Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #1042531 in Books
• Published on: 1993-08-19
• Original language: English
• Binding: Paperback
• 240 pages

Synopsis
When the original "Joy of Gay Sex" was published in America in 1977, it became not only an immediate best-seller but also a classic touchstone of the emerging gay consciousness. British readers sadly missed out on this book, as no UK Publisher has prepared to take it on. This is the revision to that classic; since its original publication, not only has homosexuality gradually become assimilated into society, but the gay community itself has undergone a great transformation as a result of the AIDS epidemic. These changes are reflected in this edition. New York psychologist, and co-author of the original book, Charles Silverstein, has collaborated with Felice Picano on this revised edition. The book has three goals: to educate gay men about safer sex and save lives by showing the varieties of sexual behaviour still available; to address the many emotional and relationship-orientated issues that arise in gay life, such as long-term couples, one-night stands, loneliness, and growing older; and to serve as a general home reference on a number of diverse topics, from living wills to a short history of condoms.

Customer Reviews

BEN NUTTALL SAYS: This book changed my life.
Before I read this book I wasn't exactly a great lover and found it hard to hold a relationship. Now I have my bible. This book is a must for all homosexual's who, like myself enjoys experimenting. After reading it I am full of confidence and willing to try anything with my partner. This book is fabulous!...

outdated, with terrible illustrations
This book is not really about sex. It is not a karma sutra-like manual, but a political statement from gay activists circa 1975. Sure its been updated here and there, notably to account for HIV and AIDS, but its mindset is very American, and very 1970s. I'm sure this will appeal to a certain type of middle aged gay man, but not to the younger, dare I say, more rounded generation of gay men. Plus, the illustrations are incredibly cringe-making. Again, 1970s US - all drawings of moustachioed leather men getting down to it.

If you're really looking for a modern book about gay sex, forget this one.

Erm . . . when you say NEW, how new do you mean?
I must admit to not reading the original, or even picking up the updated version till now, so as a 'classic' of it's day I don't feel qualified to comment.

The basics are there, albeit somewhat briefly - but a great deal of the book refers to gay 'Culture' which surely people must realise is as changeable and as any other, and different depending on geography, age, race etc.

It's not just the fact that all the guys in the hilariously 'tasteful' illustrations all look like Tom Selleck (or when they're not US naval officers) or that gay clubs don't appear to have moved on since Armistead Maupin's day - I suppose what makes me wonder if the relevance of this book has lessened is simply that gay men and our 'culture' have moved on since much of this book was written.

Oh, and not everyone is from America.

As a guide to anything in particular, it falls short on most marks - giving little in the way of tangible and practical suggestions, merely hinting at what is 'possible' and clueing the reader up with terminology (most of which is still in use today). There are obvious gaping holes which even the average 14 year old boy who gets funny feelings in his tummy at the thought of Robbie Williams will probably know about in todays more streetwise world. But I would still buy it for him, as it works much better as an introduction to the ideas behind gay Sex rather than a manual to those already familiar with it.

But for anyone not interested or able to engage in anal sex, it’s dreadful; providing little in the way of alternatives and almost ignoring the fact that some people just aren’t physically able to do it.

It’s a nice and gentle book, providing a broad look – if not a particularly in-depth one (it took about 2-3 hours to read) but so much of it is so obviously dated I find little use for it, and may hesitate recommending it.

There are better ones out there.