In the mid-1990s, former Mayor Guiliani forced adult stores to leave communities and "cleaned up" Times Square in favor of the Disney Corporation. This anthology is based upon writings from a conference on the matter. The authors ask many questions. How does/did public sex shape the gay community? How does the attack against public sex hurt AIDS education? How are prostitutes affected by the Times Square "clean up"? Why are radical queers uniting with anti-gay conservatives to close bathhouses? How is the public/private divide collapsing as gay rights becomes old news?This book showed academics working as sex radicals and sex radicals working as academics. Gay studies undergraduates are going to be surprised at how risque and sex-positive their stodgy professors can be. Readers of all educational backgrounds will be shocked when they see what sexual act is portrayed on the cover of this basically non-pornographic text.
This book had authors diverse in their gender, sexual orientation, and HIV status. This will give readers of all sexualities a glimpse at how members of the gay community can conflict with each other. For instance, the venom at which these contributors condemn Signorile and Rotello has not been seen since the constructionists' attack against the late historian Boswell. Still, as complex as this book was, it may be an example of too many cooks spoiling the soup. Further, this book is VERY New York-centered and many readers from other localities may not be able to relate.
Let me leave with two examples of problems in this book. Kendall Thomas interviews a black gay man and black lesbian who started radical sex establishments in the City. He introduces his first question with reference to the 1980s Bowers decision and Pat Califia as if these clubowners were as erudite as himself. Later, Munoz jumps from Adorno to Warhol to tearoom art to the psychology of HIV-negative gay men all within 15 pages. I think these two academics are two of the most awesome writers out there and yet I found myself rolling my eyes during both discussions.
This book is unique, yet it gets repetitive after a while. It is quite challenging, yet I still ask myself, "What were all these contributors thinking?!"
I am glad I got the chance to read this book, but some of the balls being juggled here were dropped.
