Scan barcode
A review by leelulah
Sexual Personae: Art and Decadence from Nefertiti to Emily Dickinson by Camille Paglia
1.0
This is a scam. It's not smart, and it's not good in the slightiest. It's just Camille Paglia rambling. If you can tolerate this, good for you. I will not torture myself. I stopped at the first 100 pages. She's a LOT like Jordan Peterson, making baseless psychological claims and yet, these get taken as truth by illiterate people.
She's also heavily Freudian and contradictory. This book is borderline male worship. If that sounded like a radical feminist complaint to you, think of the disgusting ways in which she worships pedophilia, abortion, pornography and the nauseous feeling she gets and spreads about the pregnant body (saying pregnancy itself is solipsistic and devilish).
She even gets away with saying men are potential rapists, and there is nothing you can do because rape, as terrible as it is, is part of nature. And the talks about how man is superior just because of his genitalia. For a self professed homosexual, she is absolutely obsessed with penises. And I was told that this woman defended values! (I know she doesn't). I get the idea that many people get blinded by the psychologist discourse and don't even process what they're reading.
I'm nauseated at her selective reading of history, literature, paganism and Christianity to support things that don't make sense. Rationality and rationalism aren't the same and neither are exclusive to men. Among the women of tragedy she just took out the ones that stood because of being evil, and from there she concluded that men are afraid of women, particularly their mothers. Antigone didn't count as an upholder of law and reason, apparently! (luckily, I don't think she'll ramble about Madonna here, but I was dreading the moment as she goes back and forth to make "poignant" contemporary commentary).
She's quick to laud capitalism because it gave women the possibility to think like men and write obnoxious books, perhaps she should reflect on this sentiment a bit more for how much it describes her and this book in particular. For all her oppositon to transvestites, transsexualism or however you call it, she seems to endorse it a great deal so as long as it retains "shamanic" qualities. If men think this woman 'gets' them, then I'm truly sorry for them.
She's also heavily Freudian and contradictory. This book is borderline male worship. If that sounded like a radical feminist complaint to you, think of the disgusting ways in which she worships pedophilia, abortion, pornography and the nauseous feeling she gets and spreads about the pregnant body (saying pregnancy itself is solipsistic and devilish).
She even gets away with saying men are potential rapists, and there is nothing you can do because rape, as terrible as it is, is part of nature. And the talks about how man is superior just because of his genitalia. For a self professed homosexual, she is absolutely obsessed with penises. And I was told that this woman defended values! (I know she doesn't). I get the idea that many people get blinded by the psychologist discourse and don't even process what they're reading.
I'm nauseated at her selective reading of history, literature, paganism and Christianity to support things that don't make sense. Rationality and rationalism aren't the same and neither are exclusive to men. Among the women of tragedy she just took out the ones that stood because of being evil, and from there she concluded that men are afraid of women, particularly their mothers. Antigone didn't count as an upholder of law and reason, apparently! (luckily, I don't think she'll ramble about Madonna here, but I was dreading the moment as she goes back and forth to make "poignant" contemporary commentary).
She's quick to laud capitalism because it gave women the possibility to think like men and write obnoxious books, perhaps she should reflect on this sentiment a bit more for how much it describes her and this book in particular. For all her oppositon to transvestites, transsexualism or however you call it, she seems to endorse it a great deal so as long as it retains "shamanic" qualities. If men think this woman 'gets' them, then I'm truly sorry for them.