What do you think?
Rate this book
Satan Was A Lesbian
Here it is! The infamous book that proves the female of the species is deadlier than the male! Young Charlene knew something was different about her, but never expected the depraved acts she’d commit in her adult life. She lived in a divine body which lured men only close enough to be repelled by the black coldness of her eyes. With women...it was different. The cold stare—the icy calm of the little beauty drew them like a lodestone and they melted under the Duval technique of keeping passion under tight control—until lust fulfilled its promise, but all in its proper time. Each of Charlene’s conquests knew the attainment of the peak had been worth the climb.
One spot of warmth through her armor—tiny, helpless little Cynthia, who became completely ‘turned on’ when she was thoroughly frightened—let love in to ravish Charlene, only to make life more difficult for this hot and hungry hellcat!
One spot of warmth through her armor—tiny, helpless little Cynthia, who became completely ‘turned on’ when she was thoroughly frightened—let love in to ravish Charlene, only to make life more difficult for this hot and hungry hellcat!
146 pages, Kindle Edition
Published February 20, 2018
22 people are currently reading
471 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 - 30 of 38 reviews
Read
May 20, 2021 "let's talk about your breasts, Cynthia"
see, this is why I watch the mother of all of the long furbies, Strange Aeons
see, this is why I watch the mother of all of the long furbies, Strange Aeons
Read
February 16, 2021As a book? Bad. As a piece of problematic and kinda stupid sexy lesbian pulp nonsense? Great.
January 20, 2022
It's troubling how much fun I had reading this. I made a 30 minuite talk about it. I read it twice which is 2 more times than it should be read.
9.6/10 would not recommend.
9.6/10 would not recommend.
Read
February 7, 2021[April 2018]
If you're ONLY into good books I don't recommend this one. There is only one character with personality, Charlene, and her personality is really unbelievable. There is no suspense level whatsoever. Sometimes the grammar is incorrect. And especially the end was very ridiculous in its try to seem deep.
BUT if you're up for some trash read this! I had to giggle so much.
UPDATE [Decembre 2020]:
It's been a few years since I read this so I don't remember it that well but after I saw a video about it (Hi, Strange Aeons) I think it plays down sexual abuse. That's not funny and not okay.
I used to be a way more edgy and unreflected person when I read this.
If you're ONLY into good books I don't recommend this one. There is only one character with personality, Charlene, and her personality is really unbelievable. There is no suspense level whatsoever. Sometimes the grammar is incorrect. And especially the end was very ridiculous in its try to seem deep.
BUT if you're up for some trash read this! I had to giggle so much.
UPDATE [Decembre 2020]:
It's been a few years since I read this so I don't remember it that well but after I saw a video about it (Hi, Strange Aeons) I think it plays down sexual abuse. That's not funny and not okay.
I used to be a way more edgy and unreflected person when I read this.
May 19, 2021
bats eyelashes. blank stare
January 15, 2025
Look, I knew perfectly well what I was doing, when I picked up this book. Still, the writing is so shockingly bad, it will make your eyes water.
I have to admit, I was rather disappointed with the protagonist, Charlene not being Satan, after I read the title: Satan Was a Lesbian.
As it turns out, Charlene’s alleged satanic tendencies include:
- hitting on girls in Continentals
- reckless driving
- nipple gazing
- a demeanour unattractive to men
- one count of bartender murder
- being 5’8
- a non-con BDSM session in a dog collar.
Now, it’s not necessarily the method I object to, but the scale. I think Charlene should go larger.
If you mean to imply that your protagonist is as evil as the Prince of Darkness – even if your hand has been forced in that direction by social censorship of gay characters – I say: commit to it, Fred Haley, alleged author, who was not Monica Roberts.
I realize the 1960’s is not a particularly easy decade to work with – between the multiple wars, famines, coups, genocides, and the Berlin wall, it might almost seem like Satan’s work here is done. But here’s an idea: have your protagonist call that Kremlin-Washington hotline established by Kennedy after the Cuban Crisis, impersonate Khrushchev or Brezhnev, and say the Soviets are nuking the US. Now doesn’t that shorten the distance between “Satan” and “Lesbian” in the title?
Charlene could be the sort of Doctor No character, with a private island, and a penchant for arming small, unstable third-world countries with nuclear weapons, or trading illegal arms to Chinese terrorist squads. If any associate displeases her, she could send them into a fire pit with a push of a button. She could, at one point, capture an elite top-secret British spy and put him in an unnecessarily elaborate torture device involving crotch-cutting lasers, and when he asks: Do you expect me to talk?, she could smile and say, No, Mr Bond, I expect you to die.
Obviously, in this scenario, Charlene couldn’t go out with her novel girlfriend, Cynthia, because Cynthia is – how do I put it best – dumb. No, she’d have to seduce the best women on the market, girls of highest intellectual refinement and moral excellence – the aristocrats of thought – and fuck them over with months of psychological torture; now that’s evil.
See what I mean? Opportunity sadly missed.
This book contains a scene of unironic nipple sucking before a double homicide confession.
Flashbackbang, darling.
I have to admit, I was rather disappointed with the protagonist, Charlene not being Satan, after I read the title: Satan Was a Lesbian.
As it turns out, Charlene’s alleged satanic tendencies include:
- hitting on girls in Continentals
- reckless driving
- nipple gazing
- a demeanour unattractive to men
- one count of bartender murder
- being 5’8
- a non-con BDSM session in a dog collar.
Now, it’s not necessarily the method I object to, but the scale. I think Charlene should go larger.
If you mean to imply that your protagonist is as evil as the Prince of Darkness – even if your hand has been forced in that direction by social censorship of gay characters – I say: commit to it, Fred Haley, alleged author, who was not Monica Roberts.
I realize the 1960’s is not a particularly easy decade to work with – between the multiple wars, famines, coups, genocides, and the Berlin wall, it might almost seem like Satan’s work here is done. But here’s an idea: have your protagonist call that Kremlin-Washington hotline established by Kennedy after the Cuban Crisis, impersonate Khrushchev or Brezhnev, and say the Soviets are nuking the US. Now doesn’t that shorten the distance between “Satan” and “Lesbian” in the title?
Charlene could be the sort of Doctor No character, with a private island, and a penchant for arming small, unstable third-world countries with nuclear weapons, or trading illegal arms to Chinese terrorist squads. If any associate displeases her, she could send them into a fire pit with a push of a button. She could, at one point, capture an elite top-secret British spy and put him in an unnecessarily elaborate torture device involving crotch-cutting lasers, and when he asks: Do you expect me to talk?, she could smile and say, No, Mr Bond, I expect you to die.
Obviously, in this scenario, Charlene couldn’t go out with her novel girlfriend, Cynthia, because Cynthia is – how do I put it best – dumb. No, she’d have to seduce the best women on the market, girls of highest intellectual refinement and moral excellence – the aristocrats of thought – and fuck them over with months of psychological torture; now that’s evil.
See what I mean? Opportunity sadly missed.
This book contains a scene of unironic nipple sucking before a double homicide confession.
Flash
December 2, 2020
great book, gets kinda nsfw at points but i love it
my favorite thing about this book is that the only people who hate it are straight men who think every piece of media is for them
my favorite thing about this book is that the only people who hate it are straight men who think every piece of media is for them
July 9, 2018
The cover drew me to the book. It was certainly an experience.
Too much foreplay, too many flashbacks, unexpected ending.
Oh and I hope you like feet if you want to read this.
Too much foreplay, too many flashbacks, unexpected ending.
Oh and I hope you like feet if you want to read this.
June 30, 2023
not very good but im giving it 2 stars for gay sex
February 3, 2025
well!! okay!!!!!
March 30, 2018
It's very good. A bit pornographic at times, but wow. Seriously. Read this.
August 25, 2025
I didn’t go into this expecting it to be good.
I picked it up out of curiosity. What kind of thing were queer people sneaking under the shop counter in the 60’s? For context, I’m a gay man, so I wasn’t expecting to be aroused. Which is fortunate because… damn.
I figured it might be like when 50 Shades of Grey first dropped: groups of women giggling and passing it around, laughing at the “dirty” bits. For a couple of chapters, that’s exactly what this is. The sex scenes are so absurdly described that they pass through the realm of “bad” and circle back around to being hilarious. Two strangers in a tiny car, describing the painfully unsexy logistics of trying to navigate the space. It’s laugh-out-loud stuff. Not because it’s well written, but because it’s spectacularly bad.
Unfortunately, that’s as good as it gets. Was I in it for the plot? Perhaps I was, so that’s on me.
From there, the book just becomes repetitive. The main character, Charlene, is a cardboard cut-out: impossibly beautiful, ice-cold, everyone wants her, and she’s always in control. The “plot” (if you can call it that) is basically
Right in the final pages of the novel,
I wanted campy Satanic lesbian mayhem. I got none of that. The title catfished me. There’s no Satan. Charlene isn’t evil. She’s just… a horny, one-time vigilante, I guess? The eroticism is so tame it could pass for PG-13, and I’m pretty sure the author has never met a woman.
Let me share with you an excerpt to demonstrate what I’m talking about:
At this point my vagina shrivelled up, dropped off and scuttled into a corner to cry. By the time I finally convinced it to come back, I was hit with:
This was when my vajayjay took one final shuddering breath and died.
Still, I can’t give it just one star. There’s a masterpiece of dialogue that deserves to be laminated and preserved in the halls of eternal prose:
Shakespeare could never.
Overall: The first chapters are fun in a so-bad-it’s-good way, but the novelty wears off quickly and the rest is a slog. My condolences to the lesbians of the 60’s who had to settle for this as representation.
I picked it up out of curiosity. What kind of thing were queer people sneaking under the shop counter in the 60’s? For context, I’m a gay man, so I wasn’t expecting to be aroused. Which is fortunate because… damn.
I figured it might be like when 50 Shades of Grey first dropped: groups of women giggling and passing it around, laughing at the “dirty” bits. For a couple of chapters, that’s exactly what this is. The sex scenes are so absurdly described that they pass through the realm of “bad” and circle back around to being hilarious. Two strangers in a tiny car, describing the painfully unsexy logistics of trying to navigate the space. It’s laugh-out-loud stuff. Not because it’s well written, but because it’s spectacularly bad.
Unfortunately, that’s as good as it gets. Was I in it for the plot? Perhaps I was, so that’s on me.
From there, the book just becomes repetitive. The main character, Charlene, is a cardboard cut-out: impossibly beautiful, ice-cold, everyone wants her, and she’s always in control. The “plot” (if you can call it that) is basically
Right in the final pages of the novel,
I wanted campy Satanic lesbian mayhem. I got none of that. The title catfished me. There’s no Satan. Charlene isn’t evil. She’s just… a horny, one-time vigilante, I guess? The eroticism is so tame it could pass for PG-13, and I’m pretty sure the author has never met a woman.
Let me share with you an excerpt to demonstrate what I’m talking about:
“They released the slacks and panties and moved down to tear off the flat shoes and heavy socks covering her feet.”
At this point my vagina shrivelled up, dropped off and scuttled into a corner to cry. By the time I finally convinced it to come back, I was hit with:
“She felt her breasts swinging loosely with her movements, and they seemed to double in weight.”
This was when my vajayjay took one final shuddering breath and died.
Still, I can’t give it just one star. There’s a masterpiece of dialogue that deserves to be laminated and preserved in the halls of eternal prose:
“Oh.” Cynthia took another gulp of her drink. “Well, uh, what’ll we talk about first?”
Charlene remained completely motionless. “Your breasts, Cynthia. Let’s talk about your breasts.”
Shakespeare could never.
Overall: The first chapters are fun in a so-bad-it’s-good way, but the novelty wears off quickly and the rest is a slog. My condolences to the lesbians of the 60’s who had to settle for this as representation.
January 16, 2026
Satan may well be a lesbian, but our MC Charlene is certainly not the Prince of Darkness. She's actually a half-decent human being, which I was very surprised at. Yes, yes, I hear all of you in the back screaming: 'The 1960s were homophobic - lesbians were the devil incarnate back then!' Maybe I'm just too woke for all of this, but it seems to me that if you're going to reference Satan in your title and attempt to catch us in the wings of Mephistopheles with your cover, you might at least give your MC a desire to harm innocent people.
Overall, I liked the book a lot. I was surprised to see people highlighting that it was written for men's pleasure. It's not exploitative in a male-gazey way, and the only major male character gets killed (after being presented in an unfavourable light). Maybe people are subconsciously swayed by the male pseudonym (although the title page makes it clear that the book was written by one Monica Roberts). I would wager that it's simply a prime example of reviewers thinking: 'Book with sex. Man like sex. Book for man.' Sure, most pulp books were aimed at men, but the only part of Satan Was a Lesbian that showed it was the wishful thinking about breasts. I hesitate to call it a misunderstanding of anatomy because, hey, there are 8 billion people in the world; surely someone's breasts could do all of that naturally.
As a lesbian with a passion for pulp, I am always thinking about Yvonne Keller's categorisation of it: 'pro-lesbian' versus 'virile adventure'. Due to the raciness of this book, I'd definitely class it as a virile adventure, but I wouldn't say it was anti-lesbian per se. Sure, there's a bit of 'bury your gays' and they all fall in love a bit too quickly, but I don't detect animosity or delegitimisation. I genuinely think it reads however you want it to read. I read it for a laugh, so I was pleasantly surprised at the quality. I think anyone who unaffectionately calls this trash is forgetting that we live in the era of dark romance, meaning that by my trash-o-meter this is more of a John Waters-esque extravaganza than an actual bad book.
Overall, I liked the book a lot. I was surprised to see people highlighting that it was written for men's pleasure. It's not exploitative in a male-gazey way, and the only major male character gets killed (after being presented in an unfavourable light). Maybe people are subconsciously swayed by the male pseudonym (although the title page makes it clear that the book was written by one Monica Roberts). I would wager that it's simply a prime example of reviewers thinking: 'Book with sex. Man like sex. Book for man.' Sure, most pulp books were aimed at men, but the only part of Satan Was a Lesbian that showed it was the wishful thinking about breasts. I hesitate to call it a misunderstanding of anatomy because, hey, there are 8 billion people in the world; surely someone's breasts could do all of that naturally.
As a lesbian with a passion for pulp, I am always thinking about Yvonne Keller's categorisation of it: 'pro-lesbian' versus 'virile adventure'. Due to the raciness of this book, I'd definitely class it as a virile adventure, but I wouldn't say it was anti-lesbian per se. Sure, there's a bit of 'bury your gays' and they all fall in love a bit too quickly, but I don't detect animosity or delegitimisation. I genuinely think it reads however you want it to read. I read it for a laugh, so I was pleasantly surprised at the quality. I think anyone who unaffectionately calls this trash is forgetting that we live in the era of dark romance, meaning that by my trash-o-meter this is more of a John Waters-esque extravaganza than an actual bad book.
June 4, 2025
this book is horrible. I enjoyed it very much. the writing is just awful. The characters very flat. The dialog was so unnatural. I think at one point a flash back time line didnt make sense.
but the biggest crime of all where the amount of typos. now writing is subjective and i enjoyed the bad writing for what it was. but the typos were inexcusable because the editor wrote an editors note about how the author clearly never met a lesbian and how he fixed up typos to make it readable. I don't think he fixed any typos. some of the mild issues involved periods in places periods don't go and overall wrong punctuation. they didn't follow started quotation rules with indents and changing paragraphs for new speakers. at least once a quotation was ended by a forward and back quotation. another point there was a • in the middle of sentence. How do you even do that?? the main characters name once had a space in it. now a typo here and There happens, I get it. but when you write in your editors note that you fixed typos, and there are multiple per page, you didn't fix typos.
Another important thing to know about this book is that it was written at a time when Obsenity Laws were being used against LGBT books. what I think is funny is that the common mainstream media complaint is that there's always a happily ever after. but in 1950s-60s book lgbt books could not have those. I think its important to mention because it is a clear byproduct of homophobia.
but the biggest crime of all where the amount of typos. now writing is subjective and i enjoyed the bad writing for what it was. but the typos were inexcusable because the editor wrote an editors note about how the author clearly never met a lesbian and how he fixed up typos to make it readable. I don't think he fixed any typos. some of the mild issues involved periods in places periods don't go and overall wrong punctuation. they didn't follow started quotation rules with indents and changing paragraphs for new speakers. at least once a quotation was ended by a forward and back quotation. another point there was a • in the middle of sentence. How do you even do that?? the main characters name once had a space in it. now a typo here and There happens, I get it. but when you write in your editors note that you fixed typos, and there are multiple per page, you didn't fix typos.
Another important thing to know about this book is that it was written at a time when Obsenity Laws were being used against LGBT books. what I think is funny is that the common mainstream media complaint is that there's always a happily ever after. but in 1950s-60s book lgbt books could not have those. I think its important to mention because it is a clear byproduct of homophobia.
April 10, 2023
It's a trash book, sure! But Charlene's name is similar to mine, and that will always be funny to me. I've got the humor of an 8-year-old sometimes. Sure, it makes me want to pick up a shovel and bury myself six feet underground from the cringe that boils within me. But this book is funny at how absurd it is!
Also, I still can't believe this is actually, from my memory, the first book I have ever recommended to someone! I don't know if I should be proud of this or ashamed, but hey, if he ever gets to read this, I'm sure it was a fun traumatic experience for you! :D
Also, I still can't believe this is actually, from my memory, the first book I have ever recommended to someone! I don't know if I should be proud of this or ashamed, but hey, if he ever gets to read this, I'm sure it was a fun traumatic experience for you! :D
January 13, 2021
Is it a genuinely good book? No, not really. But it's really fun. There's some moments with dubious consent in the latter half of the book but it's over all a pretty fun book that I really enjoyed. The ending is a total twist that I didn't love but I understand that historically it had to be done and it can pretty easily be ignored. Honestly I though this was a pretty solid and almost wholesome lesbian story.
September 13, 2023
Satan Was a Lesbian is one of those rare sex books that actually lives up to its lurid cover, although no scene as depicted on the cover actually occurs in the book. I read this with zero expectations as to quality, but was pleasantly surprised. One of the reasons might have been for the fact that book was written by a woman, despite the male pseud0nym, so that there is a certain verisimilitude to the characters. Interestingly enough the title page shows her real name, Monica Roberts.
November 5, 2023
Let's be real folks, it was intended to be scandalous erotica. On that note it failed in my eyes because the scenes were way too unhinged and morally questionable, as well as being 80% "her boobs boobied boobily." Just talking about boobs. Not much else. As for the non-hanky panky related scenes, the part where Charlene kills a guy for SAing someone was pretty slay (pun intended). Over all, it's a quick read that makes you go ??? and I, admittedly, enjoyed it.
August 15, 2025
absolute dogshit. technically passes the bechdel test. forget feminism she doesn't exist, same with any semblance of plot. disappointingly few satanic rituals occurred and by that I mean none. trigger warnings for cat death, human (?) death, rape, murder, foot fetishes, infantilization of several sexually portrayed characters, and inaccurate descriptions of breasts. a true piece of literature. favorite quote: "your breasts, Cynthia. let's talk about your breasts." 1.5 stars: could be worse?
March 17, 2018
Read this because of its unusual title. The author is a woman using a nom de plume. As far as I can remember, this is the first piece of lesbian erotica I have ever read. I expected it to different to something written by a heterosexual male but it wasn't really.
April 15, 2025
As a book, not great- as a piece of history and something to bring up in discussion regarding the history of queer literature.... it is interesting. Definitely not good in terms of writing or representation though.
August 12, 2019
not actually about satan :( and mostly just boring
February 16, 2021
Wow, just wow.
Read
April 27, 2021Only made it to page 167 but I saw what I needed to see
September 5, 2021
Read it for the lulz
March 1, 2023
It’s trashy, it’s problematic, Charlene is a walking red flag, and I had way more fun with this story than I expected.
March 25, 2023
never again
October 16, 2023
it was really entertaining. good read if you want to turn our brain off and have a good time.
January 3, 2024
Wtf did I just read
January 6, 2024
So fucking funny but absolutely horrendous, certainly worth looking into if you're interested in early queer literature but just a horrible horrible book by todays standards.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 38 reviews