When I first picked up this book, I almost didn't make it to the end of the introduction because I found its take on early 21st century discourse on consent so offputting. The rest of the book worked better for me, but covering four thousand years and large areas of the Christian west means themes are covered in a rather shallow way. On the whole, this was a book worth reading even if took me a long time to finish it. ( )

This probably isn't the best book I will read on this topic, it's too bitty and comes to no real conclusion (as if he was going to write a 20th century chapter and a conclusion but decided to end where he was at with the end of the Victorian era) this looks at how for 4000 years humanity has tried to regulate relationships between consenting adults, and non-consenting and what that has meant over the years as well, and mostly they've mucked it up, causing more trouble than they were trying to fix. There is a fine line between trying to keep people from being exploited (i.e. child abuse, rape etc) and trying to regulate everything someone does publicly and privately.

It's an interesting romp through many centuries of abuse of power and I found it an interesting read, but I was left wanting more. If this was on TV I'd be arguing with it ( )

No good. This book purports to be an academic history, but it isn't. There are a number of not only unsubstantiated but unexplained claims. Give me a citation once in a while! In addition, there's an off-puttingly chatty tone to many elements of the book that destroy any credibility in those sections. From the very beginning, the author has an upsetting habit of trying to make jokes about things that a tuned-in reader will think through immediately. For example, within the first few pages, the author criticizes universities' code of conduct policies defining sexual consent as being absurd and unfairly penalizing men... yet any aware reader would be well aware of the fact that there is an epidemic of rape on campus that is systematically hidden, and most rapists are never even charged, much less convicted. A historian of sex and punishment would know that.

I tried, but I did not finish. Not recommended. ( )

I've had this on the go for six months and it's time to admit that I've stalled halfway through. Obviously this means that I am unable to write a full review, but just to offer some pointers... I found the first third very interesting as it deals with the period up to the eighteenth or nineteenth centuries, but then I found that it began to drag slightly. The style occasionally felt a bit too chatty for what is essentially a history book, and there were some assertions which I simply don't believe can be fully ascertained - such as the date that prehistoric man first realised the connection between sex and pregnancy. Nevertheless there's certainly plenty of colour and the use of court transcripts, literature and monumental inscriptions means that there are plenty of glimpses into the taboos and lifestyle of the past. (The overriding impression is that there simply hasn't ever been a period in history when it was a good time to be a woman, so thank goodness for the present day.)

Thus: flashes of interest and liveliness, but the scholarship needs to be taken with a pinch of salt. However, I must emphasise once more that I simply couldn't force myself on past the middle of the book, so please understand this is not an official review but more of a collection of thoughts about the first half. ( )

Fascinating history of human attitudes to sex, particularly the ill-treatment of women.
Pity The Author does not continue on to current period, although there are references to Bill Clinton, Roman Polanski and others.