Genuinely sad that I'm giving this book a two-star rating, but I feel it has to be done for reasons that will become clear later in this review. Boyslut seeks, as its tagline says, to be both a memoir of Zane's life while also acting as a manifesto to empower bisexual men to embrace their bisexuality. Zane is clear from the start that this empowerment and visibility is important because he never had access to out bi men when he was younger and it led to some of the negative experiences in his life. The book is divided into four sections, each with its own specific theme and message: Shame, Confusion, Security, and Pride.
Overall, the book feels shallow - like it has aimed for a goal it came just shy of achieving. Several of the discussions throughout the four sections could have been expanded to really hammer home messages or make insightful analyses. This, however, is not my main concern with the book. Instead, perhaps by being surface level, Boyslut might have a larger audience because of this as well as possibly provide entry-level education for folks who are not bisexual men yet find themselves reading the book.
Instead, my main problem with the book and the reason for its rating is due to the sharp decline in the final third. The book started fun, responsible, educational, and biographical, but changed to irresponsible, potentially damaging, and biographical at the end. The rest of this review will consist of one example which I've picked out to demonstrate this negative messaging.
There is an entire chapter discussing how STIs are no big deal and that while they aren't fun they ought not to be stigmatized. Because they ought not to be stigmatized, we shouldn't shame people for not wearing condoms. The defence presented is that we have medicines to treat and cure most STIs, after all, and the ones we can't cure we can manage such that folks have long and happy lives regardless. This then turns disparaging of healthcare professionals who just don't get it, referencing a nurse Nancy he was seeing at the clinic, because they aren't in the queer community.
As a bisexual healthcare professional, I want to go on record that there is a difference between shaming someone for having an STI (which I will agree is bad) and shaming someone for a cavalier nonchalance towards infections which are actively mutating to the point where we don't have effective treatments for those who do get infected, often from partners who themselves don't know they are infected because a test doesn't show positive yet. Even the one acknowledgement of antibiotic-resistant gonorrhea is flippantly dismissed with the reasoning "If (or when) we start to see major outbreaks of antibiotic-resistant gonorrhea, I'll start wrapping it up, but until then, I'm going to keep raw-dogging it" (160).
The answer to 'we don't yet see treatment-resistant X' shouldn't be 'so I'm not going to change until that happens'. Instead, our answer as responsible queer folks with even the slightest bit of health education should be 'so let's prevent it from ever getting that bad'.