Ostensibly a book focused on women, I found this to be an incredibly useful and valuable book. I think it's good for all genders!

So many of the lessons have remained with me and helped me re-examine so many of the assumptions I'd had before reading it. Highly recommended. ( )

3.5 stars. I think this book is worth reading, particularly if you did not have access to comprehensive sex education when you were younger or if you have questions about how your body works. As someone who did have access to sex ed, I still learned some things from it (the first time I read it, which was several years ago). ( )

No secret ingredient, just you

The book is good if a bit underwhelming. It all pretty much boils down to accept yourself as you are, although that in itself is hard and takes a lot of work. ( )

This review originally appeared on my blog at www.gimmethatbook.com.

I won this book through a Goodreads giveaway! Thanks to Emily Nagoski and Simon & Schuster for contributing the book in exchange for an honest review.

There are many books out there claiming to be the best source of knowledge about the female body; but this one is pretty much on the money. Nagoski talks honestly about what women experience, and why. Her tenet is: we are all alike, but different, we are all normal.

Women may get their knowledge from social media, and therefore have an unrealistic image to live up to. Women may feel “broken” because their bodies don’t react the way they think they should. This feeling is insidious and permeates the brain and hinders sexual pleasure.

Nagoski explains that women have a “brake” and an “accelerator” and that they need to be aware of what hits them, in essence. She talks about “spectatoring” (thinking about yourself in a denigrating way during sex, effectively hitting your brake) and discusses how to love your body.

COME AS YOU ARE is an uplifting, celebrating, and positive book that all women should read. The ideas she puts forth are simple, and she includes worksheets and questions in the book that the reader can use to help them along their journey to better self awareness.

The author includes a chapter on anatomy, which is very thorough and should educate even the most sexually aware person! She also debunks the myths that women’s pleasure is secondary to men’s, or that the purpose of a female is just to procreate. Her message gives women power on every page.

Intertwined with Nagoski’s wisdom are 4 fictional women, each experiencing a different problem. As the book progresses, each woman’s relationship progresses, concurrent with what the author is saying. This way the reader can see how the principles are applied in real life.

What makes this book different from other self help books is that the solutions are put forth for both the mind and the body. It won’t matter if your sex drive is low or high, as the tenets will make many women feel better, both about themselves and about what they feel. Education goes a long way, and this is the author’s aim: to let women know they are normal, while teaching them why this is so. There can be no better message, especially in these times where the average female has a lot of negativity surrounding her. Every woman should read this book, then give it to their partner. There would be more happiness in the world if that occurred. ( )

(Disclaimer: Listened to this on Audiotape only got to Chapter 4.) I put this down after chapter 4. Her "revolutionary" "ground-breaking" etc.. theory is that women have two parts of their brain dedicated to sexuality--the accelerator which makes you interested and the brakes which stop you from being interested.

Am I a genius so I'm the only person to whom this was obvious way before I read this book? Am I the only person who finds it unbelievably cliché to be told to get out a mirror and really examine your vagina? Here's a hint: if its been in Fried Green Tomatoes, its been done.

I really wanted to like her and to hear amazing theories about why women work the way they do sexually. This just rehashed what I already knew. Waste of my time. ( )

A great book that busts the myths of women's sexuality and provides helpful suggestions on how to find pleasure and joy your way
Backed by close to 50 pages of footnotes and references. ( )

Thought this was really insightful and obviously well researched. While it is marketed at women, it would be great if more men read it as I think societal thinking will only change if men push for it as well. ( )

Very informative and well written in an engaging style that is easily understood. Explains mind and body interactions with in depth instruction on body parts and functions. The chapter on stress is a must read. ( )

I found this book to be absolutely enlightening. Not only did I learn the physiological and physical similarities and differences between both men and women's sexual health, but I discovered my own "sexual type" and that I am, in fact, not broken.

It was relieving to read about scenarios that I have encountered myself, and to know that a large portion of women experience the same issues that I have. This book has really changed the way I view my own sexuality and I can better understand it as its portrayed and encouraged or discouraged in the media and by our culture. It was made even more poignant by the science and evidence the author uses to support the majority of the claims made in the book!

I would certainly recommend this book to both men and women, as I feel most of the information can be applied to ANYONE involved and interested in their sexual well-being and desire, and how it can be related to couples as well.

Overall, I give the book 4.5/5 stars, .5 stars off because I feel in parts that the author falls to the same trap that she stated she was trying to avoid - she continually advocates that a woman's sexuality is not simple like a man's is, but the reality is that both men and women can experience simple or complex sexuality and I would have liked her to be more encompassing of this fact. ( )

I love the enthusiasm for women's pleasure. I bet taking a workshop with this author is a hoot. I got tired of some of her metaphors for the complicated intersection of brain/nervous system/cultural assumptions, even while I see the usefulness of having metaphors for them. ( )

I read this on the recommendation of a friend who suggested it might help clear things up for me. She winked when she said it. And so, as a man, I realize I am not the target audience, which makes this a difficult thing to review.

The good: several of my female friends have told me that this book changed their lives. Evidently there is good advice here, and it definitely cleared up some misconceptions I had around women's sexuality. To that extent, if you can suspend your disbelief, this is probably a great read.

The bad: I mentioned suspension of disbelief. Nagoski often refers to "the science," claiming that whatever study proves her point. However, my overwhelming feeling throughout the book was that Nagoski had ideas that empirically seemed to work out, and was trying to justify them through the literature. While there are quite a few citations (none of which I followed up on), the studies she describes simply /reek/ of bad science. They are either studies about rats that she's extrapolated to human behavior, or they are unreplicated studies of n
While the facade of science probably lends an air of legitimacy to what otherwise would be a book of just-so stories, it completely falls flat to a scientifically-minded audience. And so I'm stymied here. Nagoski's methods are clearly bunk, but due to how many people I know personally whom have been helped by this book, I feel that I need to credit where it's due.

Should you get points for accidentally being right, even if your methods are completely wrong?

Another gripe: the prose here is rather egregious. It comes off a lot like having a chat-room conversation back in the early 2000s. For example, Nagoski doesn't seem to know the word "feelings," and instead, exclusively refers to "getting the Feels." There are a lot of strained analogies to popular culture, almost none of which I was familiar with --- and the ones I was, the metaphor didn't really connect. For example, she spent a few pages describing the plot of Groundhog Day, and then when she got around to her point, it really didn't seem to be related to Groundhog Day at all! I think it was about "why do vaginal and clitoral orgasms feel different from one another if they are REALLY AND TRULY JUST THE SAME THING?" but I can't remember.

Relatedly, the book espouses particularly bad ontology. As alluded to above, Nagoski decides by fiat that ALL ORGASMS ARE THE SAME. She adopts a non-standard definition of orgasm, and justifies this claim based on her new definition. She says, if you notice a distinction between vaginal and clitoral orgasms, that you are wrong. Because they are the same thing. "And besides, every orgasm is different from one another, so why differentiate?"

Nagoski makes this misstep many times throughout the book. Maybe it's just me splitting hairs, but she willingly and oftentimes redefines a word. Clearly she is attempting to remove stigma or get past some cultural blocks, or whatever, but make no mistake --- this is the work of a marketer, not a researcher. Nagoski evidently has something to sell here, which she admits, but it's unclear whether she's aware she's doing this, or whether her thinking really is this sloppy. Like it or not, words mean something, and we use them because they usefully carve distinctions that we'd like to make. It's fine to show us that these distinctions are mistaking the forest for the trees, but a better approach than saying "you're wrong, orgasm doesn't REALLY mean that" is "here's a better word that better carves reality at its joints."

The ugly: the major takeaway of this book seems to be "no matter what your sexuality is, it's normal." There's a lot of dark-arts psychology in the prose of this book, in an attempt to reassure the reader that they are "not broken." My initial, uncharitable response to this was "what sort of sad, weak person needs to seek reassurance from this?" But then I remembered the women who have praised this book to me, and quite a number of them are remarkably strong, wildly inspiring humans.

As such, I have reconsidered my view, and instead interpret the book's reaffirming attitude as evidence of just how fucked up women's sexuality must be in our culture. As a man, this is never going to be a thing I will experience first-hand, so any evidence is helpful to gain an honest understanding here. Maybe it's not weak people who feel that they're broken; maybe it's just everyone. If so, I guess I can get onboard with the book's approach, but it still feels a bit dishonest.

Overall, if you are like me, this book probably isn't a great investment of your time. There are definitely things to be learned here, but the vast majority of it is an owner's guide to contextualizing women's sexuality. My primary takeaways are that the expectation of sex leads to sexual excitement, regardless of whether or not the brain is into it --- and that getting rid of the expectation of sex from intimate touching can help alleviate stress and, paradoxically, lead to significantly better sex. ( )

Revolutionary and pragmatic for any cisgender woman in a heterosexual relationship seeking steps toward self compassion to enhance her sexuality. ( )

I bought this book because I received a diagnosis of vaginismus earlier this year and the people on the vaginismus subreddit recommended it.
First off, this book is extremely straight and cisgender. The author mentions this at the beginning of the book-there simply isn’t enough research.

However, if you are a person who is dating another person with a vagina, or if you yourself have a vagina and want to have sex with your partner, or you just want to masturbate by yourself, I would still say you should read this book. There is a lot of good information in here for couples about how to communicate, how to be non-judgmental about their partner’s feelings and their own feelings.

Besides that, the science is fascinating. I had an inkling if it before I read this but a lot of her terms and explanations BLEW MY GODDAMN MIND!

This book definitely helped me come to terms with my diagnosis, not as a good thing or a bad thing, but simply something that exists and that I can seek medical care for (and have done so). It helped me to realize I’m okay just the way I am and my body is okay just the way it is. We are all made up of the same parts, just arranged differently. ( )

"If you feel broken, or know someone who does... we've all been lied to but its no one's fault.." This is the page heading that this book fell open to when I first opened this Amazing book. This is the book I wish I had had years ago and should be part of Everyones sex education. This book won't just change your sex life, it will change your whole life forever.

Special P.S. to the author: Thanks & Wow. ( )

This is more self-help than hard science (although there's plenty of science cited for all the points). Even if you aren't searching for help or answers, the overall message is hugely positive and affirming for people with vaginas to hear. The tl/dr:

-everyone is different, and everyone is normal
-responsive (vs spontaneous) desire is normal and more common for women
-nonconcordance (disagreement between your brain and your body's responses) is real and normal
-for most women, context is EVERYTHING
-we all have sexual "brakes" and "accelerators" that work independently of each other and have varying degrees of sensitivity

There's a lot more, but I wish I had grown up with all of this knowledge. Also, I've read others' beefs with the author's casual tone. I'm usually put off by chattiness in books, but it didn't bother me here. Maybe because she's a therapist? Maybe because talking about sex clinically doesn't feel as open? Meh. Not bothered. ( )

This book will turn what you know about women’s sexuality upside down!

For years, women’s sexuality has been regarded as being basically the same as a man’s sexuality, just watered down. Nagoski argues that this is not the case. While we all have the same parts, we’re organized in different ways, so a wide variety of responses to sexual stimuli can all be considered in the “normal” range. How we respond depends on context, including emotional, cultural, and physical. Nagoski spends a lot of time discussing accelerators and brakes—those things that turn us on and those things that put a damper on our ability to enjoy our sexual experiences. To make these concepts easier to understand, she weaves stories featuring several couples (who are composites of actual patients of hers) in a variety of relationship situations throughout the book.

While women are the main intended audience of this book, a lot of the information will be useful to men, especially those who want to better understand their woman partners. The book doesn’t focus specifically on heterosexual relationships, making it relevant to LGBTQ readers.
My conclusion--read this book! You’ll be glad that you did! ( )

This book is written primarily for cisgender women. As a cisgender heterosexual male, I found it insightful.

Normal
The first thing I was struck by in the book was Nagoski’s extensive and creative use of the term “normal,” and the gender-stereotypical insecurity its usage implies. “Normal” is generally used in a statistical sense. Here it is used to be psychologically comforting and statistically meaningless, as Nagoski relentlessly insists that everyone is “normal.” If we set aside this unusual use of the word, we’re still confronted with a question: why would someone want to be normal? Personally, I would much rather be exceptional, noteworthy, interesting, or even unusual. Only if I’m trying to disappear do I aim for normality. All of this points towards a conclusion: that most women feel “abnormal” in regard to their sexual selves, and with a negative connotation. This is unfortunate news.

Mechanistic Analogies
The second thing I’m struck by in the book is the author’s use of mechanical analogies. Women are living organisms with a high degree of complexity. Often in the book I feel as though Nagoski oversimplifies women, turning them into machines. An example: her most frequently used analogy is that of accelerator and brake. When you think of these two terms, what image comes to mind? For me, it is a car. Regardless of the utility of this analogy, there are some significant hazards of thinking of a woman as a car, not least of which is that it then has a driver that is necessarily not the car. The one analogy in the book that I enjoy is that of a woman’s sexuality as a garden. Nagoski looks at different biomes and explores diversity through this analogy. Like women, gardens are living systems.

Understanding Women Through Men
The third striking aspect of the book is that Nagoski begins with indictment of the way that female sexual education is taught through a male lens—and then goes to explain everything by the analogies to male anatomy and response. In other words, the presentation of this books appears to reinforce (rather than counteract) this narrative. That said, I did learn some fascinating things. For example, that there are “homologues” for every aspect of male and female genitalia.

Female Orgasm as Non-Evolutionary
The fourth surprising aspect of this book is that Nagoski states that the female orgasm is evolutionarily unnecessary (as opposed to the male orgasm, which is associated with sperm). She notes that her students don’t like this story—and I can understand why!

Science and Values
The fifth oddity is that the book ultimately aims to change the way that women feel about their sexuality, but attempts to do so through science. There is incongruity to this approach; good science is unbiased. On the other hand—values, by their nature, are biased. So the reader is left wondering—what happens if the science veers off in another direction, and if, in a generation, we’ll realize that women should feel poorly about their sexuality? By fastidiously citing the science, Nagoski undermines her aim of reassuring women of their own worth and own experience. Both sexual science and sexual values are important, but to try to further one with the other denigrates both.

Context
If there’s one thing I’ve learned from this book, it is about the importance of female context. Eighty-five percent of women have responsive desire, meaning that becoming turned on is a phenomenon emergent from their context (psychological environment, physical environment, relational environment, etc.). There is an aspect of hazard that Nagoski overlooks in her exploration of this topic (possibly because the book was written before the #MeToo era). Responsive desire is a contributing factor to why we have stereotypes surrounding that men initiate sexual advances, and also a contributing factor to the ways in which men persist even after receiving no for an answer.

In conclusion, there were a number of aspects of this book that I found distracting, but ultimately it was an interesting read and I did learn more about female sexuality. ( )

This is a bit more of a personal review for me, so skip this if you're not interested - I picked up this book after my therapist recommended it. Sexuality and understanding my body are something I've recently come to realize I've always struggled with. This book is full of science and has really given me understanding about the way I work and helped me see some of the reasons as to why I feel the way I do currently. It's a lot to take in and a book I'd recommend that you be prepared to highlight and annotate (yes, really!) - my own copy is tabbed and highlighted so that I can revisit some especially pertinent sections and better absorb them. Each section has some activities you can complete right in the book as well.

If you're struggling to understand your sex drive, whether it be high or low, I think you'll find this book useful. In fact, you'll learn that sex isn't even a drive! I'm not one of those people to ever feel like a book is life-changing, but this one comes pretty close. I don't read much in the way of self-help, but this book was so helpful that it makes me wonder what else is out there. Nagoski explains the science she's studied in a very relatable way. I would especially recommend this if you've ever felt "broken" when it comes to desire, drive, etc. It was incredibly important to me to be able to understand not only the way I feel, but that the way I feel isn't broken or wrong. It's normal and understandable.

I'm not yet sure how I'll apply all I've learned, but I'm so glad I read this book. ( )

http://blog.threegoodrats.com/2016/05/come-as-you-are.html

https://thedirtynormal.com/

https://www.emilynagoski.com/

https://www.ted.com/talks/emily_nagoski_the_truth_about_unwanted_arousal/transcr.....

In Come As You Are, Emily Nagoski briskly debunks a number of prevalent cultural myths with science. She mostly wants you to know that you are normal; she repeats: We all have the same parts, organized in different ways. A few more key takeaways:

-People have different levels of SIS (Sexual Inhibition System, a.k.a. brakes) and SES (Sexual Excitation System, a.k.a. accelerator). There is more variation within each category (women, men) than between the categories, just like with height. This is the Dual Control Model.

-Spontaneous desire vs. responsive desire: both are normal!

-Only about one third of women are reliably orgasmic from intercourse; it depends where the clitoris is and whether it's being stimulated during vaginal penetration.

-Nonconcordance: genital response doesn't necessarily match a person's experience of arousal (contrary to the "standard narrative" about sex, e.g. wet = aroused)

-The chasing dynamic: "low desire" is, by definition, a relationship issue

-Expecting (anticipating), eagerness (wanting), and enjoying (liking) are separate functions in your brain.

-The "little monitor" next to your brain's "one ring" watches to make sure the world is behaving according to her expectations, and directs the investigation when there is any discrepancy between the world and her expectations. Her goal is to close the gap. What kind and how much effort are you investing in pursuit of that goal? How much and how quickly are you making progress? Try harder or give up?

Quotes in the private notes section ( )

The book has a lot of important points on sexuality and arousal and seems to be firmly based in science (I didn't check personally). If I were the president I'd have everybody read and apply this book to increase sexual well being. For me all of the models that were introduced have already changed how I think about (female) sexuality.

The only negatives are that it's a bit long sometimes, Nagosky can sometimes take a long time to get to her point which also decreases the information overview per chapter.

So: great book! ( )

This is probably the most empowering book I've ever read. I want to buy a bunch of copies and give it to everyone I know, it's that important. Nagoski makes the science behind sexuality easy to understand with a friendly, informal writing style and lots of metaphors -- which is something that could potentially come off as condescending, but it never does in this book. Instead, it's absolutely reassuring and informative. I'll probably be talking about how great this book is forever! ( )

This is a wonderful book - that I wish had been around when I was a young man. This is a science grounded and practical account of female sexuality that all men should inform all men as well.

If I had read this as a younger man - my relationships and my masculinity would have all been enriched. ( )

What I like about this book are the theories and models that the author has already presented--far more succintly--in her blog, The Dirty Normal. The model of a Sexual Excitation System (the accelerator) and a Sexual Inhibition System (the brakes) working simultaneously is enlightening. Similarly, the idea that one partner can experience "spontaneous desire" while another partner has "responsive desire" is interesting as well as validating. But there is so much more about this book that sits poorly with me:
1. The "surprising new science" is just not very good. One of the studies that the author cites frequently used rats, not people. It is not good science to extrapolate from one species to another. In addition, many of the human studies have a small sample size, making it difficult to generalize the findings.
2. The author uses lots of "cute" metaphors that do nothing to illustrate her assertions. Why are feelings called "a sleepy hedgehog"? Why is a model nicknamed "the little monitor" and then, in the notes section, the author reveals that the monitor does not actually exist? Similar "cute" expressions that really irk me include calling feelings "the Feels." I suspect that the audience for this book is undergraduate college students, so the author tailors her language to reflect their slang. That might work for the current crop of readers, but how will future college students, using a new slang vocabulary, relate to this informal writing?
3. Monogamous partnerships are privileged. The author rarely if ever writes about other kinds of relationships. I would have appreciated some recognition of and consideration for single people who are sexual without wanting to be monogamous/in a romantic relationship.

Recommended only for undergraduate students (of all genders). ( )

This book is fantastic, and way out in front of its peer group (Bonk, I Love Female Orgasm, etc.). Nagoski is an astute observer, a compelling storyteller and a brilliant, curious thinker about female sexuality. I wish this book had been published 10 years ago :) ( )

This *almost* gets 4 stars, but not quite, I knew most of the information in here, and I felt like she talked down to the reader somewhat. However, this is really excellent in many ways, and if you *don't* know these things, this would be an easy read to get you there. So I would recommend it. ( )