If you are looking for a model of feminine and masculine in the past five thousand years and especially the 1950's, based on the patriarchal model, Stone's book will please you. I was annoyed and shocked at times. I do remember believing much of what she reports, the brain washings of the fifties. I'm grateful for the work I've done to become aware of and throw out such debilitating anti-woman teachings. Yes, women and men have introjected the patriarchal system. I don't believe Stone sees her own Inner Patriarch as clear as she sees her client's.
I was shocked to read "Abortion is killing an unborn child. Taking a life is a sin." What woman would say that? Other than the Phyllis Schafly followers. She states the Inner Patriarch of men is the one who rules against incest. Really. No, the Inner Patriarch sanctifies it along with rape.
I am not a fan of Voice Dialogue, but have always been drawn to Jungian depth psychology with archetypes, complexes, and much more. There is a great gulf between the two. And between Stone and me. I don't believe in the Good Patriarch, an oxymoron to be sure. Stone's opinionated and ultra-traditional views of feminine and masculine qualities were grating. "Perhaps if the Inner Patriarch of women did not agree with the criticality of the outer world, then women would not be victims of judgements." What does that mean? It's too close to if women did not wear short skirts, they would not be raped for me.
Fortunately, I am also reading Rebecca Solnit, a perfect balm.