Fetish: Fashion, Sex & Power

overall this book is very good, however it leaves out some important elements of fetishism and fetish culture. It pin points important elements of fetish and fashion, while skimming over the importance of emotions, trust, childhood,sex, power. When Steele addresses sex and power she uses a freudian approach. this is simply because steele's educational backround is limited to maintinly fasion history. The book is complete with fetish photos, and describes the history and evoltion of the fetish well. Steele, describes one fetish party that she has attended and makes assumptions about fetishes, however i find it difficult to fully accept her conclusions due to her limited exposure. She does not accuratly address the role of fetishism in the gay and lesbian and bisexual community, but rather sticks to trannies and crossdressers. Futhermore, much of the evidence that she uses to explain fetishes is based on biological sex and gender roles. Both of which i would argue are downplayed among those who are open minded enough to participate in fetish culture.This book is very well written and hard to put down. The book is well edited and well sectioned to keep you entertained and statisfied. It great book for someone who wants a brief and PG 13 explaination of fetishism-- for someone who knows little about the history of fetishims--or for your slightly kinky friend. Please keep in mind that Steele looks at fetishes from a fashion perspective--if you are looking for a more indept explaination of fetish culture you wil left, without it

A very well-written and -researched essay whose clarity and wit is all the more remarkable for its breadth of subject matter (fetish and fashion, along with all the psychology, sociology, sexuality, feminism, etc. that they entail) and the high degree of subjectivity authors usually bring to that subject matter. Steele's writing is observant, engaging, stylish and piercingly critical--she gains much credibility in my mind by debunking the corset myth, for example. One flaw is that the wide implications of the subject matter often lead her off on tangents. It often takes her some time--in some cases, the entire book--to fully elucidate her points. You have to trust her to explain everything in the end--a trust which is largely well-placed.Oddly, the largest overarching theory about the connection between obscure fetish gear and high fashion is left implicit in a "perhaps. . ." phrase at the end. That theory is that most behaviors and interests previously thought perverse are being accepted into the mainstream as our society becomes ever more leisure-oriented and pleasure-based. Also unresolved is why fetishism seems to be largely Western and modern--is this a function of social organization, the definition of "fetishism", new sex research, sexual liberation, mass-media communication, all of these? There's an interesting correlation here with the equally culture-specific and modern outbursts of schizophrenia and serial killing (killers who are of course sexually motivated, highly perverse and often fetishistic). This is a query of high social concern, and I'm now more convinced of the role of the mass media--fetishism requires visual stimulation, Steele says, and there's more of that in a wider variety of subject matter than ever before. Not to simply psychology, but it's an interesting factor.The notion that males rather than females are prone to fetishism is almost borne out by this book itself, as though it took a woman to write sensibly and objectively about fetish/fantasy issues. Conversely, she trips up in fashion, her academic field, which she's too close to for that degree of objectivity. In dicussing whether fetish-inspired fashions empower or degrade women (a discussion wisely complicated with reader-response and intentionalist critiques), she doesn't realize the question she's begging: Why are fetish fashions almost exclusively produced for and worn by women? You could argue that fetishism is almost exclusively male activity projected onto female items. But many fetishists are just as satisfied wearing the fetish items themselves. And as Steele distinguishes, fashion is about "normal" fetishizing, not fetishism, and works by far looser rules. All she really says to this question is that men's fashions are "slower to develop" and suggests a psychoanalytic theory (interesting, though far from convincing) about why women like dressing up more than men do. I think the obvious answer she misses is that w

_Fetish: Fashion, Sex & Power_ examines a number of fetishes, their histories, and their influence on mainstream fashion. Some of the fetishes described include shoes, corsetting, latex, and leather. The author does a nice job of debunking some myths and uncovering the roots of each practice. Many of the photographs are provocative, but not overly obscene. Overall, an interesting look at the influence of "fringe" dressing on mainstream fashion.