Scan barcode
pineapple_morgan's review against another edition
2.0
A very cisheteronormative look into the relationship between human sexuality, social sexual norms, and (the advent of) monogamy. I feel I gave this book simultaneously too much and not enough credit; for a book about sexuality, there is nary a whisper of LGBT+ identities and existence except for a single sentence about halfway through and a few off-hand mentions that did not dive into the ways lgbt+ lives and loves also refute the evolutionary psychology-flavored notions of the nuclear family and (cisgendered, heterosexual) monogamy that this book's entire thesis is based on. I spent so much of this book asking where are all the gay people? It caused no small amount of frustration for me and as such takes up the bulk of this review. The authors also dip into some good old-fashioned gender/bioessentialism, but thankfully most examples are only noted in order to be refuted later in the book. Outside of this, there's no denying it was a very engaging read, full of interesting anecdotes, science and scientific history, and eyebrow-raising at unhealthy societal norms then and now. Of course, over the course of reading this review I have done a bit more digging and it turns out a lot of the supposed science in this book is tenuous at best, which just adds to the frustration and lowered my initial score of 3 stars down to 2. Thanks, but I'll stick to books like The Ethical Slut or Polysecure for all my non-monogamous nonfiction needs.
mayaber's review against another edition
3.5
read this book for class and lowkey learned a lot. super interesting if u wanna know more about social constructs around monogyny and female sexuality
kimchifairy's review against another edition
Engaging, thought-provoking if a bit intellectually suspect. The criticism of heteronormative, mononormative societies is not unreasonable: the mirror-image assertion that it's just 'natural' for humans to be nonmonogamous, since some human societies are, and so are bonobos, is a bit silly. I suppose it's mainly a disciplinary issue (there are some very jarring, often socially conservative canards, like the repeated assertion of the Victorian 'repressive hypothesis' as fact): the authors seem allergic to saying simply that human sexual, romantic and familial behaviour are subject to all kinds of complex socio-historical construction, and that if we want to understand them better, maybe the answers lie in those processes of construction, and not in the precise shapes and configurations of our genitals.
kingofspain93's review against another edition
I was sooooo down for this book conceptually, and possibly it is a useful takedown of common myths (evolutionary arguments for sexual monogamy, the inevitability of patriarchy, etc.) for many. I’m really glad it was a best seller! but there was very little in this book that I think needed a book-length treatment, and the writing style didn’t justify it. it was incoherent and anecdotal, and it makes the arguments less convincing than they ought to be when stand-up comedians and non-authorities are quoted alongside scientists and philosophers. if this had been clear and succinct, it could easily have been more effective and half the length without alienating the audience. the topic is critical, the vibe is sloppy.
I do like that the authors argued that our modern conceptualization of sex and gender roles is largely tied to the (very recent) development of agriculture and the massive shifts in capital that brought about. I would be curious to hear addressed post-agricultural societies (like pre-colonization Ireland) that were still extremely egalitarian and sexually open. I was also glad that they explicitly and emphatically named all major world religions as originators of sexual repression and gendered oppression. I wanted this to be so much stronger than it was, though.
heikieesmaa's review against another edition
1.0
Summary: everyone but the authors are idiots. Very annoying self-important style with a lack of substance.
juliatsang's review
informative
slow-paced
3.5
I was really excited to read this book, but unfortunately I found the writing to be kind of bad and the science to be lacking. There still are some interesting points explored in the book that I believe to be worth talking about and normalizing in society.
whimsicalmeerkat's review against another edition
5.0
Disclaimer: To echo a sentiment expressed by the authors towards the beginning of [b:Sex at Dawn: The Prehistoric Origins of Modern Sexuality|7640261|Sex at Dawn The Prehistoric Origins of Modern Sexuality|Christopher Ryan|http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1291105594s/7640261.jpg|10168576], I am not interested in discussing the validity of evolution. If you contend it is not a valid scientific model, this is not a book for you.
[b:Sex at Dawn: The Prehistoric Origins of Modern Sexuality|7640261|Sex at Dawn The Prehistoric Origins of Modern Sexuality|Christopher Ryan|http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1291105594s/7640261.jpg|10168576] is an impressive, witty, and funny book that researches both the origins and inaccuracy of the prevalent views of human sexuality. It is well-researched and the authors base their conclusions on scientific data rather than merely psychological studies or the theories proposed in the past. They present the idea that our current societal focus on monogamy is, in fact, contrary to the way in which we have evolved biologically. They discuss the ways in which female sexuality has been distorted over centuries, including some of the horrific things that have been done in the name of suppressing something that is regularly presented as slight or aberrant. They discuss some of the potential future implications of these theories on the belief in the nuclear family as the "natural" model, despite pretty conclusive evidence.
I highly recommend this book to anyone interested in either the evolution of our species or today's sexual climate.
[b:Sex at Dawn: The Prehistoric Origins of Modern Sexuality|7640261|Sex at Dawn The Prehistoric Origins of Modern Sexuality|Christopher Ryan|http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1291105594s/7640261.jpg|10168576] is an impressive, witty, and funny book that researches both the origins and inaccuracy of the prevalent views of human sexuality. It is well-researched and the authors base their conclusions on scientific data rather than merely psychological studies or the theories proposed in the past. They present the idea that our current societal focus on monogamy is, in fact, contrary to the way in which we have evolved biologically. They discuss the ways in which female sexuality has been distorted over centuries, including some of the horrific things that have been done in the name of suppressing something that is regularly presented as slight or aberrant. They discuss some of the potential future implications of these theories on the belief in the nuclear family as the "natural" model, despite pretty conclusive evidence.
I highly recommend this book to anyone interested in either the evolution of our species or today's sexual climate.