Reviews
Odd Girls and Twilight Lovers: A History of Lesbian Life in 20th-Century America by Lillian Faderman
captaincocanutty's review against another edition
3.0
3.5 stars
Thorough account of lesbian history throughout the 20th century, and how perceptions of and ideas around same-sex relationships changed over time. At some times a little slow but a lot of interesting information.
Thorough account of lesbian history throughout the 20th century, and how perceptions of and ideas around same-sex relationships changed over time. At some times a little slow but a lot of interesting information.
starrygal's review against another edition
4.0
Well written, interesting, informative, fairly comprehensive. It's cool to have more context on stories I've heard about lesbians from older times. My main complaint is that it's pretty cisnormative.
thomasgoddard's review against another edition
4.0
After a book that carefully and unbiasedly (mostly) examines both the history of lesbianism and women's movements over the past century? Look no further.
Although, be prepped for a moment of disbelief when you discover that there really is no such thing. I mean, it's one of those strange situations where you realise that there's no such thing as a fish; there's just many independent organisms that are categorised, for ease, as fish.
For example, a salmon is more closely related to a camel than it is to a hagfish. (Thank you Wikipedia)
And so, back to lesbians. The only thing that connects women who identify as such is that they prefer women.
Brief digest: women often paired up historically but it was more of a situation only the rich could indulge in, lesbian was coined by some dudes who thought a women uninterested in men was sexually Inverted, 1920s saw more women able to work and support each other in pairings, 1930s had packs of women roaming the country for work, 1950s the butch and femme appeared out of a desire to invent traditions, rituals and a coded identity for themselves, 1960s sexual revolution largely didn't touch lesbians as they viewed it as a patriarchal conspiracy, 1970s the lesbian-feminism started which was a heavily separatist move to start communities, publishing houses, record companies, etc... But all died due to bad organisation within 10 years (they rejected the 'patriarchal' hierarchical way of organising)... And they were heavily TERFy, uncomfortable for diverse and disabled people and hated Gay men because they were men... 1980s they realised they shouldn't construct their entire lives around a single character trait and rejoined the Gay community to help during the AIDs epidemic... they also came back into the wider community again and work within it and so they won a lot of respect and understanding from the wider public again... 1990s the book ends with a warning to younger women that they were falling into the same dark patterns that women in the 1960/70s had in becoming separatist, misandrist and overly concerned with socialist ideas that never work when the foundation is a sexual preference.
There's way more than that. I've obviously heavily simplified things. But it was really amazing to see the way that history seems to be repeating itself today. Militant people ruining a well-intentioned movement in order to profit and achieve power for themselves.
One day we'll rise above our obsession with difference and realise that we're human and therefore all disgusting, self-obsessed, selfish, greedy, liars. But until then, read this book. It's heavily focused on American life though. Just FYI.
And the rest of the people who reviewed this low and got stroppy about it not talking a lot about Black people and transgender lesbian history: you're an idiot. The whole point is that the movement has been historically self-centred and against those people, the whole book criticised that fact too! It was a bad thing. There are plenty of books written by people who know that side of things WAY better than this white cis author does or could. Read more broadly. If they HAD written more about that, you'd probably get salty because they didn't 'do it right'. The last part of the book was directed at you, re-read it... you nonsensical virtue-signalling sophomoric pedants.
Same goes for the idiot that read this entire book (I actually doubt that) and still came away locked into the same closed down position that the author was somehow writing a book about people who 'say' they are lesbians but aren't really.
Just because YOU have an idea of what a lesbian is, doesn't make you right. It is just YOUR idea of what a lesbian is. If other women want to identify as a lesbian and YOU don't agree... Keep it to yourself... Because it's exactly your brand of exclusionary militant nonsense that held all types of people out of the community for the last hundred years... minorities, non-binary, trans people, the poor.... You don't own the term and people can identify how they like.
Although, be prepped for a moment of disbelief when you discover that there really is no such thing. I mean, it's one of those strange situations where you realise that there's no such thing as a fish; there's just many independent organisms that are categorised, for ease, as fish.
For example, a salmon is more closely related to a camel than it is to a hagfish. (Thank you Wikipedia)
And so, back to lesbians. The only thing that connects women who identify as such is that they prefer women.
Brief digest: women often paired up historically but it was more of a situation only the rich could indulge in, lesbian was coined by some dudes who thought a women uninterested in men was sexually Inverted, 1920s saw more women able to work and support each other in pairings, 1930s had packs of women roaming the country for work, 1950s the butch and femme appeared out of a desire to invent traditions, rituals and a coded identity for themselves, 1960s sexual revolution largely didn't touch lesbians as they viewed it as a patriarchal conspiracy, 1970s the lesbian-feminism started which was a heavily separatist move to start communities, publishing houses, record companies, etc... But all died due to bad organisation within 10 years (they rejected the 'patriarchal' hierarchical way of organising)... And they were heavily TERFy, uncomfortable for diverse and disabled people and hated Gay men because they were men... 1980s they realised they shouldn't construct their entire lives around a single character trait and rejoined the Gay community to help during the AIDs epidemic... they also came back into the wider community again and work within it and so they won a lot of respect and understanding from the wider public again... 1990s the book ends with a warning to younger women that they were falling into the same dark patterns that women in the 1960/70s had in becoming separatist, misandrist and overly concerned with socialist ideas that never work when the foundation is a sexual preference.
There's way more than that. I've obviously heavily simplified things. But it was really amazing to see the way that history seems to be repeating itself today. Militant people ruining a well-intentioned movement in order to profit and achieve power for themselves.
One day we'll rise above our obsession with difference and realise that we're human and therefore all disgusting, self-obsessed, selfish, greedy, liars. But until then, read this book. It's heavily focused on American life though. Just FYI.
And the rest of the people who reviewed this low and got stroppy about it not talking a lot about Black people and transgender lesbian history: you're an idiot. The whole point is that the movement has been historically self-centred and against those people, the whole book criticised that fact too! It was a bad thing. There are plenty of books written by people who know that side of things WAY better than this white cis author does or could. Read more broadly. If they HAD written more about that, you'd probably get salty because they didn't 'do it right'. The last part of the book was directed at you, re-read it... you nonsensical virtue-signalling sophomoric pedants.
Same goes for the idiot that read this entire book (I actually doubt that) and still came away locked into the same closed down position that the author was somehow writing a book about people who 'say' they are lesbians but aren't really.
Just because YOU have an idea of what a lesbian is, doesn't make you right. It is just YOUR idea of what a lesbian is. If other women want to identify as a lesbian and YOU don't agree... Keep it to yourself... Because it's exactly your brand of exclusionary militant nonsense that held all types of people out of the community for the last hundred years... minorities, non-binary, trans people, the poor.... You don't own the term and people can identify how they like.
circularcubes's review against another edition
5.0
Faderman doesn't cover absolutely everything in this book, and there are definite flaws, but one has to start SOMEWHERE, and this book is as good a start as any to my exploration of queer history. I'm sure I would have come to this book sooner or later, knowing me, but I'm especially glad I was able to read this book as part of a class looking at lesbian history, because I was able to read this book with a much more critical eye and much more contextualization than I would have been able to otherwise.
caedocyon's review against another edition
5.0
Longer review later. I bring tidbits from this book up all the time in discussion lately, and I'm hoping to get Sam to read it, too. Not perfect and I don't agree with everything she says, but very good, well-researched, and SO interesting.
simlish's review against another edition
4.0
Odd Girls and Twilight Lovers is a comprehensive look at a hundred years of lesbian history. It's very much an introductory overview, with only a chapter or two per decade, but it takes the reader through the development of lesbian identity and culture.
It was a lot of information that I was kind of aware of, but it was laid out well, and sourced thoroughly, and gave me a much better understanding of how culture contributed to the idea of lesbianism in each century, as well as what the experience of living through it was. An invaluable reference and jumping off point. A little dry, but that's about what I expected. It does what it sets out to do, and does it well.
It was a lot of information that I was kind of aware of, but it was laid out well, and sourced thoroughly, and gave me a much better understanding of how culture contributed to the idea of lesbianism in each century, as well as what the experience of living through it was. An invaluable reference and jumping off point. A little dry, but that's about what I expected. It does what it sets out to do, and does it well.