What do you think?
Rate this book
Girls Who Like Boys Who Like Boys: Women and Gay Male Pornography and Erotica
This book investigates what women enjoy about consuming, and in some cases producing, gay male erotic media–from slashfic, to pornographic texts, to visual pornography–and how this sits within their consumption of erotica and pornography more generally. In addition, it will examine how women’s use of gay male erotic media fits in with their perceptions of gender and sexuality. By drawing on a piece of wide-scale mixed methods research that examines these motivations, an original and important volume is presented that serves to explore and contribute to this under-researched area.
232 pages, Hardcover
Published March 19, 2018
31 people are currently reading
676 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 15 of 15 reviews
August 2, 2020
Hey, I finished reading this 23 days before the two-year mark. I always read non-fiction quite slowly, because it's data, not story. I know stories and tropes intuitively after decades of reading them. But non-fiction is always different.
I was given a copy of this book because I was trying to puzzle out what so appealed to me in m/m Romance, and the author took pity on me. (At the time, it was over a hundred bucks, way out of my budget.) I am grateful. I've learned a lot, both about the research into various aspects surrounding the question of the appeal of slash fic to women, and about myself and my own related questions. If you have similar questions, do read this. It's worth your time.
My conclusions? M/m's primary appeal for me is the absence of sexism that a woman character invariably brings. Also, I like boys, the more the merrier. Also-also, the politics of my 'shocking' preferences and pushing the boundaries of what's "acceptable" for women to prefer appeals to me very much. :)
I was given a copy of this book because I was trying to puzzle out what so appealed to me in m/m Romance, and the author took pity on me. (At the time, it was over a hundred bucks, way out of my budget.) I am grateful. I've learned a lot, both about the research into various aspects surrounding the question of the appeal of slash fic to women, and about myself and my own related questions. If you have similar questions, do read this. It's worth your time.
My conclusions? M/m's primary appeal for me is the absence of sexism that a woman character invariably brings. Also, I like boys, the more the merrier. Also-also, the politics of my 'shocking' preferences and pushing the boundaries of what's "acceptable" for women to prefer appeals to me very much. :)
January 30, 2021
Blue 5/53. (For boys and for being erotica, or 'blue texts'. I'm reaching.)
So I have Many Jumbled Thoughts on this book.
Number one, the author of this academic book didn't really engage academically instead of just descriptively until ch. 7. Chapters 7 and 9 were good (from both a topical and academic standpoint) but the rest of the book was either anecdotal evidence or an overreliance on theory. There was very little attempt to engage critically with the purported topic, perhaps because the author admittedly is an academic and a writer of slashy fanfic herself. Oddly, there was a lot of discussion of QaF slash, which is weird because that specific show and its slash community were big HALF MY LIFE AGO. Also, AO3 and ff.net get shoutouts which JUST FELT WEIRD.
She also draws a line between 'acafans' (academics who are fans) and the rest of fandom. Gatekeep-y. I also assume that this book wasn't written with me as a target audience in mind - I do have some credibility though; I work with poetry that is full of REALLY GAY SUBTEXT (and sometimes text, but mostly SUBTEXT) plus I've read slash. Don't even try to tell me Fraser is straight.
Honestly, this book reminded me why I don't like fandoms. They're clubby and the idea that there are OTPs (helpfully explained in an endnote, like the reader of this volume wouldn't know what an OTP or a Mary Sue, etc. was) that Must Not Be Overturned is shit. And I say this as someone who firmly believes that Fraser/RayV is the marriage and (Fraser/)RayK is the sexy hot boytoy on the side. (OK, so I don't remember With Six You Get Eggroll ALL THAT WELL). See also Steve/Bucky & (Steve/)Sam in the MCU. Jed/Leo isn't even subtext-y. Look at those lingering stares.
Also, her defense of fans reads like #NotAllFans. Yes, many many many (I would assume most) fans of slash are reasonable well-adjusted people. But I remember interacting parasocially with several who weren't online. Her survey of female self-admitted slash fans is a good number across countries and sexualities and ages, but she also clearly cherry picks anecdotes when a more thorough examination of the statistical data is necessary to back it up. Her examination is cursory.
Honestly, it was like reading a senior thesis that got a B on stuff my college friends could discuss better instead of doctorate-level material.
On the plus side, mention of Supernatural mpreg & SGA John/Rodney in anecdotes. Because everyone knows John/Rodney should be canon. Just look at them.
I was really excited to read this book, and I was let down so hard.
So I have Many Jumbled Thoughts on this book.
Number one, the author of this academic book didn't really engage academically instead of just descriptively until ch. 7. Chapters 7 and 9 were good (from both a topical and academic standpoint) but the rest of the book was either anecdotal evidence or an overreliance on theory. There was very little attempt to engage critically with the purported topic, perhaps because the author admittedly is an academic and a writer of slashy fanfic herself. Oddly, there was a lot of discussion of QaF slash, which is weird because that specific show and its slash community were big HALF MY LIFE AGO. Also, AO3 and ff.net get shoutouts which JUST FELT WEIRD.
She also draws a line between 'acafans' (academics who are fans) and the rest of fandom. Gatekeep-y. I also assume that this book wasn't written with me as a target audience in mind - I do have some credibility though; I work with poetry that is full of REALLY GAY SUBTEXT (and sometimes text, but mostly SUBTEXT) plus I've read slash. Don't even try to tell me Fraser is straight.
Honestly, this book reminded me why I don't like fandoms. They're clubby and the idea that there are OTPs (helpfully explained in an endnote, like the reader of this volume wouldn't know what an OTP or a Mary Sue, etc. was) that Must Not Be Overturned is shit. And I say this as someone who firmly believes that Fraser/RayV is the marriage and (Fraser/)RayK is the sexy hot boytoy on the side. (OK, so I don't remember With Six You Get Eggroll ALL THAT WELL). See also Steve/Bucky & (Steve/)Sam in the MCU. Jed/Leo isn't even subtext-y. Look at those lingering stares.
Also, her defense of fans reads like #NotAllFans. Yes, many many many (I would assume most) fans of slash are reasonable well-adjusted people. But I remember interacting parasocially with several who weren't online. Her survey of female self-admitted slash fans is a good number across countries and sexualities and ages, but she also clearly cherry picks anecdotes when a more thorough examination of the statistical data is necessary to back it up. Her examination is cursory.
Honestly, it was like reading a senior thesis that got a B on stuff my college friends could discuss better instead of doctorate-level material.
On the plus side, mention of Supernatural mpreg & SGA John/Rodney in anecdotes. Because everyone knows John/Rodney should be canon. Just look at them.
I was really excited to read this book, and I was let down so hard.
March 8, 2023
Дуже цікаве (для мене гг) дослідження жінок, які читають, пишуть і дивляться еротичні і порно матеріали, де фігурують геї. Авторка намагається пояснити, навіщо це жінкам, що означає для них (і трошки - для суспільства загалом). Не буду переказувати ці пояснення - як мінімум тому, що їх багато)) від потягу до трансгресії до бажання уникнути гетеро контенту через трабли зі сприйняттям власного тіла чи травму від насильства.
Скажу тільки, що мені як частині цієї спільноти дуже багато з написаного відгукнулося, і сподобалася позиція авторки - дуже емпатична, уважна і не arrogant.
Але з мінусів - вона трохи перебирає із залученням теорії (причому принаймні в деяких випадках це якась трохи спекулятивна теорія, хоча я взагалі не фахівчиня і квір та гендерних студіях, може, там так норм)).
Скажу тільки, що мені як частині цієї спільноти дуже багато з написаного відгукнулося, і сподобалася позиція авторки - дуже емпатична, уважна і не arrogant.
Але з мінусів - вона трохи перебирає із залученням теорії (причому принаймні в деяких випадках це якась трохи спекулятивна теорія, хоча я взагалі не фахівчиня і квір та гендерних студіях, може, там так норм)).
March 1, 2019
3.5 See more at:
http://romancenovelsforfeminists.blog...
http://romancenovelsforfeminists.blog...
March 7, 2023
<3 чудова
в процесі написання довгого відгуку. у мене надто багато виписаних цитат, в книзі (яка є ґрунтовним дослідженням) дууууже багато інфи. вернусь після систематизування, залишайтесь на лінії.
якщо ви слешерка, або цікавитесь цим світом (або хоча б жіночою сексуальністю), просто маст рід
в процесі написання довгого відгуку. у мене надто багато виписаних цитат, в книзі (яка є ґрунтовним дослідженням) дууууже багато інфи. вернусь після систематизування, залишайтесь на лінії.
якщо ви слешерка, або цікавитесь цим світом (або хоча б жіночою сексуальністю), просто маст рід
January 19, 2021
some very interesting insights and lots of further reading to do, some of it was quite... hmm. unwilling to counter much of what was quoted? but this aca fan stuff is new to me, so.
June 2, 2024
Saw this book referenced in multiple Contrapoints videos and she praised it as one of the best books on women’s sexuality in the present day, beyond the initial premise of women consuming m/m media. Very interesting insights on women’s sexuality, straight women and queer women alike!
Want to read
March 22, 2024came here from contrapoints
March 2, 2025
A poorly structured book, Girls Who Like Boys Who Like Boys, reads mostly like a bibliography draft for feminism beginners.
With bite-sized quotes from the likes of Foucault and Butler, the lack of a clear viewpoint or question before each chapter makes Neville’s arguments read like bullet points that are trying to answer empty questions, resulting in an unfinished feel to a book that’s supposed to be about the engrossing topic of women’s relationships with homoerotic media.
Despite its detrimental flaw, the book is still worthy of a casual read. It does a decent job of showing the types of discourse that are forming on a topic that’s still under-studied by most gender critics these days.
Men vs. Sexual Object:
- “‘I more often react to a hot boy by thinking it would be hot to see him being fucked than to think of being fucked by him. I guess my appreciation of the male body, such as it is, is mostly voyeuristic.”
- “We don’t know how to look (Men)—not properly—and part of this is because we aren’t given anything to look at.”
- “Both men and women are more comfortable viewing female rather than male nudity, largely due to the greater exposure they have had to female nudes.”
Fantasy, Women vs. Men:
- “The differences in the form and content of men’s and women’s fantasies are often quite minimal’—both enjoy quick advancement to the sex act, little in the way of seduction or emotional complexity, employ the use of ‘crude’ language, and focus on body parts.”
- “Both men and women were more aroused by the casual sex theme than sex with a partner, leading Fisher and Byrne (1978) to conclude that romantic or affectional emphasis is not a precondition for female arousal by erotica.”
Women vs. Erotica/Romance/Porn:
- “The porn/erotica distinction simply boils down to ‘call[ing] something by one name when you like it and another when you don’t.”
- “Porn exists only to titillate. [Whereas] I like to think of erotica as thinky porn.”
- “Erotica has romance, too, so it’s all right for women to like it, because it gets us all worked up and ready for committing to men. So I’ve made a point of insisting… that I wasn’t writing erotica, I was writing porn.”
Reader’s Identification:
- “‘Genderfucked’ gaze—the idea that the imagined ‘self’ has the freedom to mutate into alternative manifestations when viewing or reading pornographic material.”
- “It is not so much that the female readers of explicit m/m slash want to become male, rather they want the ‘sexual intensity, sexual enjoyment, the freedom to choose’ which is generally only afforded to men and to male characters.”
- “BL and slash allow for the enjoyment that comes with ‘visual recreation without the self-examination.”
Heteronormativity, Submission vs. Penetration:
- “The emphasis placed on monogamous love and a ‘happy ending’ is partly what has led to female produced m/m SEM such as slash being viewed as both conventional and heteronormative.”
- “Fixation on penetrator/penetrated as being analogous to male/female ‘reflects an inability or an unwillingness to move beyond a heterosexist understanding of sex.”
- “It(anal) allows access into the body, when after all only women are supposed to have a vulnerable interior space. All this makes anal eroticism a suasive point for the displacement or erasure of purely phallic boundaries.”
With bite-sized quotes from the likes of Foucault and Butler, the lack of a clear viewpoint or question before each chapter makes Neville’s arguments read like bullet points that are trying to answer empty questions, resulting in an unfinished feel to a book that’s supposed to be about the engrossing topic of women’s relationships with homoerotic media.
Despite its detrimental flaw, the book is still worthy of a casual read. It does a decent job of showing the types of discourse that are forming on a topic that’s still under-studied by most gender critics these days.
Men vs. Sexual Object:
- “‘I more often react to a hot boy by thinking it would be hot to see him being fucked than to think of being fucked by him. I guess my appreciation of the male body, such as it is, is mostly voyeuristic.”
- “We don’t know how to look (Men)—not properly—and part of this is because we aren’t given anything to look at.”
- “Both men and women are more comfortable viewing female rather than male nudity, largely due to the greater exposure they have had to female nudes.”
Fantasy, Women vs. Men:
- “The differences in the form and content of men’s and women’s fantasies are often quite minimal’—both enjoy quick advancement to the sex act, little in the way of seduction or emotional complexity, employ the use of ‘crude’ language, and focus on body parts.”
- “Both men and women were more aroused by the casual sex theme than sex with a partner, leading Fisher and Byrne (1978) to conclude that romantic or affectional emphasis is not a precondition for female arousal by erotica.”
Women vs. Erotica/Romance/Porn:
- “The porn/erotica distinction simply boils down to ‘call[ing] something by one name when you like it and another when you don’t.”
- “Porn exists only to titillate. [Whereas] I like to think of erotica as thinky porn.”
- “Erotica has romance, too, so it’s all right for women to like it, because it gets us all worked up and ready for committing to men. So I’ve made a point of insisting… that I wasn’t writing erotica, I was writing porn.”
Reader’s Identification:
- “‘Genderfucked’ gaze—the idea that the imagined ‘self’ has the freedom to mutate into alternative manifestations when viewing or reading pornographic material.”
- “It is not so much that the female readers of explicit m/m slash want to become male, rather they want the ‘sexual intensity, sexual enjoyment, the freedom to choose’ which is generally only afforded to men and to male characters.”
- “BL and slash allow for the enjoyment that comes with ‘visual recreation without the self-examination.”
Heteronormativity, Submission vs. Penetration:
- “The emphasis placed on monogamous love and a ‘happy ending’ is partly what has led to female produced m/m SEM such as slash being viewed as both conventional and heteronormative.”
- “Fixation on penetrator/penetrated as being analogous to male/female ‘reflects an inability or an unwillingness to move beyond a heterosexist understanding of sex.”
- “It(anal) allows access into the body, when after all only women are supposed to have a vulnerable interior space. All this makes anal eroticism a suasive point for the displacement or erasure of purely phallic boundaries.”
November 27, 2021
Sa kung ano-anong fandom na ko napasama pero this year ko lang na-discover ang fan fiction (at ang nakakabilib na AO3 and the people behind it). Ewan ko kung dahil na rin sa pandemic. Ang dami kong nabasa (at may isang nasulat haha). Grabe yung passion (and fun!). Pagsusulat nang walang hinahanap na kapalit -- dahil lang talaga gustong magsulat ng stories tungkol sa celebrities na gusto nila (may mga umaabot pa sa 200K+ words!), pagbabasa hanggang madaling araw (minsan angst pa at slow burn), zines, writing events, pagpapalitan ng fic recs, events na dedicated sa iba't ibang OTPs. All for the love. Dahil nga dito naligaw ako sa lintek na librong ito haha. Marami itong naibigay na background about slash literature at insight kung bakit ito tinatangkilik lalo na ng mga babae at insight din sa epekto nito sa kultura at mindset ng mga tao. I also learned a lot about myself (at marami pala kami), bakit mataas lagi ang ratings ko sa mga stories gaya ng Beijing Comrades at 2gether hahaha. I appreciate the research that the author did (ang daming references!) and the interviews she conducted. I also appreciate that the author is a reader and a writer of slash herself. Yung isang hinahanap ko lang, same as the other reviews, sana sinama niya yung questionnaire na ginamit niya and the responses. Siguro nandun yun sa actual academic document na pinasa niya for her study? Minsan lang din medyo complex na yung mga cultural at psychological ideas na ginagamit kaya nagstruggle akong intindihin. Minsan din medyo repetitive na yung ideas. Anyway, ok pa rin naman this was still a good read for me.
November 28, 2018
Actually, more like three and a half: I was just getting a bit irked at how little sense there was of what slash fiction is like - apart from that it involves m/m sex, various tropes, plus various rather meta descriptions of certain common thematic issues. Possibly a bit outwith what the author was doing, but it seemed to leave a certain vagueness at the centre.
June 28, 2024
Great read with quotes from the readers and writers of slash fic themselves which is nice. Would have liked a little bit more theory but this book is more about examining the responses of the readers and writers of slash fic rather than than looking at theory about why they write what they write.
August 19, 2022
Interesting, but way more of a thesis style than I was hoping for. I was looking for more of a popular science writing style.
June 10, 2024
Very empathetic and thorough exploration of a topic that is often de facto treated with derision.
August 20, 2025
many interesting points in here, some i disagree with, much more that i would gladly co-sign. i love nuanced community-insider discussions about slash and bl culture!
Displaying 1 - 15 of 15 reviews