Most Helpful Customer Reviews
36 of 44 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
Revolutionary Book with Flaws!, May 6, 2007
This review is from: Androphilia: Rejecting the Gay Identity, Reclaiming Masculinity (Paperback)
Androphilia examines the CORE of why male homosexuality is hated in this world. That core is that gay males (and gay male identity) are seen as effeminate, whereas straight men (and straight male identity) are seen as manly. Jack Malebranche argues that homosexuality need NOT mean this, that a man can be turned on by men sexually and STILL be a man. This is a radical message. The gay community, Malebranche argues, encourages effeminateness in gay men (e.g., "you go girl") and reinforces the very stereotypes that make the mainstream not want to associate with male homosexuality. The book criticizes effeminateness in men because effeminateness--whether perceived or real--separates gay (read, effeminate) men from the larger brotherhood of straight (read, real) men. If gay men embrace traditional masculinity, Malebranche argues, they would discover that rich world that straight men enjoy (e.g., courage, emotional control, and being tough). Straight men would also not be uncomfortable around gay men. This is a revolutionary message.
Androphilia, however, has drawbacks as serious as the book is revolutionary. Its utopian vision is: 1) A world where gay men--not just straight men--have embraced traditional masculinity and 2) A world where androphiles (men sexually attracted to men) and straight men associate as men FIRST and as straight or androphile SECOND. The problem is that the book does not address the IMPLICATIONS of this. If male homosexuality is seen as manly as male heterosexuality, then the fear of male homosexuality would diminish among straight men. As activist Peter Tatchell has argued (barely mentioned in Androphilia), more men would then have straight AND gay sex without identifying themselves as straight or gay. Bisexuality would become the norm. The b word, however, is used but twice in Malebranche's book. The assumption of Androphilia is that the straight/gay divide would continue as if it were an innate difference. Perhaps, that is the gist of the book's problem. In adopting an either/or stance on sex and gender, Malebranche goes to the other extreme. He questions the idea that masculinity is constructed to argue that it is innate. What about BOTH?
The danger of this book is that it elevates straight men (and male heterosexuality) as masculine and does not critically examine heterosexuality itself. Many straight men, for example, wear long hair, earrings, and even nail polish. Many straight men are also soft-spoken. There is nothing wrong with this, of course. But rather than address today's metrosexual phenomenon (which may be a prelude to a bisexual future for men, not just for women), Malebranche instead argues that most straight men are traditionally masculine. This is still true. But things are changing. This flux of masculinity is important because if same-sex attracted men are to embrace their masculinity, they need to first understand WHAT they are embracing.
In the epilogue, Jack Malebranche rejects gay marriage because, in his view, marriage is designed for men and women about to reproduce and raise children. For androphiles, Malebranche proposes fraternal unions based on traditional rituals of manhood (e.g., sharing blood). This is a fresh departure from the gay marriage debate. But Malebranche's solution assumes that ALL androphiles (including bi men) want to be ONLY with men without raising kids. Also, Malebranche's solution does not question the couple paradigm. What about people who want to marry more than one person? There is a growing movement in the West for polyamory (many loves). But Malebranche does not address this in his gay marriage epilogue. Where do bi men and bi women fall in this? What about men who fall in love with the same woman? What if the woman wants to marry both of them in the future? What if one man is straight, one man is bi, and the woman is bi? What would such a marriage look like in the future? Androphilia proposes ONE model for masculinity (e.g., traditional masculinity), ONE model for same-sex unions (e.g., the couple paradigm), and ONE model for same-sex desire (e.g., becoming apolitical and rejecting all queer subcultures). In so doing, this book does not present MORE CHOICES for males--let alone, for females.
Overall, Androphilia calls on men sexually attracted to men to accept their homosexuality as MEN (actually, as one TYPE of man, the traditional kind) and to take responsibility for CHOOSING to act--or not act--on their homosexual desires. This is commendable. But the book rejects romantic love between men as unmanly. The book argues that violence against gays is a thing of the past. This simply isn't true. Malebranche even dismisses as pathological men with different homosexual tastes than he has.
In short, Androphilia is a starting point for seriously original thinking about the future of gay male identity (and culture) and by implication, the future of straight male identity (and culture). But just that: a starting point. Most important, Androphilia resurrects the long-neglected ideas of Adolf Brand, a German writer/activist who, in the 1890s, organized against the idea of homosexual men being a "third sex." Androphilia mentions Brand in passing and that the gay community--and straight world--adopted instead the "urning" (third sex) idea of sexologist Magnus Hirschfeld. Brand's idea that homosexual men were NO DIFFERENT (gender-wise) from heterosexual men was ignored, Malebranche writes in passing. But WHY Brand's ideas were rejected (e.g., the mainstream fear of bisexuality) is not explored. Still, Androphilia resurrects Brand's forgotten paradigm, one that proposed a return to ancient male cultures (e.g., ancient Greece). For this alone, Androphilia deserves to be read. For this IDEA. The INTENT of the book, however, is to create a respectable way of being homosexual. In this, Androphilia echoes writers like Andrew Sullivan and Camille Paglia. The idea of embracing traditional masculinity is valid--up to a point--in an age of masculinity being pathologized. But readers ought to know that beyond this groundbreaking message, this type of literature is part of the conservative backlash against everything that the 1960s represented. The 21st century will require MORE options for humanity, not less.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
17 of 20 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
Disappointing, August 8, 2009
This review is from: Androphilia: Rejecting the Gay Identity, Reclaiming Masculinity (Paperback)
When I heard about this book, I was very excited. Finally, it seemed, someone was thinking and feeling like I do. I had grown tired of the self-imposed limitations of gay culture and was searching for a revaluation of masculinity. In a culture where even allegedly straight guys are just as vain and self-absorbed as a stereotypical woman, I was longing for some new thinking about the virtues of manliness--honesty, loyalty, fearlessness, steadfastness, etc. I immediately ordered and read "Androphilia," hoping for a celebration of men who find manliness attractive, intellecutally, spiritually and sexually.
The book, however, largely fails to deliver. It's mostly a rant against effeminate gays. I basically agree with much of what the author says, but the ranting gets repetitive, and the bitter tone reveals someone who is not so much post-gay as gay-resentful. Instead of being inspiring, the book quickly became tiresome. Instead of celebrating the virtues of manliness, it mostly bitches about those who are not adequately manly. Also, the author's notion of masculinity remains pretty superficial. He talks up manliness, but doesn't really get beyond appearances. He criticize bears (rightly) for just being furry queens, but he doesn't really have much of substance to offer as an alternative. The book turns out to be not so much a manifesto as a gripe-fest. I know the gripes, I'm looking for something more constructive.
Also, the author contends repeatedly that homophobia and discrimination are dead, and gay people and organizations are propping up an empty specter of hate in order to sustain their self-serving agendas. It strikes me that only someone who has spent (and still spends) way too much time in the gay ghetto could possibly think such absurd thoughts. I don't deny that there are self-serving gay people and gay organizations (I think GLAAD deserves some of his criticism, for instance), but anyone who thinks that homophobia is a thing of the past, and that if you just act straight enough, no one will care that you have homosex, is just delusional. However post-gay you may style yourself, androphiles will still have to fight many of the same battles as gay males. Wouldn't it be more manly for androphiles to lead those battles, rather than to pretend that "it's just a gay thing."
The author also contends that gay marriage is a non-issue because, as real men, androphiles shouldn't ape hetero behavior. True enough. But why can't androphiles remake marriage in whatever way they want to? The battle over gay marriage is simply for equal legal recognition of all relationships. No one is suggesting that two men, or two women, must get married in a church, have a huge wedding reception at which all of their family members get obnoxiously drunk, and then settle into a lifetime of boredom in which one partner goes to work and the other takes care of the house in the suburbs. The relationship between married androphiles can take whatever form the partners (or "compadres," if you wish) decide upon--it can be as individual or unique as the union itself.
In short, this book deserves credit for suggesting that relationships between men can take forms that are not exhausted by the stereotypical gay or straight versions. This is a potentially revolutionary idea. But this book only begins to scratch the surface.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
20 of 25 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Creating A More Personally-Rewarding Ideal For Homosexual Men, March 14, 2007
This review is from: Androphilia: Rejecting the Gay Identity, Reclaiming Masculinity (Paperback)
If, as a homosexual man, you have ever vocalized any preference for either masculinity or any stereotypically masculine pursuit, only to be swamped by cries of `internalised homophobia' and claims that you're `not being true to yourself', then this is the book for you.
Mr. Malebranche lays forth his manifesto in a succinct, `straight-shooting' style more akin to sports writing or detective fiction than a sociology text, starting with the simple concept that basing your whole identity around your sexuality and thereby confining yourself to a subculture the idolizes femininity rather than masculinity is extremely limiting and unsatisfying for men.
Whilst those who revel in victimhood will view it as an attack, the first section of the book simply states the idea that gay culture is redundant and thereby unnecessary for many homosexual men, who are expected to compromise their ideals and affect effeminate behaviour for social acceptance, (based on unproven pop psychology concepts such as gay men being innately and / or biologically different to straight men, or that flaunting your sexuality in an over-the-top, in-your-face manner is the only valid way you can be completely comfortable with your own homosexuality). Commonly-held beliefs are explored and the logic of each is questioned.
The book quickly moves onto an exploration of masculinity and how societies through history have shaped ideas of what men admire and preferred to see in other men. Traditionally-venerated masculine concepts of discipline, honour, self-restraint, self-reliance, nobility and bravery were passed on from men because they were found to be of worth. The author suggests that a deeper understanding of these traditions could be used by homosexual men to give their life structure, discipline and a sense of reward, that the gay community can't offer, since it sells the idolization of youth, lack of boundaries and self-destructive behaviour as the norm, and dismisses masculinity as only exaggerated cartoons of excessive masculinity.
The rest of the book is a call for men to question what they've been taught by gay dogma, re-examine their lives and to step outside their comfort zones and actually explore those ideals and areas of masculinity they've been conditioned to think are closed off to them. Forcing yourself into unfamiliar territory opens you up to new experiences and how you meet those challenges is how you grow as a human being. Seeking Real Achievement in life is a key concept here, with the aim of creating a different ideal of homosexual man.
So you couldn't throw a ball as a kid. Do you believe the myth that `gays are bad at sports' and simply not try ever again? Re-evaluate free of cultural expectations and make a decision as an adult. Sure, you may not be into team sports, but maybe rock climbing turns out to be a fun pastime. Motor sports might still bore you, but fishing might be more your thing.
Learn to interact with straight men via the common ground of your masculinity, and to see them as the real men they are, other than simplified cartoons, or simple `forbidden fruit' sex fantasies. Form stronger friendships, and deeper relationships
Since I received the review copy of the work months ago, I've put this section of the book into action and have been out there and trying new experiences. Like any unfamiliar task, there's a short period of awkwardness that eventually turns into competence. If I fumble a ball the first few throws, do I decide it's too hard and give up, or do I keep doing it, get better, and eventually realize it's no big deal?
Most importantly, I've been having a lot of fun, being amazed at what I'm actually capable of, confirming masculinity isn't some frightening `other', and experiencing the deeper rewards of male camaraderie and respect from men who know of my male preference, but take me seriously as a man due to the fact that I don't rub it in their faces constantly and aren't afraid to get my hands dirty and pitch in. That's far more rewarding for my own self-image than 1000 Gay Pride Parades.
Do you really think so little of yourself you'd rather live in fear of changing your own oil?
This book opens up a whole new field of potential Androphilia Studies, and gives me hope that one day that being sexually attracted to the characteristics of masculinity that make men `men', and therefore attracted to the men who embody them, will be seen as the completely logical train of thought that it is, rather than some betrayal of someone else's idea of what a homosexual man should be attracted to.
Congratulations, Mr. Malebranche. I'd like to shake your hand.
[...]
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
|
|
Most Recent Customer Reviews
|
