Scan barcode
diana_blackmoon's review
2.0
A lot of reviews have commented that this book would be better as a podcast. I don't know why they said it but I know why I agree. This book is a collection of short biographies of mostly men that are "bad". Unfortunately, the separate chapters vary in tone or even in a definition of what is considered bad. There is a lot of nazis. There is also a blackmailer, or a racist anthropology writer. If those essays were separate maybe I would have liked them more, but because it is one book if you write about a nazis that were killing people in a somewhat neutral tone and then use a lot of criticism about someone that wrote an untrue book about POC it feels kind of wierd.
Almost all people mentioned here are men. There is one bisexual woman here.
There were people the author called "not homosexual in the context as we understand it today" but he did not bother to represent one homosexual woman.
To be honest the whole expirience feels pointless as a non-fiction book to read. In one essay the author will show how homosexuals used their oppression as weapon against POC. In other he will write how a British guy fell in love with a Muslim. Then he will proceed to describe that partner as just "the young men the main character fell in love with". He will critique the racism then proceeds to exclude POC from this book. He will critique imperialism and capitalism but does not discuss patriarchy that is harming the lgbtq community.
There are multiple sentences that shocked me of how misogynistic they were. This book is just another non fiction written by a man that has read about intersectionality but as a white able-bodied man cannot really write a compelling piece about it.
Almost all people mentioned here are men. There is one bisexual woman here.
There were people the author called "not homosexual in the context as we understand it today" but he did not bother to represent one homosexual woman.
To be honest the whole expirience feels pointless as a non-fiction book to read. In one essay the author will show how homosexuals used their oppression as weapon against POC. In other he will write how a British guy fell in love with a Muslim. Then he will proceed to describe that partner as just "the young men the main character fell in love with". He will critique the racism then proceeds to exclude POC from this book. He will critique imperialism and capitalism but does not discuss patriarchy that is harming the lgbtq community.
There are multiple sentences that shocked me of how misogynistic they were. This book is just another non fiction written by a man that has read about intersectionality but as a white able-bodied man cannot really write a compelling piece about it.
ziamammamia's review against another edition
challenging
informative
reflective
slow-paced
3.5
***3.5/5
Thoroughly researched study of queer people who were, on all accounts except their queerness, bad people that sought to prove we are a better community when understanding the importance of unity and intersectionality. Enjoyed the read, although the prose is very dense and academic. Not a bad thing, but did make it slow - and sometimes boring.
sofiagzz's review against another edition
informative
reflective
medium-paced
3.0
should've listened to the podcast lowkey. still a good book tho
its_alex_stevenson's review against another edition
funny
informative
inspiring
reflective
medium-paced
4.0
melf's review
the content here was something i was interested in, but the structure/delivery was blah.
nnoctivagantt's review against another edition
2.0
I thought this was an interesting idea for a book, but overall it was just very boring and felt like a chore to read. Although I did learn some things, it felt like sifting through a history textbook and I didn't enjoy that. I don't think it worked very well to convert a podcast into a book in this circumstance, it felt disjointed at times.
I am also really not sure what the qualifier for being a "bad gay" was. Some of these people were actual nazis while others just like... had sex and the church didn't like it and those don't feel comparable at all to me.
Lastly, I thought the conclusion of "homosexuality is a history of failure" was a really bizarre conclusion to draw and not one that analyzes the broad scope of histories that queer people have had across the world.
I am also really not sure what the qualifier for being a "bad gay" was. Some of these people were actual nazis while others just like... had sex and the church didn't like it and those don't feel comparable at all to me.
Lastly, I thought the conclusion of "homosexuality is a history of failure" was a really bizarre conclusion to draw and not one that analyzes the broad scope of histories that queer people have had across the world.
woodlanderratic's review against another edition
3.5
unfortunately a bit dry compared to the podcast, but still a pretty good read