Oh man, so many conflicted feelings about this book. I definitely liked it but I felt the arguments he made were not as strong as they could have been. I did enjoy however reading his viewpoints about queer history.

I'm not quite sure what to make of this book. On the one hand, it does some important work and was able to get a lot of access to primary sources/interviews with really interesting gay people, whose voices are easily the highlight of the text. On the other hand, the book is more personal than it presents itself as being, and can sometimes be really lacking in nuance. It also spends more time on the "reclaiming" aspect of the title than on the actual history of radical gay sexuality, which it primarily considers as the pre-AIDS culture of the 70s. As a reading experience, it volleyed from delight to frustration constantly.

On a third hand, there are a few passages which, all by themselves have made this book a worthwhile read for me. For example,

Spoiler

"[Jeanne] Barney, a straight woman, was an unlikely choice to be editor of America's first leather magazine. However, she had high ambitions for it: "With Drummer, I wanted a gay leather S/M Evergreen Review. The leather people I knew were older, better educated, more affluent, intelligent, affable, and I felt that they deserved the best possible product." Barney may not have fit the stereotypical role of a leader in the leather community but she was definitely in sync with its spirit and her interest in S/M was not voyeuristic: "I was with the guys and I was sort of a Mother Superior. I would be lying if said my interests weren't piqued. Just by chance I met a detective from the Hollywood Division. I used to get him in my living room and get him all lubed up with K-Y. And there is nothing in this whole world as satisfying as having your fist up the ass of the LAPD.""

Like that makes it a four star book all by itself.