Truck Month Best Books of the Month Amazon Fashion Learn more nav_sap_plcc_ascpsc Jessy Lanza Father's Day Gift Guide 2016 Fire TV Stick Get Ready for Summer and Save 15% The Baby Store Find the Best Purina Pro Plan for Your Pet Amazon Cash Back Offer DrThorne DrThorne DrThorne  Amazon Echo  Echo Dot  Amazon Tap  Echo Dot  Amazon Tap  Amazon Echo Starting at $49.99 All-New Kindle Oasis AutoRip in CDs & Vinyl Outdoor Recreation SnS
Customer Review

49 of 58 people found the following review helpful
3.0 out of 5 stars Someone get Mr. de Botton some good porn!, December 25, 2012
Verified Purchase(What's this?)
This review is from: How to Think More About Sex (The School of Life) (Paperback)
[Let me preface this review by saying I've been reading Alain de Botton for more than a decade and have typically enjoyed his work. When I saw this new release, I was so excited that I preordered it on Kindle months ago and was surprised when it arrived the morning of Christmas Eve]

I have to say, I'm a bit disappointed with the views presented in "How To Think More About Sex". Initially, de Botton presents some stark and sobering realities of sex within long-term relationships and offers up several dilemmas that he intends to explore. However, his idea of exploration is more like flip-flopping on specific issues (e.g. Adultery). First we get the cons, then the pros and then... he just settles somewhere in the middle. Even his Conclusion section feels limp, ending on a "sex is what it is" sort of note.

While this approach technically makes good on the title's promise, it doesn't seem to realize the full potential of the topic of sex, instead remaining rather timidly within the conventions of everyday life and stereotypical relationships. Where are the daring challenges to accepted conventions, the bold analysis of how society's relationship with sex changes as society (and to some extent humanity) also change?

We see just how constricted de Botton's thinking is when he talks about pornography. He states that only those "whose logical selves have never been obliterated by the full force of sex" can remain 'modern' on the subject of porn, going on to promote censorship of such materials as "necessary both for mental health of our species and for the adequate functioning of a decently ordered and loving society". According to de Botton:

"Pornography asks that we leave behind our ethics, our aesthetic aense and our intelligence when we contemplate it, in order that we give ourselves over wholly to the most mindless sort of lust. The plots are daft, the lines of dialogue absurd, the actors exploited, the interiors ugly and the photographs voyeuristic."

My lord.

de Botton's remarks are technophobic and, along with the entire 'Pornography' chapter, read like the heavy-handed generalizations of someone who has little breadth of experience of the subject at hand. Pornography can be found in a multitude of media, with vastly differing degrees of absurdity, aesthetics and intelligence. The fact that de Botton failed to discover more holistically engaging forms of porn is no excuse for his backwards views.

Furthermore, de Botton seems to be unable to conceive of a world where regular pornography viewing might benefit an individual, single or otherwise. Sure, there are those who may abuse pornography and may lead a "lesser" life (quotes for subjectivity on de Botton's part), but who is he to suggest censorship? And once we adopt his--or anyone else's--subjective morality, where we do we stop?

3.5 out 5 stars, with serious points off for de Botton pushing his own morality without even a cursory attempt to explore how society might embrace change rather than run away from it
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No

[Add comment]
Post a comment
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Amazon will display this name with all your submissions, including reviews and discussion posts. (Learn more)
This badge will be assigned to you and will appear along with your name.
There was an error. Please try again.
Please see the full guidelines here.

Official Comment

As a representative of this product you can post one Official Comment on this review. It will appear immediately below the review wherever it is displayed.   Learn more
The following name and badge will be shown with this comment:
 (edit name)
After clicking the Post button you will be asked to create your public name, which will be shown with all your contributions.

Is this your product?

If you are the author, artist, manufacturer or an official representative of this product, you can post an Official Comment on this review. It will appear immediately below the review wherever it is displayed.  Learn more
Otherwise, you can still post a regular comment on this review.

Is this your product?

If you are the author, artist, manufacturer or an official representative of this product, you can post an Official Comment on this review. It will appear immediately below the review wherever it is displayed.   Learn more
System timed out

We were unable to verify whether you represent the product. Please try again later, or retry now. Otherwise you can post a regular comment.

Since you previously posted an Official Comment, this comment will appear in the comment section below. You also have the option to edit your Official Comment.   Learn more
The maximum number of Official Comments have been posted. This comment will appear in the comment section below.   Learn more
Prompts for sign-in


Track comments by e-mail
Tracked by 1 customer

Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-2 of 2 posts in this discussion
Initial post: Dec 30, 2012 12:18:58 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Dec 30, 2012 12:26:47 PM PST
D. Garcia says:
There is something very naive in suggesting that we don't try to impose morality on someone else: doing so is already an imposition of one's morality. In a sense, there is no such thing as a moral vacuum. We can only choose what morality we're going to follow.

Opposing someone's perspective on the basis that it imposes moral values is usually an uncreative way to dismiss an argument that you don't want to deal with because it's too personal or can't articulately rebut, and I think that may hold with your comment.

Posted on Jan 1, 2013 9:48:42 PM PST
This is like saying warnings about cigarettes are out of line because some people confine their tobacco use to fine cigars. You may want to read this thread to acquire a less constricted understanding of the risks porn entails for those who begin with highspeed: The issue here isn't naked bodies; it's delivery and its effect on the brain. A bit of technophobia may well be in order.
‹ Previous 1 Next ›

Review Details



Location: New York, NY United States

Top Reviewer Ranking: 814,786