LTIstorikai Valdemaras Klumbys ir Tomas Vaiseta įžengė į teritoriją, kurioje lyg ir nieko neturėjo rasti – juk iki šiol vyrauja įsitikinimas, kad seksualumo kultūra sovietų Lietuvoje tarsi neegzistavo. Tačiau jie skaitytojams ir skaitytojoms prieš akis atveria netikėtai įvairią ir dinamišką seksualumo kultūrą: tuometė spauda mėgaujasi publikuodama seksualizuotus moterų atvaizdus ir tik valdžiai susizgribus tai nevirsta kultūros revoliucija; atsiradus vaizdo grotuvams, piliečiai grupelėmis renkasi žiūrėti pornografijos; gydytojai auklėja vyrus, nesugebančius seksualiai patenkinti savo žmonų; apklausose trečdalis studentų prisipažįsta turėję seksualinių santykių tik iš smalsumo. Klumbys ir Vaiseta, remdamiesi spauda, dienoraščiais, atsiminimais, archyvais ir interviu, nagrinėja seksualumo kultūrą sovietų Lietuvoje trimis pjūviais: per viešai publikuotus vaizdus, lytinio švietimo ir seksualinės tematikos tekstus ir visuomenės elgseną. Jie teigia, kad sovietmečiu valdė meilės diktatūra, kuriai pavyko nuslopinti prasidėjusią seksualinę kultūros revoliuciją, bet tuomet ši virto seksualiniu pilietiniu karu. [Leidėjo anotacija]
ENHistorians who have explored the topic of gender and sexua i y in the Soviet Union and Lithuania appear to have focused more on exactly the same points that the Soviet system would have preferred them to target: gender images and roles, relationship issues, family politics, and love, with its both private and public expressions. Yet, the things that were considered to be of a lesser importance or even evil nature during the Soviet times, namely, sexual relationships, sexual satisfaction, the body and its pleas ures have been left in the shadows. The sexual transformation that took place in the Soviet Union is rarely explored conceptual, ly especially with regard to trying to determine whether it could be likened to a sexual revolution. Therefore, this book turns away from the usual questions in the historiography of this topic, questions regarding family and gender images, the many relationships between them, and the regime policy guarding them. Instead, e book focuses on the culture of sexuality and its norms in Soviet Lithuania (1944-1990). However, seeing as the previously men tioned questions are inseparable from the topic of sexuality, the issues of men and women, the popular notions and images of femininity and masculinity, love and its perception do not disappear completely from the horizon of this research. Nonetheless, they have been given significance only as components of the culture of sexuality, as elements that allow for a better understanding and explanation of the sexual culture of the time.The title of the book, “The Little O”, expresses its main principle. In the West, “The Big O” became the axis of the events of 1968, when public discourse welcomed the topics of sexual relationships, pleasure, and the importance of (female) orgasm, as well as its liberating and emancipating force, which brought on a cultural change that was nothing short of a revolution. Interestingly, at the end of the 1960s, notions of the sexual life and the issue of female sexual frustration also entered public debates in Soviet Lithuania. Yet, these questions (just like many other issues related to sexuality) were restrained, their importance lessened. Instead, these issues were framed within glorified discussions on love, family, and the relationships between sexes; the vital issue of womens sexual frustration was unsolved. Therefore, the sexual culture of the time was developing around “The Little O”. In the book, the culture of sexuality is understood as having three inter-related components: the visuals (photographs, illustrations, video footage, arts), textual discourses (establishing, forming, maintaining, explaining, and interpreting sexual norms in the press, books, education and propaganda leaflets, etc.), and peoples behaviour, i. e. everyday practices that mirrored, rejected and created new sexual norms of the time. Accordingly, the book is divided into three parts: first, “Image” (exploring the visual culture), then, “Word” (investigating public textual discourses), and, finally, “Action” (commenting on everyday sexual behaviour). [From the publication]