Hardly any of it, if any of it at all, was new to me. Not that this was any fault of De Mez, but because they outline things that are incredibly disturbing. (3) Her last two chapters were brutal to read. So in short, I agree with the thesis, although I might not agree with the extent or every instance of her application. But at times it felt reductionistic to explain so much always in terms of an unhealthy approach to masculinity. She may have been describing some historical account exposing an evangelical blemish (which was normally still insightful in itself). In other words, at other times, Du Mez would outline some historical account, that in my opinion, did not seem to have a whole lot to do with views of masculinity, although she would seek to draw that connection. (2) That said, there were points in her book where she went down trails that did not (to me) seem entirely to support her thesis. And that’s very, very true, in my opinion. Her point is that much of evangelicalism is fraught with such a view of masculinity. I don’t think she uses the term “toxic masculinity.” But (defined in the best possible way) I think this term fits what she’s describing. So I know the truth of her thesis not just academically, but also on a personal level from my own experience. I personally grew up in the orbit of the evangelical world Du Mez is describing. (1) I very much agree with and appreciate the overall message of the book. But anyway, that means you should take any critique or quibbles below with a certain grain of salt in case the fault, in this case, lies with the reader (me) and not the book/author.īut allow me to list out some of the thoughts I have in terms of assessment:
So when I listen to books I expect I inevitably overlook or don’t absorb some of its details, but nonetheless gain an overall impression of the book. One note: I listened to this book as an audiobook, which always creates a different experience (at least for me) than a more careful read. And I’ll give the book a balanced 3-starts, which Goodreads describes as “I liked it”, to express my general appreciation of the book, its argument, and form, while also taking into consideration my quibbles and hesitancies. However, given the popularity and influence of this book, I had several folks ask me for my thoughts.
I didn’t originally give this book a rating when I marked it “read.” That’s largely because I felt pretty ambivalent about it - things about it drew me towards a high ranking, like 4 or 5-stars but other things I found more dissatisfactory or more mediocre. Jesus and John Wayne: How White Evangelicals Corrupted a Faith and Fractured a Nation by Kristin Kobes Du Mez