OYENTE

JorJor G.

  • 6
  • opiniones
  • 0
  • votos útiles
  • 17
  • calificaciones

Research-based, Unbiased, Compassionate, Rigorous and Fair

Total
5 out of 5 stars
Ejecución
5 out of 5 stars
Historia
5 out of 5 stars

Revisado: 11-05-24

Dr. Soh is one of those individuals with intellectual integrity who can care about causes without injecting misinformation, disinformation and other nefarious tactics so often deployed on any topic that touches the political realm of opinion.

A sober analysis and personal story of the perils of genuine efforts at speaking the truth on controversial subjects. She avoids needless inveincentives and sticks to the facts while demonstrating and encouraging empathy and compassion for individuals who are the subject matter of her research.

Informative and provocative, it will provide needed facts to help understand gender, and arrive at sensible positions on how to assess issues surrounding gender.

Well done, Dr. Soh. I highly recommend to people of all political beliefs.

Se ha producido un error. Vuelve a intentarlo dentro de unos minutos.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

Theatrical Value Is Outstanding

Total
5 out of 5 stars
Ejecución
5 out of 5 stars
Historia
5 out of 5 stars

Revisado: 08-17-24

The performances and musical score really swallowed me into the story. I was listening on a knife's edge in parts.

A classic work that really felt alive in this format and version. Well done!

Se ha producido un error. Vuelve a intentarlo dentro de unos minutos.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

A Hyper-Partisan Author Who Portends to be Objective

Total
2 out of 5 stars
Ejecución
5 out of 5 stars
Historia
2 out of 5 stars

Revisado: 04-24-24

I'm a centrist who has a large amount of criticism for the political left. But the apologetics for the far-right extremism, insurrectionism, lies about the 2020 election---that even GOP state-level officials say is false---this author embraces them as truthful, legitimate and justified beliefs. Moreover, he believes "wrath" that emanates from these demonstrably falsehoods beliefs to be justified. It is too difficult to seriously read a scholar who is so unaware, or obtusely in denial of his own irrational biases. There are many other reasonable, measured, scholars who check their partisanship, and my time, and yours, would be better spent reading their works.

Se ha producido un error. Vuelve a intentarlo dentro de unos minutos.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

Great Insights, But Too Verbose

Total
4 out of 5 stars
Ejecución
5 out of 5 stars
Historia
3 out of 5 stars

Revisado: 04-02-23

I would've given it 3 stars, but for the fact, it was my fault I read the unabridged version.

I appreciate the sincerity and insight he offers in many respects (5 stars for that). There are myriad parts, however, that seem rambling and not focused on the point he is trying to make in the chapter.

He also relies on quotes and references Biblical scriptures more than any other sources combined. This seems deliberate for a targeted, mostly Christian audience. He also speaks more of literary references than social science itself. When he does mention psychologists, it is typically the psychoanalytic school (Freud and Jung). I don't have an issue with doing so per se since it is more of a philosophical text he wrote here. But, there is a dearth of more contemporary and empirical research. He is a clinical psychologist, and while I welcome his anecdotes, I would think he would have had more to say about cognitive behavioral approaches rather than an overly abundant emphasis on psychoanalysis and Biblical scriptures.

It is definitely provocative. I loved parts of it and, at other parts, found myself saying aloud, "Shut up!" or "get to the point." Especially in his protracted, unnecessary, loquacious tangents into Christianity, which erode from his otherwise more erudite discussion. If it were a scale of 1-10, I would give a 7.

Se ha producido un error. Vuelve a intentarlo dentro de unos minutos.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

Essential Reading for the Last 100 Years of SCOTUS

Total
5 out of 5 stars
Ejecución
5 out of 5 stars
Historia
5 out of 5 stars

Revisado: 10-10-22

Highlights various double standards and inconsistencies in legal reasoning SCOTUS has used to between the wealthy and powerful and poor and disinherited.

The Warren Court of 1954 - 1969 was an era of improving toward equality and equitable democracy. Since then, however, the conservative control and ideologies on the Court have sought not just to undue the Warren Era progress, but even the New Deal improvements in worker's rights and corporate accountability.

Well researched and thorough in the evidence it presents to defend the book's thesis.

Se ha producido un error. Vuelve a intentarlo dentro de unos minutos.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

Narration imbues proper emotion into content

Total
5 out of 5 stars
Ejecución
5 out of 5 stars
Historia
5 out of 5 stars

Revisado: 09-28-22

I never felt bored, nor too lost or confused with the listening experience. The content is world class and the voice actor did the content proper justice.

Se ha producido un error. Vuelve a intentarlo dentro de unos minutos.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

adbl_web_global_use_to_activate_webcro805_stickypopup