What do you think?
Rate this book
What Do Gay Men Want?: An Essay on Sex, Risk, and Subjectivity
“Compelling, timely, and provocative. The writing is sleek and exhilarating. It doesn’t waste time telling us what it will do or what it has just done—it just does it.”
—Don Kulick, Professor of Anthropology, New York University
How we can talk about sex and risk in the age of barebacking—or condomless sex—without invoking the usual bogus and punitive clichés about gay men’s alleged low self-esteem, lack of self-control, and other psychological “deficits”? Are there queer alternatives to psychology for thinking about the inner life of homosexuality? What Do Gay Men Want? explores some of the possibilities.
Unlike most writers on the topic of gay men and risky sex, David Halperin liberates gay male subjectivity from psychology, demonstrating the insidious ways in which psychology’s defining opposition between the normal and the pathological subjects homosexuality to medical reasoning and revives a whole set of unexamined moral assumptions about “good” sex and “bad” sex.
In particular, Halperin champions neglected traditions of queer thought, including both literary and popular discourses, by drawing on the work of well-known figures like Jean Genet and neglected ones like Marcel Jouhandeau. He shows how the long history of of gay men’s uses of “abjection” can offer an alternative, nonmoralistic model for thinking about gay male subjectivity, something which is urgently needed in the age of barebacking.
Anyone searching for nondisciplinary ways to slow the spread of HIV/AIDS among gay men—or interested in new modes of thinking about gay male subjectivity—should read this book.
David M. Halperin is W. H. Auden Collegiate Professor of the History and Theory of Sexuality, Professor of English, Professor of Women’s Studies, Professor of Comparative Literature, and Adjunct Professor of Classical Studies at the University of Michigan.
—Don Kulick, Professor of Anthropology, New York University
How we can talk about sex and risk in the age of barebacking—or condomless sex—without invoking the usual bogus and punitive clichés about gay men’s alleged low self-esteem, lack of self-control, and other psychological “deficits”? Are there queer alternatives to psychology for thinking about the inner life of homosexuality? What Do Gay Men Want? explores some of the possibilities.
Unlike most writers on the topic of gay men and risky sex, David Halperin liberates gay male subjectivity from psychology, demonstrating the insidious ways in which psychology’s defining opposition between the normal and the pathological subjects homosexuality to medical reasoning and revives a whole set of unexamined moral assumptions about “good” sex and “bad” sex.
In particular, Halperin champions neglected traditions of queer thought, including both literary and popular discourses, by drawing on the work of well-known figures like Jean Genet and neglected ones like Marcel Jouhandeau. He shows how the long history of of gay men’s uses of “abjection” can offer an alternative, nonmoralistic model for thinking about gay male subjectivity, something which is urgently needed in the age of barebacking.
Anyone searching for nondisciplinary ways to slow the spread of HIV/AIDS among gay men—or interested in new modes of thinking about gay male subjectivity—should read this book.
David M. Halperin is W. H. Auden Collegiate Professor of the History and Theory of Sexuality, Professor of English, Professor of Women’s Studies, Professor of Comparative Literature, and Adjunct Professor of Classical Studies at the University of Michigan.
176 pages, Hardcover
First published August 21, 2007
8 people are currently reading
145 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 13 of 13 reviews
June 5, 2019
David Halperin's extended essay is divine and essential for understanding "what next" in the (specifically) gay movement in the United States. Though he never proposes a distinct plan of action, he effectively argues against the predominating psychoanalytic framework imposed on gay male subjectivity since and as a result of the AIDS/HIV epidemic in the United States, starting as early as the 1980s, with increasing urgency in the early 1990s. Halperin reflects on idea(s) and practice(s) of "abjection" in Michael Warner's and Jean Genet's works, especially to emphasize rhetorical and non-normative methods for constructing strings of "queer futurity" (see Jose Munoz).
In-Depth Abstract: In What Do Gay Men Want?, queer theorist David Halperin argues that gay male subjectivity has been mediated by psychological and psychiatric institutions, especially in order to confront safe sex practices in the wake of the HIV/AIDS epidemic in the United States. Halperin employs Michel Foucault’s History of Sexualities to delineate academic and academic focus on political activism in place of queer affect starting in the 1980s. He writes, “If we are to keep [Foucault’s radical] hope alive, we will have to forge queer alternatives to the modern, scientific culture of the self and its psychological hermeneutics of the subject” (p.8). The goal, Halperin writes, is “not to discredit psychology as an intellectual project so much as to escape a style of thinking that understands the person in terms of individual interiority and judges subjective life according to a normative standard of healthy functioning” (p.9). At the core, Halperin uses Michael Warner’s 1995 essay, “Unsafe: Why Gay Men Are Having Risky Sex,” to bring into focus the intensive rhetorical and psychoanalytic analyses that dominated the reception of HIV/AIDS in the gay community in the early 1990s. In particular, Halperin is interested in confronting the “affective structure of gay male subjectivity, shaped by originary social experiences of rejection and shame, and bristling with impulses to transgress” (p.57). Halperin’s main example centers around “abjection”: a term Warner uses to investigate why gay men would put themselves at risk, having sex with HIV-positive sexual partners via barebacking (subculture). In conjunction, Halperin illuminates Jean Genet’s conception of “abjection” in Miracle of the Rose (1943) and The Thief’s Journal (1948), pointing out, specifically, the moment of abject/transgression in the jailhouse when the Spanish police confiscate Genet’s vaseline tube. Halperin argues that “abjection” is a distinctly social transgression that, in light of Foucault’s call to political intervention, cannot be adapted either within a psychological framework (which is, instead, abject or perverse) or a purely theoretical framework (since theory cannot substantiate effective and perpetual social engagement or change). Instead, Halperin argues for a “non-disciplinary model of gay subjectivity” that takes “abjection and spirituality out of the realm of the miracle and transcendence--and return them to the vicissitudes of social existence” (p.108). In other words, Halperin is interested in a gay male subjectivity that is “not a subjectivity of [psychologizing] risk, an object of social hygiene, or a target of therapeutic intervention” (p.110). Instead, Halperin calls for a gay subjectivity that is “far from having to be bracketed, denied, suppressed, or closeted; [a subjectivity that] can impel political resistance” (p.110).
Halperin's text is profound, well argued, and insightful, even for queer theorists in 2015, who may be interested in "what next" after gay marriage threatens to become the next "new normal." To read this text in conjunction with Tim Dean's Unlimited Intimacy, is timely and crucial. Five stars.
In-Depth Abstract: In What Do Gay Men Want?, queer theorist David Halperin argues that gay male subjectivity has been mediated by psychological and psychiatric institutions, especially in order to confront safe sex practices in the wake of the HIV/AIDS epidemic in the United States. Halperin employs Michel Foucault’s History of Sexualities to delineate academic and academic focus on political activism in place of queer affect starting in the 1980s. He writes, “If we are to keep [Foucault’s radical] hope alive, we will have to forge queer alternatives to the modern, scientific culture of the self and its psychological hermeneutics of the subject” (p.8). The goal, Halperin writes, is “not to discredit psychology as an intellectual project so much as to escape a style of thinking that understands the person in terms of individual interiority and judges subjective life according to a normative standard of healthy functioning” (p.9). At the core, Halperin uses Michael Warner’s 1995 essay, “Unsafe: Why Gay Men Are Having Risky Sex,” to bring into focus the intensive rhetorical and psychoanalytic analyses that dominated the reception of HIV/AIDS in the gay community in the early 1990s. In particular, Halperin is interested in confronting the “affective structure of gay male subjectivity, shaped by originary social experiences of rejection and shame, and bristling with impulses to transgress” (p.57). Halperin’s main example centers around “abjection”: a term Warner uses to investigate why gay men would put themselves at risk, having sex with HIV-positive sexual partners via barebacking (subculture). In conjunction, Halperin illuminates Jean Genet’s conception of “abjection” in Miracle of the Rose (1943) and The Thief’s Journal (1948), pointing out, specifically, the moment of abject/transgression in the jailhouse when the Spanish police confiscate Genet’s vaseline tube. Halperin argues that “abjection” is a distinctly social transgression that, in light of Foucault’s call to political intervention, cannot be adapted either within a psychological framework (which is, instead, abject or perverse) or a purely theoretical framework (since theory cannot substantiate effective and perpetual social engagement or change). Instead, Halperin argues for a “non-disciplinary model of gay subjectivity” that takes “abjection and spirituality out of the realm of the miracle and transcendence--and return them to the vicissitudes of social existence” (p.108). In other words, Halperin is interested in a gay male subjectivity that is “not a subjectivity of [psychologizing] risk, an object of social hygiene, or a target of therapeutic intervention” (p.110). Instead, Halperin calls for a gay subjectivity that is “far from having to be bracketed, denied, suppressed, or closeted; [a subjectivity that] can impel political resistance” (p.110).
Halperin's text is profound, well argued, and insightful, even for queer theorists in 2015, who may be interested in "what next" after gay marriage threatens to become the next "new normal." To read this text in conjunction with Tim Dean's Unlimited Intimacy, is timely and crucial. Five stars.
June 5, 2008
There are a lot of reasons not to like this book.
These are mine: Haplerin's gay paternalism; his sketchy close reading; his tendency to expand and contract his definitions of gay male (read: gay, white, bourgeois male) subjectivity; his utopic valorization of gay sex (read: butt sex); his tendency to erect then "debunk" psychoanalytic strawmen stitched together out of his own brief but vulgar readings of Freud, Bersani and Dean, and even his tendency to pathologize unprotected sex between men while simultaneously claiming not to do so (and indeed striking out at those who do).
These are mine: Haplerin's gay paternalism; his sketchy close reading; his tendency to expand and contract his definitions of gay male (read: gay, white, bourgeois male) subjectivity; his utopic valorization of gay sex (read: butt sex); his tendency to erect then "debunk" psychoanalytic strawmen stitched together out of his own brief but vulgar readings of Freud, Bersani and Dean, and even his tendency to pathologize unprotected sex between men while simultaneously claiming not to do so (and indeed striking out at those who do).
December 8, 2020
I'm sympathetic with Halperin's attempts to depsychologise queer subjectivity, but there seemed to be a disconnect between his theoretical goals and his AIDs activist concerns. His use of Genet and reading Abjection as an inverse form of saintliness is particularly astute. Though, I think closer attention to Kristeva's theories could have strengthened the argument more.
The reprint of Warner's essay included here is a fantastic read as well.
The reprint of Warner's essay included here is a fantastic read as well.
August 13, 2020
it's pretty good--dated, now, but still pretty good. i think it could have still been about 20 pages shorter, as the lengthy discussion of abjection and genet was a bit much for me, and seemed to drag.
June 18, 2021
Mixed bag, with some moments of deep and cutting insight. Central thesis is solid, but his work with psychoanalysis and Genet is sometimes a bit confusing
November 10, 2024
Is me posting this review on Goodreads an act of abjection? dear god I hope my parents don’t find this acc ever
Read
December 4, 2008Are homosexuals sick? Since gay liberation, the enlightened answer to that question has been a resounding no. But times have changed. Recent efforts to analyze gay men's motives for sexual risk-taking in the context of the HIV/AIDS epidemic have led to a revival of medical thinking about homosexuality and breathed new life into punitive clichés about gay men's alleged low self-esteem, lack of self-control, and various psychological "deficits." What Do Gay Men Want? offers a different language for describing gay men's inner lives.
Unlike most writers on the topic of barebacking (condomless sex), David Halperin rejects psychology's claim to hold the keys to human subjectivity. He argues that psychology, which is grounded in a highly prejudicial opposition between the normal and the pathological, between healthy and unhealthy behavior, masks a set of dubious moral assumptions about "good" and "bad" sex.
Against these insidious forms of sexual discipline, Halperin champions neglected traditions of queer thought, both literary and popular, that afford fascinating possibilities for addressing the vexed question of what gay men want. In a series of provocative and often moving readings of authors as obscure as Marcel Jouhandeau and as well known as Jean Genet, he shows how the long history of gay men's uses of "abjection" can yield alternative, non-moralistic models for thinking about gay male subjectivity.
The reverberations of this original and bold contribution to queer studies will be felt for years to come. Anyone searching for creative and non-judgmental ways to slow the spread of HIV/AIDS among gay men—or interested in new modes of thinking about gay male subjectivity—should read this book.
"What Do Gay Men Want? is compelling, timely, and provocative. The writing is sleek and exhilarating. It doesn't waste time telling us what it will do or what it has just done—it just does it."
—Don Kulick, Professor of Anthropology; Director, Center for the Study of Gender and Sexuality; and Director, Program in Gender and Sexuality Studies, The Center for the Study of Gender and Sexuality, Department of Social and Cultural Analysis, New York University
"This rich and provocative book is a fundamental intervention in (and reconceptualization of) the field of queer studies. This, Halperin's most recent work, will confirm his reputation even as it serves to renegotiate what is (or should be) thinkable under the rubric of 'queer studies.'"
—Paul Morrison, Professor of English and American Literature, Brandeis University, and author of The Explanation for Everything: Essays on Sexual Subjectivity
"With Genet, David Halperin invokes a desire that seeks the limits of desire, and, warning against explaining it away through analyses of the individual psyche, proposes a poetical-philosophical-political exegesis. Brilliant, elegant, simple."
—Myra Jehlen, Board of Governors Professor of English, Rutgers University, and author of Readings at the Edge of Literature
"Truly a wonderful read . . . wonderfully clear and exciting argument for new ways in which we may understand gay subjectivities."
—Gay & Lesbian Issues in Psychology
Unlike most writers on the topic of barebacking (condomless sex), David Halperin rejects psychology's claim to hold the keys to human subjectivity. He argues that psychology, which is grounded in a highly prejudicial opposition between the normal and the pathological, between healthy and unhealthy behavior, masks a set of dubious moral assumptions about "good" and "bad" sex.
Against these insidious forms of sexual discipline, Halperin champions neglected traditions of queer thought, both literary and popular, that afford fascinating possibilities for addressing the vexed question of what gay men want. In a series of provocative and often moving readings of authors as obscure as Marcel Jouhandeau and as well known as Jean Genet, he shows how the long history of gay men's uses of "abjection" can yield alternative, non-moralistic models for thinking about gay male subjectivity.
The reverberations of this original and bold contribution to queer studies will be felt for years to come. Anyone searching for creative and non-judgmental ways to slow the spread of HIV/AIDS among gay men—or interested in new modes of thinking about gay male subjectivity—should read this book.
"What Do Gay Men Want? is compelling, timely, and provocative. The writing is sleek and exhilarating. It doesn't waste time telling us what it will do or what it has just done—it just does it."
—Don Kulick, Professor of Anthropology; Director, Center for the Study of Gender and Sexuality; and Director, Program in Gender and Sexuality Studies, The Center for the Study of Gender and Sexuality, Department of Social and Cultural Analysis, New York University
"This rich and provocative book is a fundamental intervention in (and reconceptualization of) the field of queer studies. This, Halperin's most recent work, will confirm his reputation even as it serves to renegotiate what is (or should be) thinkable under the rubric of 'queer studies.'"
—Paul Morrison, Professor of English and American Literature, Brandeis University, and author of The Explanation for Everything: Essays on Sexual Subjectivity
"With Genet, David Halperin invokes a desire that seeks the limits of desire, and, warning against explaining it away through analyses of the individual psyche, proposes a poetical-philosophical-political exegesis. Brilliant, elegant, simple."
—Myra Jehlen, Board of Governors Professor of English, Rutgers University, and author of Readings at the Edge of Literature
"Truly a wonderful read . . . wonderfully clear and exciting argument for new ways in which we may understand gay subjectivities."
—Gay & Lesbian Issues in Psychology
October 12, 2014
Halperin made the argument that psychoanalytic and psychological approaches to HIV/AIDS prevention efforts, alone, are failing gay men because they do not appropriately account for gay male subjectivity, which, according to Halperin, is partially based in abjection. He argues that the rush to psychoanalytic models of human behavior to explain gay men's sexual risk taking is, at best, failing those who are not making a decidedly conscious or unconscious decision about risk, and at worst, is re-pathologizing, medicalizing, and moralizing gay male subjectivity. Halperin suggests that we attempt to develop new models of thinking about and discussing gay male sexual risk taking, which would not rely solely on psychoanalytic and psychological models and language for explaining gay male subjectivity.
I found his critique of the psychoanalytic models and language underpinning much of HIV/AIDS prevention efforts to be particularly compelling. His explanation of the faults in the very common goal of risk elimination, versus risk avoidance, was especially interesting to me. He does not provide any concrete suggestions for a new model or discourse of HIV/AIDS prevention efforts. Instead, he explains why one is needed, and provides some general parameters within which one (or more) could be developed.
Although this is now somewhat dated, I think it could be very helpful in thinking about what choices we gay men make and how to address those choices. Halperin relies heavily on an article by Michael Warner published in the Village Voice in 1995, which is reprinted in the book. It was an excellent essay and stated, among other things, that HIV/AIDS prevention efforts will continue to fail gay men until we develop spaces where we are permitted and encouraged to discuss what sex means, what risk means, and what we want.
In the end, the book was difficult and challenging, but worth the effort.
I found his critique of the psychoanalytic models and language underpinning much of HIV/AIDS prevention efforts to be particularly compelling. His explanation of the faults in the very common goal of risk elimination, versus risk avoidance, was especially interesting to me. He does not provide any concrete suggestions for a new model or discourse of HIV/AIDS prevention efforts. Instead, he explains why one is needed, and provides some general parameters within which one (or more) could be developed.
Although this is now somewhat dated, I think it could be very helpful in thinking about what choices we gay men make and how to address those choices. Halperin relies heavily on an article by Michael Warner published in the Village Voice in 1995, which is reprinted in the book. It was an excellent essay and stated, among other things, that HIV/AIDS prevention efforts will continue to fail gay men until we develop spaces where we are permitted and encouraged to discuss what sex means, what risk means, and what we want.
In the end, the book was difficult and challenging, but worth the effort.
March 5, 2009
If I had to distill Halperin's personality from this book-length essay, I would venture to say that he is a contrarian; when everyone at the table says "yum" Halperin says "yuck."
Halperin's highly suspects the language of psychology, though provides little glimpse into what words would now be bandied about during an hour-long counseling session. Perhaps, the word "abjection," would find its way into gay men's mouths; a word that Halperin has a particular affinity for. Wrapped up in a gay sexual identity is both pleasure and pain and a tendency towards subversion. His illumination of identity pong takes place in the context of HIV and unprotected sex. He is largely responding to those who exclaim "We can stop HIV today." To ask any sexual being to engage in 100% safe sex 100% of the time (especially when alcohol is given a starring role) is like asking an avalanche to melt before it reaches the village.
Of course the entire essay is predicated on there being a set gay male identity, which is problematic for obvious reasons. Perhaps, he has gone on one too many gay cruises. Surely those gay males have fallen from the same genetic tree. Not convinced? Just endure an exhaustive internet search of pictures for gay male cruises. Let me know when you find an individual.
Surely Halperin brings up very interesting lines of inquiry and his essays succeeds in this manner. His questioning of the tenets and language of psychology is one tough thread that dangles out of the essay and provides much meat for mastication.
Halperin's highly suspects the language of psychology, though provides little glimpse into what words would now be bandied about during an hour-long counseling session. Perhaps, the word "abjection," would find its way into gay men's mouths; a word that Halperin has a particular affinity for. Wrapped up in a gay sexual identity is both pleasure and pain and a tendency towards subversion. His illumination of identity pong takes place in the context of HIV and unprotected sex. He is largely responding to those who exclaim "We can stop HIV today." To ask any sexual being to engage in 100% safe sex 100% of the time (especially when alcohol is given a starring role) is like asking an avalanche to melt before it reaches the village.
Of course the entire essay is predicated on there being a set gay male identity, which is problematic for obvious reasons. Perhaps, he has gone on one too many gay cruises. Surely those gay males have fallen from the same genetic tree. Not convinced? Just endure an exhaustive internet search of pictures for gay male cruises. Let me know when you find an individual.
Surely Halperin brings up very interesting lines of inquiry and his essays succeeds in this manner. His questioning of the tenets and language of psychology is one tough thread that dangles out of the essay and provides much meat for mastication.
Read
January 15, 2013Reviews of this book here and in the press have been unfair. Halperin is attempting, if with limited success, to address the knotty problem of just how an often anti-erotic gay male culture is linked with a libidinal desire for the same sex. Of course he writes about Joan Crawford and Broadway musical-- that's the white, male, American gay culture he was belated initiated into. Any smart reader can take Halperin's insights --and they are many-- and adapt them for his "own" gay male culture. Would we have wanted Halperin to speculate about a subculture not his own? I know the dangers of self-ethnogoly, but Halperin needs to be given the license to look towards his own milieu to continue the project of understanding how gay culture, its demise perennially announced, resurfaces again and again in oddly similar formations. Read this book, and if you're a gay guy collate it with your own experiences-- it won't always be a perfect fit, but I bet you sometimes it will be.
March 6, 2008
The title should be Why Do Gay Men Want AIDS? because that's really what the author is exploring. To summarize, or at least state what I got out of it, Halperin suggests that we should be able to talk about the notion of abjection, defined as a state of self-negation, in gay sex without pathologizing gay male behavior. It opens up a lot of interesting avenues of discussion, especially around HIV transmission and crystal meth use. My only criticism is Halperin seemed suggest that abjection is a gay thing, whereas I think it's just a part of humanity. I would imagine, though, that abjection is a more powerful force among outcast groups such as gays and blacks.
March 30, 2013
A fine treatment of the concept of "abjection" and a strong argument for refraining from psychoanalyzing or pathologizing the gay subject, but the author's deliberate refusal to offer practical solutions to the problem of risky sex (or to even explain how his anti-theory could manifest itself in praxis, beyond continuing with prevention efforts as they are now, only with a different intellectual foundation) left me cold. It's hard to believe such a significant piece was occasioned by the Warner article from the VV (reprinted in the appendix), which is humdrum by comparison but which was apparently quite important at the time of its release.
June 3, 2008
So far: it's amazing. No surprise about that : Halperin is one of the most gifted thinkers currently writing about the gays.
Displaying 1 - 13 of 13 reviews