Scan barcode
zen's review
3.0
I bought this book for the last two chapters, I’m not gonna lie.
I’ve always been interested in what we consider to be “normal”. It feels to me like most people I know, most people I interact with, have an idea of “normal” that’s not theirs but society’s. They’re just repeating things because it’s the “normal” thing to do and when you ask for clarifications they simply cannot answer. So I certainly enjoyed how this book dove into the assumption that “normality” is a specific set of universal rules, which really isn’t the case.
The first three chapters—on ethical non-monogamies, age gap relationships and asexuality—were kinda boring because I consider these 3 things to be completely normal and even part of my daily life. It was nice, though, to see an outsider like Tsoulis-Reay go into these discussions with an open mind and lots of empathy. She’s a nice guide for someone who’s struggling to understand these concepts because you can follow her struggles and see how she untangles her feelings by asking questions to other people and herself. Still, the ethical non-monogamies chapter was a little too short for my liking, but that’s because the topic is so broad and the book simply touched on the tip of the iceberg. For example, all of the protagonists of this chapter had open marriages—other configurations are not explored.
The last two chapters are… a different can of worms.
The “consensual” incest chapter was easier to swallow maybe because at the end it was implied that every and any incest relationship is inherently abusive. (And also both people are human. Which is kinda important.) I understand why that happened—and I’m happy that Shelly managed to escape her abusive relationship with her father—but at the same time I feel like the chapter was kinda lacking at the end. What about relationships that are not abusive? Do they exist? If they do, what makes them not inherently abusive? There were so many questions that weren’t even brought up. I would’ve loved (as much as the word “loved” can be used in this context…) to see a deeper dive into the discussion.
As for the zoophilia chapter. That was bad, I gotta admit it. It was deeply upsetting in more than one way. I’m glad I read it because it seriously asked some needed questions on our ethics towards animals. If we’re gonna use the whole “animals can’t consent” argument, we do need to ask ourselves why it’s so easy to overlook consent when it comes to animal breeding and/or the meat market as a whole. I think this chapter highlighted a lot of our hypocrisy when it comes to what is normal and what isn’t. It was still disturbing, though. Some of the questions asked... I mean, I feel for these people and for what they’re going through. The fact that they can’t talk about it really doesn’t help because they can’t even find the help needed to not hurt other living beings. But if there’s no informed consent, then there is no consent, I think.
Also, one thing that irked me is that at some point Paul talks about a furry website. Tsoulis-Reay did not explain what furries are. If someone doesn’t already know the term, after reading this book they’ll probably make the (wrong) connection between furries and zoophiles. That does a disservice to the furry community that’s not harming anyone—be them human or animal—and already has to suffer because of prejudice from outsiders.
All in all, the book wasn’t that bad, but it was barely a primer on most of these topics. I think that was the point: to spark a conversation. But still…
I’ve always been interested in what we consider to be “normal”. It feels to me like most people I know, most people I interact with, have an idea of “normal” that’s not theirs but society’s. They’re just repeating things because it’s the “normal” thing to do and when you ask for clarifications they simply cannot answer. So I certainly enjoyed how this book dove into the assumption that “normality” is a specific set of universal rules, which really isn’t the case.
The first three chapters—on ethical non-monogamies, age gap relationships and asexuality—were kinda boring because I consider these 3 things to be completely normal and even part of my daily life. It was nice, though, to see an outsider like Tsoulis-Reay go into these discussions with an open mind and lots of empathy. She’s a nice guide for someone who’s struggling to understand these concepts because you can follow her struggles and see how she untangles her feelings by asking questions to other people and herself. Still, the ethical non-monogamies chapter was a little too short for my liking, but that’s because the topic is so broad and the book simply touched on the tip of the iceberg. For example, all of the protagonists of this chapter had open marriages—other configurations are not explored.
The last two chapters are… a different can of worms.
The “consensual” incest chapter was easier to swallow maybe because at the end it was implied that every and any incest relationship is inherently abusive. (And also both people are human. Which is kinda important.) I understand why that happened—and I’m happy that Shelly managed to escape her abusive relationship with her father—but at the same time I feel like the chapter was kinda lacking at the end. What about relationships that are not abusive? Do they exist? If they do, what makes them not inherently abusive? There were so many questions that weren’t even brought up. I would’ve loved (as much as the word “loved” can be used in this context…) to see a deeper dive into the discussion.
As for the zoophilia chapter. That was bad, I gotta admit it. It was deeply upsetting in more than one way. I’m glad I read it because it seriously asked some needed questions on our ethics towards animals. If we’re gonna use the whole “animals can’t consent” argument, we do need to ask ourselves why it’s so easy to overlook consent when it comes to animal breeding and/or the meat market as a whole. I think this chapter highlighted a lot of our hypocrisy when it comes to what is normal and what isn’t. It was still disturbing, though. Some of the questions asked... I mean, I feel for these people and for what they’re going through. The fact that they can’t talk about it really doesn’t help because they can’t even find the help needed to not hurt other living beings. But if there’s no informed consent, then there is no consent, I think.
Also, one thing that irked me is that at some point Paul talks about a furry website. Tsoulis-Reay did not explain what furries are. If someone doesn’t already know the term, after reading this book they’ll probably make the (wrong) connection between furries and zoophiles. That does a disservice to the furry community that’s not harming anyone—be them human or animal—and already has to suffer because of prejudice from outsiders.
All in all, the book wasn’t that bad, but it was barely a primer on most of these topics. I think that was the point: to spark a conversation. But still…
arisa9290275's review
challenging
informative
medium-paced
4.0
4.0.
Finding Normal is a book about how people with sexual preferences on the fringes of society find connection through the Internet. Covering a range of taboo topics from polyamory to incestuous and "zoophile" relationships, this theme is rather generic and it seemed like the author wanted a way to string these shock-value topics together.
I give this a 4.0 because it is a book on something that I never thought I would read and will likely never read again. It was interesting to read to say the least. The author tries to clearly draw a line between what is generally more accepted (chapters 1-3) to those that are questionable (chapter 4). I will admit that it was difficult to wrap my head around the last ones as I find them to still be gross.
Definitely not a book for everyone but for those with a strong stomach and conscious.
Finding Normal is a book about how people with sexual preferences on the fringes of society find connection through the Internet. Covering a range of taboo topics from polyamory to incestuous and "zoophile" relationships, this theme is rather generic and it seemed like the author wanted a way to string these shock-value topics together.
I give this a 4.0 because it is a book on something that I never thought I would read and will likely never read again. It was interesting to read to say the least. The author tries to clearly draw a line between what is generally more accepted (chapters 1-3) to those that are questionable (chapter 4). I will admit that it was difficult to wrap my head around the last ones as I find them to still be gross.
Definitely not a book for everyone but for those with a strong stomach and conscious.
evil_mia's review
challenging
dark
hopeful
informative
inspiring
reflective
relaxing
medium-paced
4.25
pleurotus's review
informative
fast-paced
4.0
Content Warnings
Moderate: Incest and Sexual harassment
riverofpages's review
challenging
informative
reflective
medium-paced
3.75
The book inspired a lot of discussion which I believe is what it set out to do.
I only wish it had gone more into detail about certain types of relationships but that’s just me imposing my goals for this book in the author.
Worth reading with a friend so you can discuss!
I only wish it had gone more into detail about certain types of relationships but that’s just me imposing my goals for this book in the author.
Worth reading with a friend so you can discuss!
Content Warnings
Graphic: Sexual content
Moderate: Incest
johnsonsm1's review against another edition
dark
emotional
informative
reflective
sad
medium-paced
4.25
Content Warnings
Graphic: Sexual content
cdubiel's review
5.0
I feel weird being the first person to review this, but I can't lie - I saw it pop on Edelweiss and immediately read the whole thing. I am really interested in stories about people who defy the norm, and I appreciated that Tsoulis-Reay deconstructed what normal is and why it exists. The stories in the first part are more focused on unconventional sexual relationships which are generally not considered deviant. The stories in the second part, Transgressing Normal, may be considered disturbing depending on your level of comfort with taboo sexual acts. Those who are triggered by sexual assault, incest, and content involving sex with animals should not read. These particular issues are not my triggers, yet I found myself feeling disturbed at the end of the book; Tsoulis-Reay does an amazing job of reporting on the people involved in these situations, diving deep into their personal lives with a smooth and engaging style. I think part of the discomfort stems from feeling empathy for people who perform acts that many consider unspeakable. It's a lot to struggle with, but I think it's important.
madeline's review
slow-paced
2.0
CW: sexual activity, non-monogamy, incest, bestiality
This book is grounded in a series of columns the author wrote for New York Magazine exploring human behavior, particularly people in unconventional, uncommon, or taboo sexual or romantic relationships. Tsoulis-Reay expands on those columns, sometimes revisiting the people featured or detailing more about her experiences writing them. It's meant to showcase the ways in which people connect and find community, and while she certainly proves people can find an in-group for almost anything, I'm not sure that she really succeeds at endearing some of these characters to us anymore.
There are five (quite long) chapters -- consensual non-monogamy, age-gap relationships, asexuality/aromanticism, genetic sexual attraction, and bestiality. Clearly some of these relationships are more taboo than others, and Tsoulis-Reay does her best to present the content without a lot of judgment. But it still feels like we're less hearing their stories and more hearing her experience of the people she interviewed. She's a clear intermediary between the reader and the subjects, and I just don't think it really works.
A huge strong point for the book is the work Tsoulis-Reay did in investigating the origins of the online communities where these groups of people started to connect with each other. As someone who spent a lot of time on Tumblr in the 2000s and early 2010s, I remember watching people gain the vocabulary they needed to identify themselves there, and I understand the power of an online group of friends who make you feel like whatever you're feeling is normal. The parts where she's talking about the early Internet (and even activists who came before it) were the most interesting to me.
This book wasn't quite what I wanted it to be, and it's not one I'd recommend to everyone. But for those interested in the history of community-building online, this could be a really good fit.
Thank you St. Martins and NetGalley for the ARC!
This book is grounded in a series of columns the author wrote for New York Magazine exploring human behavior, particularly people in unconventional, uncommon, or taboo sexual or romantic relationships. Tsoulis-Reay expands on those columns, sometimes revisiting the people featured or detailing more about her experiences writing them. It's meant to showcase the ways in which people connect and find community, and while she certainly proves people can find an in-group for almost anything, I'm not sure that she really succeeds at endearing some of these characters to us anymore.
There are five (quite long) chapters -- consensual non-monogamy, age-gap relationships, asexuality/aromanticism, genetic sexual attraction, and bestiality. Clearly some of these relationships are more taboo than others, and Tsoulis-Reay does her best to present the content without a lot of judgment. But it still feels like we're less hearing their stories and more hearing her experience of the people she interviewed. She's a clear intermediary between the reader and the subjects, and I just don't think it really works.
A huge strong point for the book is the work Tsoulis-Reay did in investigating the origins of the online communities where these groups of people started to connect with each other. As someone who spent a lot of time on Tumblr in the 2000s and early 2010s, I remember watching people gain the vocabulary they needed to identify themselves there, and I understand the power of an online group of friends who make you feel like whatever you're feeling is normal. The parts where she's talking about the early Internet (and even activists who came before it) were the most interesting to me.
This book wasn't quite what I wanted it to be, and it's not one I'd recommend to everyone. But for those interested in the history of community-building online, this could be a really good fit.
Thank you St. Martins and NetGalley for the ARC!
thesapphicphoenix's review
4.0
When I saw this title I knew I had to request it . As I have grown older I have realized I have a passion for both the taboo and sexual awareness. What I didnt expect was the level of detail that this author took and the passion they clearly have for their writing. I found the book informative and thought provocking. While it did pull me in, I do have to admit that the format of the book threw me for a loop. It seemed like the chapers were a bit to long and the seperation of the book into two parts was a little strange. My overall rating hovers at a 3.75 but since there is no way to rate this title this way I am increasing my starts to 4. I would read from this author again if given the chance since they did such a wonderful job at keeping my attention.