Buy new:
-5% $32.29
FREE delivery Sunday, September 22 on orders shipped by Amazon over $35
Ships from: Amazon
Sold by: GULAK
$32.29 with 5 percent savings
List Price: $34.00
The List Price is the suggested retail price of a new product as provided by a manufacturer, supplier, or seller. Except for books, Amazon will display a List Price if the product was purchased by customers on Amazon or offered by other retailers at or above the List Price in at least the past 90 days. List prices may not necessarily reflect the product's prevailing market price.
Learn more
Get Fast, Free Shipping with Amazon Prime FREE Returns
FREE delivery Sunday, September 22 on orders shipped by Amazon over $35
Or Prime members get FREE delivery Friday, September 20. Order within 4 hrs 16 mins.
Only 1 left in stock - order soon.
$$32.29 () Includes selected options. Includes initial monthly payment and selected options. Details
Price
Subtotal
$$32.29
Subtotal
Initial payment breakdown
Shipping cost, delivery date, and order total (including tax) shown at checkout.
Ships from
Amazon
Ships from
Amazon
Sold by
Sold by
Returns
30-day refund/replacement
30-day refund/replacement
This item can be returned in its original condition for a full refund or replacement within 30 days of receipt.
Returns
30-day refund/replacement
This item can be returned in its original condition for a full refund or replacement within 30 days of receipt.
Payment
Secure transaction
Your transaction is secure
We work hard to protect your security and privacy. Our payment security system encrypts your information during transmission. We don’t share your credit card details with third-party sellers, and we don’t sell your information to others. Learn more
Payment
Secure transaction
We work hard to protect your security and privacy. Our payment security system encrypts your information during transmission. We don’t share your credit card details with third-party sellers, and we don’t sell your information to others. Learn more
$9.14
Get Fast, Free Shipping with Amazon Prime FREE Returns
Used book in good condition. May have some wear to binding spine cover and pages. Some light highlighting markings writing may be present. May have some stickers and or sticker residue present. May be Ex-lib. copy. May NOT include discs or access code or other supplemental material. Ships directly from Amazon and is eligible for Prime or super saver FREE shipping. Used book in good condition. May have some wear to binding spine cover and pages. Some light highlighting markings writing may be present. May have some stickers and or sticker residue present. May be Ex-lib. copy. May NOT include discs or access code or other supplemental material. Ships directly from Amazon and is eligible for Prime or super saver FREE shipping. See less
FREE delivery Sunday, September 22 on orders shipped by Amazon over $35
Or Prime members get FREE delivery Thursday, September 19. Order within 4 hrs 16 mins.
Only 1 left in stock - order soon.
$$32.29 () Includes selected options. Includes initial monthly payment and selected options. Details
Price
Subtotal
$$32.29
Subtotal
Initial payment breakdown
Shipping cost, delivery date, and order total (including tax) shown at checkout.
Access codes and supplements are not guaranteed with used items.
Kindle app logo image

Download the free Kindle app and start reading Kindle books instantly on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required.

Read instantly on your browser with Kindle for Web.

Using your mobile phone camera - scan the code below and download the Kindle app.

QR code to download the Kindle App

Follow the author

Something went wrong. Please try your request again later.

Making Sex: Body and Gender from the Greeks to Freud Paperback – February 1, 1992

4.3 4.3 out of 5 stars 42 ratings

{"desktop_buybox_group_1":[{"displayPrice":"$32.29","priceAmount":32.29,"currencySymbol":"$","integerValue":"32","decimalSeparator":".","fractionalValue":"29","symbolPosition":"left","hasSpace":false,"showFractionalPartIfEmpty":true,"offerListingId":"IFvhjc%2BWat6r7ak9B%2FMKGlSzsb9MqI%2BQOTq5qVRuPsZcPyb8TGKkTKGkImc9BRQ1eTyCA91Z%2FJLPQomslsnL%2BSToLm8E6M1AvZ20EstqDvy8w9iH%2B%2BHt5jO15yNXo2ZMpPqCkv5JRHrTnq9J0NsjJNwIuA8SM98%2Bjr1yLxnkCg1DpClqEaQsPPPolmWhj4jP","locale":"en-US","buyingOptionType":"NEW","aapiBuyingOptionIndex":0}, {"displayPrice":"$9.14","priceAmount":9.14,"currencySymbol":"$","integerValue":"9","decimalSeparator":".","fractionalValue":"14","symbolPosition":"left","hasSpace":false,"showFractionalPartIfEmpty":true,"offerListingId":"IFvhjc%2BWat6r7ak9B%2FMKGlSzsb9MqI%2BQ3NpCK%2BdVANe9YSFcVjcNzM2au2p8D5KMrw9kVFqpTVdzYonnAAggLkND6U09faNawQyGZXNS75ZskskRlmgjA4rEf0dIuwG%2FBctRrjWlPZPMBb8MsP3njLKOAFeDgQz0MlrMydRM1XshW6SZwEp6Jvqzrs31g88n","locale":"en-US","buyingOptionType":"USED","aapiBuyingOptionIndex":1}]}

Purchase options and add-ons

This is a book about the making and unmaking of sex over the centuries. It tells the astonishing story of sex in the West from the ancients to the moderns in a precise account of developments in reproductive anatomy and physiology. We cannot fail to recognize the players in Thomas Laqueur’s story―the human sexual organs and pleasures, food, blood, semen, egg, sperm―but we will be amazed at the plots into which they have been woven by scientists, political activists, literary figures, and theorists of every stripe.

Laqueur begins with the question of why, in the late eighteenth century, woman’s orgasm came to be regarded as irrelevant to conception, and he then proceeds to retrace the dramatic changes in Western views of sexual characteristics over two millennia. Along the way, two “master plots” emerge. In the one-sex story, woman is an imperfect version of man, and her anatomy and physiology are construed accordingly: the vagina is seen as an interior penis, the womb as a scrotum, the ovaries as testicles. The body is thus a representation, not the foundation, of social gender. The second plot tends to dominate post-Enlightenment thinking while the one-sex model is firmly rooted in classical learning. The two-sex story says that the body determines gender differences, that woman is the opposite of man with incommensurably different organs, functions, and feelings. The two plots overlap; neither ever holds a monopoly. Science may establish many new facts, but even so, Laqueur argues, science was only providing a new way of speaking, a rhetoric and not a key to female liberation or to social progress.
Making Sex ends with Freud, who denied the neurological evidence to insist that, as a girl becomes a woman, the locus of her sexual pleasure shifts from the clitoris to the vagina; she becomes what culture demands despite, not because of, the body. Turning Freud’s famous dictum around, Laqueur posits that destiny is anatomy. Sex, in other words, is an artifice.

This is a powerful story, written with verve and a keen sense of telling detail (be it technically rigorous or scabrously fanciful).
Making Sex will stimulate thought, whether argument or surprised agreement, in a wide range of readers.


Books with Buzz
Discover the latest buzz-worthy books, from mysteries and romance to humor and nonfiction. Explore more

Frequently bought together

This item: Making Sex: Body and Gender from the Greeks to Freud
$32.29
Get it as soon as Sunday, Sep 22
Only 1 left in stock - order soon.
Sold by GULAK and ships from Amazon Fulfillment.
+
$23.99
Get it as soon as Sunday, Sep 22
In Stock
Ships from and sold by Amazon.com.
+
$20.09
Get it as soon as Sunday, Sep 22
In Stock
Ships from and sold by Amazon.com.
Total price:
To see our price, add these items to your cart.
Details
Added to Cart
spCSRF_Treatment
Some of these items ship sooner than the others.
Choose items to buy together.

Editorial Reviews

Review

“[Making Sex is] a brilliant documentation of difference between the one-sex and two-sex models…presenting a simple theme with broad and cascading implications… I didn’t need Laqueur to teach me that sex was interesting, but now I have a broader base for this greatest of certainties.”Stephen Jay Gould, New York Review of Books

“[Laqueur] gives us an excellent sense of how our predecessors, including physicians and scientists, thought about the anatomy that fascinates every schoolchild… No one can doubt, after reading this book, that our notions of masculinity or femininity have been imposed on what are supposed to be objective biological observations.”
Melvin Konner, New York Times Book Review

“[In this] challenging analysis of our ideas on gender…Laqueur shows how radically our consciousness of ourselves, our bodies, our sex has changed over the centuries. The categories we think of as most basic turn out to be mutable… And in this transformation, Laqueur emphasises, social changes were as crucial as medical teachings.”
Roy Porter, The Independent

About the Author

Thomas Laqueur is Helen Fawcett Distinguished Professor of History at the University of California, Berkeley.

Product details

  • Publisher ‏ : ‎ Harvard University Press; Revised ed. edition (February 1, 1992)
  • Language ‏ : ‎ English
  • Paperback ‏ : ‎ 336 pages
  • ISBN-10 ‏ : ‎ 0674543556
  • ISBN-13 ‏ : ‎ 978-0674543553
  • Item Weight ‏ : ‎ 1.2 pounds
  • Dimensions ‏ : ‎ 6.37 x 0.7 x 9.25 inches
  • Customer Reviews:
    4.3 4.3 out of 5 stars 42 ratings

About the author

Follow authors to get new release updates, plus improved recommendations.
Thomas Walter Laqueur
Brief content visible, double tap to read full content.
Full content visible, double tap to read brief content.

Discover more of the author’s books, see similar authors, read author blogs and more

Customer reviews

4.3 out of 5 stars
42 global ratings

Top reviews from the United States

Reviewed in the United States on October 21, 2017
Wonderfully written BS out of the mind of Gramsci...have an original thought! Someone...please!
Reviewed in the United States on December 8, 2011
Thomas Laqueur discusses the emergence of the study and ideation of the corporeal body and the formation of social categorizations of gender from Antiquity to the Freudian Era. He argues that the one-sex body model, in which both "sexes" were considered versions of the male body, consumed anatomical, cosmological and "scientific" thinking until the Enlightenment Era. The Enlightenment, and especially the French Revolution, ushered in "the world of reductionist explanation" in which nature and "the flat, horizontal, immovable foundation of physical fact: sex," mattered most in terms of sexual distinction (151). The Revolution itself gave birth to a "genuine new feminism," but also "a new kind of antifeminism" that erected societal boundaries between the sexes (194). Sexual difference remained a "gender" or "social division between men and women" (155). Thus, the one-sex model continued to permeate notions of sexual relations and anatomy until the early 20th century. Laqueur thus claims "the ways in which sexual difference have been imagined in the past are largely unconstrained by what was actually known about this or that bit of anatomy," or various "physiological" processes. Instead, notions of sexual difference have long stemmed "from the rhetorical exigencies of the moment" (243). Thus, he argues that "gender" was "real," in its social construction of male dominance, while "sex" was "epiphenomenonal," or subject to interpretation.
Laqueur contends that pre-Enlightenment medical texts viewed the physical body as inherently male. The female body's sexual organs were simply an inverted version of the penis. Bodily fluids such as milk, blood and semen were of similar matter. Therefore, "the boundaries between male and female" were (and Laqueur would argue still "are") "of degree and not of kind" (25). This discourse, a "one sex model," supported by such prominent philosophers as Aristotle and anatomists as Vesalius, dominated anatomical and medical rationalization, as well as gender literature, for nearly two millennia. Thus, a female could become a male, for example, after strenuous activity that would cause her inner sexual organs to drop. However, a male could not become a female, since "nature tends always toward what is most perfect," the male body (127). "Man" was "the measure of all things, and woman does not exist as an ontologically distinct category" (62). Moreover, such an order to the cosmos of humanity played a social role, maintaining a male ordered society.
Not even the hard scientific, observable discoveries of the "Scientific Revolution" of the late 17th to early 18th century could overturn the one sex model, as linguistic categories of male and female predominated scientific observation. Although the Enlightenment focus on "nature" garnered a new era of recognition for the female body and politic, as well as a notion of "two fleshes" by the 19th century, the recognition was one of gender differentiation rather than sex delineation. Thus, Laqueur argues, in a vein similar to Foucault that gendered social categories (as well as the discourse and language such categories created), in which men held higher privilege than women, came to dominate Western culture while the one sex model remained. The two sex model was produced, Laqueur contends, "through endless micro-confrontations over power in the public and private spheres" over the course of the late 19th into the early 20th century (193). Moreover, 18th and 19th century beliefs that the female was "passionless" since she did not need orgasm to conceive played into notions of body heat (positive and male) as opposed to body coolness (negative and female). Even the writings of Sigmund Freud, Laqueur contends, indicate Freud saw a paternalistic order, since women possessed an "internal passive vagina," as an appropriate rendering of "socially defined roles" (241).
Laqueur's conception of the social categorization of the sexes, often through the lens of a paternalistically ordered social structure, fits nicely with Barbara Duden's chapter concerning "the perception of the [female] body." Duden examines the journal entries (over 1800) of Dr. Johannes Pelargius Storch, a male "physician" in the German town of Eisenach during the early to mid 18th century. Duden found that Dr. Storch consistently "struggled to force his own body concept into the scheme" of his prognoses of various female patients (106). Because physicians of Storch's era were not permitted to "open" bodies, doctors often examined external fluids in an effort to deduce the workings of the internal body. The internal body was "a place of metamorphosis," in which bodily fluids, especially blood, had to be kept in balance (109). Emotional reactions by women, such as fear, worry, jealousy or anger, caused what Storch labeled "mishaps," that could alter the blood balance in the body leading to various maladies including death. Moreover, natural, "cosmic events" such as the alignment of the stars or changing of the seasons could also cause women to experience various levels of illness, especially during the menses. Thus Storch tried to understand the female body "in the microcosm that corresponds to an order in the macrocosm" (177).
7 people found this helpful
Report
Reviewed in the United States on April 9, 2010
Laqueur argues that like sex much like gender, which is now recognised to change with the times, has reinvented by people throughout time. Societies and communities tend to construct categories by which they organise things, people and their societies; whilst, these categorical tools appear legitimate and obvious to the historical actors who employ them, historical hindsight effectively demolishes their innateness. Laqueur argues that sex is not something that exists outside of us but within us, something that is transformed and made by communities and not by nature. Lauquer suggests that ideas of sex can be separated into two groups: the single sex model which precedes the 18th century and the two sex model which follows the invention of sex (which he claims occurs in the 18th century). Further, Lauqueur claims that these changes in the conception and implications of sex changed as a function of society and were independent of scientific advances. Despite presenting a number of interesting case studies and examples Lauquer's evidence does not adequately support his thesis because historical knowledge challenges the one sex model; the lack of categories does not imply the lack of separate entities; the analysis of the implications of the language utilised by historical actors is problematic.
Reading Aristotle also suggests that at least him considered sexes to be separate. He compares slaves to women and implies that there are separate. The historical record challenges Laqueur's assertions because societies have frequently divided roles, and sexual mores according to sex.
Much of Laqueur assertions lay on the apparent absence of separate categories for men and women. He argues that throughout history women were seen as imperfect men, or inverted men (if we look at some of the dissection drawings made - it is clear from the similarities between vaginas and penises that they thought women were inverted males). Thus, Lauquer argues that women were considered to lack the heat required to be male. From this and the lack of different terminology (to which I'll get on later) he extrapolates that there was but one gender. However, he recognises that people were able to distinguish between man and women but the basis of this distinction was not there genitalia. Women were supposed to perform certain roles and also lacked heat; whereas men, who were seen as more rational and superior were expected to fulfil a different set of roles ergo men and women were separated and perceived to be different. While, the basis on which the distinction was made may not have focused on their genitalia the distinction existed and separated society into two groups; coincidentally (or not) once genitalia is used to separate the sexes along with their respective traits and roles the membership of groups does not change. Ergo, there is functionally no change; whereas prior to the 18th century (assuming Lauquer is correct) women were perceived to have certain characteristics and amongst those was their inverted penises; now, these same characteristics were perceived to result from the presence of said genitalia. We are left with a perfect correlation and a distinction that does not affect the interactions between said groups nor their composition but only their name.
Laqueur also explores the language used by historical actors and whilst language can be very important to understand how and what people thought its significance must be properly analysed. Laqueur argues that the fact that people used similar terms to refer to male and female reproductive organs means that these were not differentiated in the minds of those that utilise them. The fact that ovaries were referred as testes according to Laqueur means that these people did not separate the sexes. Alas, they (and may I add we still) refer to other organisms penises as penises; are we to extrapolate from this; that there is or that historical actors thought there was only one species? The fact we call these organs by the same name does not imply we consider them to be the same. Further, we still refer to some of these structures using the same names: gonads, gametes, secondary sexual characteristics; despite the fact we recognise that whilst these structures differ they are functionally homologous.
8 people found this helpful
Report
Reviewed in the United States on April 22, 2013
This book was mandatory reading for a Masters' class on Renaissance Studies - yes, in France. While much remains to be said regarding the notions of "sex" as mere ideological construction, the review of ancient Greek and Roman medical treatises, from pre-Galenic theories, via Renaissance notions (most famously those of Vesalius and Valverde) up to 19 th C. French lunacy and S. Freud, followed alas by his disciple Marie Bonaparte, makes for a fascinating read, that does call for a sequel at the very least.
My favourite quote, when Laqueur reminds us of the ongoing male fear of "effeminacy", is of course from Shakespeare; need I explain the historical "prohibition" on feelings of love experienced by men towards women? Love "liquifies", turns men into women...Ah.
O Sweet Juliet,
Thy beauty has made me effeminate
And in my temper soft'ned valour's steel! (3.1..111-13) quoted p. 123.
4 people found this helpful
Report

Top reviews from other countries

M. S. Stewart
5.0 out of 5 stars Five Stars
Reviewed in the United Kingdom on November 6, 2016
Great