Are men necessary?

I read a lot. Usually, the books are reasonable and give me little to complain about, a good investment of time. They provide something to think about, distractions from "real life" and "boredom". This time, though, I have to rant. Maureen Dowd's book Are Men Necessary? is confused, gossipy, catty, incoherent and grossly generalizing.

What point are you trying to make Ms. Dowd? That women should be allowed to act as they wish, while men's behaviors towards women should be strictly regulated? That men act in stereotypical caveman fashion or that society is making them more feminine and sensitive? Are women catty and unsupportive of each other, or would they get along better in the large world politics forum? Really now, choose a point, make all chapters contain evidence to support that point, then write a coherent, insightful conclusion. That's the way books are written. It makes them not only enjoyable, but informative as well, leaving the reader a more educated person. You instead leave me feeling like you wrote a series of lengthy, but poorly planned op-eds that are often self-contradictory accomplishing only your true intention to name-dropping gratuitously. Perhaps the worst offense in your book is your gross generalizations. Not all men are the chauvinist pigs only attracted to double D sex kittens. Not all women want to become plastic, Barbie-esque clones of youth until the day they die. It is offensive consider how you would over simplify all relationship in my past as not being based on mutual respect for intelligence and common interests or goals and instead classify them as bait-and-switch affairs of a man trying to sleep with me and disappear while i trap him in my man-trap. You insult the idea of love. You have wasted many hours of my life, which i want back.

Maureen Dowd, are you necessary?