Scan barcode
tomhillsdon's review
1.0
Writing from a radical lesbian feminist point of view, Bindel sheds light on some interesting opinions regarding some of the current issues facing the gay and lesbian communities. I enjoyed her discussions of the differences between lesbian and gay men, the worrying pre-occupation with equal marriage among the gay community, and the 'pink pound'. I agreed with her view that equality doesn't necessarily mean sameness, ie becoming part of/replicating the patriarchal institutions that straight people continue to adhere to. It made me question my own views and thoughts on what gay identity means today which can only be a good thing. Her very definite standpoint did hinder the the discussion at times, meaning that she comes across as someone with a very set agenda for the gay/lesbian community which may have passed us by and is not necessarily relevant now. I would have liked to have heard her views on the diversity of the gay community and got a bit more insight on the inner prejudices within the gay community relating to race/ethnicity/class etc. Overall, some very interesting insights on some very current issues facing not just the gay community...
ingebored's review
2.0
Interesting concept and a lot of valid commentary on the queer liberation movement in the United Kingdom. It was highly personal, though, and there was a lot of biphobia. It had the potential to be a great battle cry and to motivate young queer people to get involved with the movement, but instead it seemed patronizing and nostalgic to me.
jenny_librarian's review
2.0
I wish I could give this book more than 2 1/2 stars, but I can't. The author's tone (which she likes to call radical, but sounds more like a call to anarchy to me) comes in too strong. On the basis of scientific research (one survey divided between heterosexual and "others"), this is basically an opinion piece.
Let's start with her nature vs nurture convinction. Bindel is convinced that sexual orientation in a choice, based on the simple fact that there is no evidence of a gay gene. To simplify biology down to genes is such a huge mistake! Where I do understand where she comes from, you do not choose your sexual orientation, you choose whether to act on it or not. Not only that, but her explanation of nurture with "environment" is simply wrong. There have been scientific research with twins raised in different environments where both identified as gay, just as siblings everywhere raised in the same environment don't automatically identify with the same sexual orientation.
Her constant use of "lesbian and gay men" frustrates me. Where do genderfluid and trans people identify in this? And what about queer people? Or women who prefer the term gay to lesbian? Bindel refuses to acknowledge most of the LGBT community on the grounds that anyone who is not a lesbian (or gay man, to an extend) does not get treated the same. Newsflash, of course we don't get treated the same, because you completely erase us!
Which brings me to my next point: her efforts to invalidate bisexuality. According to Bindel, bisexuality is mostly for women who are not ready to identify as lesbian. Apart from some well placed name-dropping, the whole concept of bisexuality is forgotten by Bindel. Does remind me of society (both straight and LGBT+) in general... Not even that, but she goes as far, in her Conclusion, to say that "Jessie J is supposedly bisexual, but the rumours and suspicion point towards the idea she is simply a lesbian marketed in a way so as not to alienate straight men". Congratulation Bindel, you just managed to do what the patriarchal society you condemn so strongly does on a daily basis: refuse to acknowledge Jessie J's right to identify as she likes.
It is quite sad that her opinions comes through so strongly, because she does make some fair points throughout the book. But by mixing LGBT+ rights with women's rights (except for reproductive rights, because everyone knows women automatically stop ovulating when they identify as lesbian - and therefore do not need access to the pill or to tampons and pads...) and patriarchy with capitalism, most of her "radicalism" comes out as a cry for anarchy instead of change.
Not to mention that, in the current political atmosphere, this book - written only 2 years ago - seems to be quite outdated, when you see the international human rights movement coming together in answer to the rise of the "alternative-right".
Let's start with her nature vs nurture convinction. Bindel is convinced that sexual orientation in a choice, based on the simple fact that there is no evidence of a gay gene. To simplify biology down to genes is such a huge mistake! Where I do understand where she comes from, you do not choose your sexual orientation, you choose whether to act on it or not. Not only that, but her explanation of nurture with "environment" is simply wrong. There have been scientific research with twins raised in different environments where both identified as gay, just as siblings everywhere raised in the same environment don't automatically identify with the same sexual orientation.
Her constant use of "lesbian and gay men" frustrates me. Where do genderfluid and trans people identify in this? And what about queer people? Or women who prefer the term gay to lesbian? Bindel refuses to acknowledge most of the LGBT community on the grounds that anyone who is not a lesbian (or gay man, to an extend) does not get treated the same. Newsflash, of course we don't get treated the same, because you completely erase us!
Which brings me to my next point: her efforts to invalidate bisexuality. According to Bindel, bisexuality is mostly for women who are not ready to identify as lesbian. Apart from some well placed name-dropping, the whole concept of bisexuality is forgotten by Bindel. Does remind me of society (both straight and LGBT+) in general... Not even that, but she goes as far, in her Conclusion, to say that "Jessie J is supposedly bisexual, but the rumours and suspicion point towards the idea she is simply a lesbian marketed in a way so as not to alienate straight men". Congratulation Bindel, you just managed to do what the patriarchal society you condemn so strongly does on a daily basis: refuse to acknowledge Jessie J's right to identify as she likes.
It is quite sad that her opinions comes through so strongly, because she does make some fair points throughout the book. But by mixing LGBT+ rights with women's rights (except for reproductive rights, because everyone knows women automatically stop ovulating when they identify as lesbian - and therefore do not need access to the pill or to tampons and pads...) and patriarchy with capitalism, most of her "radicalism" comes out as a cry for anarchy instead of change.
Not to mention that, in the current political atmosphere, this book - written only 2 years ago - seems to be quite outdated, when you see the international human rights movement coming together in answer to the rise of the "alternative-right".
noahee's review
roughly 7 years out of date & only bout gay men/women & not queer people
lydiaemilyy's review
Unapologetic and most likely somewhat controversial. I'm not sure if I agree with her on every point, but it's an interesting insight into gay liberation and the de-politicisation of the movement.
As the subtitle suggests, Bindel focuses the vast majority of her book on homosexual issues and does not discuss other sexual and/or romantic orientations. There was one particulary troubling remark on bisexuality that concerned me a little, but mostly other sexualities were simply not discussed, and if they were they were mentioned more in passing. Which makes sense, as Bindel herself is a lesbian; her own sexual oritentation is bound to be the one that she understands the most. It is rather cissexist. Despite her early assertations that both gender and sexuality are social constructs, she still talks about the lack of a penis when it comes to lesbian relationships. Although in places it was unclear if that was cissexism or whether she was categorising how the bigots of this world see lesbian relationships (sexist, homophobic, transphobic bigots are unlikely to know that gender has nought to do with one's body or genitalia).
Perhaps the subheading should instead read "What does it mean to be a white, cisgender, gay today?" rather than "What does it mean to be gay today?".
Still, it was an interesting book that opened my eyes to some different ways of thinking and her straightforward way of putting forward her views and arguments was refreshing in this context.
As the subtitle suggests, Bindel focuses the vast majority of her book on homosexual issues and does not discuss other sexual and/or romantic orientations. There was one particulary troubling remark on bisexuality that concerned me a little, but mostly other sexualities were simply not discussed, and if they were they were mentioned more in passing. Which makes sense, as Bindel herself is a lesbian; her own sexual oritentation is bound to be the one that she understands the most. It is rather cissexist. Despite her early assertations that both gender and sexuality are social constructs, she still talks about the lack of a penis when it comes to lesbian relationships. Although in places it was unclear if that was cissexism or whether she was categorising how the bigots of this world see lesbian relationships (sexist, homophobic, transphobic bigots are unlikely to know that gender has nought to do with one's body or genitalia).
Perhaps the subheading should instead read "What does it mean to be a white, cisgender, gay today?" rather than "What does it mean to be gay today?".
Still, it was an interesting book that opened my eyes to some different ways of thinking and her straightforward way of putting forward her views and arguments was refreshing in this context.
More...