What do you think?
Rate this book


369 pages, Kindle Edition
First published January 1, 2019
“True self-acceptance is readily recognizable: it is largely free of needless explanation, apology, and pandering, and free of reactive, unrealistic self-confidence and compensatory false pride. Self-acceptance allows realistic self-confidence, which is significantly unhinged in adulthood from the expectations and approval of others. In the end, authentic self-acceptance—or the lack of it—is almost the entirety of what defines a life. Without true self-acceptance, there is no true self-confidence or self-realization. Without self-realization, lives feel squeezed, purposeless, and truncated, cut short long before physical death finally ends them entirely.”
Although society has created the conflict by imposing a simplistic, inhuman model, it is left to LGBTQ people to deal with the problem: it is LGBTQ people who are left feeling deviant and “misaligned.” We have the choice of either rejecting the social construction in a pursuit of wholeness and authenticity or bringing ourselves into alignment.
Authentic lives are significantly nonreactive: they are primarily rooted in an internal center rather than in others’ norms and expectations.
So, I'm not sure what I expected this to be, but I sure didn't expect it to be everything that it was. It was such a well-done piece of work, & the author deserves praise for what he's he's done here.
That said, I'm not quite certain how to relate my reading experience here. I quite enjoyed the insight provided via the interplay of the author's lived realities as a compassionate psychologist, & his personal life as a gay man. His read on recent history in the world of gay men (I'm calling "recent" Stonewall to the present) & the sometimes odd ways the cumulative fallout of it all manifests itself, in so many myriad ways, in the world of gay men in the United States is nothing if not eye-opening. I learned SO MUCH.
Perhaps it may help potential readers to be explicitly aware that the information in this book pertains to the U.S. population. Populations elsewhere may have overlap on some issues, but in no way will the entirety of this book wholly relate to the gay male population of any other nation. Although that is so, interested parties should not be put off from reading this. There is still so much available here that is universal, but nothing that might not be understood by all readers. I am simply saying, that if one is seeking information on the lives of gay men elsewhere in the world, this book might provide illumination only in the way that it examines a population & individuals w/ histories of being considered as undesirable outsiders by the larger society in which they exist. The psychological damage of living under such sustained threat & strain is indeed universal.
A few tidbits of what I learned might be appropriate. The grouping along age-lines to better understand generational differences of this population in relating to one another was highly enlightening. The way the generations relate to the AIDS crisis alone is enough to almost put the groups on their own islands. Then there is the aspect of "community" that coalesced &, in a sad way, dissipated both w/ the knowledge of the virus & treatment possibilities, & w/ the almost invasive usurpation by social media apps. Loneliness is epidemic. Too many gay men, raised in the U.S. culture of hyper-masculine posturing, & worship of physical objectification as superior to intimate connection, have not the 1st clue how to go about acquiring the support they need to mature into healthy, stable men. Nor do they know how to deal w/ the trauma & (socially-acquired) shame that more often than not remains internalized, & unrecognized w/ expert-levels of denial, which therefore does nothing but fester unabated in the subconscious. Such a reaction is not uncommon in any marginalized person, nor is it uncommon when it occurs in entire traumatized & unsupported communities or populations. In fact, amongst younger gay men, there is a sort of refusal to acknowledge vulnerability. It manifests oddly as an almost full denial of AIDS as a real threat, w/ the requisite shunning of HIV+ persons, rather than the support one might think a younger, informed population should have developed. In slightly older generations, utter paranoia about condom-usage can result in a very stressful hyper-vigilance that eventually exhausts the individual psyche. Then, of course, there is the older generation suffering from an unreal amount of PTSD from the grief & terror of the time when the unknown was culling them w/ an invisible scythe, & the broader society either turned their backs, or applauded.
While the above seems bleak, it explains so much. It clearly identifies the paths that brought that population & each of it's sub-groups to the place they are in now. Knowing one's history can do so much to aid one's own understanding of one’s own self. Seeing the whole historical pathway of it could be empowering to individuals by enabling better identification of the reasons one may be reacting negatively to their place in modern times. Hopefully such identification would facilitate becoming better adjusted to living in the world. Additionally, knowing that other people are out there dealing w/ the same traumas allows one to feel less alone, & to acknowledge that social connection is possible. Validation of shared trauma could do wonders for the healing processes of some people in this community, particularly those still unable to process so many years of grief & extreme loss.
Fortunately, this population, like all populations, is made-up of individuals. As such, despite the 1 larger connection of identifying as "gay," there are multitudinous examples of living according to one's own terms, & owning one's own life, despite all that may stacked against the group as a whole. There is no one way to be who you are, so to speak. That both opens up all kinds of possibilities, & all kinds of modern questions. For instance, toward the back of the book there is a very valid section that mentions the desire of the larger non-hetero population to acquire all the blessings bestowed via societally-accepted hetero-normativity. In other words. marriage, child-rearing, & all the blessings of the state that are conferred upon this type of old institution. While certainly an understandable notion, is it really the be-all end-all of equality? Obviously, denial of rights & benefits is not acceptable, but are other loving, supportive relationships any less deserving of respect? Non-traditional relationships have abounded over the course of human history, but they are nearly always invalidated as valid & worthy of respect by those "respectable" & "law-abiding" types of humans & their institutions. It seems just another way to create even more class divisions, in my personal opinion. This book does not fully go into discussion on such a topic, but merely raises the idea that in going forward, fully contemplating why a collective path has been chosen, & possibly what hands one might be playing into, can only allow for broader discussion of what "inclusion" & "acceptance" really mean. Working toward a desirable outcome for all, & not just those willing to "conform," is beneficial not to just certain individuals & populations, but to the whole of society. For any out-group, "conforming" to broader norms to justify worthiness tends to not benefit the whole of their members. Rather it may serve to further diminish & ostracize those persons who don't fit into that mold of accepted, so-called normative conformity, simply so that some members of the group might find some extra inches of acceptance. When talking about this specific grouping of persons, that is very particular kind of acceptance, often socially conditional, granted by the society & institutions that only yesterday were content to let them die. Big questions for any group seeking to throw off so much history of injustice & oppression, & worth the brief, illuminating mention given here-in. Inclusion is tricky rope, so it’s worthwhile to consider such questions. A fuller understanding of any undertaking in never an ill thing to acquire.
Finally, I just want to say that I saw a comment in a review that suggested the author thought sex was the answer to everything. For the life of me I can not understand how that conclusion was arrived at by the commenter. It was not my experience in these pages. There were some patients w/ intimacy issues, meaning the fall-out after the excitement of a new relationship had worn off, as it will eventually do. Being men raised stateside, emotional vocabulary & availability was not 2nd nature by any means, thus the source of the difficulties w/ maintaining a bond once the physicality had been dialed down. It's understandable, very human, & very much able to be improved upon by willing parties not spooked into paralysis by the emotional vulnerability of that learning curve. All long-term relationships undergo some degree of this phase in a relationship. In those w/ members raised on a mythos equating feelings to weakness however, this can be an especially difficult time. Thus the help they sought by enlisting our psychologist author to assist them in navigating such terrain. Outside of overcoming the estrangement felt by the members of such relationships, I have no idea what the aforementioned commenter might have been alluding to; maybe we read different books.
I've a friend completing her psychology Masters', & I will pass this book on to her. I nearly passed it on to my (gay) daughter, as we had recently had a discussion about what is "appropriate" at gay pride parades, given the fact that children are often present. Being an older, although more hetero-leaning person, I had a longer (& partially more directly experienced) view of the history of repression that was being currently played out by such attire as bondage-wear & the like, which I was able to relate. It was a case of history being played out (isn’t everything?), & another example of how knowing the past can help one to understand the point at which we are existing presently. Also, this is why the different generations must talk to each other. I had no idea people were attempting to regulate how others celebrated Pride, & she didn’t fully understand why such attire & forms of suggestive public display were guaranteed to be present at Pride. So we both learned things, which is good for everyone. (I further elaborated that these were learning moments for parents to have healthy discussions w/ kids, rather than continuing to practice the societally-avoidant stance on such arbitrarily "moral" practices, like sex, the human psyche, & biology. Age-appropriateness is of course called for in such discussions, but if one doesn't treat a thing as if it is abhorrent, then developing brains will not place special attention on it & thus avoid processing emotions associated w/ it's otherwise unexplained relationship to shame. So many hang-ups can be avoided by just being frank about life, & the variety of ways of living. Of course, that’s just me.) Oh, look at me digressing. Point is, I think the insights will do more good by being absorbed by someone about to go out & do therapy every day, than my kid who will likely let this sit on her shelf for a couple years before getting around to it. (In fairness, I’ve sent her a small library worth of books.) No worries. Once published I’ll get her a copy. I know she’ll learn so very much, & she’ll love it like I did.
In short: I recommend it! I’m so pleased I won this.
There are two different perspectives on what makes a man a "homosexual." The first—the heterosexual perspective—is that homosexuals are "men who have sex with men." The gay man's perspective, briefly put, is that he is "attracted to other men." The difference between the two descriptions is important: the heterosexual identifies a single, objective behavior, the gay man an internal life of feeling.
When I recently asked a gay Dutch public health official what it meant to "be gay in the Netherlands," he responded, "I'm not sure what the question is. If you mean, do we live in our own parts of town as you do in the U.S., the answer is no. The whole issue doesn't mean as much in the Netherlands, we don't really have gay and straight people the way you do. It's more like we have people, and all people are different.
Shame, self-rejection, and self-contempt are feelings imposed from outside, toxic feelings we hear expressed by others and take in [...] Many men can unlearn [these feelings], and today's slowly shifting social values provide an opportunity, particularly for young men who are still working to find themselves and the lives they will lead. For older men with more entrenched trajectories, the unlearning is possible but more difficult. Men of all ages do change, and the millions of gay men who suffered difficult starts but now live with authentic self-acceptance stand testimony to the possibility.