What do you think?
Rate this book
The Screwball Asses
[Note: This text, first published anonymously, has been attributed to Guy Hocquenghem and subsequently published under his name by Semiotext(e). More recently, however, this attribution has been strongly contested, and it is more likely the text's author was Christian Maurel.]
A founder of Queer theory contends that the ruling classes have invented homosexuality as a sexual ghetto, splitting and mutilating desire in the process.
Alone in his forest dwelling, an ogre had spent years building machines to force his visitors to make love to one another: machines with pulleys, chains, clocks, collars, leather leggings, metal breastplates, oscillatory, pendular, or rotating dildos. One day, some adolescents who had lost their way, seven or eight brothers, entered the ogre's house...—From The Screwball Asses
Our asshole is revolutionary.—Guy Hocquenghem
Workers of the world, masturbate!—Front Homosexuel d'Action Revolutionnaire slogan
First published anonymously in Félix Guattari's Recherches in the notorious 1973 issue on homosexuality (seized and destroyed by the French government), The Screwball Asses remains a dramatic treatise on erotic desire. In this classic underground text, queer theorist and post-'68 provocateur Guy Hocquenghem takes on the militant delusions of the gay liberation movement. Hocquenghem, founder and leader of the Front Homosexuel d'Action Revolutionnaire, vivisects not only the stifled mores of bourgeois capitalism but the phallocratic concessions of so-called homophiles, and, ultimately, the very act of speaking desire (and non-desire). Rejecting any “pure theory” of homosexuality that claims its “otherness” as a morphology of revolution, he contends that the ruling classes have invented homosexuality as a sexual ghetto, splitting and mutilating desire in the process. It is only when non-desire and the desire of desire are enacted simultaneously through speech and body that homosexuality can finally be sublimated under the true act of “making love.” There are thousands of sexes on earth, according to Hocquenghem, but only one sexual desire. Available in English for the first time, The Screwball Asses is a revelatory disquisition, earning Hocquenghem his rightful place among the minoritarian elite of Gilles Deleuze, Jean Genet, and Tony Duvert.
A founder of Queer theory contends that the ruling classes have invented homosexuality as a sexual ghetto, splitting and mutilating desire in the process.
Alone in his forest dwelling, an ogre had spent years building machines to force his visitors to make love to one another: machines with pulleys, chains, clocks, collars, leather leggings, metal breastplates, oscillatory, pendular, or rotating dildos. One day, some adolescents who had lost their way, seven or eight brothers, entered the ogre's house...—From The Screwball Asses
Our asshole is revolutionary.—Guy Hocquenghem
Workers of the world, masturbate!—Front Homosexuel d'Action Revolutionnaire slogan
First published anonymously in Félix Guattari's Recherches in the notorious 1973 issue on homosexuality (seized and destroyed by the French government), The Screwball Asses remains a dramatic treatise on erotic desire. In this classic underground text, queer theorist and post-'68 provocateur Guy Hocquenghem takes on the militant delusions of the gay liberation movement. Hocquenghem, founder and leader of the Front Homosexuel d'Action Revolutionnaire, vivisects not only the stifled mores of bourgeois capitalism but the phallocratic concessions of so-called homophiles, and, ultimately, the very act of speaking desire (and non-desire). Rejecting any “pure theory” of homosexuality that claims its “otherness” as a morphology of revolution, he contends that the ruling classes have invented homosexuality as a sexual ghetto, splitting and mutilating desire in the process. It is only when non-desire and the desire of desire are enacted simultaneously through speech and body that homosexuality can finally be sublimated under the true act of “making love.” There are thousands of sexes on earth, according to Hocquenghem, but only one sexual desire. Available in English for the first time, The Screwball Asses is a revelatory disquisition, earning Hocquenghem his rightful place among the minoritarian elite of Gilles Deleuze, Jean Genet, and Tony Duvert.
88 pages, Paperback
First published March 1, 1973
13 people are currently reading
856 people want to read
About the author
Guy Hocquenghem
30 books39 followersGuy Hocquenghem, essayist and activist, is often considered the father of Queer theory. He was the author of Homosexual Desire (1972) and L'Amour en relief (1982). The Screwball Asses is his first work available from Semiotext(e).
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 29 of 29 reviews
February 16, 2010
"In my entire life, I have only ever really met that which I was not trying to seduce"
This book is challenging; by this, I do not refer to its' erudite vocabulary or considered prose, but to its' clear-eyes analysis of queer culture as a necessary construct of a homophobic capitalist culture. It seems Guy Hocquenghem would have found good company at a contemporary workshop on pansexuality or polyamoury, yet penned this text in 1973; this is its' first English publication. He was post-old-left; he demands a fuller account of love and death than Freudo-Marxism can supply, yet rebels against the boxes capitalist society places us in; he is dismayed by voluntarism, yet demands to speak of desire--to have desire direct analysis. Dig it: he considers loveless cruising a machine built by capitalism, couplehood an insane invention of the socius, orgasm a joyous risk of death, and believes that if we ever relieved ourselves of this culture of monosexuality and sublimated homosexuality there would no longer be homosexuality or heterosexuality:
"There are two sexes on earth, but is only to hide the act that there are three, four, ten, thousands, once you throw that old hag of the idea of nature overboard. There are two sexes on earth, but only one sexual desire."
This book is 87 pages, and sold for $13; it should be included in any meaningful review of queer theory.
This book is challenging; by this, I do not refer to its' erudite vocabulary or considered prose, but to its' clear-eyes analysis of queer culture as a necessary construct of a homophobic capitalist culture. It seems Guy Hocquenghem would have found good company at a contemporary workshop on pansexuality or polyamoury, yet penned this text in 1973; this is its' first English publication. He was post-old-left; he demands a fuller account of love and death than Freudo-Marxism can supply, yet rebels against the boxes capitalist society places us in; he is dismayed by voluntarism, yet demands to speak of desire--to have desire direct analysis. Dig it: he considers loveless cruising a machine built by capitalism, couplehood an insane invention of the socius, orgasm a joyous risk of death, and believes that if we ever relieved ourselves of this culture of monosexuality and sublimated homosexuality there would no longer be homosexuality or heterosexuality:
"There are two sexes on earth, but is only to hide the act that there are three, four, ten, thousands, once you throw that old hag of the idea of nature overboard. There are two sexes on earth, but only one sexual desire."
This book is 87 pages, and sold for $13; it should be included in any meaningful review of queer theory.
August 13, 2010
What I love is how EVERYONE comes under fire in this hilarious analysis of gay culture. Most reviewers jump on Hocquenghem's scathing critique of the bourgeois left, but what I find more surprising from this revolutionary May 68er is his insight into the predatorial, anti-sentimental views (and practices) of the gay/activist arena and the dialectic that ensues from this contradiction...a problematic we certainly still live within.
As G.H. writes, "Clearly, love and death are banned from the political discourse of the bourgeoisie as well as from the discourse of the preceptors of the sexual revolution. For the bourgeoisie and for the Communist Party, sex is family, and family must be love. It seems clear enough. For the autonomous sexual movements that call themselves revolutionary, and particularly for homosexuals, sex is desire, and desire is politics. But love, that is, the desire to desire, has been cast off, as if it were nothing but a superstructure built as a trompe l’oeil in the structure of desire. As for death, neither the bourgeois nor revolutionaries ever talk about."
As G.H. writes, "Clearly, love and death are banned from the political discourse of the bourgeoisie as well as from the discourse of the preceptors of the sexual revolution. For the bourgeoisie and for the Communist Party, sex is family, and family must be love. It seems clear enough. For the autonomous sexual movements that call themselves revolutionary, and particularly for homosexuals, sex is desire, and desire is politics. But love, that is, the desire to desire, has been cast off, as if it were nothing but a superstructure built as a trompe l’oeil in the structure of desire. As for death, neither the bourgeois nor revolutionaries ever talk about."
September 12, 2025
I love reading queer theory sm :')
It's like... I feel my brain working, but it's bc l'm analyzing GAY SH*T!! <3
Thank you to Semiotext(e) for my advanced copy!
It's like... I feel my brain working, but it's bc l'm analyzing GAY SH*T!! <3
Thank you to Semiotext(e) for my advanced copy!
February 14, 2016
sex is dumb
August 11, 2021
"To demand recognition of homosexuality as it exists today, colonized by heterosexual imperialism, is simply reformist."
Damn.
Damn.
Read
January 9, 2021dated but important
June 9, 2018
The last chapters of the book coalesce into thunder and lightning. I've been generally meandering through the work, agreeing here, disagreeing there. Then wham it all comes together.
Hocquenghem wrestles with various details about attempts at radical homosexuality in the 70s. His words are dated, his comments speaking to a highly fragmented queer community that seems very different from today (no duh, I know).
However, he hates how many scripts he responds to even as he tries to radicalize. He laughs at the radical community and how distant it is from its supposed goals (reducing phallocentric power, embracing embodied desire, and many others). Hocquenghem argues that homosexuality is tied to heterosexuality because of its vehement opposition (which always serves to entangle, not distinguish).
Ho, how he hates this. The French can hate and so poetically. He hates it all but while laughing. He dreams of impossible configurations of desire that can be truly ahistorical (that is to say futurist). He goes on that it is impossible for anyone to fully experience their sexual identity, since it is always already inherited from others.
He says some outright dumb things in this book as he tries to imagine such a world. But I admire his vision for trying to imagine it with such earnest frustration.
Here is one of dozens of passages I was tempted to write up:
"Power is not something to be destroyed: that remains beyond our means. What we can do, however, is understand its mechanism and do everything possible to disrupt it. Whether we do this be overriding power isntead of censuring it, by working towards the generalized confusion of powers, by driving the rules of the game over the edge, we must always remember that thesee activities will continue to be exercises of power, nocturnal perhaps, but not the desired emergence of weakness between all men. Besides, at this point, it would be best if the senses could rip power away from sense. Then, we would onlt speak wails and cries, laughter and dancing, noise and music."
I'm left not with the sense that he was right in the specifics of what he said, but in the general.
I would not have read such a rare corner of writing if it wasn't for interlibrary loans and big thanks to this practice in general. This book felt more groundbreaking than much of the gay canon of critics I've read in the past. I don't think this book is for everyone but it did turn my world upside down.
Hocquenghem wrestles with various details about attempts at radical homosexuality in the 70s. His words are dated, his comments speaking to a highly fragmented queer community that seems very different from today (no duh, I know).
However, he hates how many scripts he responds to even as he tries to radicalize. He laughs at the radical community and how distant it is from its supposed goals (reducing phallocentric power, embracing embodied desire, and many others). Hocquenghem argues that homosexuality is tied to heterosexuality because of its vehement opposition (which always serves to entangle, not distinguish).
Ho, how he hates this. The French can hate and so poetically. He hates it all but while laughing. He dreams of impossible configurations of desire that can be truly ahistorical (that is to say futurist). He goes on that it is impossible for anyone to fully experience their sexual identity, since it is always already inherited from others.
He says some outright dumb things in this book as he tries to imagine such a world. But I admire his vision for trying to imagine it with such earnest frustration.
Here is one of dozens of passages I was tempted to write up:
"Power is not something to be destroyed: that remains beyond our means. What we can do, however, is understand its mechanism and do everything possible to disrupt it. Whether we do this be overriding power isntead of censuring it, by working towards the generalized confusion of powers, by driving the rules of the game over the edge, we must always remember that thesee activities will continue to be exercises of power, nocturnal perhaps, but not the desired emergence of weakness between all men. Besides, at this point, it would be best if the senses could rip power away from sense. Then, we would onlt speak wails and cries, laughter and dancing, noise and music."
I'm left not with the sense that he was right in the specifics of what he said, but in the general.
I would not have read such a rare corner of writing if it wasn't for interlibrary loans and big thanks to this practice in general. This book felt more groundbreaking than much of the gay canon of critics I've read in the past. I don't think this book is for everyone but it did turn my world upside down.
August 13, 2020
This book is so incredibly outdated in its language and theory. Hocquenghem's entire view of homosexuality is based so solely on the cis male experience and is so tied with the cis body it's absolutely unbearable for anyone outside of that experience within the LGBT community reading it, and this is without even mentioning the things he said about race in this book. I understand it's pretty dated, but jesus, that's no excuse. There were countless black and brown LGBT+ theorists writing incredible works during this time that that were so much more revolutionary, inclusive, and honestly, *readable*.
May 31, 2021
Guy Hocquenghem tries to disassociate gender and sexuality from the definition of desire. It is a unique perspective, which (in my opinion) most of us recognize, but we do not discuss it, or we sweep it under the rug. This perspective was written in 1973, and is still applicable, and this is haunting.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
February 4, 2013
An engaging, thought-provoking example of queer theory avant-la-lettre.
July 8, 2021
‘What I like, myself, is to desire all bodies that can produce joy and revolution.’
February 13, 2025
A great and super deep and complicated book. This book was “short”, only 83 pages, but I reread each sentence maybe 4 times at the least. The author’s knowledge on the subject is mind blowing and I feel like I needed a couple more brain cells to fully understand it. This will definitely be a book I reread every now and again, because there’s much I didn’t catch. Thankfully the author is extremely funny, so it’s not just a slog of queer theory with complex words, but also has bits of humor and sarcasm. The author definitely points out many interesting things and has caused me to look at concepts in a new way. Really cool and informative, and I’ll need to read parts of this again when I’m more smarter.
“For I cannot imagine the dissolution of normalcy without the so-called intersexual states becoming universal. I see no other way to get rid of the tyranny of virility, a tyranny, it should be said, that oppressed men just as much as it does women. To demand the recognition of homosexuality as it exists today, colonized by heterosexual imperialism, is simply reformism” - Guy Hocquenghem
“For I cannot imagine the dissolution of normalcy without the so-called intersexual states becoming universal. I see no other way to get rid of the tyranny of virility, a tyranny, it should be said, that oppressed men just as much as it does women. To demand the recognition of homosexuality as it exists today, colonized by heterosexual imperialism, is simply reformism” - Guy Hocquenghem
January 19, 2025
Σε κάποια σημεία με κούρασε η υπερβολικά συνειρμική γραφή. Αν εξαιρέσουμε πολλές παρατηρήσεις που φαίνονται παρωχημένες για τις σύγχρονες κουήρ σπουδές, κρατώ κάποια εύστοχα σχόλια και το πολύ ωραίο τέλος:
"Μόνο στο σπίτι του μέσα στο δάσος, ένα τέρας κατασκεύαζε επι χρόνια μηχανές με σκοπό να αναγκάσει τους μουσαφίρηδές του να κάνουν έρωτα μεταξύ τους: μηχανές με τροχαλίες, αλυσίδες, ρολόγια, κολάρα, δερμάτινες επιγονατίδες, μεταλλικές πανοπλίες και δονητές ταλαντευόμενους, εκκρεμείς ή περιστρεφόμενους. Μία μέρα μερικοί έφηβοι που είχαν χάσει το δρόμο τους, επτά ή οκτώ αδέρφια, μπήκαν στο σπίτι του τέρατος.
Δεν ξέρουμε αν οι μηχανές τούς παγίδευσαν ή αν η περιέργειά τους ήταν τέτοια που παγιδεύτηκαν με τη θέλησή τους. Πάντως, σφηνωμένοι ο ένας πάνω στον άλλον, ανα ζεύγη και καταδικασμένοι να εκσπερματώνουν μέχρι το τέλος του κόσμου έγιναν οι μοχλοί ενός εργοστασίου χωρίς ηλεκτρισμό και οι σκλάβοι ενός πτώματος. Γιατί αυτό που δεν γνώριζαν ήταν ότι το τέρας είχε στο μεταξύ πεθάνει στη σοφίτα του."
"Μόνο στο σπίτι του μέσα στο δάσος, ένα τέρας κατασκεύαζε επι χρόνια μηχανές με σκοπό να αναγκάσει τους μουσαφίρηδές του να κάνουν έρωτα μεταξύ τους: μηχανές με τροχαλίες, αλυσίδες, ρολόγια, κολάρα, δερμάτινες επιγονατίδες, μεταλλικές πανοπλίες και δονητές ταλαντευόμενους, εκκρεμείς ή περιστρεφόμενους. Μία μέρα μερικοί έφηβοι που είχαν χάσει το δρόμο τους, επτά ή οκτώ αδέρφια, μπήκαν στο σπίτι του τέρατος.
Δεν ξέρουμε αν οι μηχανές τούς παγίδευσαν ή αν η περιέργειά τους ήταν τέτοια που παγιδεύτηκαν με τη θέλησή τους. Πάντως, σφηνωμένοι ο ένας πάνω στον άλλον, ανα ζεύγη και καταδικασμένοι να εκσπερματώνουν μέχρι το τέλος του κόσμου έγιναν οι μοχλοί ενός εργοστασίου χωρίς ηλεκτρισμό και οι σκλάβοι ενός πτώματος. Γιατί αυτό που δεν γνώριζαν ήταν ότι το τέρας είχε στο μεταξύ πεθάνει στη σοφίτα του."
September 20, 2025
Honestly felt the impact of the author function a ton with this one as I can truly imagine offering it a much more generous reception if it has continued to be misattributed to Hocquenghem (and so I would have interpreted the words through the views of one I had already experienced rather than as a foundational piece that has an adversarial relationship with those same views). The masochism liberation front manifesto included at the end was great, and so were several points made in the book but the majority of it felt too restrained
September 29, 2025
‘Η άρχουσα τάξη είναι αυτή που διαμέλισε την επιθυμία, που την ακρωτηρίασε εντελώς. Η αστική τάξη εφηύρε την έννοια της ομοφυλοφιλίας και την έκανε γκέτο, δεν πρέπει να το ξεχνάμε αυτό. Υπάρχουν δύο φύλα στη γη λένε, για να μας κρύψουν ότι, αν ξεφορτωθούμε αυτή την κωλοαντίληψη περί φύσης, υπάρχουν στην ουσία τρία, τέσσερα, δέκα, χίλια! Υπάρχουν δύο φύλα στη γη, αλλά μία και μοναδική σεξουαλική επιθυμία.’
Πιο διαχρονικό από ποτέ και ταυτόχρονα λίγο dated, μικρό βιβλίο αλλά γραμμένο σε σχετικά δύσκολη γλώσσα. Αξίζει τον κόπο!
Πιο διαχρονικό από ποτέ και ταυτόχρονα λίγο dated, μικρό βιβλίο αλλά γραμμένο σε σχετικά δύσκολη γλώσσα. Αξίζει τον κόπο!
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
Read
December 1, 2025I have read this small book in the English translation and remember being intrigued and impressed by the raw honesty and allegory used in this very political and polemical writing.
Reading this again but this time in Greek, 4 years later, with maturity and clarity I still admire and respect the writer.
I found it difficult to follow the Greek translation despite the fact that Greek is my native language. The English translation was way better and captured the spirit of the original without over complicating and over intellectualising the text.
Reading this again but this time in Greek, 4 years later, with maturity and clarity I still admire and respect the writer.
I found it difficult to follow the Greek translation despite the fact that Greek is my native language. The English translation was way better and captured the spirit of the original without over complicating and over intellectualising the text.
April 12, 2021
An intriguing essay rooted in the complications of gay organization in social movements of 1970s France. Conflicts of sexuality are intertwined with conflicts of capitalism like an irksome hydra, and Hocquenghem (as well as translator Wedell) establishes a tone which is neither pedantic nor generalizing. Some recursive rhetoric at points, but for the purposes of the essay (which was almost immediately banned in France upon first publication) it seems neither here nor there.
February 16, 2023
Pretty great! Relatively short read, really interesting to get a glimpse into what theorizing homosexuality meant to 1972 French radicals. Obviously I'm not gonna endorse every word here, but over half a century later, this text still has a lot to offer! Highly recommend - would love to reread this at a later juncture. Chapters 6-8 were especially strong.
March 9, 2023
It started out as something extremely impalpable to me but took a poignant turn as Hocquenghem dives into his take on love, coupledom, phallocracy, power, and etc. He takes issues with everyone and everything including himself. Need to revisit: Chapter 5, 7, and 9.
Read
September 14, 2023i am going to have to reread this at some point
September 15, 2024
My guy was spitting back then however it sometimes felt like he was yappin a lil too much tbh
January 10, 2026
Takes no prisoners!
February 13, 2018
Published in 1973, Hocquenghem provided one of the first examples of Queer theory and provided a necessary critique on traditional psychoanalytical perspectives on Homosexuality.
While starting off dry, this small book quickly becomes an intimate dialogue between the reader the Hocquenghem. Though several texts are referenced, I find the most engaging part is Hocquenghem's own experience.
Hocquenghem separates the Homosexual from his desires towards the same gender. It's constantly reiterated desire is a machine, a machine that drives all humans. He states that the need to define an individual as a homosexual is a product of a Capitalistic society, and Queer culture is as well.
This book makes no attempt to mask the author's disdain toward topics such as capitalistic ideals, homophobic sentiment, cruising culture, marriage culture - and in contrast with other Queer theory it shows how distant and sterile these can become without taking into consideration the subjective nature of the them.
While starting off dry, this small book quickly becomes an intimate dialogue between the reader the Hocquenghem. Though several texts are referenced, I find the most engaging part is Hocquenghem's own experience.
Hocquenghem separates the Homosexual from his desires towards the same gender. It's constantly reiterated desire is a machine, a machine that drives all humans. He states that the need to define an individual as a homosexual is a product of a Capitalistic society, and Queer culture is as well.
This book makes no attempt to mask the author's disdain toward topics such as capitalistic ideals, homophobic sentiment, cruising culture, marriage culture - and in contrast with other Queer theory it shows how distant and sterile these can become without taking into consideration the subjective nature of the them.
December 1, 2019
"This situation has reached the point where the strangeness and phantasmagorical anomaly of daily life that capitalism has created is fought against even before it is perceived. Since they know that every thing is misery, exploitation and political trickery, and since they have established that everything must be systematically criticized, they have completely forgotten the pleasure of observing their surroundings. [...] Physical sensibility to the planet and the play of receptive organs would appear to conceal an enemy of the revolution or some diabolical form of power."
August 26, 2010
I definitely need another read through this one (its conveniently a small/short one), but I'm quite fascinated by it. Central to its discussions are topics of homosexual relationships and shifting power, confusion of revolutionary homosexual acts, so so much more. Its dense, but I like it :)
October 26, 2010
An interesting work especially historically as a proto-queer theory. Good for lambasting the 70's gay/lesbians right movements. He sometimes comes to bizarre conclusions.
February 20, 2011
need to reread this.
February 5, 2015
A little dated, but absolutely amazing!
December 21, 2015
Incoherent.
Displaying 1 - 29 of 29 reviews