Book Reviews: 2026

Year in Review

Books Finished: 6
Pages Read: ~1,700
Audiobooks: 1
E-books: 4
Paper Books: 1

Year in Review coming in December...

The Great Sex Divide

Finished: 2026-02-23
Author: Wilson, Glenn
Year: 1989
Pages: ~160

I've been keenly aware of the fact—and it really is a fact—that men and women are fundamentally, biologically, mentally, and physically different since a very early age. However, I believe we are equal, chiral halves of the single organism of man. One sex is better in one regard, the other is worse in that first sense, but better in a second, and so on. This isn't a very complex concept and most people would agree with this, however, feminists and other mentally challenged individuals are unwilling to grasp this simple idea.

Men and women are very strange and behave in confusing and annoying ways until you start thinking of the actions of people as being largely pre-determined by their biology as opposed to their actions being conscious, though-out decisions. A fish doesn't fly like a bird since it lacks the biological capacity. Tigers make bad pets since they are wild predators. A child can't think as quickly or clearly as an adult since they aren't fully developed yet. These examples don't point to any of these creatures being inferior, just that they are different from each other.

Men tend to have a better spacial and psychical understanding than women, who in turn, are generally better with language skills and color perception. Men are generally physically stronger while women reach biological maturity faster. Men have external, dangling genitalia while women have the capability of bringing new life into the world. These are all positives and negatives in some respects, but they are trade-offs in our biology that are made up for when you include the equal but opposite sex in your life.

Glenn Wilson illustrates these and many more differences while delivering a clear explanation for them. I sincerely recommend this book if you'd like to read more on this subject. I also read another of Glenn's books last year before this one and it was equally as enlightening. He rails on feminists a bit too, which I always enjoy.

A Short Stay in Hell

Finished: 2026-02-03
Author: Altman, Andrew; Watson, Lori
Year: 2009
Pages: ~110

A coworker introduced me to this book as his entry into our workplace book club and it seemed immediately interesting to me as it is based on The Library of Babel, a short story by Jorge Luis Borges, which I have read a few times and greatly enjoy.

This book tells the story of a Mormon who goes to a hell much like the one described by Borges; an infinite (for all intents and purposes) library of books, each of which is full of random characters. The man's goal is to find a book that accurately tells the story of his life, then deposit it into a book chute in order to be freed. This task is basically impossible and the story spans a great length of time and tells us of some of the events that transpire during the man's search.

Overall, I enjoyed it. I was heavily dissatisfied with the ending however. I expected the author to round it off with a lesson or with some clever way out of the labyrinth, but that was not the case. I would probably read this again in a few years and I do recommend it to those who appreciate structural horror and that crushing feeling of colossal helplessness that can be evoked by stories such as this.

Debating Pornography

Finished: 2026-01-15
Author: Altman, Andrew; Watson, Lori
Year: 2019
Pages: ~300

While writing an article about morality and ethics and discussing its principles with my coworkers, the topic of pornography was brought up. I sought out a book—such as the one shown above—as I wanted to learn more about the viewpoints of others and see if I was missing anything. This book was largely a waste of my time. The author explained his viewpoint through a series of drawn-out paragraphs that made sure to nail the same handful of points home as many times as possible. They spoke about a few different perspectives and rationales for the benefits, neutrality, or evils of pornography as well as the harm it may or may not cause to the users, participants, and / or society at large.

The anti-porn feminists (APFs) argue that porn is bad for women, makes the public perceive them as less valuable than men, makes women earn less money, and raises the amount of violent sexual crimes in a society.
The pro-porn feminists (PPFs) argue that it is empowering and important for the queers and helps women feel self-empowered.
The anti-porn, non-feminists (APNFs) argue for similar points to the APFs. They argue that women are harmed, porn is not covered by the First Amendment, and that it damages society at large.
The pro-porn, non-feminists (PPNFs) argue that porn is a "moral right" afforded to people (like the ability to drink alcohol) and that it may contribute to negative situations for women and society at large, it is protected as "free speech" and not harmful in itself.

What all of these perspectives seem to share is the assumption that pornography carries some built-in moral or social meaning, which I reject. Because of this, I found very little of value in a book that treats pornography as if it must be either a social toxin or a social good. To me, that entire debate is built on assumptions I do not share, so the arguments themselves never really get off the ground.

Note: I expanded this review into a larger article located here.

[Updated: 2025-12-23]