Scan barcode
whatsmacksaid's review
3.0
I certainly took my time in reading this (over a year--oops), so the earlier sections have lost some of their original "oomf." That said, the discussions regarding historical relationships between women, specifically the idea of the romantic friendships, was fascinating and easily the best parts of the entire book. They were informative and well-researched, and full of information and ideas I'd never heard or thought of before.
In contrast, the latter parts that discuss second-wave feminism were odd and uncomfortable to read. There's blatant homo-, trans-, and bi-phobia throughout. It was moderately interesting in terms of learning about ideas that were central to second-wave feminism, but Faderman believed (believes?) that to be a true feminist meant one had to choose lesbianism and had to reject any and all male relationships (...though perhaps not familial relationships with the brothers and fathers? It's difficult to tell).
Overall, I do recommend "Surpassing the Love of Men." It was interesting and informative and, from what I've gleaned, a seminal part of second-wave feminism. However, I do wish I'd skipped, or perhaps just skimmed, the latter sections.
In contrast, the latter parts that discuss second-wave feminism were odd and uncomfortable to read. There's blatant homo-, trans-, and bi-phobia throughout. It was moderately interesting in terms of learning about ideas that were central to second-wave feminism, but Faderman believed (believes?) that to be a true feminist meant one had to choose lesbianism and had to reject any and all male relationships (...though perhaps not familial relationships with the brothers and fathers? It's difficult to tell).
Overall, I do recommend "Surpassing the Love of Men." It was interesting and informative and, from what I've gleaned, a seminal part of second-wave feminism. However, I do wish I'd skipped, or perhaps just skimmed, the latter sections.
youreadtoomuch's review
5.0
Excellent read! I've learned so much. Crazy how some of the history still resonated with me today - the longing and shame and empowerment. The book also does a good job of not claiming that. this is all the history because most recorded material did, unfortunately, tend to be saved from wealthier, more affluent characters. What a shame, imagine all others experiences in sapphic love we're missing out on???
sallyneate's review
5.0
This rating comes with a huge caveat that this book was published in 1980, and there are a few places where gender is discussed that will feel very antiquated (or downright dodgy) to a modern reader.
If you can get past that, then you'll find the most comprehensive study of lesbian relationships ever. I love Faderman's style, with a crystal clear thesis that she adheres to and builds upon as the book progresses. I frequently hate academic writing and find it meanders without aim, but that doesn't happen here. It's heavy on detail yet maintains a lightness of touch in the writing, with many knowing nods to the expected lesbian reader.
Would recommend this as essential reading for anyone with an interest in lesbian history.
If you can get past that, then you'll find the most comprehensive study of lesbian relationships ever. I love Faderman's style, with a crystal clear thesis that she adheres to and builds upon as the book progresses. I frequently hate academic writing and find it meanders without aim, but that doesn't happen here. It's heavy on detail yet maintains a lightness of touch in the writing, with many knowing nods to the expected lesbian reader.
Would recommend this as essential reading for anyone with an interest in lesbian history.
jesswalsh's review against another edition
2.0
A good source book for evidence of romantic friendships between middle class women in literature. However, the analysis is weak and narrow, often because of anti-butch and transphobic assumptions.
avatherose's review
4.0
read for school! definitely outdated in some areas but the breadth of her research is phenomenal
tangleroot_eli's review
3.0
2.5 stars rounded up out of respect for the vastness of Faderman's research, even if I often disagreed with the conclusions she drew from that research.
I took a lot of long, angry notes about this book as I was reading it. In the end, it boils down to this: Surpassing is a commendably thorough work about a particular segment of (white, upper- and upper-middle-class, American and Western European) woman-woman relationships during a particular slice of history. However, Faderman's observations and conclusions are inescapably biased by her second-wave lesbian-separatist 1970s white feminism, with all the "color-blindness," biphobia, and incipient terfism that that entails.
Faderman writes in the introduction to the 1998 edition that she decided not to change anything, so that the book would stand not only as a work about history but also as a work of history. But I couldn't help but wish that she'd added some kind of notes, such as Starhawk did in the 10th and 20th anniversary editions of [b:The Spiral Dance|73869|The Spiral Dance A Rebirth of the Ancient Religion of the Great Goddess|Starhawk|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1348517478l/73869._SX50_.jpg|71468], to suggest where her views and conclusions had or hadn't changed. Having the framework of Faderman's "now" (even a now that's now 20 years out of date) might have helped me gel a little more with her framework of "then."
I took a lot of long, angry notes about this book as I was reading it. In the end, it boils down to this: Surpassing is a commendably thorough work about a particular segment of (white, upper- and upper-middle-class, American and Western European) woman-woman relationships during a particular slice of history. However, Faderman's observations and conclusions are inescapably biased by her second-wave lesbian-separatist 1970s white feminism, with all the "color-blindness," biphobia, and incipient terfism that that entails.
Faderman writes in the introduction to the 1998 edition that she decided not to change anything, so that the book would stand not only as a work about history but also as a work of history. But I couldn't help but wish that she'd added some kind of notes, such as Starhawk did in the 10th and 20th anniversary editions of [b:The Spiral Dance|73869|The Spiral Dance A Rebirth of the Ancient Religion of the Great Goddess|Starhawk|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1348517478l/73869._SX50_.jpg|71468], to suggest where her views and conclusions had or hadn't changed. Having the framework of Faderman's "now" (even a now that's now 20 years out of date) might have helped me gel a little more with her framework of "then."
coltyn's review
No one read this. For my eyes only.
what a fascinating book! This author is alive and kicking and I would be terrified to hear her views today because her contempt for trans people and butch lesbians in the text is pretty intense. The amount of research and history she compiled is overwhelming, and thinking about the lived experience of the individuals written about is heavy, sometimes tragic, sometimes deeply heartwarming. The number of women who lived full lives with immense pain and depression and devotion is impossible to conceptualize for me, and these lives have to be reduced down to a few paragraphs a hundred times over...it's a lot to deal with emotionally. I guess there's something to be said for seeking representation of modern experiences and feelings in historical texts as a source of validation of the queer experience in the 21st century, but that isn't the whole story with this book. Faderman's view of lesbianism and its relationship to patriarchy is radical and powerful, but it does not hold up in today's world of queer studies and queer living. Her repeated insistence that sexual/romantic attraction to women is secondary to the rejection of male domination and prescribed gender roles simply does not make any sense just 40 years after the writing of this book. The idea that all women can and should choose to become lesbians and that straight women are not as evolved as lesbians is funny but also insane. Out of context, a few of these arguments are outright homophobic by today's standards. Just a weird moment of the book was her claim that wlw and mlm should not be grouped together in terms of experience because they don't experience attraction/gender the same way and THAT is true, but she skips over the shared political marginalization of both groups and is pretty dismissive of non-lesbian queerness as a whole. The way she speaks about gender and what today MIGHT be called trans-ness is especially confusing.
The biggest downfall in my opinion is that she insists on defining lesbians and love between women within the terms of patriarchal gender relations rather than critiquing the way gender is perpetuated and reinforced as a means of gaining control and power. Faderman's view of womanhood and her experience and research into the lives of wlw in Western history is rigid and essentialist. The book is valuable for its information and many of the author's insights are moving, but this is not a progressive text by today's standards (which is perfectly ok, but it should be pointed out).
what a fascinating book! This author is alive and kicking and I would be terrified to hear her views today because her contempt for trans people and butch lesbians in the text is pretty intense. The amount of research and history she compiled is overwhelming, and thinking about the lived experience of the individuals written about is heavy, sometimes tragic, sometimes deeply heartwarming. The number of women who lived full lives with immense pain and depression and devotion is impossible to conceptualize for me, and these lives have to be reduced down to a few paragraphs a hundred times over...it's a lot to deal with emotionally. I guess there's something to be said for seeking representation of modern experiences and feelings in historical texts as a source of validation of the queer experience in the 21st century, but that isn't the whole story with this book. Faderman's view of lesbianism and its relationship to patriarchy is radical and powerful, but it does not hold up in today's world of queer studies and queer living. Her repeated insistence that sexual/romantic attraction to women is secondary to the rejection of male domination and prescribed gender roles simply does not make any sense just 40 years after the writing of this book. The idea that all women can and should choose to become lesbians and that straight women are not as evolved as lesbians is funny but also insane. Out of context, a few of these arguments are outright homophobic by today's standards. Just a weird moment of the book was her claim that wlw and mlm should not be grouped together in terms of experience because they don't experience attraction/gender the same way and THAT is true, but she skips over the shared political marginalization of both groups and is pretty dismissive of non-lesbian queerness as a whole. The way she speaks about gender and what today MIGHT be called trans-ness is especially confusing.
The biggest downfall in my opinion is that she insists on defining lesbians and love between women within the terms of patriarchal gender relations rather than critiquing the way gender is perpetuated and reinforced as a means of gaining control and power. Faderman's view of womanhood and her experience and research into the lives of wlw in Western history is rigid and essentialist. The book is valuable for its information and many of the author's insights are moving, but this is not a progressive text by today's standards (which is perfectly ok, but it should be pointed out).
evewithanapple's review
2.0
Maybe updated editions will be better (the one I read was printed in 1981) but WOW holy gender essentialism Batman.