edit: I skipped some stuff but read most of the last bit just to say I finished (apparently 15% of e-copy was notes bibliography etc). everything still stands — first part was boring with no real perspective, second part was A Lot and not enjoyable or well structured to be thought provoking. pass!

…

Yeah, I couldn’t finish this one, I made it 75% through but the chapter on bestiality was as bad as the trigger warnings professed. Of what I did read, the author does not have any interesting exploration of her subject matter and the framing was nothing special, it is pretty dry and the questions for thought at the end of each chapter just felt tacked on and limp. The chapter on age gap relationships turned out to be familiar to me already as I’d seen the primary couple featured on that snapchat segment “Love Don’t Judge,” and this book is kind of that writ large — no real discussion, just a presentation of people. And the two poles are 1) things you’re probably familiar with, asexuality and polyamory and 2) incest and bestiality.

As a real criticism for publishers, I know that the chapter titles were probably left just as the interviewee’s names in order to emphasize them as people over their sexual proclivities, but I wish that the titles had something to do with the content of the chapter so as a reader I could gauge exactly what I’m about to read or what chapters I want to skip without having to be deep into them.

This was a weird one and I’m not entirely sure how to rate it. I almost felt like the author was able to write more neutrally about the final two chapters than the earlier chapters; I sensed judgment from the author particularly during some of the poly segments.

The earlier chapters were very drawn out and weren’t anything that hasn’t been written about before. I’m not sure who the target audience for this book was supposed to be. People who are not usually phased by taboo would probably be bored by the first part and interested to read the second part. People who are more shocked by such things would probably be interested by the first part and, judging from other reviews, feel that the second part had gone too far.

The chapter about animals was in particular seemed to leave out relevant information because some of it discusses animals and consent in the context that we eat animals and breed animals. But vegans argue that this isn’t ethical behavior either, precisely because of issues of consent, and that wasn’t mentioned (at least not in depth, unless I really zoned out during that bit).

I think this would have been better off as individual standalone articles, like this apparently started, rather than a book.

I was excited to read this book, but ended up skimming most of it. Yeah, these are taboo subjects. Mostly extreme ones. But there are only a few topics written about and each chapter only covers the life of one individual or group. The “hyper connected world” is more of an aside and shouldn’t even be in the title. Really, the only connection to that part of the title is that people that share that taboo interest commiserate and/or meet online. I get that the author wanted to humanize the person with the taboo interest, but with 40 pages or so each? It got boring pretty quickly.

I bought this book for the last two chapters, I’m not gonna lie.

I’ve always been interested in what we consider to be “normal”. It feels to me like most people I know, most people I interact with, have an idea of “normal” that’s not theirs but society’s. They’re just repeating things because it’s the “normal” thing to do and when you ask for clarifications they simply cannot answer. So I certainly enjoyed how this book dove into the assumption that “normality” is a specific set of universal rules, which really isn’t the case.

The first three chapters—on ethical non-monogamies, age gap relationships and asexuality—were kinda boring because I consider these 3 things to be completely normal and even part of my daily life. It was nice, though, to see an outsider like Tsoulis-Reay go into these discussions with an open mind and lots of empathy. She’s a nice guide for someone who’s struggling to understand these concepts because you can follow her struggles and see how she untangles her feelings by asking questions to other people and herself. Still, the ethical non-monogamies chapter was a little too short for my liking, but that’s because the topic is so broad and the book simply touched on the tip of the iceberg. For example, all of the protagonists of this chapter had open marriages—other configurations are not explored.

The last two chapters are… a different can of worms.

The “consensual” incest chapter was easier to swallow maybe because at the end it was implied that every and any incest relationship is inherently abusive. (And also both people are human. Which is kinda important.) I understand why that happened—and I’m happy that Shelly managed to escape her abusive relationship with her father—but at the same time I feel like the chapter was kinda lacking at the end. What about relationships that are not abusive? Do they exist? If they do, what makes them not inherently abusive? There were so many questions that weren’t even brought up. I would’ve loved (as much as the word “loved” can be used in this context…) to see a deeper dive into the discussion.

As for the zoophilia chapter. That was bad, I gotta admit it. It was deeply upsetting in more than one way. I’m glad I read it because it seriously asked some needed questions on our ethics towards animals. If we’re gonna use the whole “animals can’t consent” argument, we do need to ask ourselves why it’s so easy to overlook consent when it comes to animal breeding and/or the meat market as a whole. I think this chapter highlighted a lot of our hypocrisy when it comes to what is normal and what isn’t. It was still disturbing, though. Some of the questions asked... I mean, I feel for these people and for what they’re going through. The fact that they can’t talk about it really doesn’t help because they can’t even find the help needed to not hurt other living beings. But if there’s no informed consent, then there is no consent, I think.

Also, one thing that irked me is that at some point Paul talks about a furry website. Tsoulis-Reay did not explain what furries are. If someone doesn’t already know the term, after reading this book they’ll probably make the (wrong) connection between furries and zoophiles. That does a disservice to the furry community that’s not harming anyone—be them human or animal—and already has to suffer because of prejudice from outsiders.

All in all, the book wasn’t that bad, but it was barely a primer on most of these topics. I think that was the point: to spark a conversation. But still…

I love the concept of this book. I think it’s well-written, we’ll-researched, and well-structure. I’m pretty open-minded sexually and, for the most part, I agree that people can do whatever floats their boat privately- as long as it doesn’t harm children or anyone(thing) that cannot give consent.
And that’s where this book loses stars for me. The incest and beastiality genuinely upset me and I could not read those chapters. I get it, those things are real and occur, but I appreciate the trigger warnings so I could avoid that section entirely.
That being said, most people could benefit from reading the first part of this book. There are some close-minded folks out there who could really use this as a wake-up call to make an effort to understand without the need to participate. I’d recommend it to anyone curious about basically anything “alternative” in sexuality. Again, aside from children and animals, the idea of “right vs wrong” in sex shouldn’t even be a thing, but anyone open to learn could benefit from this one.

I was hoping for a little more taboo, I think… My taboo meter is likely skewed from all the e sex therapy training I’ve had. Kept me engaged, but no content out is the ordinary for me & my profession.

This title and description was too good to resist. Wild.

I found myself speed reading the "usual" sexualities that were covered in the first part like polyamorous, lgbt, asexual, and age gaps to head into the more scandalous ones in part two. I found the reporting to be very neutral, and objective all throughout. The writer adds her two cents here and there, and lots of disclaimers about she is not advocating for anyone or giving them a platform. The chapters on each are very lengthly and I almost feel like Part 1 should have been condensed, for interest sake more than anything.

Part 2 covers consensual incest and zoophiles. Scandalous. Again, very objective reporting on the people that volunteered to talk. I enjoyed the foray into psychology on the incest one, and was feeling some empathy for the zoophile by the end of that one, surprisingly. I enjoyed reading about the people and deciding for myself where I stand morally on their confessions.

I think Part 2 should have been the meat of the book and expanded, as there are opportunities to cover more. For the age gap in Part 1, I was almost expecting a pedophile to be interviewed because just like incest and sex with animals, is illegal. By the end of this, I was also wondering about the people that have kinks and are into feet, bdsm, furries and all that. While these might just be kinks instead of sexual orientations, generally I would have been interested in more coverage of the abnormal.

Thanks to the publisher and NetGalley for the eARC in exchange for an honest review.

This is the kind of book that will make you think long after you finish it. It's not just the somewhat taboo and undiscussed topics or the slightly voyeuristic feeling of reading about them, it's the fact that it left me thinking, "Who gets to decide what normal is?"
Now, this isn't the primary thing that the author was trying to convey, as the thread that ties everything together is how anyone can find their tribe and feel part of a community thanks to the hyperconnected world we live in today. That's definitely interesting and Tsoulis-Reay did a great job of writing about how things have changed, becoming a lot easier for people who are outside what the majority consider to be normal, however, the things that continually made me stop to think were more along the lines of what normal is and how it's defined. With a couple of exceptions that I found icky despite trying to be as open-minded as possible, most of the people interviewed are just going about their lives in a way that doesn't fit in with the status quo.
I can see it really not being the kind of book a lot of people would enjoy because it's really well-written and researched, but it's also incredibly uncomfortable even if you like to think of yourself as having an open mind. Tsoulis-Reay dug deep into each topic and found people willing to bare their souls in order to give as comprehensive a look at their lifestyles as possible. The fact that the author manages to do so as detachedly as the most veteran of journalists while still being sympathetic and empathetic is beyond impressive.

Very happy thanks to NetGalley and St. Martin's Press for the thought-provoking read!

This was very good read, albeit a little hard once I got to the more taboo topics. But I learned a lot through this book and appreciate the author's candidness in the more taboo sections. Even if you don't want to read about the more taboo pieces, the first part of the book is well worth a read. It covers Polyamory, Age gap relationships (all consenting adults), and Asexuality & Aromantic.