This book touched me deeply, both in my heart and in my funny bone. I can't read this book anywhere I can't laugh out loud because even after countless readings I still find it to be the funniest thing I have ever read. Then just a page or two later, I find an ache in my chest and a tear in my eye. Peg has a place in my heart for the rest of my life, and I am thrilled to tears to see that the author has written more books, especially another about the characters from Virgins. I would recommend this book to anyone ( even my husband loved it) but I rarely lend it for fear of losing my copy.

This book has the amazing ability to make you laugh and cry all within a matter of a few pages. I felt like the author had dropped right into my high school and had written about my life. I highly recommend this....you won't regret it. When you are done reading this, read the sequal called "Girls Forever Brave and True" to find out what happens to the characters 10 years later.

It made me laugh, it made me cry, it made me think. A must read for anyone Catholic, and for anyone who remembers growing up!

I love Phillips' writing style in this historical fiction. I read it ten years ago, and it is still one of my favorites that I lend out to friends with positive response.

Eventhough the book is composed by four different unrelated stories, of a black evaegelist in Liberia, a black woman heading for a new life in California during the pilgrimage of the XIX century, the Captain of a slaves trading vessel, and a G.I in England during the II World War; for me there is a phrase that encompass most of the sadness and despair that goes with a life that other persons have damaged and limited due to the shade of your skin and not because of your actions and omissions.

"The young evangelist preached with all his might, but Marta could not find solace in religion, and was unable to sympathize with the sufferings of the sun of God when set against her own private misery".

Caryl Phillips' Booker Prize shortlisted "Crossing The River" (CTR) about the emergence of an African diaspora arising from the slave trade with the African colonies is a collection of seemingly unrelated vignettes spanning over 100 years which share the same emotional core. Each of the four segments making up CTR is a cry from the soul, which poignantly if not bitterly captures the essence of the cultural dislocation suffered by those sold to foreign lands. Some, like Nash in "Pagan Coast", imbibe the Christian values of their colonial masters but experience the pull of their native calling when they are set free and returned as missionaries. Others like Martha, from "West", suffer the misery, indignity and hopelessness that only chattels should know. Phillips isn't out to demonise the white man. He leaves it to us to judge. How do we doubt do-gooder Edward's sincerity in making Nash into a new man ? But then there is also skipper James Hamilton's indifference to the cruelty meted out to slaves in the title segment. The final segment "Somewhere in England" doesn't seem to belong but it does. The strong emotional resonance that these stories evoke is what binds them together. Phillips also displays his literary genius and stylistic versatility in using different styles for the different segments. His Conrad-influenced prose in "Pagan Coast" boasts some of the most beautiful and fluent writing ever. On "Somewhere in England", he comes across like a contemporary novelist using prose punctuated by thought fragments. "CTR" brings four separate but all desperately heartrending stories together. The names of the three children - 2 boys and a girl - sold to slavery by their father in an act of desperate foolishness and named Nash, Martha and Taylor, all make their appearances. They are the countless nameless who consititute the African diaspora today. CTR is a brilliantly constructed and devastatingly powerful piece of work. Nobody interested in serious literature should miss it !

If you want to laugh and be engaged, buy this book.

It's romantic, it's funny, its political, and it has something to say. I read this book first, then the 'Virgins' book that came before it. I enjoyed them both. You can read them in either order.

The author has a real flare for the absurd and for excellent characterizations. I'll read anything she writes, but I truly fell in love with these characters.

I love this book! It is the sequal to the hilarious "Virgins". Anyone woman who grew up going to Catholic school will fall on the floor laughing at this one.

There aren't many book for teenagers, and this one was great. I never started to read books until I read Caryl Rivers.

Studies of this topic have historically used "snowball" samples due to difficulties in getting enough participants via random mechanisms. Rivers and Barnett ditched secondary criteria (Hertz used corporate careers in _More Equal ThanOthers_ from the early 80s; Schwartz used equality in the relationship in _Peer Marriage_ more recently) in favor of focussing on the primary one: a marriage of two people who both work full time. The result applies across income ranges and job types in a way that the work of Hertz and Schwartz did not. And the results are wonderfully encouraging! A two-earner family is less stressed, more flexible, has a stronger relationship between the adults and with the kids and is intellectually and emotionally a more rewarding environment for child-raising. The women are less subject to depression and the men are more actively involved in family life. The big downside: these people are *busy*. I highly recommend this readable and insightful look at what is now the norm for American households

This is an extremely well written book that takes scholarlyinquiry and re-packages it for the popular lay audience. While I wouldlike to refer to this style as entertaining, I refrain from doing so because of the seriousness of the subject and the alarm bells it sets off in me regarding its message. "She Works/He Works" explores the present state of the two earner income family and forcefully debunks the myth based on nostaglia regarding life in the fifties where Mom was a full-time happy homemaker and Dad was the sole breadwinner. The author's derail the Ozzie and Harriet syndrome and discuss how this period of post-war euphoria was really just a blip on the screen and should not be seen as an idyllic time. In reality, Harriet was miserable and was probably spending most her time sipping Vodka and Tonics while she wisked away at her husband's ring around the collar and doted on her children. The authors do a marvelous job in pointing out the really positive outcomes that have emerged as a result of women entering the workforce as serious full-time workers. In summary, women are happier in challenging jobs, their husbands are are happier that they are no longer the only source of income for the family in a time of frequent downsizing and economic uncertainty. Unfortunately, while the facts are optimistic when it comes to the improvement in physical, mental, and economic health for the adults in the family, it is extremely alarming for the well-being of young children. The authors spend an entire chapter in trying to discredit those like Penelope Leach("Children First") that do not feel that the picture of the two-earner family is a rosy one because of its impact upon young children in daycare. One can be totally in agreement that Ozzie and Harriet should remain forever "dead" without succombing to the assumption that this must be at the expense of the young child. One can be in support of the benefits of the workplace without being in support of placing children in a warehousing mode while this goes on. The "collaborative couple" might need to seriously re-think whether they should have children from an economic, emotional, and career vantage point. If they do, then perhaps, they can come up with a temporary and flexible alternative that would allow ONE (not necessarily the women) to stay home and become a "personal manager" for their young child. All of the recent fanfare on brain development during the birth to three years of age period is extremely compelling. This is a critical period of time that really requires one-on-one "qualified" parenting in order to optimize the growth(emotional,cognitive,physical)of the child. The new "collaborative couple" which the authors so brilliantly bring to the reader's attention, really needs to go back to the problem-solving chalk board and come up with some creative alternatives to placing their young off-spring in a less than optimal environment. This is not a mis-directed wish to return to some period of time that really was not all that it was cracked up to be, but rather a careful analysis of all the recent data that is coming out of the neurosciences that unequivocably highlights how critical the Birth-To-Three period is and how it cannot be entrusted to "others" to oversee. This book is a MUST READ FOR ALL not because of the correctness of the conclusions it draws but because of the need to challenge them. It should also be pointed out that a distinction must be drawn between scholarly research data and a journalistic presentation of the data. There is a difference and this can easily be lost when reading such a well written book.

I really liked this book for it's depiction of characters who aren't afraid to feel. A man who was in the Vietnam War meets a woman whose family was affected by the war. How they connect is thought-provoking and moved me.

I did not like the book at all. As far as Im concerned it is just a bunch of run on thoughts that have nothing to back up what she was thinking.

The great thing about Caryl River's writing is that she can impart real wisdom and still make you laugh out loud. I loved the characters in this book, each one completely human, each one trying to play they hand they've been dealt (including JFK), each one struggling to find a place for herself or himself in a rapidly changing world. The story has the sense of reality that can only be achieved by someone who was there.

To many people, the years when President Kennedy was in the White
House and Martin Luther King, Jr. preached a message of equality and
freedom were "Golden Years" whose like will never come
again. That this era was a magical time for Americans can be summmed
up in the name that was given to it, and in the title of Caryl Rivers'
book: "Camelot."

I wasn't alive yet at the time, so I
found Rivers' book invaluable in bringing the era alive for me. The
Civil Rights movement that coincided with Kennedy's tenure had a
lasting impact on our society. Many people still carry on the
struggle to keep these hard-won rights in the hands of everyone,
regardless of skin pigmentation or gender.

Rivers' book brings this
explosive time alive through the experiences of Mary, Jay and
Don. These three young people witness some of history's most pivotal
events firsthand. Rivers presents their reactions and experiences with
honesty and power, triumph and tragedy.

Rivers creates distinct
individuals masterfully through Mary's youth and freshness, Jay's more
worldly cynicism and bizarre sexual fetishes -- one could almost call
them hangups -- and Don's eloquent ruminations (Don's experiences are
told entirely from the first person). His weakness for truly horrific
bodice rippers is a stroke of genius on Rivers' part.

I laughed out
loud when the liberated and educated girlfriend of this likewise very
idealistic and principled young man begins mouthing dialogue from his
favorite author. That I also laughed at Mary and Jay's "Pat and
Dick" routines almost goes without saying.

Whether you wish to
revisit this treasured era of American history, or if, like me, you
are experiencing it for the first time, you can possibly do it in no
better company than Rivers' masterful and wonderful creations.

I have read many books about parenting. Some are in support of the stay at home mom and others support the working mom. The fact that many of us need to read books like this to feel good about the choices we make seems to say that this is a controversial issue with no easy right answer. She works, He works, is a book written to make to income families feel good about their choice. Other books are written to make stay at home moms feel good about their choice. People will believe what they want to believe about this debatable issue. Make the choice for yourself. Do what is correct for your children and family. If that means working, by all means work. If that means staying home with your young children, be all means stay home with your children (at least while they are young and not school age). I am in support of all loving parents that really make an effort to create good lives for their children. While keeping your children and family in mind, make the right choice for your circumstances. I think books like this are for the most part pointless. They are written to make the authors feel good about their choices whatever they may be. It is also written to justify the choices that author has made. However if you are reading this book to support the choices you have made, that is fine too. We all need to feel supported especially when confronting difficult decisions like this one regarding our families and lifestyle.

Before you buy or, God forbid, become influenced by this book, read what a major news columnist had to say about the study that provides most of the data for this book:

A study from a major university early last year made the pronouncement that children whose mothers work full-time suffer no detrimental effects.

Now, that's what the news media wanted us to hear. CBS Evening News couldn't wait to broadcast it. The Washington Post, the Boston Globe, and the Atlanta Journal & Constitution all trumpeted the story.

There was just one problem. The study showed no such thing. It's an example of how the "science" of sociology is being used to serve an ideological agenda.

It was later discovered that the researcher, Dr. Elizabeth Harvey of the University of Connecticut, had skewed some of the data. The stay-at-home mothers in her study were mostly young, poor, and uneducated. They were twice as likely to be single mothers as the national norm, and their income was less than half the national average.

In his book, There's No Place Like Work, Brian Robertson observes, "Clearly, [Harvey's] findings could not be applied to American society as a whole -- yet this is precisely what was claimed in the news stories."

The misinterpretation of her data didn't faze Harvey a bit -- in fact, just the opposite. She said she hoped her study would alleviate the guilt mothers feel when they leave their children each day.

Robertson says the lesson we ought to take away from this is that sociological research "can be -- and often is -- used selectively in the debate over what type of culture we shall have." Journalists grabbed onto Harvey's study because they have a philosophical commitment to the idea that no woman should be asked to interrupt her career in order to care for her children full-time.

If you don't believe that, imagine how the media would react if a researcher announced that full-time daycare caused great harm to kids. As writer Danielle Crittenden asks, would such a study "be heralded... as a vindication for mothers who stay at home?" Would the network anchors tell these moms they need not feel 'guilty' about not contributing to their household expenses?

Don't hold your breath.

Over the last three decades, huge numbers of Americans have shifted time and attention from home to the workplace. Despite assurances by the experts that children are not being harmed by this, Robertson notes, "There remains a strong sense among the public that something is deeply wrong with the parent-child relationship." And a Wall Street Journal poll reveals that an incredible 83 percent of all Americans believe that "parents not paying enough attention" to their children has become "a very serious problem."

Democrats apparently want to solve the problem with government-funded daycare. Republicans want to reform labor laws to give working parents more flexibility. But Robertson says both of these are quick-fix approaches that will not work. They ignore the reasons behind the social and economic pressures that have led to the "flight from domesticity."

The reasons behind this flight are the subject of this special BreakPoint series based on Robertson's book, There's No Place Like Work.

You'll learn the truth about how deliberate, government policies are harming America's families -- and what you can do about it.

(Charles Colson is chairman of Prison Fellowship Ministries. His daily commentary can be heard on radio stations throughout the United States, and at the Breakpoint web site.)

This book is pure hucksterism based on bad statistics. Instead of easing your conscience with crud like this, take a look at the two-income families in your neighborhood and decide if they're "thriving."

This book finally debunks many of the myths that tend to dog working parents. It turns the table around to show that, in many cases, working parents provide a healthier and happier lifestyle for their families.

Let's face it, the two-income family is hear to stay. It is highly unlikely that we as a society will go back to having a parent stay at home just to tend to its children. It didn't work in the '50s, and it won't work now. We need meaningful change based on a real assessment of the situation--and this book gives one.

Based on Barnett and Rivers' 4 year study of 600 working class and middle-class COUPLES (don't know WHAT that other review is talking about--this book is not based on the study "A Reader" suggests--the data was compiled by 1996 from a study funded by [I think]Radcliff). Many real-life examples are given, and their invaluable insights compliment Barnett and Rivers' points.

Brava!