Reviews for Sextrology: The Astrology of Sex and the Sexes

The average rating for Sextrology: The Astrology of Sex and the Sexes based on 2 reviews is 3 stars.

Review # 1 was written on 2011-03-10 00:00:00 Nichole Allen have you ever wondered which star sign is the most likely to engage in scat play? well, dear reader, never fear - welcome to the astrology guide of your dreams! which sign likes it rough? which sign is a big excited puppy? which sign has the smallest tits? which sign has the biggest dick? which sign is bossy in bed, which sign just lays there like a wooden plank? which sign is the gayest, which sign is the most lesbionic? hey, what is the hairiest sign? which sign likes to trim that bush? all those answers and more await you and your quivering fingers within this exhaustive tome. good grief, the level of detail on every single sign is mind-boggling. how do they know these things, every tiny little thing about a person, down to the most obscure details? are people really defined by their sign, so much so that each sexual longing can be exactly predicted and minutely detailed, in every way? why would the stars know which sign has the biggest feet? why would the stars even care? or was this book written by God? a God-like level of knowledge of all human beings and everything they do is certainly contained within. fortunately, the tone of the book is light rather than ponderous, which makes reading this perhaps similar to the feeling one would have rushing through a lavish and over-heated bodice-ripper. it is a true guilty pleasure.

Review # 2 was written on 2008-02-26 00:00:00 KEVIN BUTLER So, true fact: I considered going to Astrology School. Doesn't that sound fun?! Apparently, there is an actual school for this tucked somewhere in the hills of upstate New York. Unfortunately, a rare fit of "common sense" led me to pursue a boring office job - and trust me, I would have been a better astrologer. Now, a disclaimer: I do take astrology with the proverbial grain of salt. I do. I know it can't all be true, and logistically it doesn't make a lick of sense. (This: is an excellent article on the subject.) Yet I still sorta kinda maybe believe it. I'm the girl that responds with a verbose, intellectually stimulating (I mean, to me) conversation when a rando dude saunters up to me at a bar and asks me what my sign is, in a tone of voice that somehow saunters as well. I will leave it up to you to judge how well I fare with the bros. So, the book. It's a lengthy, wordy, somewhat pretentious treatise on the subject by a couple of folks with obviously suggestive names and a truly annoying photo of themselves on the jacket. I haven't read the whole thing, but enough of it to get the gist (the book will lazily open itself up to the astrological profiles of men I have dated throughout the years, with the Libra and Scorpio chapters showing exceptional wear/tear). I think Starsky and/or Cox must be a Virgo, because there is an insane amount of organizing: categories, subcategories, and lists abound. The analysis splits each star sign into male and female aspects - the authors argue that when a person's gender corresponds to their sign's as(sign)ed gender (for the sake of example, Taurus is a feminine sign, so let's say a female Taurus) they EMBODY the qualities of that particular sign, while a male Taurus is always REACHING and SEARCHING for these qualities. Which makes sense in my personal experience? (You could also argue that the influence of astrology in the collective consciousness is swaying my viewpoint. CHICKEN/EGG.) I found the section on archetypes particularly interesting. Some examples were great, and really used existing information and connotation to the author's advantage, just in explaining the damn thing. I never took anything too literally and just assumed it was all sort of a blurry-edged philosophical word-spew (no, I don't think Pisces men are literally Jesus Christ; yes, okay, the use of Artemis makes me understand the fierceness of this sign; etc). I came away with some new knowledge of the astrological variety after reading this. I now know which signs are into whipping, lite bondage, and kissing (isn't everyone into kissing?). I know what section of the population to seek out if I am yearning for that perfect lesbian bedfellow. (But seriously, it's nice to include the gays for once.) I know which men like sloe-eyed girls (the Googling of this term led to the awkward discovery of a college professor writing about his boner-inducing sloe-eyed student, which led to his abrupt termination; it means "soft, dark, purplish or black eyes; having slanted eyes"). An open letter to professors: don't put it out there on the internet when you want to fuck your students. I now know: who I want to have sex with and whom I should avoid. And of course, I will arm myself with this information to endlessly analyze people, but it won't matter a damn in my end game. That's the boon of having a rich inner life! Far less interesting were the incredibly specific profiles of each sign's background and childhood, etc. Starsky/Cox should have stuck to the vague philosophical. I guess you just have to read this for fun. As for astrology as a science, honest, some things were pretty cool. Particularly the explanations (in the form of little symbols and charts, naturally) of male/female, opposite signs and their attractions/repulsion (stuff I knew about but now understand a lot better), the whole astrological wheel situation, in which reincarnation plays a huge part - for we are apparently rebirthed according to the lessons we have yet to learn, and each signs corresponds to a spiritual age, and you are a Sagittarius because you have to learn the secrets/wisdom of all the signs that follow you! So get to work. I'm a Leo. According to this book, I can't survive this life without sex, exercise, and ambition. And that's true facts.