What do you think?
Rate this book
Stonewall: The Riots That Sparked the Gay Revolution
David Carter's Stonewall is the basis of the PBS American Experience documentary Stonewall Uprising.
In 1969, a series of riots over police action against The Stonewall Inn, a gay bar in New York City's Greenwich Village, changed the longtime landscape of the homosexual in society literally overnight. Since then the event itself has become the stuff of legend, with relatively little hard information available on the riots themselves. Now, based on hundreds of interviews, an exhaustive search of public and previously sealed files, and over a decade of intensive research into the history and the topic, Stonewall: The Riots That Sparked the Gay Revolution brings this singular event to vivid life in this, the definitive story of one of history's most singular events.
A Randy Shilts / Publishing Triangle Award Finalist
"Riveting...Not only the definitive examination of the riots but an absorbing history of pre-Stonewall America, and how the oppression and pent-up rage of those years finally ignited on a hot New York night." - Boston Globe
In 1969, a series of riots over police action against The Stonewall Inn, a gay bar in New York City's Greenwich Village, changed the longtime landscape of the homosexual in society literally overnight. Since then the event itself has become the stuff of legend, with relatively little hard information available on the riots themselves. Now, based on hundreds of interviews, an exhaustive search of public and previously sealed files, and over a decade of intensive research into the history and the topic, Stonewall: The Riots That Sparked the Gay Revolution brings this singular event to vivid life in this, the definitive story of one of history's most singular events.
A Randy Shilts / Publishing Triangle Award Finalist
"Riveting...Not only the definitive examination of the riots but an absorbing history of pre-Stonewall America, and how the oppression and pent-up rage of those years finally ignited on a hot New York night." - Boston Globe
360 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2004
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 164 reviews
May 20, 2015
Carter claims explicitly that trans people and people of color were marginal to the Stonewall riots. I think that's all I need to say.
April 20, 2018
Although this is great for understanding the issues faced by the LGBT+ community in the lead-up to the Stonewall riots, it is a narrative that ignores prominent figures in the riots, such as Marsha P. Johnson. The author also concludes that the Stonewall riots and the activism that followed, were spearheaded by cis white gay men, and erases the stories of black and brown, lesbian, bisexual and transgender activists of the time.
November 14, 2018
At the heart of Greenwich Village, NY, sits the Stonewall Inn. In 1969, this mafia-run gay bar became the site of a large riot that led to the rising of the Gay Revolution. The area of Greenwich Village near Christopher Park was known as a place where many gay, young, homeless men, struggled to survive or to purposely live among the people they could best identify with. It was also an area heavily run by the mafia. This was also a time when the country was in turmoil due to the Vietnam war, Civil Rights, Women's Liberation, and the rise of the New Left.
To avoid red tape and extra costs, the Stonewall Inn was run as an exclusive club, rather than a bar. The cops were paid off to avoid the area, but occasional raids happened during off-hours to keep up appearances, until one night, Deputy Police Inspector Seymour Pine hatched a plan to close the bar down for good. In a spontaneous raid, Pine and his laches raided the place, sparking a 2-night riot. Many involved in the gay community and supporters of the inn's patrons instigated the riots and eventually started a revolution by coordinating the Gay Liberation Front and the Gay Activist Alliance. Author David Carter profiles key figures involved in the riots, the atmosphere in the gay community, and the events that led up to the raid on June 28, 1969.
Also covered is the aftermath of the riots and the work of GLF and GAA in the months following, as well as the fight for the basic rights of the gay community. This is an important story that needs to be told. The 60s were a time of change and revolution. It was a time that many fought for simple civil rights for minority groups: women, blacks, ethnic groups, and LGBTQ.
This book is very well researched, very readable, and very enlightening.
To avoid red tape and extra costs, the Stonewall Inn was run as an exclusive club, rather than a bar. The cops were paid off to avoid the area, but occasional raids happened during off-hours to keep up appearances, until one night, Deputy Police Inspector Seymour Pine hatched a plan to close the bar down for good. In a spontaneous raid, Pine and his laches raided the place, sparking a 2-night riot. Many involved in the gay community and supporters of the inn's patrons instigated the riots and eventually started a revolution by coordinating the Gay Liberation Front and the Gay Activist Alliance. Author David Carter profiles key figures involved in the riots, the atmosphere in the gay community, and the events that led up to the raid on June 28, 1969.
Also covered is the aftermath of the riots and the work of GLF and GAA in the months following, as well as the fight for the basic rights of the gay community. This is an important story that needs to be told. The 60s were a time of change and revolution. It was a time that many fought for simple civil rights for minority groups: women, blacks, ethnic groups, and LGBTQ.
This book is very well researched, very readable, and very enlightening.
January 29, 2023
As a person not of the LGBTQ community I feel like I learned a lot from the book. But also since I have little intimate knowledge of this community I find it hard to know just how accurate the representation and lens that the author was looking at it thru.
From that perspective I found that it was very though and it was set up in a good fashion. He took six of the major players and set them up like chapters. First going thru their childhood, teen years, and college years then where they were for Stonewall. What they did after the movement and even a endcap for their lives.
I felt like he did a good job of showing just how complex civil rights are. No matter for what group. It is rare that two people agree on how they should be treated let alone a whole group. And while we all deserve dignity, respect and grace a lot of people see those two things differently and how to go about getting them very differently.
I'm glad I got a chance to read this book.
From that perspective I found that it was very though and it was set up in a good fashion. He took six of the major players and set them up like chapters. First going thru their childhood, teen years, and college years then where they were for Stonewall. What they did after the movement and even a endcap for their lives.
I felt like he did a good job of showing just how complex civil rights are. No matter for what group. It is rare that two people agree on how they should be treated let alone a whole group. And while we all deserve dignity, respect and grace a lot of people see those two things differently and how to go about getting them very differently.
I'm glad I got a chance to read this book.
October 27, 2017
This is THE book to read if you're interested in the subject. I needed to research the subject for a chapter in my gay soldiers book, and after quite a bit of reading, this was the source that came up regularly as the definitive account. It really captured the details of the entire series of events, as well as the background and context.
And it was also an engaging read.
And it was also an engaging read.
March 10, 2021
This was alright.
If you're doing research it's great, thoroughly researched, lots of details and points of view on the events. If you're researching around Stonewall, it's definitely a great read.
However, if you're someone just wanting to know more about the Stonewall Riots, I don't think you should pick this up. It's super dense and dry, difficult to read and remember the many people mentionned (I got through it okay because I had the physical copy AND the audiobook). Like, informative, but not a great time.
It still made me tear up a few times haha. It's a history book, so very much not written in an emotional way, but queer history has a unique way to make me emotional out of nowhere.
Also, it's very, very obviously written and researched by a white cis man. Wouldn't recommend it to trans readers especially, because it's full of "transgendered men" to refer to trans women, and it's pretty icky on all trans stuff. There was an attempt at inclusion at times, lol, but still lots of misgendering and deadnaming, erasure of well-known trans names of the movement (Marsha P. Jonhson is mentionned twice in passing, no mentions of Sylvia Rivera). There's a point of view of someone who is clearly a trans woman but who the author deadnames and misgenders until she's "dressed up" to go out to the Stonewall.
The author also contradicts himself in his conclusions. He makes it very clear through the book that trans women, gender non-conforming people, and lesbians were instrumental to the riots and still concludes that the movement was mostly white cis gays.
Anyway, it's probably a must if you're doing research around the subject, if you're just curious to know a little more about the riots without things like the geographical details, it's probably not the book for you.
If you're doing research it's great, thoroughly researched, lots of details and points of view on the events. If you're researching around Stonewall, it's definitely a great read.
However, if you're someone just wanting to know more about the Stonewall Riots, I don't think you should pick this up. It's super dense and dry, difficult to read and remember the many people mentionned (I got through it okay because I had the physical copy AND the audiobook). Like, informative, but not a great time.
It still made me tear up a few times haha. It's a history book, so very much not written in an emotional way, but queer history has a unique way to make me emotional out of nowhere.
Also, it's very, very obviously written and researched by a white cis man. Wouldn't recommend it to trans readers especially, because it's full of "transgendered men" to refer to trans women, and it's pretty icky on all trans stuff. There was an attempt at inclusion at times, lol, but still lots of misgendering and deadnaming, erasure of well-known trans names of the movement (Marsha P. Jonhson is mentionned twice in passing, no mentions of Sylvia Rivera). There's a point of view of someone who is clearly a trans woman but who the author deadnames and misgenders until she's "dressed up" to go out to the Stonewall.
The author also contradicts himself in his conclusions. He makes it very clear through the book that trans women, gender non-conforming people, and lesbians were instrumental to the riots and still concludes that the movement was mostly white cis gays.
Anyway, it's probably a must if you're doing research around the subject, if you're just curious to know a little more about the riots without things like the geographical details, it's probably not the book for you.
January 3, 2016
Engaging history, though I was puzzled by some of the author's conclusions. A number of names are mentioned. Sadly, many of the most compelling figures of the era, like Marsha P. Johnson and Zazu Nova, died before they could be interviewed. Strangely, though the author wrote about lesbians, transgendered individuals, and effeminate gay men of different races and ethnicities, he felt compelled to state that the majority of people responsible for the riots were white, gay, cisgendered men. This conclusion seems counter to what he just wrote about. I appreciated this book mostly for the context of blackmail and organized crime that surrounded the Stonewall raid.
December 21, 2013
David Carter's Stonewall is a tremendously comprehensive look at the June/July 1969 riots. Indeed, the book first gives the reader a rundown on the history of Greenwich village, as well as the urban design that led to the short, one-way streets and triangular lots around the bar. If it is related to the Stonewall riots, Carter covers it.
Of particular interest were the human stories. Ed Murphy, the gay Mafioso that blackmailed wealthy, closeted gay men, and pimped the underage and poor. Murphy was able to whitewash his image after the riots, taking control of the Christopher Street Liberation March and changing its route so that it ended in Greenwich Village where he still controlled many locales. It appears that with his death in 1989, he has become long forgotten, which is for the best, really. Other interesting people were the street youth that first rioted, their histories courtesy of Thomas Lanigan-Schmidt and Bob Kohler; the conservative homophile activists that chided the kids for the destruction, such as Dick Leitsch and Randy Wicker; the deputy inspector, Seymour Pine, who led the raid; and the Gay Liberation Front and Gay Activists Alliance who smartly took advantage of the momentum to improve the lives of LGBT people.
As well as providing a full account of the riots, David Carter's book seeks to settle the most debated questions about the event, namely, was Seymour Pine lying when he claimed that the raid wasn't motivated by homophobia, but rather because the manager, Ed Murphy, was operating a blackmail ring out of the bar? Was there really a lesbian who urged the onlookers to help her? What was the extent of the involvement of transgender people? Do the riots lose their significance now that we know just what a Mafia den the Stonewall was? Was Judy Garland's death connected to the riots? Etc.
Carter leads the reader through the whole gamut of emotions, first sadness and powerlessness as he lays the background for the riots, and just what a shitty situation LGBT people lived in before the riots, then anger and joy as the rioters get the best of the cops, and finally, satisfaction, as the GLF and GAA seize the moment, force the hand of politicians in their favor and organize dances that were, finally, not Mafia-controlled.
The narration is fairly slow to start (that chapter on urban deisgn!) and fairly dense and impenetrable at times, which may lead the uninvested to give up before Carter gets down to business. So I dock a point for that. Otherwise, Stonewall is highly recommended, to the point where even the footnotes deserve attention and add details.
Of particular interest were the human stories. Ed Murphy, the gay Mafioso that blackmailed wealthy, closeted gay men, and pimped the underage and poor. Murphy was able to whitewash his image after the riots, taking control of the Christopher Street Liberation March and changing its route so that it ended in Greenwich Village where he still controlled many locales. It appears that with his death in 1989, he has become long forgotten, which is for the best, really. Other interesting people were the street youth that first rioted, their histories courtesy of Thomas Lanigan-Schmidt and Bob Kohler; the conservative homophile activists that chided the kids for the destruction, such as Dick Leitsch and Randy Wicker; the deputy inspector, Seymour Pine, who led the raid; and the Gay Liberation Front and Gay Activists Alliance who smartly took advantage of the momentum to improve the lives of LGBT people.
As well as providing a full account of the riots, David Carter's book seeks to settle the most debated questions about the event, namely, was Seymour Pine lying when he claimed that the raid wasn't motivated by homophobia, but rather because the manager, Ed Murphy, was operating a blackmail ring out of the bar? Was there really a lesbian who urged the onlookers to help her? What was the extent of the involvement of transgender people? Do the riots lose their significance now that we know just what a Mafia den the Stonewall was? Was Judy Garland's death connected to the riots? Etc.
Carter leads the reader through the whole gamut of emotions, first sadness and powerlessness as he lays the background for the riots, and just what a shitty situation LGBT people lived in before the riots, then anger and joy as the rioters get the best of the cops, and finally, satisfaction, as the GLF and GAA seize the moment, force the hand of politicians in their favor and organize dances that were, finally, not Mafia-controlled.
The narration is fairly slow to start (that chapter on urban deisgn!) and fairly dense and impenetrable at times, which may lead the uninvested to give up before Carter gets down to business. So I dock a point for that. Otherwise, Stonewall is highly recommended, to the point where even the footnotes deserve attention and add details.
December 24, 2011
This book is so good. But holy shit does it ever make me want to punch a cop.
June 10, 2019
Though I learned a lot that I didn't know about Greenwich Village in the late 60's, this book felt myopic and exclusionary in its analysis of the role of certain demographics at the Riots, particularly trans women of color. If you can count on one hand the amount of times Marsha P Johnson is mentioned - always in briefest passing - in a book about the Stonewall Riots, you know you've missed the mark.
July 2, 2024
4.5 audiobook
August 2, 2021
While “Stonewall: The Riots that Sparked the Gay Revolution” by David Carter covers the history of the famous “riots” in front of the Stonewall Inn in 1969, it actually does quite a bit more. The first half of the book covers background of what it was like to be gay in the 1950s and 1960s, the corruption and harassment of police officers (not to mention the odious program of entrapment), and how the only gay bars in the 1960s were run by the Mafia. The 1960s were a tumultuous decade where the ideas of the civil rights movement took root into all historically oppressed groups, and the riots were one more expression of an “out” group demanding equality. The Stonewall riots were the spark that ignited the gay rights movement. This was significant in two ways – first, the riots (and I use the term loosely as they were far more contained and less violent than other more famous riots of the 1960s) were the first time the rioters got the better of the police by using strength of numbers and by taking advantage of the unique geography of the neighborhood to constantly evade the police and regroup back where they started. Second, while the riots themselves were significant, they created a momentum of sustained exposure to the budding gay rights movement that can still be seen today. My favorite part of the riots? - the homeless youths taunting the police via kickline!
May 11, 2023
im extremely dubious of this account as a complete narrative of the stonewall riots. the author will take great pains to list off the name of every gay male involved he can, and then will describe everyone else as “one lesbian” or “a group of transvestites.” he acknowledges that transwomen and lesbians fought the hardest and had the most to lose, but then……. Really did not elaborate on the particulars AT ALL. my lip genuinely curled at how much attention was diverted at the start of the riot to a bunch of gay men standing around and watching while lesbians and trans people were (transwomen) were doing all of the disruptive work to cause change. Significant, well-known names from the movement are completely left out or glossed over. My rating may change as I read around further on the subject, but I doubt it
June 26, 2020
Ignores the role Black trans women like Marsha P Johnson and other PoC played in the birth of the movement. Some good history is there, but I can’t overlook this omission.
November 10, 2017
I initially became interested in the book while looking into the life of Ed "The Skull" Murphy, a man involved in the blackmailing of homosexuals, child sex trafficking, and the Mafia.
Carter dishes on Murphy, but the book is concerned with the subject of gay rights and activism before and after Stonewall. The story is interesting and engaging, involving Mafiosos, cops, "respectable" gay activists, and the "gender fluid" (to use a modern term) homeless youth who congregated both in Stonewall and in the Village as a whole.
My primary critique is minor, in that Carter sometimes drops a person into the narrative without explaining who he or she is. This happened a couple of times, most notably for me with Leo Martello.
Martello was involved both in the gay liberation movement and the early Wicca/Neopagan movement in NYC. He's a very interesting person himself, tied to not just GLF but the Magickal Childe, other New York homosexuals, and early pagan publications, including a series of books that he wrote about the early days of American Wicca, Satanism, etc.
I don't expect Carter to chronicle the early pagan movement in NYC, but some information on the man and the roles he played in two different, but now very important, groups would have been welcome, especially since he is mostly forgotten nowadays.
Another minor issue, this not being Carter's fault, is that a number of key players at the time could not be interviewed because they have long since passed away. The street kids especially had rather short life spans because of turning tricks, doing drugs, heavy drinking, anti-gay attacks, etc. and all of this before AIDS. Further, many used street names, drag names, etc. making tracking them down all but impossible.
Despite these two minor complaints, one of which is beyond the author's control, this is well worth reading.
Carter dishes on Murphy, but the book is concerned with the subject of gay rights and activism before and after Stonewall. The story is interesting and engaging, involving Mafiosos, cops, "respectable" gay activists, and the "gender fluid" (to use a modern term) homeless youth who congregated both in Stonewall and in the Village as a whole.
My primary critique is minor, in that Carter sometimes drops a person into the narrative without explaining who he or she is. This happened a couple of times, most notably for me with Leo Martello.
Martello was involved both in the gay liberation movement and the early Wicca/Neopagan movement in NYC. He's a very interesting person himself, tied to not just GLF but the Magickal Childe, other New York homosexuals, and early pagan publications, including a series of books that he wrote about the early days of American Wicca, Satanism, etc.
I don't expect Carter to chronicle the early pagan movement in NYC, but some information on the man and the roles he played in two different, but now very important, groups would have been welcome, especially since he is mostly forgotten nowadays.
Another minor issue, this not being Carter's fault, is that a number of key players at the time could not be interviewed because they have long since passed away. The street kids especially had rather short life spans because of turning tricks, doing drugs, heavy drinking, anti-gay attacks, etc. and all of this before AIDS. Further, many used street names, drag names, etc. making tracking them down all but impossible.
Despite these two minor complaints, one of which is beyond the author's control, this is well worth reading.
June 27, 2018
This account of the Stonewall riots, including the events leading up to it and resulting from it, was comprehensive, well-researched and very readable. It has definitely helped me to put the events in context and to better understand the history of the LGBTQ rights movement. Well worth reading.
February 17, 2013
I wasn't sure I was going to like this one. About halfway through, I was seriously considering giving up. Too much in the way of speculation about motives and various shadowy Mafia figures involved in the illegal bars, etc. But then, once the buildup to the bust of the Stonewall Inn and the subsequent riots began, the book was EXCELLENT. Very good "frontline" story telling. It also gave the perspective of the police who were initially trapped inside the building, which I quite liked.
I also found the "aftermath" section very interesting, about the formation of the GLF and GAA, and the almost overnight creation of the gay rights movement as a serious political force. Not to denigrate the efforts over the previous decades by activists, but the explosion in activism and support can be linked fairly clearly with Stonewall.
So, I do recommend this to not only readers interested in gay rights and gay history, but for anyone interested in an under-reported aspect of the tumultuous late 60s. Just give it some time, and you'll be rewarded.
I also found the "aftermath" section very interesting, about the formation of the GLF and GAA, and the almost overnight creation of the gay rights movement as a serious political force. Not to denigrate the efforts over the previous decades by activists, but the explosion in activism and support can be linked fairly clearly with Stonewall.
So, I do recommend this to not only readers interested in gay rights and gay history, but for anyone interested in an under-reported aspect of the tumultuous late 60s. Just give it some time, and you'll be rewarded.
June 19, 2022
Decent rundown of the events of the riots. The mafia/J. Edgar Hoover connection was interesting. Main critiques, to echo other reviews: the author's conclusions section is bizarre and detracts from the book overall. Further, he deliberately avoids using words like "transgender" or "non-binary," given that they are more recent terms that weren't used at the time. I suppose that's not a terrible justification, but that could have been front-loaded to the beginning and absolutely should have been handled more thoughtfully.
July 1, 2016
Extremely well written. Less droning lecture and more a spirited storytelling adventure. While reading, I felt like I was really there, in Greenwich Village, witnessing history as it happened. Consider me delightfully enlightened.
August 25, 2021
(3.5)
to say that i have mixed feelings would be an understatement. i picked the book up when i managed to turn one of my most recent research spirals into something viable for uni assignments (my new approach is that if i am not taught what i want i will find a way to teach myself and make it everyone else's problem) and i must say — the book is very exhaustive. it covers not only the events of the riots, but what led up to them, the socio-political situation not only of NYC but also of San Francisco, the legislations against and the grievances of the queer community in the sixties, the political organisations that followed.
however. this is the story of gay (caucasian) men, with some lesbians peppered in here and there. trans and poc folx take on a marginal role, when they are mentioned, depicting a version of the stonewall riots far different from the one i've grown accustomed to. the language is also far from ideal (e.g. trans women are addressed as "transgendered men") and while Carter does justify both linguistic choices and narratives in the conclusions, i think much can be said about inclusiveness and who is in charge of deciding what side of history gets told.
to say that i have mixed feelings would be an understatement. i picked the book up when i managed to turn one of my most recent research spirals into something viable for uni assignments (my new approach is that if i am not taught what i want i will find a way to teach myself and make it everyone else's problem) and i must say — the book is very exhaustive. it covers not only the events of the riots, but what led up to them, the socio-political situation not only of NYC but also of San Francisco, the legislations against and the grievances of the queer community in the sixties, the political organisations that followed.
however. this is the story of gay (caucasian) men, with some lesbians peppered in here and there. trans and poc folx take on a marginal role, when they are mentioned, depicting a version of the stonewall riots far different from the one i've grown accustomed to. the language is also far from ideal (e.g. trans women are addressed as "transgendered men") and while Carter does justify both linguistic choices and narratives in the conclusions, i think much can be said about inclusiveness and who is in charge of deciding what side of history gets told.
September 30, 2017
David Carter presents the definitive look at the event that is generally considered the birth of the Gay Rights Movement. Carter's exhaustive search through archives and meticulously collected eyewitness accounts capture the event in vivid detail, but it is his framing of the actual riots with an in-depth look at what it was like to be gay in America during the 60s, the political and legal landscape in New York, and the individual key players, that establishes a much-needed context. Equally important is the author's exploration of the ramifications of Stonewall - particularly the birth of countless activist organizations that were spawned as a result . Finally, Carter dispels some important misconceptions: Judy Garland's death on the same day was purely coincidence and played no part in the riots (p. 259), and although some of the key figures in the events leading up to the riots were persons of color and transvestites (Marsha P. Johnson, "The Congo Queen," etc.), the majority of those involved on the front lines were, contrary to popular belief, caucasian (p. 262). Not that this matters in the least, but much brouhaha was made over the supposed "whitewashing" of the recent Hollywood depiction which, as it turns out, was quite accurate in many ways.
I would like to note that a PBS documentary (Stonewall Uprising) was based on Carter's book, but does not do it justice. It should only be used as a companion to the book, not a substitution. I highly recommend this book for historians or anyone interested in an insightful and accessible book on LGBT history.
I would like to note that a PBS documentary (Stonewall Uprising) was based on Carter's book, but does not do it justice. It should only be used as a companion to the book, not a substitution. I highly recommend this book for historians or anyone interested in an insightful and accessible book on LGBT history.
December 24, 2024
It took me AGES to read this. Mostly because of my nonfiction aversion, but also the first chapter. The first one is recounting where exactly Stonewall was, what was around it, the history of the area etc and it was SUPER dry and boring. But once you get past that, it gets more interesting. Still, it's nonfiction, so yeah. In the end, I enjoyed this and felt like I learned some stuff.
I also need to point out that at least one reviewer has stated that the author is transphobic and a lot of people have condemned his book. I at least wish I'd known that before I read it...because I could have looked for that. As it was, I didn't notice anything. But I'm a cis white woman. So have any of you read this? What did you think? And what did I miss?
I also need to point out that at least one reviewer has stated that the author is transphobic and a lot of people have condemned his book. I at least wish I'd known that before I read it...because I could have looked for that. As it was, I didn't notice anything. But I'm a cis white woman. So have any of you read this? What did you think? And what did I miss?
October 1, 2020
The book I read for my September book report is called “Stonewall The Riots That Sparked The Gay Revolution.” I was excited to crack into this book because this subject has always interested me.
The story is a retelling of what gave my community rights not that many years ago. The story takes place in New York, specifically a place called Greenwich Village. The beginning of the book gives a relatively long background of this town. Although I found myself growing bored and caught my mind wandering several times the boredom didn’t last for long.
Soon the story kicked off with (now) some of my favorite people in history. Their names were Marsha P. Johnson and Sylvia Rivera. These wonderful trans women of color not only led the uprisings, but also have impacted the community in many other ways!
Overall I give this book a four out of five stars. The only reason it has not received five is because I have never been much of a fan of nonfiction. As a result, it was a little difficult for me to get through this book.
The story is a retelling of what gave my community rights not that many years ago. The story takes place in New York, specifically a place called Greenwich Village. The beginning of the book gives a relatively long background of this town. Although I found myself growing bored and caught my mind wandering several times the boredom didn’t last for long.
Soon the story kicked off with (now) some of my favorite people in history. Their names were Marsha P. Johnson and Sylvia Rivera. These wonderful trans women of color not only led the uprisings, but also have impacted the community in many other ways!
Overall I give this book a four out of five stars. The only reason it has not received five is because I have never been much of a fan of nonfiction. As a result, it was a little difficult for me to get through this book.
February 25, 2021
This was a pretty comprehensive overview of the gay rights revolution not just the Stonewall riots. I thought it would mainly just centered on Stonewall but it gives a good background on what led to the riots as well as the activism that continued thereafter. What really stuck me so vividly were the laws against homosexuality that were enforced not that far in the past. I can't imagine such a ridiculous waste of tax payers money and use of police but it really brings home how the police can be used for unlawful activities. Although we still have a long way to go, it is encouraging to see how far we have already come.
June 21, 2022
This book goes into many of the injustices experienced by the LGBTQ community before Stonewall, during the Stonewall riots, and even after the riots. This book is well done and eye opening.
How did I find this book? It was a suggestion last year through Cloud Library. When I finally received it I had several others books and Pride month had passed, so I made an effort to read it this year.
How did I find this book? It was a suggestion last year through Cloud Library. When I finally received it I had several others books and Pride month had passed, so I made an effort to read it this year.
July 22, 2019
This is a must read book. I had heard of the riots but never understood the impact or the what/ why of them. Wow. What a fascinating look at what happened.
April 24, 2017
So far, I am enjoying this book very much and not even half way through it I feel as if I learned more about the gay right's movement then I have in my entire lifetime. The introduction gives a clear picture for the setting of the Stonewall riots and how much of a "powder keg" the whole scene/crowd was, being at the tail end of the civil rights movement in America during that decade.
"[Arthur Evans] noticed a quotation by the revolutionary [George Washington] inscribed on the arch's top: "Let us raise a standard to which the wise and the honest may repair."" pg. 29
"The presence of drag queens at the Stonewall Inn has been much exaggerated over the years for a number of reasons. One of the first is a terminology problem. The word queen [italicized] was more widely used in the late sixties to indicate any gay man who was not conventionally masculine, whereas today the word usually occurs in the phrase drag queen or indicates a very gay male. Thus when a contemporary person reads about "a whole bunch of queens," the picture that may come to mind is one of transvestites, whereas the 1960s usage probably simply indicated a group of gay men, with the understanding that none of them were totally straight-acting.
Complicating the picture is the existence in the late 1960s of gay men known as scare queens or flame queens. One of the club's regular customers explains the meaning of these terms that describe a kind of gay male who became practically nonexistent not long after 1969: "What you had back then was flame queens, which were very similar to the character Emory in Boys in the Band: they were super-effeminate, hair would be teased, they would wear eye makeup, Tom Jones-type shirts, maybe hip-huggers, bright colors." pp. 75-76
"While other clubs and settings may have offered places for socializing and making romantic and sexual liaisons and while there were a number of clubs where people could dance, the Stonewall was the only sizable place where gay men could express their sexuality freely and openly for sustained periods of time. Bathhouses offered places where gay men could actually have sex--that was the bathhouses' sole purpose--but socializing there was largely incidental to sexual activity. In other words, the Stonewall Inn was the only place where gay men could express all sides of their personalities. Not only could gay men dance freely, but there also could be a certain expansiveness about their dancing, given the physical size of the club and the security provided by the Mafia." pp. 87-88
"Many other credible witnesses offer similar testimony concerning the gay street youth. Lanigan-Schmidt says, "What I know definitely from my own experience is that the people who did the most fighting were the drag queens and the hustlers. [They] fought with the same ferocity they would fight with any situation of survival put their sense of dignity on the line, very much like Bob Dylan's 'When you ain't got nothing, you got nothing to lose.' " pg. 162
"What is the Gay Liberation Front?," the answer was given was, if grounded in theory:
We are a revolutionary homosexual group of men and women formed with the realization that complete sexual liberation for all people cannot come about unless existing social institutions are abolished. We reject society's attempt to impose sexual roles and definitions of our nature. We are stepping outside these roles and simplistic myths. We are going to be who we are. At the same time, we are creating new social forms and relations, that is, relations based upon brotherhood, cooperation, human love, and uninhibited sexuality. Babylon has forced us to commit ourselves to one thing . . . revolution." pg. 219
"The media-savvy group realized that it could be highly beneficial to have a log or symbol, which was provided by Marty Robinson's new lover, Tom Doerr, a graphic design artist....the symbol Doerr suggested was that of the lambda, the eleventh letter of the Greek lowercase alphabet, which resembles an inverted letter Y...the lambda was chosen because in chemistry and physics it symbolizes a complete exchange of energy, "that moment that's witness to absolute activity." pg. 237
"[Arthur Evans] noticed a quotation by the revolutionary [George Washington] inscribed on the arch's top: "Let us raise a standard to which the wise and the honest may repair."" pg. 29
"The presence of drag queens at the Stonewall Inn has been much exaggerated over the years for a number of reasons. One of the first is a terminology problem. The word queen [italicized] was more widely used in the late sixties to indicate any gay man who was not conventionally masculine, whereas today the word usually occurs in the phrase drag queen or indicates a very gay male. Thus when a contemporary person reads about "a whole bunch of queens," the picture that may come to mind is one of transvestites, whereas the 1960s usage probably simply indicated a group of gay men, with the understanding that none of them were totally straight-acting.
Complicating the picture is the existence in the late 1960s of gay men known as scare queens or flame queens. One of the club's regular customers explains the meaning of these terms that describe a kind of gay male who became practically nonexistent not long after 1969: "What you had back then was flame queens, which were very similar to the character Emory in Boys in the Band: they were super-effeminate, hair would be teased, they would wear eye makeup, Tom Jones-type shirts, maybe hip-huggers, bright colors." pp. 75-76
"While other clubs and settings may have offered places for socializing and making romantic and sexual liaisons and while there were a number of clubs where people could dance, the Stonewall was the only sizable place where gay men could express their sexuality freely and openly for sustained periods of time. Bathhouses offered places where gay men could actually have sex--that was the bathhouses' sole purpose--but socializing there was largely incidental to sexual activity. In other words, the Stonewall Inn was the only place where gay men could express all sides of their personalities. Not only could gay men dance freely, but there also could be a certain expansiveness about their dancing, given the physical size of the club and the security provided by the Mafia." pp. 87-88
"Many other credible witnesses offer similar testimony concerning the gay street youth. Lanigan-Schmidt says, "What I know definitely from my own experience is that the people who did the most fighting were the drag queens and the hustlers. [They] fought with the same ferocity they would fight with any situation of survival put their sense of dignity on the line, very much like Bob Dylan's 'When you ain't got nothing, you got nothing to lose.' " pg. 162
"What is the Gay Liberation Front?," the answer was given was, if grounded in theory:
We are a revolutionary homosexual group of men and women formed with the realization that complete sexual liberation for all people cannot come about unless existing social institutions are abolished. We reject society's attempt to impose sexual roles and definitions of our nature. We are stepping outside these roles and simplistic myths. We are going to be who we are. At the same time, we are creating new social forms and relations, that is, relations based upon brotherhood, cooperation, human love, and uninhibited sexuality. Babylon has forced us to commit ourselves to one thing . . . revolution." pg. 219
"The media-savvy group realized that it could be highly beneficial to have a log or symbol, which was provided by Marty Robinson's new lover, Tom Doerr, a graphic design artist....the symbol Doerr suggested was that of the lambda, the eleventh letter of the Greek lowercase alphabet, which resembles an inverted letter Y...the lambda was chosen because in chemistry and physics it symbolizes a complete exchange of energy, "that moment that's witness to absolute activity." pg. 237
July 14, 2026
So this book started out really strong! Part 1: Setting the Stage, did a great job in doing just that. The history of Greenwich Village, Christopher Street, and the Stonewall Inn was fascinating, it felt really well researched, and I feel like I learned a lot. Part 1, also set the stage with a very in-depth history of gay rights (or lack thereof) in the US, and New York, in the runup to the riots. While I suspected things were bad, David Carter did a good job of highlighting just how dire it was for Queer people during this time. I know there aren’t many modern societies where being Queer wasn’t dangerous at some stage, but the US really outdid itself — and unfortunately still does — at feigning moral superiority.
“Throughout the 1950s and 1960s, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and police departments kept lists of known homosexuals and their favored establishments and friends; the U.S. Post Office kept track of addresses where material pertaining to homosexuality was mailed. State and local governments followed suit: bars catering to gay men and lesbians were shut down and their customers were arrested and exposed in newspapers. Cities performed “sweeps” to rid neighborhoods, parks, bars, and beaches of gay people. They outlawed the wearing of opposite-gender clothes and universities expelled instructors suspected of being homosexual.”
Adam, Barry (1987). The Rise of a Gay and Lesbian Movement
Moral laws? Really? I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again, whoever did the PR for the US when trying to get people to help colonise it, should win an award for the greatest bullshit artist ever, because that whole ‘land of the free, home of the brave’ thing was — and still is — the greatest crock of shit. The US will only ever be a utopia for straight cis white men, and I’ll never be convinced otherwise!
Sometimes though, sometimes some light will peek through all the faux moral outrage, and we see beautiful acts of rebellion, rebellion that can usher in real change, not just change in the US, but change that can become global. The Stonewall Riots were such an act.
“It is as if on the morning of June 28, 1969, America symbolically got back the anger she had created by her neglect of her most despised children: the fairies, queens, and nelly boys she had so utterly abandoned, saying she did not want them.”
Unfortunately this was the part of the book where David Carter began to lose me!
Carter interviewed people who were at Stonewall on the night of June 28, so we get lots of first hand accounts of what happened, and who was there — but see there are some caveats. Of the roughly 200 people that were reported to be there that night, Carter interviewed 19 people, and from what I could gather, all of those 19 people were cis white men. And I didn’t get the impression that any of those cis white men were street queens, street queens who were most definitely there, and by accounts in this very book, were heavily involved in what happened!
Now here is the thing, this book was written over 30 years after the riots, and unfortunately it’s highly likely that a large number of those who were there on that night, died due to AIDS related illnesses within that time. The most vulnerable of those people were the street queens. I feel like this is where what I can only see as whitewashing begins. I don’t think that it was wholly intentional, or at least I thought that until the conclusions. Those who were Queer and were interviewed, seemed to have been heavily involved in the movement after the riots. And even I, an Irish straight cis white woman, know that a lot of people in those organisations weren’t exactly welcoming to certain types of Queer people. Trans people for example! Black Trans women in particular!!
Now I know the term ‘history is written by the victors’ gets thrown around a lot, and the recording of historical events are much more nuanced than that, but in this case it really does feel a bit like ‘history was written by those who were the only ones left to tell it’ and I fear that those left had a certain view on what way those involved in Stonewall, and what came after, should be recorded.
I’m not saying that those who were interviewed lied, and I’m not even saying that Carter was biased — although it kind of felt like that — but by stating in the conclusion that the riots were started primarily by cis white men, based on the interviewing of only cis white men, I got very ‘only the good Gays’ were involved vibes.
And what do I mean by ‘only the good Gays’ you may ask? Well to be frank, I mean ‘conservative’ Gays. The ‘I’m Gay, not Queer’ kind of people.
I’d been trying to work out what it was that was making me uncomfortable about the whitewashing while reading this, and I couldn’t put my finger on it. Then at the very end of Pride month, The New York Times published an opinion piece by Matthew Vines titled ‘I’m Gay, Not Queer. It Matters’ on 30 June 2026, and that perfectly encapsulated the feelings I got while reading this book. It felt like there was an ‘othering’ of those who didn’t fit the narrative — the trans people, the BIPOC, the lesbians, the street queens, and hustlers — they became almost a footnote in this book.
Again, I don’t think there is outright lies here, but I think there is a lack of nuance in regard to what happened that night. I believe those who were interviewed believed that they were the only catalyst for the beginning of a movement. That does not make it true, and it does not discount all the many other accounts of that night. Accounts like the Lesbian being detained, the street queens squaring off with police, the ones that recount Trans women being there that night. Accounts Carter actually retells, but then for some reason in the conclusion totally discounts in favour of cis white men. It’s mind boggling!
So I was already a little tetchy, but then…
Oh but then…
The copaganda!!!!!
Now, I was getting a slight sniff of it when Carter was recounting what was happening when the cops were trapped inside the Stonewall Inn. That sniff was coming from how the author recounted the actions of Deputy Inspector Seymour Pine. It felt like Pine was getting praised for doing his actual job and ensuring that his officers *NOT* shoot people. I’m sorry, was that not what this man was being paid to do? Serve and PROTECT?!?!
So the sniff was there, but nothing could have prepared me for the praise that man got in the conclusion!
I refuse to believe that his man, who served in the military, and was in the police force and served out of a precinct notorious for harassing Queer people, was not in some way homophobic at that time. He may well have grown as a person as the years went by, but at that time, I have a hard time believing that we was not harassing Queer people, when harassing Queer people seemed to be de rigueur for police officers at that time. But according to the conclusions that’s not the case! Pine’s story remained consistent throughout his life you see, and well some tourists who spoke to Pine when you lived in Israel in the 1990’s backed that up. So you see, there is no way that Pine was a bad guy. A member of the police force would never lie you see! *massive side-eye*
I feel like the conclusions in this book were just not needed. This piece of work apparently took over 10 years, and while it was certainly guilty of whitewashing and copaganda within the body of the work, it was never as blatant as it was in the conclusions, and it quite frankly ruined any of the research that came before. I don’t feel like I can trust the accounts in this book now. Luckily there is any number of other accounts of what happened at the Stonewall Inn on 28 June 1969, and even though we are living in what feels like an uncertain time for our LGBTQIA+ communities — especially in the US — The Stonewall Inn and those that stood up to oppression that night, and the nights that followed, will continue to be symbols of the power of rebellion!
“Throughout the 1950s and 1960s, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and police departments kept lists of known homosexuals and their favored establishments and friends; the U.S. Post Office kept track of addresses where material pertaining to homosexuality was mailed. State and local governments followed suit: bars catering to gay men and lesbians were shut down and their customers were arrested and exposed in newspapers. Cities performed “sweeps” to rid neighborhoods, parks, bars, and beaches of gay people. They outlawed the wearing of opposite-gender clothes and universities expelled instructors suspected of being homosexual.”
Adam, Barry (1987). The Rise of a Gay and Lesbian Movement
Moral laws? Really? I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again, whoever did the PR for the US when trying to get people to help colonise it, should win an award for the greatest bullshit artist ever, because that whole ‘land of the free, home of the brave’ thing was — and still is — the greatest crock of shit. The US will only ever be a utopia for straight cis white men, and I’ll never be convinced otherwise!
Sometimes though, sometimes some light will peek through all the faux moral outrage, and we see beautiful acts of rebellion, rebellion that can usher in real change, not just change in the US, but change that can become global. The Stonewall Riots were such an act.
“It is as if on the morning of June 28, 1969, America symbolically got back the anger she had created by her neglect of her most despised children: the fairies, queens, and nelly boys she had so utterly abandoned, saying she did not want them.”
Unfortunately this was the part of the book where David Carter began to lose me!
Carter interviewed people who were at Stonewall on the night of June 28, so we get lots of first hand accounts of what happened, and who was there — but see there are some caveats. Of the roughly 200 people that were reported to be there that night, Carter interviewed 19 people, and from what I could gather, all of those 19 people were cis white men. And I didn’t get the impression that any of those cis white men were street queens, street queens who were most definitely there, and by accounts in this very book, were heavily involved in what happened!
Now here is the thing, this book was written over 30 years after the riots, and unfortunately it’s highly likely that a large number of those who were there on that night, died due to AIDS related illnesses within that time. The most vulnerable of those people were the street queens. I feel like this is where what I can only see as whitewashing begins. I don’t think that it was wholly intentional, or at least I thought that until the conclusions. Those who were Queer and were interviewed, seemed to have been heavily involved in the movement after the riots. And even I, an Irish straight cis white woman, know that a lot of people in those organisations weren’t exactly welcoming to certain types of Queer people. Trans people for example! Black Trans women in particular!!
Now I know the term ‘history is written by the victors’ gets thrown around a lot, and the recording of historical events are much more nuanced than that, but in this case it really does feel a bit like ‘history was written by those who were the only ones left to tell it’ and I fear that those left had a certain view on what way those involved in Stonewall, and what came after, should be recorded.
I’m not saying that those who were interviewed lied, and I’m not even saying that Carter was biased — although it kind of felt like that — but by stating in the conclusion that the riots were started primarily by cis white men, based on the interviewing of only cis white men, I got very ‘only the good Gays’ were involved vibes.
And what do I mean by ‘only the good Gays’ you may ask? Well to be frank, I mean ‘conservative’ Gays. The ‘I’m Gay, not Queer’ kind of people.
I’d been trying to work out what it was that was making me uncomfortable about the whitewashing while reading this, and I couldn’t put my finger on it. Then at the very end of Pride month, The New York Times published an opinion piece by Matthew Vines titled ‘I’m Gay, Not Queer. It Matters’ on 30 June 2026, and that perfectly encapsulated the feelings I got while reading this book. It felt like there was an ‘othering’ of those who didn’t fit the narrative — the trans people, the BIPOC, the lesbians, the street queens, and hustlers — they became almost a footnote in this book.
Again, I don’t think there is outright lies here, but I think there is a lack of nuance in regard to what happened that night. I believe those who were interviewed believed that they were the only catalyst for the beginning of a movement. That does not make it true, and it does not discount all the many other accounts of that night. Accounts like the Lesbian being detained, the street queens squaring off with police, the ones that recount Trans women being there that night. Accounts Carter actually retells, but then for some reason in the conclusion totally discounts in favour of cis white men. It’s mind boggling!
So I was already a little tetchy, but then…
Oh but then…
The copaganda!!!!!
Now, I was getting a slight sniff of it when Carter was recounting what was happening when the cops were trapped inside the Stonewall Inn. That sniff was coming from how the author recounted the actions of Deputy Inspector Seymour Pine. It felt like Pine was getting praised for doing his actual job and ensuring that his officers *NOT* shoot people. I’m sorry, was that not what this man was being paid to do? Serve and PROTECT?!?!
So the sniff was there, but nothing could have prepared me for the praise that man got in the conclusion!
I refuse to believe that his man, who served in the military, and was in the police force and served out of a precinct notorious for harassing Queer people, was not in some way homophobic at that time. He may well have grown as a person as the years went by, but at that time, I have a hard time believing that we was not harassing Queer people, when harassing Queer people seemed to be de rigueur for police officers at that time. But according to the conclusions that’s not the case! Pine’s story remained consistent throughout his life you see, and well some tourists who spoke to Pine when you lived in Israel in the 1990’s backed that up. So you see, there is no way that Pine was a bad guy. A member of the police force would never lie you see! *massive side-eye*
I feel like the conclusions in this book were just not needed. This piece of work apparently took over 10 years, and while it was certainly guilty of whitewashing and copaganda within the body of the work, it was never as blatant as it was in the conclusions, and it quite frankly ruined any of the research that came before. I don’t feel like I can trust the accounts in this book now. Luckily there is any number of other accounts of what happened at the Stonewall Inn on 28 June 1969, and even though we are living in what feels like an uncertain time for our LGBTQIA+ communities — especially in the US — The Stonewall Inn and those that stood up to oppression that night, and the nights that followed, will continue to be symbols of the power of rebellion!
July 4, 2024
A very conflicting book. On the one hand it is a beautifully detailed story told through intimate accounts of the gay scene of the 60s and how stonewall came to be. in relation to the people interviewed, it was balanced and allowed all the different sides of the story to come through. this made the narrative so evocative and memorable. I dozed off reading it and had a dream about the GLF that's how immersive it was. so as an account of a time and a place, it's super.
however, as a work of history, it comes with some serious prejudices, which really come through in the authors notes at the end. David Carter REALLY wants us to know this was a movement of cisgender, white gay men. for a book that prides itself on plurality of opinion, I found this strange. wherever a lesbian is mentioned (especially in the initial fracas that sparked the riots), Carter is quick to say 'may have' or 'contentious' and totally trust the suggestions of his subjects that there just weren't any women about.
moreover, it's obvious carter is very uncomfortable with saying there were trans people involved - especially trans women. he argues the terminology then meant these people shouldn't be considered trans in the way they may be today. I find that argument weak. sure, gender expression has been in flux across the years, much less the decades, but that doesn't mean transgender people didn't exist because the terminology wasn't there. the same line of thinking has been used to deny the historic existence of gay people!
this brings me back to what I think is the foundational flaw of this book: the approach to sources. Any period in history, much less a time where so many were forced to lead double lives, requires us to reflect on the biases within our sources and how we can understand gaps and silences in the archives. gay men are not immune to the misogyny of their day. maybe there is a reason the interviewees sought to diminish the role of women - especially trans women - when the documentary evidence suggests otherwise.
Basically, the author didn't really interrogate or analyse the sources he presented and its just as well those sources are so rich in their own right - at least it makes a brilliant story. I appreciate that our understanding of gender and transness has come on a lot in twenty years. but that said, it's hard to fully get into the story of an oppressed people on the rise when it's committed to excluding those most on the margins.
however, as a work of history, it comes with some serious prejudices, which really come through in the authors notes at the end. David Carter REALLY wants us to know this was a movement of cisgender, white gay men. for a book that prides itself on plurality of opinion, I found this strange. wherever a lesbian is mentioned (especially in the initial fracas that sparked the riots), Carter is quick to say 'may have' or 'contentious' and totally trust the suggestions of his subjects that there just weren't any women about.
moreover, it's obvious carter is very uncomfortable with saying there were trans people involved - especially trans women. he argues the terminology then meant these people shouldn't be considered trans in the way they may be today. I find that argument weak. sure, gender expression has been in flux across the years, much less the decades, but that doesn't mean transgender people didn't exist because the terminology wasn't there. the same line of thinking has been used to deny the historic existence of gay people!
this brings me back to what I think is the foundational flaw of this book: the approach to sources. Any period in history, much less a time where so many were forced to lead double lives, requires us to reflect on the biases within our sources and how we can understand gaps and silences in the archives. gay men are not immune to the misogyny of their day. maybe there is a reason the interviewees sought to diminish the role of women - especially trans women - when the documentary evidence suggests otherwise.
Basically, the author didn't really interrogate or analyse the sources he presented and its just as well those sources are so rich in their own right - at least it makes a brilliant story. I appreciate that our understanding of gender and transness has come on a lot in twenty years. but that said, it's hard to fully get into the story of an oppressed people on the rise when it's committed to excluding those most on the margins.
October 3, 2025
▪️Warning: there's a high chance this book will make you furious and absolutely hate the cops. (or hate even more)
▪️Best choice for really in depth research of the whole story behind Stonewall but not the most fun and interesting read if you just wanna know little more about the riots. (like me)
▪️I'm impressed how well-sourced it is, but at the same time, Carter goes into so much detail about everyone's background and names so many people it's hard to stay fully focused.
▪️I had to just skim through/skip some pages of the first part of the book otherwise I'd probably get so bored I'd DNF it before even reaching the main story.
▪️The main part was so amazing though, while also making my blood boil at the same time.
▪️Best choice for really in depth research of the whole story behind Stonewall but not the most fun and interesting read if you just wanna know little more about the riots. (like me)
▪️I'm impressed how well-sourced it is, but at the same time, Carter goes into so much detail about everyone's background and names so many people it's hard to stay fully focused.
▪️I had to just skim through/skip some pages of the first part of the book otherwise I'd probably get so bored I'd DNF it before even reaching the main story.
▪️The main part was so amazing though, while also making my blood boil at the same time.
“Everyone in the crowd felt that we were never going to go back. It was like the last straw. It was time to reclaim something that had always been taken from us.
...
There's something in the air, freedom a long time overdue, and we’re going to fight for it. It took different forms, but the bottom line was, we weren’t going to go away. And we didn’t.”💥
Displaying 1 - 30 of 164 reviews