Scan barcode
bluestjuice's review against another edition
2.0
Wow, this book made me angry. I don't even know how to rate it, I'm so conflicted in my feelings about it. The list of things wrong with Wolf's prolonged study of the vagina is long, but at risk of becoming irrationally ranty I will try to keep this brief:
- Wolf's approach to scientific inquiry is to find an idea or an insight or a piece of new information, latch onto it, and run laps searching out evidence to support her claim. There is a lot of real science invoked here, and much of it is interesting in and of itself. What is tenuous at best are the conclusions she draws, which she never really questions throughout the entire work. Based on A, she concludes, J must follow, where J is conveniently the idea she began with and was aiming at the whole time. One assumes there must be a body of work which did not lead to J which was ignored or sidestepped in order to ensure her theory maintains its primacy unchallenged. This in addition to the fact that quite often the conclusions she draws are only one possible interpretation of a set of presented data. She bills herself as hard science but really this is an opinion piece with lots of justification. Additionally, using evolution as the justification for things you already wanted to believe is sloppy and stupid.
- This book, and Wolf's approach to the vagina, is all about the experiences of heterosexual ciswomen. Mostly white women. Mostly women exactly like her. Despite giving lip service to ideas like 'every woman's sexual response is different,' she makes broad sweeping claims about the way in which the vagina interfaces with the brain and the way to optimize female experiences of sexuality and romantic/sexual relationships that completely ignore transwomen, lesbian or bisexual women, even unpartnered heterosexual women. If your theory falls apart when considered from any other lens, it's either nonsense or extremely limited in usefulness, and you should stop peddling it as transformative.
- Despite her assertion that she wants to base her claims on biology and hard science, it is impressive how many times Wolf segues into a passage in which she finds her theories corroborated by her own friends over tea, or relates some supporting anecdote from her own experience, or cites the letters and fictional writing of certain female authors to prop up her argument. She also has a fondness for weird mystical language and romanticizing ancient and eastern cultures in regards to their approaches to the female body and person, which is frustrating as these cultures are in no way homogenous nor uniformly positive in their views.
- Sexual violence is a real and serious problem, and I found the descriptions of sexual violence survivors offensive at times, because of how sincerely Wolf believes her premise that the connection between the vagina and the brain is so profound that damaging the vagina (specifically) is a shorthand way of subjugating and disempowering women. This narrative doesn't leave a lot of room for healing or overcoming wounds left by sexual violence, instead creating a dynamic that leaves sexually assault victims hamstringed by their victimization.
- The asserted link between sexual satisfaction in women and creative/mental awakening is paternalistic in the extreme, especially when posited in a deterministic 'you must have X to experience Y' way. Wolf conveniently ignores anyone who had a great artistic or transcendant mystical experience that did not involve getting laid, which must be a big disappointment for the purposefully celibate, the lesbian, and all men everywhere. Sorry, dudes, you can't be creative geniuses in the same way as sexually satisfied women, not ever.
Underneath all of this disgust (and no kidding, I had lots!) are some ideas which resonated for me, and which are worth discussion. This is the reason I'm conflicted about this book: although Wolf gets lots wrong, and overgeneralizes to the point of laughability, she brushes up on ideas that are interesting.
- This idea of the brain-vagina connection is an interesting one, although Wolf makes it sound like a very simple and also very direct link. Conflating the personhood of ciswomen to their genitals is obviously a wildly problematic idea, but the link between pleasure and various hormone levels and activation in various areas of the brain is probably not sufficiently understood.
- The section about the etymology of words relating to the female genitals was interesting to me, of course. And it probably goes without saying (though Wolf is happy to provide plenty of scientifically-based evidence) that women can be pretty sensitive to descriptors/attitudes adopted towards this piece of their anatomy, and that psychologically it is not great for women to have the vagina derided, mocked, or shamed, whether personally or in general on a cultural level. I could probably have used this section skipping the sad tale of how some generalized vaginal mockery gave Wolf a six-month bout of writer's block, though.
- There is a great deal of sexual dissatisfaction in the western world, among both women and men. From a sociological standpoint it seems worthwhile to try to discern why that might be, and how it might be addressed. Rolling back the clock to a magical time a hundred years ago when everybody had much better sex probably isn't it, not least because I see no reason to think they did. But this is fruitful ground for exploration as it likely is linked to systemic societal trends, rather than a biologic problem.
- Honestly, the last section of the book, which read effectively like scientifically-justified Cosmo advice for male heterosexual lovers, was maybe the most promising. Was it cliched and one-size-fits-all advice that will vary in effectiveness when applied to actual specific women? Totally. Did some of it sound accurate to me, a heterosexual cisgender woman with Opinions on how I would like to be treated by a man? Yep. That chapter would be interesting reading to share with a male relationship partner, although various relationship self-help books have likely covered the same ground with more or less success.
In conclusion? Aaaaahhhh. This is what I get for picking random Naomi Wolf off the library shelf in a library-request-lull.
- Wolf's approach to scientific inquiry is to find an idea or an insight or a piece of new information, latch onto it, and run laps searching out evidence to support her claim. There is a lot of real science invoked here, and much of it is interesting in and of itself. What is tenuous at best are the conclusions she draws, which she never really questions throughout the entire work. Based on A, she concludes, J must follow, where J is conveniently the idea she began with and was aiming at the whole time. One assumes there must be a body of work which did not lead to J which was ignored or sidestepped in order to ensure her theory maintains its primacy unchallenged. This in addition to the fact that quite often the conclusions she draws are only one possible interpretation of a set of presented data. She bills herself as hard science but really this is an opinion piece with lots of justification. Additionally, using evolution as the justification for things you already wanted to believe is sloppy and stupid.
- This book, and Wolf's approach to the vagina, is all about the experiences of heterosexual ciswomen. Mostly white women. Mostly women exactly like her. Despite giving lip service to ideas like 'every woman's sexual response is different,' she makes broad sweeping claims about the way in which the vagina interfaces with the brain and the way to optimize female experiences of sexuality and romantic/sexual relationships that completely ignore transwomen, lesbian or bisexual women, even unpartnered heterosexual women. If your theory falls apart when considered from any other lens, it's either nonsense or extremely limited in usefulness, and you should stop peddling it as transformative.
- Despite her assertion that she wants to base her claims on biology and hard science, it is impressive how many times Wolf segues into a passage in which she finds her theories corroborated by her own friends over tea, or relates some supporting anecdote from her own experience, or cites the letters and fictional writing of certain female authors to prop up her argument. She also has a fondness for weird mystical language and romanticizing ancient and eastern cultures in regards to their approaches to the female body and person, which is frustrating as these cultures are in no way homogenous nor uniformly positive in their views.
- Sexual violence is a real and serious problem, and I found the descriptions of sexual violence survivors offensive at times, because of how sincerely Wolf believes her premise that the connection between the vagina and the brain is so profound that damaging the vagina (specifically) is a shorthand way of subjugating and disempowering women. This narrative doesn't leave a lot of room for healing or overcoming wounds left by sexual violence, instead creating a dynamic that leaves sexually assault victims hamstringed by their victimization.
- The asserted link between sexual satisfaction in women and creative/mental awakening is paternalistic in the extreme, especially when posited in a deterministic 'you must have X to experience Y' way. Wolf conveniently ignores anyone who had a great artistic or transcendant mystical experience that did not involve getting laid, which must be a big disappointment for the purposefully celibate, the lesbian, and all men everywhere. Sorry, dudes, you can't be creative geniuses in the same way as sexually satisfied women, not ever.
Underneath all of this disgust (and no kidding, I had lots!) are some ideas which resonated for me, and which are worth discussion. This is the reason I'm conflicted about this book: although Wolf gets lots wrong, and overgeneralizes to the point of laughability, she brushes up on ideas that are interesting.
- This idea of the brain-vagina connection is an interesting one, although Wolf makes it sound like a very simple and also very direct link. Conflating the personhood of ciswomen to their genitals is obviously a wildly problematic idea, but the link between pleasure and various hormone levels and activation in various areas of the brain is probably not sufficiently understood.
- The section about the etymology of words relating to the female genitals was interesting to me, of course. And it probably goes without saying (though Wolf is happy to provide plenty of scientifically-based evidence) that women can be pretty sensitive to descriptors/attitudes adopted towards this piece of their anatomy, and that psychologically it is not great for women to have the vagina derided, mocked, or shamed, whether personally or in general on a cultural level. I could probably have used this section skipping the sad tale of how some generalized vaginal mockery gave Wolf a six-month bout of writer's block, though.
- There is a great deal of sexual dissatisfaction in the western world, among both women and men. From a sociological standpoint it seems worthwhile to try to discern why that might be, and how it might be addressed. Rolling back the clock to a magical time a hundred years ago when everybody had much better sex probably isn't it, not least because I see no reason to think they did. But this is fruitful ground for exploration as it likely is linked to systemic societal trends, rather than a biologic problem.
- Honestly, the last section of the book, which read effectively like scientifically-justified Cosmo advice for male heterosexual lovers, was maybe the most promising. Was it cliched and one-size-fits-all advice that will vary in effectiveness when applied to actual specific women? Totally. Did some of it sound accurate to me, a heterosexual cisgender woman with Opinions on how I would like to be treated by a man? Yep. That chapter would be interesting reading to share with a male relationship partner, although various relationship self-help books have likely covered the same ground with more or less success.
In conclusion? Aaaaahhhh. This is what I get for picking random Naomi Wolf off the library shelf in a library-request-lull.
hallbrooke's review against another edition
3.0
I both loved and hated this book at various points.
The topic was interesting but at times it was quite pseudo sciencey and often the chapters felt disjointed.
It in the end felt like a bit of a slog to finish which is a shame as I've heard fantastic things about wolf and it did have some fantastic bits.
The topic was interesting but at times it was quite pseudo sciencey and often the chapters felt disjointed.
It in the end felt like a bit of a slog to finish which is a shame as I've heard fantastic things about wolf and it did have some fantastic bits.
vsteg1's review against another edition
2.0
Has some good and even interesting points, but Wolf's "A correlates with B, therefore the only conclusion is C" approach leaves a bit to be desired. That's not how science works.
I've been trying to read this book for the past four or so years since I bought it, and while I'm pleased to have finally gotten through it, I don't think I'll be tempted to reread.
I've been trying to read this book for the past four or so years since I bought it, and while I'm pleased to have finally gotten through it, I don't think I'll be tempted to reread.
sharanyasarathy's review against another edition
2.0
Two words for you, Naomi: WHITE FEMINISM. Jeez. I have many other issues with the book but other people have described them far more eloquently in their comments so read those.
bookhoarding's review against another edition
5.0
A multidisciplinary look at the vagina that I think should be utilized in sex-ed courses (at least portions of it). From the lengthy history of attitudes and treatment of the female reproductive system, to modern media studies on acculturation Wolf weaves in the scientific with the phenomenological successfully. She openly admits to faults in her studies and the studies she includes (like limits to heterosexual couples, Western women and lack of male consideration in some), which really serves to strengthen the reading because you are aware from the start who she is talking about and therefore how she can expertly talk about them.
Yes, there is a lot of conversation about sex, but so much more of the reading is around how the vagina is contextualized within the conversations that have already been created around it. Wolf explores the ways in which authors (female and male) have discussed the vagina and maturity along with that. She also shows have the medical community has treated this most tender of places.
Overall a great read for any woman, no matter the place you are in life. We have spent so much of our lives being told not to discuss this part of ourselves and what Wolf proves is that the vagina actually helps to define who we are on a daily basis (mostly through hormones). Why ignore it?
Yes, there is a lot of conversation about sex, but so much more of the reading is around how the vagina is contextualized within the conversations that have already been created around it. Wolf explores the ways in which authors (female and male) have discussed the vagina and maturity along with that. She also shows have the medical community has treated this most tender of places.
Overall a great read for any woman, no matter the place you are in life. We have spent so much of our lives being told not to discuss this part of ourselves and what Wolf proves is that the vagina actually helps to define who we are on a daily basis (mostly through hormones). Why ignore it?
paintchipped's review against another edition
1.0
I'm not finishing this shit, I can't deal with another mention of "making love" or "Goddess".
catiew's review against another edition
3.0
Interesting, if a bit ~wooo~ with a bit too much tantra and painful references to the “goddess” which were unhappily reminiscent of Anastasia Steele. Wolf regularly falls into using plural anecdotes as data, and has questionable research skills.
I found Sex at Dawn superior on a wider range of subjects, and Sara Pascoe vastly more readable.
(The audiobook narrator probably hasn’t helped. If I have to hear her say “~goddess~” again, I might be sick)
I found Sex at Dawn superior on a wider range of subjects, and Sara Pascoe vastly more readable.
(The audiobook narrator probably hasn’t helped. If I have to hear her say “~goddess~” again, I might be sick)
ida_s's review against another edition
3.0
Some interesting facts and opinions, worth a read. The goddess stuff was a bit much, and adding a "he or she" here and there does not make straight circumstances relevant for lesbians.
krauterschreckse's review against another edition
challenging
hopeful
informative
inspiring
reflective
slow-paced
5.0
scubacat's review against another edition
1.0
I got halfway through this book and just couldn't read any more of it. I'm normally compulsive about finishing books I start, but this one was just not able to hold my interest. I even found myself not reading as much for a while because I didn't want to pick this book up again.
I understand what Wolf was trying to prove, but her assumptions seemed way off to me. Some of her statements had me shaking my head and thinking "Well, duh!!" and others had me questioning her statements with "How in the heck did you make that leap in logic??" Neither of which is a great response to a book, so I'm moving on.
I understand what Wolf was trying to prove, but her assumptions seemed way off to me. Some of her statements had me shaking my head and thinking "Well, duh!!" and others had me questioning her statements with "How in the heck did you make that leap in logic??" Neither of which is a great response to a book, so I'm moving on.