toward coercion, ever present in our society, as external control psychology. Choice Theory is the exact opposite of domination and invasive power. The new choice theory is, indeed, a remedy for all this misery. Without resorting to threats or bribes, we can vastly increase the likelihood that people will do what we want them to do if we learn and apply choice theory. Glasser's convincing explanation of this practical way of improving our relationships is the great achievement of this book.

Though not a book about religion, we find here a consistency with the Golden Rule, as the author himself points out. This remarkable book explores the relationships that most affect the quality of our lives: love, marriage, work, and family relationships. The author shows how schools can be true centers for quality learning. In a chapter on management in the workplace, Glasser shows why W. Edwards Deming met with such stunning success, first in Japan and later in America. Glasser also gives his view of why Southwest Airlines has been so extraordinarily successful in a highly competitive industry.

Having pointed the way to quality in our most important relationships, Glasser offers a bold proposal for creating quality communities. His proposal for vast social impact is not just a remote ideal; he describes the steps that are now being taken in one American city. If Corning, New york can do it, why not your community?

Dr. Minor Morgan is an attorney and practicing psychologist in Dallas, Texas.

This is a wonderful book on human relationships. The concepts in this book are well worth working for. As a student of psychology, I have often found conventional psychology confusing. I have held Dr. Glasser's beliefs for quite some time and now I have found them researched and recorded! I am very excited about this book! This book gives a wonderful insight on human thought and behavior. Conventional psychology fails us in so many ways. We can see this as we look at the world around us today. We must each understand one another's quality worlds instead of trying to force our own quality worlds onto other people. If we all worked at simply getting along with each other and finding happiness, the world would be a better place. This may sound trite to some--all I can say to them is "READ THIS BOOK!" If you want to get along better with your spouse, your children, your co-workers, etc. ... READ THIS BOOK! If nothing else--do it for your family--especially your children!

I am (by trade & training) an "Instrument & Controls" person, so when I stumbled upon Dr. Glassers "Control Theory" I was actually looking for "manufacturing" type controls. Taking required psych/soc courses in school, I had a hard time buying into their theory of "stimulus/response" (old Pavlov & his dog) etc. and had many heated discussions on why I thought this was bull. But when I read "Control Theory" (now updated to "Choice Theory"), things that I had observed and "understood" (via my "controls" background) fell into place. Everyone knows (?) people don't behave like machines, (but sometimes??...) and this book gives some clue into the reasonings behind motivation's & just what makes us do the things we do. Loved it!

I'm sure William Glasser meant well when he wrote this book. It's short, but it still never should have been a book. In my entire life, I don't think I've ever read a book that says only one thing, but says it over and over. If you read the first chapter, or even the back cover, you have his entire theory. The entire book repeats the theory over and over, and doesn't add any new information beyond what you read in the first few pages.

It's amazing to me that this wasn't just written as an article in some psychology magazine. The entire book could *easily* be condensed into an article of 2-3 pages.

Glasser examines the idea of Positive Addiction with running at the very centre of the book. Book is not that long, but tends to be somewhat repetitive... but still worth a read. Not Glasser's best book but even at that, the ideas he shares are good.. and the positive addiction idea does trickle into other parts of life, so that someone who is positively addicted to running or swimming or cycling, tends to feel better and can take that good feeling to other things they do. If people became more positively addicted to good relations with others... WOW! what an outcome that would be..and (third time said) Book is well worth a read..

This book starting me running 18 years ago in order to obtain a "positive addition" which is a repetitive activity that you do non-self-critically that has a beneficial effect on your mind and/or body. The author suggests that a positive addiction can forge new neuronal connections in the brain to help you think better and more creatievely. The main addictions discussed are running and meditation but there are many others including such arcane things as putting on makeup! This book was one of the early books to describe the "runner's high" which others have documented. Because of my desire to experience this and other benefits, I began a lifetime program of exercise and other types of self-improvements. Don't let the book's "old" publishing date put you off--newer self-help books are not necessarily better. I've often thought that this book's approach might especially benefit the so-called "addictive" personality, but I think all of us need to find ways to alter our consciousness without harming ourselves. This book has one of the keys.

William Glasser is a psychiatrist--strike one. Psychiatrists are still stuck on the notion that fibromyalgia an illness that is psychologically caused and continued and nothing in what I've read about his take on fibromyalgia tells me he is any different. Strike two is the statement that there is no pathology, i.e. physical abnormalities with fibromyalgia. On the contrary, there are numerous studies going on at numerous prestigious universities by numerous knowledgeable researchers that are discovering very definite physical, biochemical abnormalities in fibromyalgia patients that are not psychologically caused. Strike three--the incidence of psychological difficulties (depression, anxiety, etc.) is approximately the same in the fibromyalgia population as in the general population. If the depression rate is any higher, it's because of [people] like Glasser and the members of the medical profession who set themselves up as "experts" on the subject of fibromyalgia when they know NOTHING. It's a never ending battle for fibro patients...

Dr. Glasser has made his book on fibromyalgia, tell his story of what he now calls "choice theory", in a story format. What he tells does not just apply to fibromyalgia, it applies to most of our life challenges. This is a short book, that tells all anyone really needs to have a continuously improving life. There is a lot to be gained from telling how choice theory works by using these realistic cases. Then we can identify with the challenges faced by himself and the other people in his book.

Now that he has his story in an enjoyable format, I would like to see a companion workbook. Because, once you know the challenges, then you really need to do the necessary work.

I have been a fan of Dr. Glasser a long time, since I first ran into his early book called "Reality Therapy". Since then I have been impressed by his "Stations of the Mind" and "Schools Without Failure" and many others. Then I ran into his practices in my masters program on applied psychology and found how useful his theories are in practice.

I began reading this book several years ago just as my problem drinking crossed the line into full blown alcoholism. I had never tried AA but had listened to drinking associates who had...half heartedly. In fact, this book was given to me by one of these people. One who had read it and was still drinking unsuccessfully. All it did for ME was set me up for another failed attempt at quitting on my own. The only thing that has worked - so far - is treatment and a committment to the AA program. Its been proven to work over and over. Why go anywhere else?

I grabbed for this book with all the enthusiasm of a malaria patient reaching for quinine. I couldn't take the AA message. I couldn't see how anything was wrong with me except that every now and then I drank a little too much.

So I read this book. Even memorized parts of it. I could quote whole pages at one point. I was going to be a "responsible" drinker. Only problem was that I am an alcoholic. I will never be able to drink like "ordinary" people. The advice in this book kept me working for that control. In the process, between when I gave up AA and finally threw this dangerous pack of misinformation and lies into the trash, I lost my wife and three kids. My behavior on one night of "controlled" drinking was so impressive that a restraining order was put out to keep me from causing them undue harm and anxiety. I totalled my company car and lost my job. A month later, after my broken collar bone healed and the stitches had been taken out of my skull, I was arrested for drunken driving at two in the afternoon after a business lunch. Depression set in, and I decided to do my own version of "Leaving Las Vegas." Even that didn't work. And all this responsible and rational bologna was just making me feel worse and suicidal. Why couldn't I just take control and beat this liquor thing with the ideas in this book?

The answer is very simple. I am addicted to alcohol. Once I start, I can NOT predict what the outcome will be. I have been going to AA for almost eleven months now. Not only has the twelve step program helped rid me of the urge and compulsion to drink, it is teaching me how to live life honestly and without denial. I believe I now have a chance for a better life than I ever had before. The reason is simple: I admitted that I was powerless over alcohol and that my life had become unmanageable. I learned that only a Power greater than myself could restore me to sanity. I'm sticking with what works. I am just thankful that I never killed anybody with my car when I was believing the garbage in this goofy book! The contents of this book are not dangerous, they are criminal.

This is a valuable book, and particularly so for those who have tried Alcoholics Anonymous and found it ineffective or unworkable. The book stresses personal reponsibility in controlling the consumption of alcohol and, after all, that is the key to controlling all forms of addiction. When it comes right down to it, what else is there? No one else can do it for you.