Scan barcode
reubenlb's review against another edition
3.0
dated in its terminology and psychoanalysis threads, this picks up some interesting thoughts to run with - a more accurate title would be towards communism by being queer
levi_masuli's review
"We demand our femininity", the same thing that women reject, and at the same time we declare that these roles are devoid of sense."
Interesting overview of the gay struggle, lots of interesting bits. For instance:
"the reified woman of pornographic magazines, photographed and posed as a general rule by gay photographers, is characterized by a stiffness of form (erect breasts, firm and protruding buttocks).. a source of this desire by the gay photographer to depict, and by the heterosexual man to desire, a stiff, erect, firm body, such as is rarely met with in reality, if not the secret intention on the gay man's part to display a male body, stiff and hard like an erect penis, and the secret desire for his on the heterosexual's part."
Mieli's thesis is that desire has no genital boundaries and that all people are really transexual, and that communism, in his rather vague and idealistic definition, will liberate Eros from artificial gender categories. His goal, put simply, is "not to obtain a greater acceptance of homoeroticism by the hetero-capitalist status quo, but rather to transform monosexuality into an Eros that is genuinely polymorphous and multiple; to translate into deeds and into enjoyment that transexual polymorphism which exists in each one of us in a potential but as yet repressed form."
But Mieli's notion of Eros, at the end of the day, proves itself to be ahistorical, and this had serious implications for his book. For instance, he also justified pederasty and pedophilia as among the repressed forms of desire. Thus, he ignores the reality of power dynamics between children and people of much older ages which, in a capitalist society, tends to mutate into brutish forms of economic opportunism like prostitution. Relying too heavily on Freudian symbology (which he also rightfully dismantles), Mieli fails to see beyond mechanisms beyond the outright repression of gay desire by the hetero society and the state. Like most anarchists, his notion of the 'liberation' of Eros implies only a lifestyle change dressed in militant language, rather than coming up with ways to set-up a mechanism that directly challenges these power structures.
Interesting overview of the gay struggle, lots of interesting bits. For instance:
"the reified woman of pornographic magazines, photographed and posed as a general rule by gay photographers, is characterized by a stiffness of form (erect breasts, firm and protruding buttocks).. a source of this desire by the gay photographer to depict, and by the heterosexual man to desire, a stiff, erect, firm body, such as is rarely met with in reality, if not the secret intention on the gay man's part to display a male body, stiff and hard like an erect penis, and the secret desire for his on the heterosexual's part."
Mieli's thesis is that desire has no genital boundaries and that all people are really transexual, and that communism, in his rather vague and idealistic definition, will liberate Eros from artificial gender categories. His goal, put simply, is "not to obtain a greater acceptance of homoeroticism by the hetero-capitalist status quo, but rather to transform monosexuality into an Eros that is genuinely polymorphous and multiple; to translate into deeds and into enjoyment that transexual polymorphism which exists in each one of us in a potential but as yet repressed form."
But Mieli's notion of Eros, at the end of the day, proves itself to be ahistorical, and this had serious implications for his book. For instance, he also justified pederasty and pedophilia as among the repressed forms of desire. Thus, he ignores the reality of power dynamics between children and people of much older ages which, in a capitalist society, tends to mutate into brutish forms of economic opportunism like prostitution. Relying too heavily on Freudian symbology (which he also rightfully dismantles), Mieli fails to see beyond mechanisms beyond the outright repression of gay desire by the hetero society and the state. Like most anarchists, his notion of the 'liberation' of Eros implies only a lifestyle change dressed in militant language, rather than coming up with ways to set-up a mechanism that directly challenges these power structures.
alexisparade's review
3.0
This was a LOT of outdated Freudian psychoanalysis, and not nearly as much gay communism. I feel like this is most interesting specifically as a historical look at early, pre-Foucault queer theory, so if you don’t want to read 200 pages of how men become gay if they’re not potty-trained by 3 and that makes them want to have sex with their dad or whatever, it’s like. You know. It’s Freud.
For chapter 3, “Heterosexual Men, or rather Closet Queens”, I’d recommend the book “Not Gay: Sex Between Straight White Men” by Jane Ward for further reading. For chapter 6, “Towards a Gay Communism”, and Mieli’s critique of the homophobic leftist party line of the 70’s, I’d recommend “Towards a Scientific Analysis of the Gay Question” by the lesbian communist Los Angeles Research Group. Leslie Feinberg’s “Trans Liberation: Beyond Pink or Blue” and “Transgender Warriors: Making History From Joan of Arc to Marsha P. Johnson and Beyond” feel like very natural follow-ups to Mieli’s thoughts on transness/gender nonconformity.
For chapter 3, “Heterosexual Men, or rather Closet Queens”, I’d recommend the book “Not Gay: Sex Between Straight White Men” by Jane Ward for further reading. For chapter 6, “Towards a Gay Communism”, and Mieli’s critique of the homophobic leftist party line of the 70’s, I’d recommend “Towards a Scientific Analysis of the Gay Question” by the lesbian communist Los Angeles Research Group. Leslie Feinberg’s “Trans Liberation: Beyond Pink or Blue” and “Transgender Warriors: Making History From Joan of Arc to Marsha P. Johnson and Beyond” feel like very natural follow-ups to Mieli’s thoughts on transness/gender nonconformity.
bibliodiversidad's review against another edition
funny
inspiring
reflective
slow-paced
2.75
When I was telling someone that I was going to start this book, they told me: "Looking forward to hearing what you think. It's a bit insane, in the best way, but every single sentence is iconic." Now that I've read this I can one hundred percent confirm: it's insane, but iconic!
A rollercoaster. One moment you'd be agreeing and the other you'd be saying, "what the fuck am I reading?" Specially at times where Mieli got into really abstract philosophy. It is not a hard read but it does become a tedious one at times; do think Mieli went on rambles that, to me at least, were unnecesary or just "eh, I guess," I guess they added to his character.
What called my attention was how in the bazillion introductions to the book (it was, like, three but I haaate long prefaces), you're warned over and over about two things about this book: it's outdated and controversial. Both of which are entirely correct. It does feel stuck in its time as you read it and see the theories he chooses to analyse (both to analyse the world, as much as to analyse the theory and its theorist themselves). As someone that had no previous knowledge on the topic of psychoanalysis this entire book was interesting, but I take it all with a grain of salt... Psychoanalysis isn't but a bunch of theories, and many of the theories in this book are generally rejected today, so... And yes, it is controversial in the author's conception of the "liberation of Eros" that would also liberate pedo, cropo and necrophilia. However, that shouldn't be an impediment to supporting a lot of what Mieli had to say, because he still hit the nail on the head on many aspects of the gay experience within capitalism and its straight order, even as I read it more than fourty years later; as repeated in the introductions, this should be read thoroughly critically but with an open mind, to seek what could still be useful and inspiring to our struggle today.
I wanted to give this book three stars but, again, as much as I agree with Mieli, because, truly, he does bring to light many things I myself notice when analysing reality on my own that have always left me wondering why those social interactions happen the way they do, I also disagree with a lot of his stances and then there's just the issue of him becoming a tad bit redundant towards the end (+ some editorial issues that I find annoying.)
A rollercoaster. One moment you'd be agreeing and the other you'd be saying, "what the fuck am I reading?" Specially at times where Mieli got into really abstract philosophy. It is not a hard read but it does become a tedious one at times; do think Mieli went on rambles that, to me at least, were unnecesary or just "eh, I guess," I guess they added to his character.
What called my attention was how in the bazillion introductions to the book (it was, like, three but I haaate long prefaces), you're warned over and over about two things about this book: it's outdated and controversial. Both of which are entirely correct. It does feel stuck in its time as you read it and see the theories he chooses to analyse (both to analyse the world, as much as to analyse the theory and its theorist themselves). As someone that had no previous knowledge on the topic of psychoanalysis this entire book was interesting, but I take it all with a grain of salt... Psychoanalysis isn't but a bunch of theories, and many of the theories in this book are generally rejected today, so... And yes, it is controversial in the author's conception of the "liberation of Eros" that would also liberate pedo, cropo and necrophilia. However, that shouldn't be an impediment to supporting a lot of what Mieli had to say, because he still hit the nail on the head on many aspects of the gay experience within capitalism and its straight order, even as I read it more than fourty years later; as repeated in the introductions, this should be read thoroughly critically but with an open mind, to seek what could still be useful and inspiring to our struggle today.
I wanted to give this book three stars but, again, as much as I agree with Mieli, because, truly, he does bring to light many things I myself notice when analysing reality on my own that have always left me wondering why those social interactions happen the way they do, I also disagree with a lot of his stances and then there's just the issue of him becoming a tad bit redundant towards the end (+ some editorial issues that I find annoying.)
possiblymaybe's review
5.0
This work feels so ahead of its time that it’s ahead of our time. I feel like the world is deprived for not having Mieli still in it today.