There are a lot of attention-getting words in the title of this book: Sex Politics Religion: How Delusional Thinking is Destroying America. Once inside the book, however, there's maybe 54 pages of real material, one for each of the 54 subjects Siebold "covers" in 360 pages.
The premise here is that Americans need to stop thinking emotionally and start thinking critically about sex, politics, and religion. In this case, "critical thinking" seems to mean agreeing with Steve Siebold.
Don't expect a reasoned look at all sides of any issue, from open marriage and polyamory to the federal deficit, from obesity to money and religion.
Siebold is a former athlete and motivational speaker who has written bestsellers about "mental toughness" to help businesses succeed. His customers include
Proctor and Gamble and Toyota. He is far from unbiased in his opinions.
It so happens I agree with most of Siebold's opinions. I believe that when it comes to our personal lives, what we put in our bodies, and who and how we love, the government should stay out of it. I am pro-choice (though not to the extreme of asserting that a baby is not a baby until it is actually born, as Siebold does), and agree with many of Siebold's political views.
Thus, Sex Politics Religion is proof that you can really dislike a book while agreeing with much of what it says.
I always thought that "critical thinking," which is a mantra throughout the book, meant taking a deep look at all the aspects of an issue and listening to all sides, and then making a decision. But Siebold deals with each issue very superficially, mainly giving his opinion and then quoting people and polls that back him up.
He also makes extreme statements that certainly don't sound unemotional to me, asserting that all religious leaders are only interested in control and in leading through greed and fear, implying that the only reason to have a traditional marriage is either jealousy and possessiveness or religious fanaticism, and stating that opposition to abortion is never about saving babies but always about controlling women, for instance.
Article comments