Customer Reviews

Sexuality and Socialism: History, Politics, and Theory of LGBT Liberation

5 star:		(5)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

As an organizer that has been completely swept up in the movement for marriage equality and beyond, I found this book to be a clear, materialist analysis of where LGBT oppression comes from and what to do about it. It also makes a strong argument through some of the best LGBT history for political struggle from bellow being the decisive force in combating homophobia. The author makes a brilliant case for how sexual liberation of all people is inextricably linked to combating homophobia. Ultimately with a movement on the rise happening at the same time as rising unemployment and poverty, the politics of solidarity and socialism are more relevant than ever in building the LGBT struggle. It is so refreshing to talk about how gender and sexuality haven't always been this rigid and how things don't always have to be that way, that a revolutionary overthrow of the sexual order of the day is possible. Sexuality and Socialism contains vital history that has been buried from so many of our history books such as unified, steadfastly pro-gay black and white integrated workers organizations in the 1930's. This makes me proud to be a fighter for LGBT Liberation and ultimately, working class revolution.

I am absolutely shocked that the author of this book claims to be a socialist. The word 'equality' comes up hundreds of times, which is fine in connecting socialist politics with existing movements. However there's no larger vision directing readers to the general contours of what a liberated sexual society might look like. Without that vision, any movement for LGBT liberation will wither on the vine once the two main political demands Wolf makes in this book are met (repeal of DADT, which is mentioned on 30 pages, and same-sex marriage legalization, which is alluded to on 50 pages!). The fact that DADT has recently been repealed and gays have since this books initial publication won the right to get married throughout most of New England not only undermines her ill-advised functionalist argument that capitalism somehow depends upon and is therefore the source of homophobia. It also means that much of what she spends time getting outraged about in this book is quickly becoming a non-issue. So much for being on the cutting edge or vanguard of mass politics. Do LGBT people call it a day and rest contentedly on their laurels now, or is there something more to fight for in the realm of sexuality, like maybe liberation? Clearly Wolf would respond in favor of the latter, but by focusing so strongly on equality at the expense of liberation she is unable to offer a real way forward past the political framework established by bourgeois society.

Useful in breaking that framework would have been some discussion of the a-word: 'alienation,' a term that comes up on exactly two pages in what amounts to a superficial discussion of Wilhelm Reich's earlier work. This oversight would not be so damning were it not for the established literature on alienated sexuality within Marxian literature, a literature extending far beyond Reich's contribution (see Alan Soble's 'Pornography'). Instead Wolf is too busy calling for equality to bother with developing an identifiably socialist understanding of sexuality that could benefit heterosexual people as well as LGBT people. A shame, really, considering the amount of attention this book has received and how large its potential audience is. My advice is to acquire Mario Mieli's Homosexuality and Liberation: Elements of a Gay Critique and compare it to this work. You'll notice immediately which one is calling for a liberatory sexual politics.

Whether you are someone learning about the history of homosexuality and gender variance for the first time, or are an erudite student in the field, this book is a 'must-have' on your bookshelf. This book is NOT an academic/abstract/unintelligible book. Rather, it is a broad attempt to offer a uniquely-materialist understanding of the development, evolution, and repression of homosexuality (or, to use a more apt phrase, "non-heteronormative lifestyles") in the modern era.

Starting with the obliquely homosexual practices of the Ancient Greeks up through the present industrial/financial times, Wolf explains how sexual preference and identity have ever been a product of the social & economic conditions upon which a given society has rested. In other words, for an individual to break free of the constricting bonds of the "normal, nuclear family (1 father, 1 mother, and 2.5 children)" and live out a variant sexual existence, that individual must have a means of providing for themselves independently and in connection with other, similarly "independent" individuals.

It is for this reason that the modern notion of a "homosexual" person as a distinct "type" set apart from "heterosexual" people, is a phenomenon that first emerges with the advent of capitalism and the industrialization of society. Capitalism tore apart the old, static family life based in the countryside with its suffocating traditions and monotony, and replaced it with the buzz, fluidity, anonymity, and diversity of myriad strangers, crammed in together at work and at home, beckoned with the promise of individual advancement via the market nexus.

However, just as capitalism offers the promise of new, more liberated lifestyles, it stymies them at every turn. Capitalism has no use for the sedentary and static life of the peasant economy, far removed from commerce and industry. It does, however, seek to retain certain structures of the former feudal society and adapt them to modern uses. The nuclear family (an individual unit of privatized reproduction versus social reproduction) is one of these structures.

Capitalism does not abolish war when it overthrows the various warring fiefdoms and monarchies of the Middle Ages. Nor does it abolish religion when it seals the fate of the "Divine Kings" of Europe. To use an analogy, the eye of the human plays a very different role than does eye of the dog (which is color-blind), yet nature saw fit to pass this organ down from species to species, making only slight adaptations to render it more useful in the employ of the given animal.

In such way does capitalism treat what should otherwise be the vestigal organs of our more barbaric, ancient brethren. Insofar as capitalism remains a rigid society premised upon class division and inequality, it retains (albeit in adapted and newfangled forms) the blemishes of oppression, war, poverty, etc.

What is refreshing about Wolf's conclusion to this analysis is her point that sexual oppression can indeed be ended -- not just limited, tempered, avoided, or ignored. Oppression, being a product not of some intrinsic human fallacy, but rather the (at first) unintended product of the particular structures of society (some) humans have crafted over time, can be eradicated by likewise creating new structures and institutions for human coexistence.

Such a new structure would have to call into question the basis of a capitalistic society that necessarily is based upon class inequality and mutual competition. For this author, a truly democratic, socialist society is clearly a form of human existence more amenable to full equality and liberation for all of our species.

However, regardless of whether you agree or disagree with this or other particular conclusions drawn by the author, you will nonetheless find this a remarkably insightful, if not life-changing, read.

(If you like this book, check out other similarly-written works such as:

Women and Socialism: Essays on Women's Liberation

Black Liberation and Socialism

Subterranean Fire: A History of Working-Class Radicalism in the United States

The Meaning of Marxism

The Case for Socialism

Too much of a survey for me, I was looking for and hoping for a little more depth and less of a synthesis of things about history and theory I already know. The last two chapters reached for a prescription for depth, but did not necessarily get there. Well written, but you can see the author's obvious biases in some of the chapters. If I had worked my way through this book with a pen in hand I might have more to say on a point by point basis, but in a survey here there is so much information. What I expect will be the most useful and interesting part of the book is the bibliography and suggestion for further reading. It made me want to crack back open my old Marx/Engels reader and hit up some of the sections I haven't read yet, mostly Engels's take on the rise of the modern family under capitalism.

As a longtime gender and queer studies teacher, I heard Ms. Wolf speak on campus and she was hilarious and insightful, so I bought her book hoping that her witty style carries over to her writing, which it certainly does.

I can see why her work is so popular among young activists looking for a left-wing critique of Gay Inc., but also an accessible account of queer theory, which Ms. wolf accomplishes with aplomb. She is critical of queer theory from the standpoint of a historical materialist, which she explains extremely well. I don't have any formal training in Marxism, so the surprise benefit of this book is that I came away with not only a more critical eye toward my own field of study, but much-needed understanding of Marxism, what socialism actually means to those who adhere to its principles and the links between our economic system and intimate lives. It was really a revelation and I enjoyed reading this book and plan to use it in future classes.

There's no excuse to quote and/or reference Wikipedia in a book (p. 73). If you're reading this, you clearly have access to the internet. Walk your fingers on over to the other website and you can find much of the same information. Not having a lot of information readily available about homosexuality in the former Soviet Union is not an excuse to use such an unreliable source. I'm an undergrad and wrote twenty pages on the subject, clearly without the help of this book. Lazy, lazy, lazy.

This book is a challenging read because it covers an awful lot of ground: the historical roots of LGBT oppression; how the rise of capitalism changed the nature of the family, and with it, ideas about sexuality; the history of gay identity; gay rights organizing, including the rise and fall of the 60s-70s gay rights movement; the pernicious role of the Democratic Party; the relationship between class struggle and the battle against homophobia; the anti-gay policies of "socialist" countries like the USSR, China, Cuba, etc.; the bankruptcy of identity politics and queer theory; the "nature vs. nurture" debate about homo/heterosexuality; topical questions such as the California's proposition 8, homophobia in the black community, the stereotypes of gays in the middle (yuppies); and how gay liberation can only be accomplished by dismantling capitalism through a working-class revolution.

I learned a lot from this book. For example, I had no idea that American doctors routinely surgically alter the genitals of infants if they have' a mix of female and male parts, and in the process, they deprive these children of the ability to have orgasms later in life. Sometimes the parents aren't even informed! I was also totally unaware of the socialist/communist-led unions in the 1930s who stood up against homophobia.

One of the challenges in writing this book is that there is not a lot written on the subject by any of the "big name" Marxists (Marx, Engels, Lenin, Trotsky) although they did provide both a theoretical and practical basis for approaching the questions involved. This book covers a lot of ground, and people who want to delve deeper should really take a look at the recommended readings Wolf lists in the back of the book.

The cover photo on Sherry Wolf's book shows a protest rally with a woman holding a highlighted rainbow flag. Radical gay and lesbian activists, one assumes. Look closely, though, and you'll see that the woman is sporting a Hillary for president button. The contrast seems odd for a book on socialism. But maybe not. The idea that the Democratic Party can be pressured into doing the right thing for oppressed groups has grown stronger as the influence of the left has diminished. This mix of radicalism and reformism pervades the book.

Wolf writes in a readable style, and her book offers a useful overview of the American gay movement's history of the past few decades, as well as some insights into its politics. But despite the book's strengths, it is riddled with errors and gives short shrift to the third element of her subtitle: theory.

A fundamental problem is her use of the LGBT acronym. As she notes, "desiring to be all-inclusive and readable" is a difficult task. To her credit, she rejects the "queer" label because of its negative historical baggage, but her decision to lump together "lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people" has its own problems. For one thing, there is no such thing as "LGBT people," and it muddles differences of identity and oppression. I doubt there even is a "theory of LGBT liberation"--beyond, perhaps, asserting that all oppressed groups will be better off under socialism.

She begins with an examination of "the roots of LGBT oppression." But here already she stumbles, and not only because of her alphabet soup of categories. "The oppression of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people has not always existed," she writes, "and neither have LGBT people as a distinct sector of the population." Indeed! But "LGBT" people (or "GLBT" or "LGBTQQIAA" or other bizarre acronyms) do not constitute a "distinct sector" today either, and she is wrong to trace the "oppression of all sexual minorities" solely to "modern capitalism." The roots of sexual oppression in the West go back much earlier in class society. Homosexual oppression arose with the Holiness Code of Leviticus and is part of the Judeo-Christian tradition, compounded by the Anglo-Saxon legal heritage. Wolf ignores this history of the taboo on (male) homosexuality, or its relevance for today. (She doesn't bother with cross-cultural or anthropological studies that might complicate her view.) She does recognize that it is "tied to" the nuclear family (a relatively recent institution) under capitalism, and says that "socialists fight for a world in which sexuality is a purely personal matter, without legal or material restrictions of any sort."

But that last point is weakened by her failure to discuss the role that repression of youth sexuality (e.g., age-of-consent laws) plays in the repression of homosexual behavior. Wolf recycles bourgeois prejudice when it comes to intergenerational love, as her comments on nineteenth-century German labor leader Johann Baptiste von Schweitzer show. She refers to him as a "convicted pederast, as Engels called him--that is, a man who seduces boys." But by inserting "seduction" into her novel definition of pederasty (a sexual relationship between a man and an adolescent youth), she repeats the foolish notion that a boy under the magical age of consent (whatever it happens to be) is by definition incapable of consenting to sex with a man: "Whatever the wrongs of age-of-consent legislation that carry over into the modern era [she mentions no `wrongs'], it should stand as a basic socialist principle that sex between two people must be consensual. It is incompatible for genuine consent devoid of the inequality of power to be given by a child to a man of thirty."

But what is Wolf's definition of a "child"? What does sexual freedom mean for youth? Did consensual sex with a teenager in nineteenth-century Germany merit punishment? Wolf fails to mention the more enlightened view of Schweitzer's colleague, labor leader Ferdinand Lassalle, who said: "What Schweitzer did isn't pretty, but I hardly look upon it as a crime.... In the long run, sexual activity is a matter of taste and ought to be left up to each person, so long as he doesn't encroach upon someone else's interests." Wolf later notes that the Soviet criminal code of 1922 omitted mention of sodomy, incest, and age-of-consent laws: "`Sexual maturity' was to be determined on a case-by-case basis according to medical opinion." So, does she favor abolishing age of consent in the law? Her failure to address such questions leaves in place the sexual status quo for young people. Her final chapter would have been more accurately titled "Sexual Liberation for Some!" (not "All").

She regards the hot-button issues of the day--letting same-sexers serve openly in the military and gay marriage--as goals socialists should fight for. While she concedes that "hostility to the military is certainly understandable," she thinks it is more important to critique the federal government's "hiring practices," even if the result is to strengthen the imperial military. She seems worried that "if LGBT people are eventually deemed qualified to kill or be killed for the empire, then other legal and social restrictions would only be amplified." Her concerns already seem out of date. Top officials are pushing for repeal of "don't ask, don't tell" because the policy hampers the war machine at a time when it needs all the bodies it can get. And, thanks to Obama (whose election Wolf considers a "victory"--for whom she doesn't say), the Pentagon has the biggest war budget in history to pay for its aggression. Again, this seems like reformism posing as radicalism.

She describes at length the discrimination faced by same-sex couples (though not by transsexuals, whose interests hardly coincide with those of gays who want to get married since transsexuals already can), but has nothing to say about discrimination against singles, or about the many downsides of marriage (e.g., legal responsibility for a spouse's credit card debts, or the messiness and expense of divorce and its often traumatic effects on any children involved). In an assertion that would have Frederick Engels turning over in his grave, she argues that marriage "is part of the class struggle." Getting the state out of the marriage business and making marriage a purely private and/or religious affair would be a step toward genuine equality, but Wolf does not examine such an approach. She mentions civil unions only to denigrate them. She thinks her support for marriage is more radical than the critique of "queer theorists": "in their opposition to civil rights struggles to `normalize' and `assimilate' LGBT people into wider society by fighting for reforms such as same-sex marriage or equal employment rights, queer theorists' fundamental conservatism is exposed." Isn't this the pot calling the kettle black?

Her discussion of postmodernism (pp. 168ff.; not listed in the Index) is good, as is her critique of identity politics, as far as it goes. She is right to criticize the "sexual binary" in gay gene studies, and examines well the fluidity of same-sex practices and identity. She makes the cogent point that "Identity politics activists and scholars' adherence to identity-based power blocs is tantamount to a rejection of the notion that class is a fundamental divide in society, thus they sever the link between exploitation and oppression." And: "The legacy of identity politics organizing in the United States often lends itself to an unproductive `oppression Olympics' [a neat term] in which different groups compete, in a sense, for which one is lowest on the totem pole. It seems a politically useless endeavor, as it only mirrors the ideological framework of the dominant class in whose interest these divisions persist." But her own use of "LGBT people" is itself an example of politically correct identity politics, as is her taking of identity rather than sexual behavior as her starting point, and the reform agenda she supports has less to do with Marxism than with gay assimilation into the capitalist status quo.

Even her discussion of gay bashing focuses on identity, not on the fear of homosexuality that leads to it. Homoerotic attraction is universal, and the mostly young males who bash are acting out of fear of their own homoerotic impulses. But, with a "workerist" twist, Wolf sees this in terms of identity: "a minority of heterosexuals carry out acts of bigotry against LGBT people because, in addition to the competition under capitalism that exists between bosses for profits, there is competition among workers as well, for jobs, housing, education, etc." Fear of homosexuality is reduced to fear of joblessness: "atomized and isolated, workers at times express their rage by turning against one another rather than the system and the class that exploits and oppresses them." It's unclear how this analysis would explain, say, the murder of Matthew Shepard.

The factual errors and instances of sloppy citation are too numerous to list, but here are a few:

Marx and Engels were not "socialism's founders" (p. 9). The most detailed and free vision of sexuality under socialism was offered by the earlier utopian socialist Charles Fourier, whose Harmony provided for all varieties of sexual behavior, and whose writings on sexual freedom are far in advance of those of most Marxists. But Wolf does not mention Fourier.

Pederasts are defined as "homosexual pedophiles" (p. 77). Pederasts are men attracted to pubescent and postpubescent males; pedophiles are attracted to prepubescents. Here, Wolf is regurgitating bourgeois disiniformation.

U.S. leftist groups "defended Cuba's earlier record of abuse against sexual minorities or simply ignored it" (p. 106). This distortion seems designed to show Wolf's International Socialist Organization (ISO) in a favorable light compared to other leftist groups. While it is true that Maoists and the Communist Party are guilty as charged, the blanket statement is false. I myself gave a forum in New York for the Socialist Workers Party in the early 1970s (reported in the Village Voice) condemning the Cuban persecution of Heberto Padilla and the 1971 Cuban Cultural Congress's condemnation of homosexuality as a "social pathology," as well as the internment of homosexuals in the 1960s.

The internal debates in the SWP on gay liberation lasted nine years (1970-79), not three (p. 108).

Homosexuality per se was never outlawed in the United States (p. 117); only certain acts were illegal.

GAA's name was Gay Activists (not Activist) Alliance (pp. 129, 142, 325).

Neither edition of Donn Teal's The Gay Militants (she omits The from the title) says that the SWP was perceived by the Gay Liberation Front to be "notorious Puritans" (the quote, from Bob Martin of the youth committee of NACHO, not GLF, says nothing about the SWP: "Revolutionaries are notorious Puritans and so many radicals are uptight about their own sexual orientation"), nor were Maoists the "dominant leftist influence" in the GLF (p. 132).

The Red Butterfly cell was not formed by "Maoist gays" (p. 136).

She discusses how radical lesbians challenged NOW's early hostility to lesbianism (p. 136), but fails to mention the notorious antigay, antimale resolution adopted at NOW's October 1980 convention at the behest of its Lesbian Rights Committee, and never rescinded, condemning pederasty, public sex, sadomasochism, prostitution, and pornography.

GRID stood for Gay-Related Immune Deficiency, not "Gay-Related Infectious Disease" (pp. 164, 326).

Mattachine was not the first U.S. gay organization (p. 244).

The IWW was the Industrial (not International) Workers of the World (p. 244).

There are also numerous errors in the identification of sources in the notes. In some cases, the author given is wrong (I was the editor of Gay Liberation and Socialism, for example, not Forgione and Hill [pp. 292, 295]), and 300 (not 20) copies were published, as is clearly stated in the copy she says was lent to her by David Whitehouse (who bought his copy from me).

Wolf often cites as her source books by supporters of the ISO (which published her book and to which she belongs) when the information originally appeared elsewhere (e.g., in John Lauritsen's and my The Early Homosexual Rights Movement (1864-1935)). This happens enough to suggest that it is intentional.

The book's architecture is sloppy. Frequently, the first time a work is cited, only a short title and the author's last name are given, so complete publication information is not provided anywhere.

The "Selected Readings" is not alphabetized; works are listed haphazardly.

At 5 X 7 inches, Wolf's book is compact and easy to hold. But despite her good intentions, and her excellent, if sometimes cursory, treatment of subjects like postmodernism and poststructuralism, Foucault, identity politics, and "queer," her book is not always a reliable guide to history, and fails to make a convincing case for socialism as the way forward for sexual minorities.

SEXUALITY AND SOCIALISM: HISTORY, POLITICS AND THEORY OF LGBT LIBERATION comes from an associate of The International Socialist Review and is packed with analysis of questions of lesbian and gay people, offering essays considering the history and roots of oppression, the making of gender identity, and a history of the gay movement. A highly recommended pick for any library strong in issues of sexuality and freedom.