What do you think?
Rate this book
Queer Disbelief: Why LGBTQ Equality Is an Atheist Issue
There have been many attempts over the past decade to show how the atheism movement parallels the LGBTQ movement. While there are similarities, the differences cannot be ignored. This book is about how those two worlds overlap more than you might think, how religious believers can be both an obstacle and a path forward for true equality, and why atheists specifically should care about these issues. It examines all of these issues in extraordinary depth.
More importantly, there are non-believers who believe their support for LGBTQ rights shouldn't be assumed because the definition of atheism begins and ends with a disbelief in God's existence. That's too simplistic. This book makes the case for why atheists should be among the most vocal supporters of LGBTQ rights.
It's not enough just to agree that LGBTQ people should have equal rights; atheists must advocate for them. This should not be an extension of atheists' beliefs; their cause must be atheists' cause, too.
More importantly, there are non-believers who believe their support for LGBTQ rights shouldn't be assumed because the definition of atheism begins and ends with a disbelief in God's existence. That's too simplistic. This book makes the case for why atheists should be among the most vocal supporters of LGBTQ rights.
It's not enough just to agree that LGBTQ people should have equal rights; atheists must advocate for them. This should not be an extension of atheists' beliefs; their cause must be atheists' cause, too.
204 pages, Paperback
First published December 17, 2017
12 people are currently reading
126 people want to read
About the author
Camille Beredjick
3 books26 followersCamille Beredjick (they/them) is the author of Queer Disbelief: Why LGBTQ Equality is an Atheist Issue. Their work has also been published in Bustle, Catapult, Narratively, BuzzFeed, The Advocate, the Huffington Post, and Patheos, among others. They live in Chicago with their wife and cats.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews
April 10, 2020
I suppose that the main theme of the book is to argue for why atheists should support LGBTQ rights. But there is a good deal about LGBTQ persons that do have some beliefs in god. Maybe it is to defend believers rights that an atheist should still fight for in their advocacy of this population rights.
In Camille Beredjick’s first chapter she seeks common ground. Dispersed between some chapters are portions of interviews she conducted with some in the LGBTQ community. Chapter two visits some beliefs and unbeliefs. The third chapter focuses on religious harm. And, the fourth is when it helps. Chapter five looks at what good allyship looks like. Chapter six covers the political aspects of LGBTQ’s rights. The seventh chapter discusses working together. Chapter eight deals with ways to combat negative beliefs out there. Finally, chapter nine looks at the future.
Here follows some comments I made reading this book. Passages quoted are noted by Kindle location given in brackets [] before the quote or area when comment was made without a quoted piece text.
[322] “. . . gender and sexual identities that challenge norms.” I might be a statistical abnormality, but I refuse to consider myself as such when it comes to me being seen as unnatural, which is why, speaking for the T’s, as I am one, we are often considered abnormal by society* in more than a statistical manner.
[407] “And if weak interpretations of scripture count as justification for bad behavior, then we’re in even more trouble.” Any interpretation of scripture, in a sense, is not just weak, but wrong. I based this on the fact that much in scripture is myth or is out right false, and cannot be rightly interpreted. But, yes the quote is unfortunately true.
[418] “There’s a strong link between morality and disgust, they [four researchers - see note 28] wrote. Disgust responses are emotional, quick, and intuitive. They don’t require intentional, logical reasoning or consideration of values and principles.” This is true, but these values and principles may influences those emotions without them being thought through. And, emotions are directly responsible for making moral decisions. But, thank goodness, empathy is also involved in moral decisions. Not everyone has the same amount of empathy capabilities, and some like psychopaths have none, but there is enough around that most people in general care about others. And care is at the root of proper moral decision making. It is too bad that not everyone cares about the same people or communities, especially beyond there own.
[1077] “At my first job working in the LGBTQ rights movement, I learned about the “Platinum Rule,” which says to treat others the way they want to be treated.” (author’s italics) I find this is far superior than the usual statement of the Golden Rule.
[1477] “If religious groups truly represented their religious foundations, this would be an automatic area of collaboration [between religious groups and LGBTQ people for social justice]. Jesus was radical in His [sic] day. He was all about social justice and caring for people.” Yes like wanting to cast some (i.e unbelievers) into a flaming trash heap. Sounds like social justice to me. The fact is that if you want to cherry pick the Bible you can find some good things, but there are also truly horrendous things too. Is she saying that only the nice parts are true. The fact is that it is all either myth or almost all factually untrue. Sense this amounts to falsehoods, wouldn’t it be better to clearly reason our way to just conclusions, but religious believers cannot give up their cherished beliefs (some very nasty) very easily.
[1656] “’The scholars are clear that the Bible does not notcondemn homosexuality and that the verse commonly used against gay people don’t mean what they have been interpreted to mean . . .’” (Italics within the quote) But, that’s not the problem. The problem is that misinterpretations or mistranslations are used by bigoted religious believers to seek harm to gays, and seeking to gain support to those not up on scholarship or translation processes.
[1902] In an interlude comment in the author’s interviewee Sahar Ali Deen has a worthy statement: “No one’s identity or experience should be limited by a label which you think you understand—you don’t.” He was a gay and genderqueer Muslim, and said this in defense of those that would criticize him based on is Islamic beliefs. The important part of the quote for me is italicized. I am no label, except Stephie. It recalls when I heard someone say in trying to defend LGBTQ rights that we were all the same. I cried out inside wanting to say “I am not the same as anyone else,” but did not get the opportunity.
[2835] In the author’s attempt to play with words about anti-homosexual passages in Leviticus where it is say “lie.” That’s already a euphemism. Literally, I am sure it does not mean “fuck” but why not tell it like it is. Okay quiet down. At least translated as it would be intended today as sexual intercourse. But it is all besides the point because as I said ibid it is used as an effective weapon to whip up hatred against gays, regardless of its falsehood.
[2871] I agree with the premise here that when a transgender person wears the clothes that goes with their identified gender they are not crossdressing. They would if they wore the opposite gender’s clothes. Except the term should only be used with the permission of the person being referred to because of its overall bad connotations.
[2871] She mentions the Ethiopian Ennuchs in defense of transgenderism^as an ancient phenomenon. The problem here is, however admirable this attempt is, you cannot interpreted this as a gender phenomenon because it says nothing about it. You can only assume for whatever reason he/she/they had no balls.
[3157] “The reality is, scripture is a tool that can be used in many ways. It’s funny, conservative Christians want to accuse queer-and-transaffirming Christians of cherry picking the parts of the Bible we like, but they do the exact same thing—their cherry-picking is just mainstreamed so they can pretend that’s not what they are doing.” Let’s face it, cherry picking is the fate of all texts. I am doing it in this review as I do in most of my others. But the take away is that Bible produces more harm than comfort for LGBTQ community.
I consider that overall the author’s ultimate point is valuable. Atheists have a stake in the struggle for LGBTQ rights. For no other reason perhaps because, and I speak from an American point of view, that we atheist are also looked upon as an evil to be eradicated by the same religious bigots who seek to destroy those under LGBTQ umbrella. She does offer further reasons as well. She tries also to get atheists to accept LGBTQ persons of faith. Perhaps a little to hard, bending over backwards to this population by defending their faith. What needs to be defended is their right to hold their beliefs and their rights to be who they are. Not that their interpretation of their faith is correct. That was the feeling I got from reading those parts of the book as my cherry-picked quotes tried to argue against. The Bible is fiction, or being kinder myth with little interaction with history that sheds little light of any significance to that history. Still it is an admirable work that should be read by atheists.
So I recommend this book for both those in the LGBTQ community and those who are atheists and those that belong to both groups like me. For atheists put aside your dislike of religion when this part of the book is read (maybe even best for you to skip it) but do not lay aside or not pick up your allyship because of it and support LGBTQ rights.
* There are societies that classifies trans populations as third gender, and hence a form of acceptance, but they are still facing discrimination.
^ I use this term with no offense intended. But, I do feel it is a useful term in this context.
In Camille Beredjick’s first chapter she seeks common ground. Dispersed between some chapters are portions of interviews she conducted with some in the LGBTQ community. Chapter two visits some beliefs and unbeliefs. The third chapter focuses on religious harm. And, the fourth is when it helps. Chapter five looks at what good allyship looks like. Chapter six covers the political aspects of LGBTQ’s rights. The seventh chapter discusses working together. Chapter eight deals with ways to combat negative beliefs out there. Finally, chapter nine looks at the future.
Here follows some comments I made reading this book. Passages quoted are noted by Kindle location given in brackets [] before the quote or area when comment was made without a quoted piece text.
[322] “. . . gender and sexual identities that challenge norms.” I might be a statistical abnormality, but I refuse to consider myself as such when it comes to me being seen as unnatural, which is why, speaking for the T’s, as I am one, we are often considered abnormal by society* in more than a statistical manner.
[407] “And if weak interpretations of scripture count as justification for bad behavior, then we’re in even more trouble.” Any interpretation of scripture, in a sense, is not just weak, but wrong. I based this on the fact that much in scripture is myth or is out right false, and cannot be rightly interpreted. But, yes the quote is unfortunately true.
[418] “There’s a strong link between morality and disgust, they [four researchers - see note 28] wrote. Disgust responses are emotional, quick, and intuitive. They don’t require intentional, logical reasoning or consideration of values and principles.” This is true, but these values and principles may influences those emotions without them being thought through. And, emotions are directly responsible for making moral decisions. But, thank goodness, empathy is also involved in moral decisions. Not everyone has the same amount of empathy capabilities, and some like psychopaths have none, but there is enough around that most people in general care about others. And care is at the root of proper moral decision making. It is too bad that not everyone cares about the same people or communities, especially beyond there own.
[1077] “At my first job working in the LGBTQ rights movement, I learned about the “Platinum Rule,” which says to treat others the way they want to be treated.” (author’s italics) I find this is far superior than the usual statement of the Golden Rule.
[1477] “If religious groups truly represented their religious foundations, this would be an automatic area of collaboration [between religious groups and LGBTQ people for social justice]. Jesus was radical in His [sic] day. He was all about social justice and caring for people.” Yes like wanting to cast some (i.e unbelievers) into a flaming trash heap. Sounds like social justice to me. The fact is that if you want to cherry pick the Bible you can find some good things, but there are also truly horrendous things too. Is she saying that only the nice parts are true. The fact is that it is all either myth or almost all factually untrue. Sense this amounts to falsehoods, wouldn’t it be better to clearly reason our way to just conclusions, but religious believers cannot give up their cherished beliefs (some very nasty) very easily.
[1656] “’The scholars are clear that the Bible does not notcondemn homosexuality and that the verse commonly used against gay people don’t mean what they have been interpreted to mean . . .’” (Italics within the quote) But, that’s not the problem. The problem is that misinterpretations or mistranslations are used by bigoted religious believers to seek harm to gays, and seeking to gain support to those not up on scholarship or translation processes.
[1902] In an interlude comment in the author’s interviewee Sahar Ali Deen has a worthy statement: “No one’s identity or experience should be limited by a label which you think you understand—you don’t.” He was a gay and genderqueer Muslim, and said this in defense of those that would criticize him based on is Islamic beliefs. The important part of the quote for me is italicized. I am no label, except Stephie. It recalls when I heard someone say in trying to defend LGBTQ rights that we were all the same. I cried out inside wanting to say “I am not the same as anyone else,” but did not get the opportunity.
[2835] In the author’s attempt to play with words about anti-homosexual passages in Leviticus where it is say “lie.” That’s already a euphemism. Literally, I am sure it does not mean “fuck” but why not tell it like it is. Okay quiet down. At least translated as it would be intended today as sexual intercourse. But it is all besides the point because as I said ibid it is used as an effective weapon to whip up hatred against gays, regardless of its falsehood.
[2871] I agree with the premise here that when a transgender person wears the clothes that goes with their identified gender they are not crossdressing. They would if they wore the opposite gender’s clothes. Except the term should only be used with the permission of the person being referred to because of its overall bad connotations.
[2871] She mentions the Ethiopian Ennuchs in defense of transgenderism^as an ancient phenomenon. The problem here is, however admirable this attempt is, you cannot interpreted this as a gender phenomenon because it says nothing about it. You can only assume for whatever reason he/she/they had no balls.
[3157] “The reality is, scripture is a tool that can be used in many ways. It’s funny, conservative Christians want to accuse queer-and-transaffirming Christians of cherry picking the parts of the Bible we like, but they do the exact same thing—their cherry-picking is just mainstreamed so they can pretend that’s not what they are doing.” Let’s face it, cherry picking is the fate of all texts. I am doing it in this review as I do in most of my others. But the take away is that Bible produces more harm than comfort for LGBTQ community.
I consider that overall the author’s ultimate point is valuable. Atheists have a stake in the struggle for LGBTQ rights. For no other reason perhaps because, and I speak from an American point of view, that we atheist are also looked upon as an evil to be eradicated by the same religious bigots who seek to destroy those under LGBTQ umbrella. She does offer further reasons as well. She tries also to get atheists to accept LGBTQ persons of faith. Perhaps a little to hard, bending over backwards to this population by defending their faith. What needs to be defended is their right to hold their beliefs and their rights to be who they are. Not that their interpretation of their faith is correct. That was the feeling I got from reading those parts of the book as my cherry-picked quotes tried to argue against. The Bible is fiction, or being kinder myth with little interaction with history that sheds little light of any significance to that history. Still it is an admirable work that should be read by atheists.
So I recommend this book for both those in the LGBTQ community and those who are atheists and those that belong to both groups like me. For atheists put aside your dislike of religion when this part of the book is read (maybe even best for you to skip it) but do not lay aside or not pick up your allyship because of it and support LGBTQ rights.
* There are societies that classifies trans populations as third gender, and hence a form of acceptance, but they are still facing discrimination.
^ I use this term with no offense intended. But, I do feel it is a useful term in this context.
August 16, 2018
I think my rating is a bit lower because, very quickly, a lot of the information in it became outdated; it's hard to make a book of this sort without that happening, especially today. The sentiment is spot-on, but that information is going to be a bit frustrating for some. This includes:
1. Gavin Grimm's case was renewed (as of now, making it possible for this review to ironically become dated), since the previously-won case was sent back due to the rescinding of Obama era legislation in the Trump administration.
2. That case with MasterPiece Cakeshop? Yeah, they won, even though (retired) Justice Kennedy said this should only be applied to this one case. (But we kind of know how precedence works, so someone is bound to drag it up as Why They Should Also Win Their Discrimination Case.)
3. By the way, that same horrendous cake creature is back in the news, this time for transphobia. Let's see how they fare this time.
Otherwise, I knocked it down because I expected more nuance. This was a super 101-level book, so it's good for people (especially straight and cisgender atheists, but still good for all people of any religion) to get a handle on the situation. It's clear, concise, and pretty interesting as a whole. Since I'm... already queer and atheist, it sort of felt lacking in nuance for me, and I was expecting some critique in places (particularly when I saw the question being asked about "Are there atheists who don't support marriage equality and do they have a good reason for it?" and my mind immediately conjured Australian PM Julia Gillard in 2012, though she has been openly supporting marriage equality since 2015... maybe).
I was also expecting, once the DawkinsBros were brought up, a bigger critique on the way that New Atheism tends to skew heavily straight, white, and male (especially in the vocal supporters). It's acknowledged occasionally, but I was hoping for more critique on how those hyper-vocal supporters (Dawkins, Maher, Harris) tend to drown out the rest of us, making the landscape seem really inhospitable to atheists who aren't like them or don't subscribe to their open hostilities toward Muslims or openly accepting homophobic gay men who support paedophilia (Milo) on their shows to give them platforms, or providing platform at a so-called "debate" to the Lobster Daddy himself (granted, that was done well after this book was published).
Not that I wanted there to be this huge call-out section, but I did want there to be something more about how that environment makes it really difficult for atheists who aren't straight, white, or a cisgender man. Because it really does.
But, overwhelmingly, this is a pretty positive book. If you're just starting on the course toward being more involved in social justice (especially combating the RFRA legislation and securing a secular government or LGBTQIA+ rights), it's pretty solid.
1. Gavin Grimm's case was renewed (as of now, making it possible for this review to ironically become dated), since the previously-won case was sent back due to the rescinding of Obama era legislation in the Trump administration.
2. That case with MasterPiece Cakeshop? Yeah, they won, even though (retired) Justice Kennedy said this should only be applied to this one case. (But we kind of know how precedence works, so someone is bound to drag it up as Why They Should Also Win Their Discrimination Case.)
3. By the way, that same horrendous cake creature is back in the news, this time for transphobia. Let's see how they fare this time.
Otherwise, I knocked it down because I expected more nuance. This was a super 101-level book, so it's good for people (especially straight and cisgender atheists, but still good for all people of any religion) to get a handle on the situation. It's clear, concise, and pretty interesting as a whole. Since I'm... already queer and atheist, it sort of felt lacking in nuance for me, and I was expecting some critique in places (particularly when I saw the question being asked about "Are there atheists who don't support marriage equality and do they have a good reason for it?" and my mind immediately conjured Australian PM Julia Gillard in 2012, though she has been openly supporting marriage equality since 2015... maybe).
I was also expecting, once the DawkinsBros were brought up, a bigger critique on the way that New Atheism tends to skew heavily straight, white, and male (especially in the vocal supporters). It's acknowledged occasionally, but I was hoping for more critique on how those hyper-vocal supporters (Dawkins, Maher, Harris) tend to drown out the rest of us, making the landscape seem really inhospitable to atheists who aren't like them or don't subscribe to their open hostilities toward Muslims or openly accepting homophobic gay men who support paedophilia (Milo) on their shows to give them platforms, or providing platform at a so-called "debate" to the Lobster Daddy himself (granted, that was done well after this book was published).
Not that I wanted there to be this huge call-out section, but I did want there to be something more about how that environment makes it really difficult for atheists who aren't straight, white, or a cisgender man. Because it really does.
But, overwhelmingly, this is a pretty positive book. If you're just starting on the course toward being more involved in social justice (especially combating the RFRA legislation and securing a secular government or LGBTQIA+ rights), it's pretty solid.
August 1, 2018
"To me, there is absolutely nothing about being an atheist (using the simplest definition of not believing in a deity) that would compel someone to also join social movements [...]. But there can be something about your personal reasons for being an atheist that can lend itself to participation in social movements. If what brought you to atheism had elements of being against any form of discrimination, then that might be what connects you to the LGBTQ movement. Humans don't just wake up one morning and are atheists; something led them there. That something might also lead them to social movements." (Pages 113-114)
Should atheists support LGBTQ rights? Most of them, myself included, already do. Surveys demonstrate that among the "nones", i.e. people with no religious affiliation, the support for LGBTQ rights is much higher than in the general population. This shouldn't be a surprise: most of the arguments against LGBTQ people are in fact based on religion, or at least some interpretation of religion. LGBTQ people are also more likely to be non-believers, so the two communities partially overlap. This isn't surprising either: if you're told that God doesn't approve of who you are, it's more likely that you'll end up rejecting religion altogether. Both the atheist and the LGBTQ communities are targeted by religious groups and some of the issues they have to deal with are similar. For example, both LGBTQ people and atheists may face the problem of coming out to their family and friends. But there are also important differences, for instance LGBTQ people are far more likely to be victims of violence than atheists, at least in western societies.
Camille Beredjick is both a queer woman and an atheist and in this book she explains why she thinks atheists and the LGBTQ community are natural allies. Everybody knows how religion can be harmful for LGBTQ people: God is often used to oppose marriage equality and adoptions by gay couples, or to justify denying services to them, or even to call for violence against gay or trans people. It seems only natural, therefore, that those who reject God will also reject discrimination based on belief in God. It's undeniable that religion harms the LGBTQ community, but we must keep in mind that many queer people are also believers and find help in spirituality and in their religious community. And yes, there are also religious groups that are very supportive of the LGBTQ cause. As atheists, we must denounce religion when it's used to discriminate, but to be good allies we must acknowledge that faith plays an important role in the life of many LGBTQ people. That doesn't mean we have to agree with their theological views, but that we should put our differences aside to reach the common goal, that is equality.
The book includes conversations that the author had with a few members of the LGBTQ community, people with different religious affiliation, people of different race, gender, identity etc. The LGBTQ community is often depicted as monolithic in the mainstream media, and a good thing about this book is that it's very inclusive, showing that people are different, but they all deserve to be respected for what they are. The book has also a chapter where the most common arguments used by those who oppose LGBTQ rights are briefly analysed and debunked.
Overall this was a very interesting read and I would recommend it in particular to all atheists supporting the LGBTQ cause, and more in general to all LGBTQ allies, regardless of their religious affiliation.
https://ioateo.wordpress.com/2018/08/01/queer-disbelief/
April 10, 2019
This book is sooooo important. As an LGBTQ person who was raised Christian, spent a lot of time quesitoning my faith because of that, coming back to Christianity, realizing I'm an atheist, and still engaging in faith-based work I have *lived* the intersections of atheism and LGBTQ identity.
I was SO EXCITED to read this book. It was super validating on a personal level. And as a queer person and an atheist, I think it's going to be helpful for straight, cisgender atheists to read, for progressive religious folks to read, and for LGBTQ people of all stripes!
We are more powerful when we work together and this book will help tremendously in the cause of justice for all. Must read.
I was SO EXCITED to read this book. It was super validating on a personal level. And as a queer person and an atheist, I think it's going to be helpful for straight, cisgender atheists to read, for progressive religious folks to read, and for LGBTQ people of all stripes!
We are more powerful when we work together and this book will help tremendously in the cause of justice for all. Must read.
August 21, 2022
My favorite quote from the book is from the end:
This book was fantastic. I feel like so many people I know should read this book and I hope that they do. Specifically, I would love to get input from friends that are under the GSRM (LGBTQIA+) umbrella, both neither and not. {I happen to be asexual, but I'm also straight-passing and I'm fully aware that I do not have anywhere close to the same experience others under the GSRM umbrella do.}
“Should they participate solely because they are atheist? No. Should they participate because respect and compassion for all human beings is the right thing to do? Yes.”
This book was fantastic. I feel like so many people I know should read this book and I hope that they do. Specifically, I would love to get input from friends that are under the GSRM (LGBTQIA+) umbrella, both neither and not. {I happen to be asexual, but I'm also straight-passing and I'm fully aware that I do not have anywhere close to the same experience others under the GSRM umbrella do.}
December 9, 2020
A great introduction to a community and perspective if you are unfamiliar with the LGBTQ community or more specific elements of it. I will be referring back to this often to refresh my memory and will recommend it to people wo are not the intended audience. It was interesting to see how my lack of faith intersected or paralleled some aspects but had not correlation to others.
October 1, 2020
A well written essay discussing the intersection between the atheists and LGBTQ+ groups. Thoroughly researched (200+ references) with diverse perspectives too! I'll definitely be contacting my local LGBTQ+ organization after reading this.
February 10, 2018
Being part of the Atheist community only and having many friends which are part of the LGBTQ community, I always figured that there is a common ground, regardless of whether or not you were part of both communities. This book gave me a really good perspective on how the the LGBTQ community can use belief, or disbelief, for their well-being. It also reinforced my idea that Atheists and Homo/Transexuals share a very similar path while "coming out" to religious families and friends.
February 17, 2018
The journalist in me feels like I have to say two things off the top. First, I know Camille personally, primarily as the partner of my friend Kaitlyn. Second, as a straight, cisgender male who went to Baptist school through eighth grade and doesn't think much about my faith, the target market for this book would need the Hubble telescope to see how far away I am.
With that said, I found this an engaging read as someone who hadn't thought much about the subject ahead of time - I picked it up around 5 pm on a Friday night, and only stopped for a brief dinner break before finishing. The arguments linking the LGBTQ and atheist communities were more pervasive and more persuasive than I was expecting going in, and Camille's writing style, while complex, lends itself to the reader being able to think about their own experiences in the context of her writing. I actually lied a couple sentences ago - the book forced me to put it down two other times, once to contemplate whether morality is actually stronger in the atheist community due to the self-realization of morally strong beliefs rather than them being handed down (p. 63), and also spending some time on the GALIP Foundation's website out of curiosity (p. 87).
If I have a criticism, it's that the book does start a bit slowly. Perhaps because of preconceived notions of the subject, I worried going in about whether religion would be painted with a wide brush - and while the introduction took care to define and delineate different areas of the LGBTQ and atheist communities, the other side didn't receive much nuance, at first. This seems to be a deliberate choice to get all of the facts and connections between the communities out of the way in the beginning, though, so she can refer to them with anecdotes through the rest of the book. To me, things really started to pick up with the personal story of John (p. 43), which confirmed to me that the book would indeed be considering voices outside the LGBTQ and atheist communities alone. And by the time I got to Chapter 4, those worries were all blown to smithereens, and the result was a well-balanced, well-sourced look at the intersection of gender and religion.
From my personal vantage point, and as was probably intended by the author, the part I'll probably take forward is the FAQ of Chapter 8, where she guides (mostly straight) people through how to be allies and answer anti-LGBTQ accusations. I hope that Camille achieves the wide-ranging readership she was going for, because I found this section to be a spectacular quick primer to combat those biases that occur in everyday life. I've personally trained myself for the Biblical arguments personally, but some like the "ick" factor have been harder to combat without guidance, and I appreciate the way she turned the negative experiences of LGBTQ people on their head by laying out an easy-to-follow plan of attack. I surely will be referring to it in the future.
All in all, a strong debut, and I'm happy I read it. I will certainly be in the look out for Camille's future books, as her combination of passion for the subject as well as the ability to weave multiple personal accounts into a coherent, engaging story makes for a strong read.
With that said, I found this an engaging read as someone who hadn't thought much about the subject ahead of time - I picked it up around 5 pm on a Friday night, and only stopped for a brief dinner break before finishing. The arguments linking the LGBTQ and atheist communities were more pervasive and more persuasive than I was expecting going in, and Camille's writing style, while complex, lends itself to the reader being able to think about their own experiences in the context of her writing. I actually lied a couple sentences ago - the book forced me to put it down two other times, once to contemplate whether morality is actually stronger in the atheist community due to the self-realization of morally strong beliefs rather than them being handed down (p. 63), and also spending some time on the GALIP Foundation's website out of curiosity (p. 87).
If I have a criticism, it's that the book does start a bit slowly. Perhaps because of preconceived notions of the subject, I worried going in about whether religion would be painted with a wide brush - and while the introduction took care to define and delineate different areas of the LGBTQ and atheist communities, the other side didn't receive much nuance, at first. This seems to be a deliberate choice to get all of the facts and connections between the communities out of the way in the beginning, though, so she can refer to them with anecdotes through the rest of the book. To me, things really started to pick up with the personal story of John (p. 43), which confirmed to me that the book would indeed be considering voices outside the LGBTQ and atheist communities alone. And by the time I got to Chapter 4, those worries were all blown to smithereens, and the result was a well-balanced, well-sourced look at the intersection of gender and religion.
From my personal vantage point, and as was probably intended by the author, the part I'll probably take forward is the FAQ of Chapter 8, where she guides (mostly straight) people through how to be allies and answer anti-LGBTQ accusations. I hope that Camille achieves the wide-ranging readership she was going for, because I found this section to be a spectacular quick primer to combat those biases that occur in everyday life. I've personally trained myself for the Biblical arguments personally, but some like the "ick" factor have been harder to combat without guidance, and I appreciate the way she turned the negative experiences of LGBTQ people on their head by laying out an easy-to-follow plan of attack. I surely will be referring to it in the future.
All in all, a strong debut, and I'm happy I read it. I will certainly be in the look out for Camille's future books, as her combination of passion for the subject as well as the ability to weave multiple personal accounts into a coherent, engaging story makes for a strong read.
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews