Boston Marriages: Romantic but Asexual Relationships Among Contemporary Lesbians by Esther D. Rothblum

Boston Marriages: Romantic but Asexual Relationships Among Contemporary Lesbians Reviews

• 
  KP

  As an asexual female, it's hard to find any literature about people who live and love the way I do. This book is the closest I could find, with essays about lesbians who love each other but do not have sex together, including personal interviews with many women. Some of the stories I found downright depressing, but there were a couple that made me cry because they were so full of love and commitment- without sex, a rare thing in United States culture nowadays, or so it seems given our media's depictions of women and men. Truly inspiring and, if you're an asexual, sort of relieving to know that you're not alone...
• 
  Everett Holmgren

  This book started strong, but honestly I felt that the personal stories section was unnecessary and hurt it. I also would have liked it if at least one of the formal essays was written by someone who was asexual, rather than just occasionally celibate.
  
  That said, I would still recommend people read it, so long as they are aware that it is limited in its viewpoints and occasionally contradictory even within the same essay.
  
  I would have liked a more comprehensive look at the history of the Boston marriage, and I would have liked a little less of a suggestion that asexuality is just a phase. It may well be, in some cases, but I think the message of "hey, just think about how maybe it won't be completely an asexual relationship forever and tough it out" is missing out on how people should appreciate the present of their relationship.
  
  I would definitely like to see an updated version of this book; I want to see how some of the views and ideas expressed may have shifted in the past 20 years, particularly as gay marriage is legal in more and more places.
• 
  elvira

  “¿Qué tipo de relación “sentimental” se establece cuando no existe vínculo sexual?”
  
  “Existen tantos tipos de apetitos sexuales como de personas”
  
  “No creo que el sexo sea tan relevante en nuestras vidas como nos han hecho creer”
  
  La premisa del libro me parece super interesante y necesaria. ¿Qué diferencia una amistad de “algo más”? ¿El sexo? ¿Es follar lo que marca que alguien sea tu pareja o no? ¿Por qué se dice “amigas” para un rango de personas con el que tenemos relaciones de intensidad y carácter tan diferente? ¿Por qué las opciones son a) amiga o b) pareja? ¿Y por qué ser amiga vale menos que ser pareja?
  
  Parte del libro es darse cuenta del déficit de palabras que tenemos para referirnos a las relaciones humanas no “mainstream” y al sufrimiento interno que pueden vivir las personas al no encajar exactamente en ninguno de ellas. La casi obligación de devaluar de la amistad (“solo amigas”) y la presión para tener una pareja y acabar en una familia nuclear con ella, ignorando cada vez más otros vínculos hace que me den ganas de tirarme de los pelos (“Ese imperativo social de tener pareja es consecuencia del terror que suscita la idea de estar solas […] Cualquier cosa antes que sentir nuestra respiración o pararnos a escuchar como nos late el corazón”). Hace que las personas estén desesperadas por encajar en esa estructura y que hagan cosas que, sin esa presión, no harían. En algunos casos, esto implica mantener relaciones sexuales sin querer de verdad (“No podemos decir realmente “sí” al sexo hasta que no tenemos capacidad y libertad para decir “no””).
  
  Vivimos en un entorno social diseñado para parejas y para parejas de un determinado tipo y este libro lo deja bien claro. Lo cual también es una llamada de atención a parte de la comunidad LGBT: hemos cogido lo que es ser pareja de manera heterosexual y lo hemos transformado en algo queer pero dejando muchos elementos que pueden ser dolorosos intactos e incuestionados (en este caso, la imposición de que el vínculo de pareja debe ser sexual o la aceptación de un vínculo solo si es vía matrimonio).
  
  No me gusta mucho que usaran el término “matrimonio bostoniano” para denominar relaciones lésbicas asexuales o con momentos asexuales de la actualidad, no me parece que la situación de las lesbianas en relaciones asexuales a los finales del siglo xx sea la misma que en el siglo xix. En ese momento la mujer no debía ser sexual (al menos abiertamente), pero ahora la presión es ser sexual, todo el rato, incluso follar es vendido como una necesidad médica. Pero, aunque no me guste la palabra, entiendo el concepto y lo que querían decir al cogerlo (tener una relación lésbica asexual está ok!!).
  
  Mola porque a una de las editoras le encanta la idea de matrimonio bostoniano en la actualidad (libertad para forjar tus vínculos como quieras, sea con sexo o no de por medio, como estén cómodas las personas que lo forman y sin aceptar las presiones de esta imposición social de ser hiper sexuales continuamente), mientras que la otra piensa que es problemático (¿es asexualidad o tiene que ver con la represión de la sexualidad que las mujeres han sufrido?). Cada ensayo tiene una visión un poco diferente y tanto las que me han parecido más sensatas como las que me han parecido un poco más insensibles me han aportado muchas cosas en las que pensar.
  
  La parte de las experiencias personales me ha parecido demasiado larga, pero super interesante. Algunas de las historias eran tan disfuncionales que la parte de que follaran o no daba igual, solo quería que esas personas dejaran de estar juntas y sanaran de otra manera. Otras, sin embargo, explicaban como la ausencia de sexo funcionaba en su relación, aunque también explicaban lo confuso que puede ser a veces vivir su realidad sin un modelo referencial que les avale (“El hecho de que no nos acostemos resulta irrelevante, lo que hace que no podamos parar de pensar en ello es que es lo que nos impide definirnos totalmente como pareja”). La conclusión es que lo importante es el equilibrio, que ambas partes sepan exactamente de qué palo va la relación y que estén a gusto con ella (sea asexual o no).
  
  Obviamente el libro tiene también cosas que me han gustado menos. Está escrito en los 90 y había momentos que se notaba mucho (referencias a cómo el sida afectará en el largo plazo a relaciones lésbicas, no entender exactamente lo que es la asexualidad o si esta es legítima o real o basada en traumas). Creo que una actualización del libro solucionaría muchas de las cosas que me han dejado más escéptica.
  
  Vamos, que el libro cuestiona por un lado la viabilidad de una división tan rígida y binaria entre amiga/pareja y por otro lado por qué la diferencia entre ambos conceptos es únicamente el sexo. Me ha parecido increíble y se lo recomiendo a todo el mundo!! A seguir leyendo sobre el tema!!!
• 
  Zoe Hiscutt

  One of the first books in queer theory I could find on asexuality. The theoretical essays were useful and so readable, but the stories (second half) seemed like a bit of an add-on. Would have loved more of the theory - it’s a subject underrepresented and under researched. Would love to see a second edition with 21st century asexuality theory included!
• 
  Adele

  A reminder that queer norms and communities (like all norms and communities) are always changing, even if they claim not to be!
• 
  elstaffe

  A fascinating read. My one quibble was the same one that one of the "discussants" at the end of the book had - namely, that the definition of a "Boston marriage" was too wide in some cases. I'm now curious to see if there's been any research published in this area in the last 25 years since the book was published.
• 
  Margaret

  Interesting and liberating ideas about how relationships are defined, but don't look here for examples of thriving, healthy alternative/asexual partnerships or you'll be disappointed.
• 
  Edward

  this book was really great!! I am amazed at how it came out in the 90s like, wild, it's also interesting to learn about the absolute hangups people had then (and maybe do now? no one in my friend circle does I think but,,, who knows) like, people are so wildly On About Sex and that's not really how my group does it lmaoo but,,, I am also not a lesbian so Shrug maybe it's like that. it was cool to hear from a range of people and ironically I really enjoyed the theoretical discussions more than the actual experience section because like,,,, i skipped the second half of those because most of them were wildly dysfunctional (i agree with that one college kid in the discussion section whole heartedly good lord) half of them were good relationships but,,, still disheartening idk especially because they're put in as examples of boston marriages which is, unfair. i feel like language has changed since then because i don't know anyone in a boston marriage but i certainly know ace lesbians y'know? so the label isn't on the relationship but the person, which is what i think has changed. there was also a mention of a desire for relationship words between like, strong friendships and families and stuff which is also good and interesting,,, it was a great book and WOW stunning it came out in the 90s but the dysfunctional relationships portrayed in the irl section (half of them, not all but enough) was enough to make me skip the rest of that section in frustration
• 
  ♠️ anne ♠️

  I have mixed feelings about this book. It wasn't bad but it certainly wasn't what I expected nor what I need in a book about asexual lesbians.
  
  Of course, it was interesting to learn more about lesbians from different time periods, ranging from the late 19th century to the late 20th century. There were also references to second wave feminism which I also enjoyed.
  
  However, I wish the academic texts as well as the personal stories in the end had talked more about actual asexuality than just celibacy which are very different things. Asexuality is not the decision not to have sex, it is the lack of sexual attraction. This book talked more about celibacy than asexuality and used the terms interchangeably. It is also heavily implied that these women are in non-sexual relationships due to internalized homophobia and the fear of being a "real" lesbian if they do engage in sexual activity with another woman. I really didn't like that because asexuality isn't the "result" of self-hatred or anything.
  
  To summarize, I'd say this was an okay book to learn more about lesbians from before the 2000's but it did not at all cover the topic of asexuality.
  
  TW// discussions of rape, incest, and sexual harassment; homophobia (as well as internalized homophobia), aphobia
• 
  guillxmill

  supongo que acabo de encontrar mi modelo relacional... gracias Ro <3
• 
  Jasper

  This book is amazing. Read it.