Two things about this: first, haven't we heard enough on this subject lately? And second, would a man have written this the way Mayer has? Her thesis--which in itself is not off-base--is that men go through the ""is that all there is"" dance at the age of forty or thereabouts; that nubile young things, malleable and undemanding, have a virtually irresistible appeal for such men (as well as suggesting that maybe that isn't all there is); and that, ""as a group, men in their middle years shoulder more personal and social responsibilities than anyone else. They feel threatened not only because they sense the tensions from both ends of the life cycle, reminders of their own waning youth, but also because they must support both ends financially."" What Mayer does is to describe the symptoms of such men, then tacitly advocate a change in what has, until now, been customary male behavior--especially for these men who are too old to have been swept up in introspection the way younger men may have been. She advocates conversation and the open airing of personal emotion. In other words (to paraphrase Lerner and Lowe) she asks, ""Why can't a man be more like a woman?"" Why, indeed.