Outlasting the Gay Revolution: Where Homosexual Activism Is Really Going and How to Turn the Tide

by Michael L. Brown

The Houston mayor tried to subpoena sermons against homosexuality. The Mozilla CEO was fired for supporting a bill to uphold traditional marriage. HGTV canceled a new home-improvement show because of the Bible-based views of the show’s stars. From redefining marriage to dominating the culture, it appears that there is no stopping the gay activist agenda, but Dr. Brown boldly proclaims that the gay revolution is already a failure, containing within itself the seeds of self-destruction. In  Outlasting the Gay Revolution,  Dr. Brown clearly spells out eight principles to help Americans with conservative moral values outlast the gay never compromise your convictions, take the high moral ground, cherish sexual purity, defend natural marriage, celebrate gender distinctions, propagate the truth, turn to God, and refuse to throw in the towel. Dr. Brown’s words will fill every reader with fresh hope and courage, and while it looks like American society will never be the same again, that is not the end of the story. Gay activists will continue to overplay their hand, and most Americans will reject the tactics of these new bullies as our freedoms of religion, speech, and conscience come under increasing attack. A society based on sexual anarchy, the deconstruction of gender, and the redefinition of marriage cannot survive and thrive. Regardless of what the courts might say (including the Supreme Court), the cultural battle is far from over. The rising attack on our freedoms has only awakened a sleeping giant, in which case the battle has barely begun.

Genres: Nonfiction, Theology, Christian

272 pages, Hardcover

First published September 8, 2015

About the author

Michael L. Brown (born March 16, 1955) is a Messianic Jewish Old Testament scholar, professor, activist, itinerant speaker, and author who has preached in numerous countries and written twenty books. He is the founder and president of ICN Ministries. His writings have been translated into more than a dozen languages. He was married to Nancy Gurian on March 14, 1976 and they have two daughters, Jennifer and Megan, and four grandchildren.

Reviews

[Simon Mee]

In Outlasting the Gay Revolution we cannot have gay marriage. Why? Because it must be between a man and woman. Why? Because of some spiritual thing… …and allusions to birth rates.

If only people unattracted to each other could breed more. That’ll fix things.

There is a lot to be angry about in Outlasting the Gay Revolution. Pastors politicizing from the pulpit in Houston then playing the victim when their petition full of falsely obtained signatures gets thrown out. Misrepresenting an invasion of someone’s privacy in a sauna as the reverse. Making a really cool comparison between gay people’s opinions and the Nazi “Big Lie”. The book is a real buffet for the pearl clutchers here.

I’m not going to review the 8 principles that “structure” this book. The book reads basically as:

(i) moral panic;

(ii) you’re not gay anyway and you don’t even like it; and

(iii) stop being so mean to me just because I want to deny you civil rights.

I consider it better to pick out a couple of key themes from Outlasting the Gay Revolution, because I think they go to the heart of the hypocrisy of it.

Words have no meaning

Brown holds that if marriage could be something other than between man and woman then it could be any number of any kind of things.

My first thought is “Who care”. You and your partner can define what you have as you wish. Marriage does not have to be a heteronormative exclusionary term.

What really matters though is that Brown does not cover that “marriage” is a defined term in civil law and carries a bundle of rights. Excluding gay people from the definition of marriage makes them second-class citizens, unable to access several things a civil marriage provides. Pretending marriage is a spiritual matter is lazy way to avoid obvious issues around denying gay people these rights. Accordingly, it is ironic when Brown boohoos liberal comparisons between gay marriage and the civil rights movement of the 1960s, yet associates opposing gay marriage with opposing slavery.

I really want to emphasise this point: Brown never deals with the civil rights that marriage grants. To not even address that denying gay marriage would deny gay relationships equal footing and protection in society is moral cowardice. I do not believe he is ignorant of that matter, it has been a clear point of contention for years. He just does not want to face it, or even discuss something like “civil unions”, flawed as they may be.

Speaking of meaningless, Brown speaks of love demonstrated and truth in love. Yet he also refers to being homosexual as a sin, just not the worst sin in the world. He goes for the moral panic with stories about homosexuality causing polygamy, incest and (teasingly without ever quite committing) bestiality. Further:

We are more accepting of homosexuality today because our sexual morals are lower.

When Brown writes he has love for gay people, he is using it in a meaningless way. This book is not love for someone who needs help, it is a vehicle for demonization of the opposing view. I have seen Israel Folau talk about God’s love while condemning homosexuals to eternal hellfire. It is time to call out the ridiculousness of this terminology, emotional manipulation being used in substitution for accuracy.

Free-thinking my way

I do not think Brown wants to impose some unwieldy theocracy, but he does want his form of religion to have some privileges. For Brown, it is wrong to punish a tertiary institution for requiring a covenant permitting only sex in a heterosexual marriage or obligate that institution to hire a sexually active, out-and-proud gay man who was otherwise qualified. Why any descriptors before “qualified” should matter is beyond me.

What should be apparent is that there is an asymmetry in what Brown complains about and what Brown wants.

Brown complains about people being forced to accept the lifestyles of others. The best he can come up with about this “dangerous” position is the potential uncomfortableness of women sharing public bathrooms with men, a common canard that:

(a) implies that shared toilets will materially increase the risks that women face from men (he refers to potential heterosexual predators), compared to any other domestic situation, particularly with regards to men they already know;

(b) patronizes women with the assumption that men in bathrooms are themselves safe from violence, sexual or otherwise;

(c) plays dumb as to whether we could make changes notwithstanding alternative designs have already been introduced – we invented indoor plumbing, so I am sure we can move some walls around.

What Brown wants is to deny people rights and propagate a world view where homosexual behaviour is deemed deviant and part of sexual anarchy. Those pastors in Houston who faced subpoenas? Their issue was about having to hand over sermons where they almost certainly told their congregants to reverse an equal rights ordinance for gay and transgender residents.

Brown also writes: I truly believe that our society can deviate only so far before it either totally collapses or makes a massive course correction (or Jesus returns!). If Brown believes homosexuality will play a part in society collapsing then I do not see any point in debating him or sympathizing over any denial of “free speech”. You do not have to engage with hysteria.

So Brown’s complaint is that he will have to tolerate what others might have to do and what he wants is to deny others standing in law. These appear to be manifestly unequal things to me, and I know which I prefer.

It is true that gay marriage will, like abortion, remain at risk from state legislatures and judicial activism dressed up as originalism for awhile yet. However, public opinion trends since Outlasting the Gay Revolution was published in 2015 has made opposing gay marriage a loser opinion against a super-majority of support. I personally do not believe Christianity and homosexuality are mutually exclusive, but Brown does. Is that something you are comfortable with?

[Lora]

I just finished this book. Upon closing the cover, I clapped. This book is full of instances I previously heard about and many I hadn't. As I read through them, I was saddened for society, our country in particular. Encouragement rings through from knowing that others, including the author, are pressing on in the hope of Christ, while encouraging others to do the same. All by simply living according to how God calls us to live, thereby showing society a better way--God's way.

[Logan]

Dr. Michael Brown navigates through the current cultural hot-topic of marriage and homosexuality/transgenderism/etc. in a manner that is logical and well-researched; something I wish there were more of. Not one word was written in the book that would serve as derogatory rhetoric but rather a loving consideration of the landscape that surrounds us and what discussions must take place. Very well written and well-researched work that is a "must-read" for everyone, Christian or not.

[Kathy Baldock]

Brown called the last public review I posted on one of his books Brown a “revision” not a review. I expect this one will receive a similar response, in particular when Mr. Brown suggests that his follower en masse dismiss me. (As you do, please engage the CONTENT of this review, thank you.)

I am taking the time to post what I realize is a lengthy review: to be a strong counterbalance to Brown’s ideology, to alert those who may be tempted to give this book to LGBT persons as a “loving” action, and to expose Brown’s poor academic research.

Before I address “Outlasting the Gay Revolution,” I need to lay some groundwork as to how I approach all books I would term as Christian and anti-gay and anti-trans.

As I wrote in recent review of another what-God-REALLY-says-about-gays book -- with Brown’s latest entry as no exception, this genre of books ignore a simple foundational truth. What is referred to in the Bible in each of the passages used to bolster the avalanche of modern anti-gay ideological writing is not homosexuality.

What IS examined are biblical passages depicting violent, abusive, lust-filled, same-sex behaviors performed no less than two millennia ago in cultures where the social and sexual status of men and women were entirely different from what we have known in the past 60 to 70 years.

All such authors, Brown included, base their entire ideological theology upon the foundational presumption that people have historically participated in same-sex relationships with some semblance to the relational structure we see today.

No. Not true. At all.

_____________________________

Until the beginning of the 20th century, gay relationships -- as we now them now: equal status and mutually attracted -- were virtually unknown in ANY previous culture. (What WAS seen was relationship with large power and/or age differentials.)

The perception and cultural response to same-sex behavior between males has intractable roots in the social and sexual status of women throughout history. Because same-sex acts placed one male in the submissive, penetrated role of a woman, one male was invariably looked upon as if he were a woman.

Until women began to gain minimal upward status in the late 19th century, for a man to be treated sexually as a woman was both shaming and humiliating.

Before about the early 1900s, the sexual interaction between men and younger men or older boys included significant power differentials. The younger, submissive partner took the sexual-social role of a woman – again, a demeaning position for any male throughout history.

It was only as recent as 1879 that Karl Kertbeny first noticed there were men of equal status who were mutually attracted to one another. This newly witnessed notion made slow inroads to American culture. In fact, it was first mentioned in a medical journal in 1911. Before that, if a man was attracted to a male, all was fine in man-land as long as he maintained the dominant role of penetrator.

Until this period, people were defined by the role they played in sex, not by the sex of the person to whom they were attracted.

This monumental shift of identifying the sexual roles of people at the start of the 20th century started the transformation of how same-sex relationships came to be viewed.

As women rose in status, as cities formed, and as men began to explore sexual attractions, the interaction, which had always been associated with excess, lust and the reduction of one partner to the role of a woman, came to be seen differently.

The dynamic began to change in the 1920s; it would have been the first time in history that there was a minimal cultural understanding that people of the same sex were mutually and equally attracted.

The word “homosexual” first appeared in an English translation of the Bible in 1946. No theological documents at the time support this shift. This was clearly a cultural response to the most perverted sexual act translators could imagine to insert in the New Testament passages.

In fact, Derrick Sherwin Bailey, an English Anglican theologian, wrote Homosexuality and Western Traditions (1955) in which he closely examined the cultural and legal response to gays. Together with a team of theologians, historians, anthropologists, lawyers, and legislative leaders to study homosexuality and the sodomy laws, Bailey produced a groundbreaking work that should have been the primer for all theological writers after him. But, it was ignored.

The conservative American church and authors had been so unconcerned about gays that no one bothered to write a book addressing this most “abominable sin” until LaHaye’s The Unhappy Gays in 1978.

Gays, while certainly scorned in the culture from the 1930s, were ignored for the most part in Christian writings.

As gays were finally rising out from under cultural and medical oppression in the early 1970s, unfortunately, the conservative religious and political groups merged right around that time in the late 1970s. A smattering from within the unholy alliance saw the polarizing potential the “abominable gays” could have on amassing unregistered and uninvolved conservative voters.

And thus the deluge of modern negative conservative writings on homosexuality and faith, followed by gender identity and faith started.

That was a quick overview of modern events. If ignore them, as Brown does, you are bound to get the rest badly off-kilter.
________________________

There is no possibility that Apostle Paul, or the author of Leviticus, or Deuteronomy, could have had an inkling that over time, with the radical shift in views of women as equals and other social and cultural modifications, people could possibly engage in same-sex sex as a natural, healthy expression of love and mutual attraction. Additionally, the concept of gender identity could not have been more remote in ancient cultures.

The same-sexual behavior that biblical authors wrote about was the outcome of violence (Genesis), power dominance and social-sexual dominance (Leviticus and Deuteronomy), and lust and lack of self-control (Romans, 1 Corinthians, and 1 Timothy).

And people keep right on comparing yesterday’s apples to today’s oranges.
____________________________

The prerequisite of every single anti-gay Christian author, including Brown, is that readers must fully ignore social and medical histories of how we have come to understand the role of women and the progression of human sexuality.

Those are some darn big oversights we need to participate in to agree with their findings!

EVERY professional medical and mental health organization in the U.S. asserts that homosexuality is a normal variation of human sexuality, though certainly less prevalent than heterosexuality, still, it is a normal, expected variation. These organizations also all agree that attempting to change a person’s natural orientation is damaging.

How can any truth, especially one presumed from God Himself, come out of such severely flawed foundational presumptions?

We are in a new place in history and understanding and are being asked to wrestle with concepts that have emerged over the last half-century, concepts our forefathers in the faith never could have imagined.
_________________________________

Now to “Outlasting the Gay Revolution.”

Overall –

Stick to the topic and stop conflating issues.
Tweets, Facebook posts, and comments to blog posts do not constitute expert opinions from the other side.
It's not all about Brown. Much of the book is devoted to Brown’s personal "martyrdom" for the issue.
The use of academic resources could give Brown more credibility. These do not include WorldNetDaily, Barbwire or Charisma, or similar echo chambers.(Yes, I read the footnotes too. I find FN quite telling.)
Don't build "truths" on assumptions and presumptions.

Specifically, and as briefly as possible, really:

The purpose of this book, we are told is to: “encourage, strengthen, inspire, and informs laying out eight practical principle that will help us outlast the gay revolution, also explaining why, in many ways, the gay revolution has already failed and why it has is in itself of its own destruction.”

Consistently, as Brown raises each of the points or tells us how destructive “gay activism” is, he quickly follows the threat with a softening comment about the “nicer” gays – the ones who are presumably not activists. I am not sure where the defining line is between the activists that are destroying all in their path and those who are wanting/demanding equality and dignity.

The LGBT couples and families I know who want equal rights and treatment afforded other Americans I would presume are part of the “problem.”
Brown also repeatedly alerts the reader that they will now be put in the closet and be called homophobes and bigots. I am an advocate for LGBT equality and you would be hard pressed to find either of those words in my writings. I would most certainly use the term “ill-informed” however.

This martyrdom shtick has really played its course. If other people wanting equal rights cause the diminishment of the religious practice of Christians by no longer allowing them to discriminate, well, that is so severely flawed from the first prayer breathed.

Religious liberties and civil rights can co-exist. Sure, you may have to treat LGBT people equally in the marketplace, but my goodness, is that a problem for a Christ follower? Honoring the dignity of others should be emanating naturally from the Jesus team.

Brown’s recounting of the lifting of homosexuality from the DSM is just too riddled with myth (p.2&3 and in AQTHTA). I cover it in detail in Chapter 4 of my own book, “Walking the Bridgeless Canyon.” For the love of God and truth, can we PLEASE move on from the “bullying tactics” narrative?

If you want to understand empathetically the oppression suffered by the gay and trans communities in the US before 1973, reading social, medical, legal and governmental history on LGBT issues from the 1920s through the 1970s should be required research. Sadly, in all the pages of text and footnotes of “Outlasting,” this understanding was absent.

It is difficult to engage the many problems with Brown’s ideology and conclusions when, as I stated, the foundation is so horribly flawed. My notes on the book are extensive.

Some stand outs though are – Brown recounts the 2011 event when he led Christians into Charlotte Pride “to engage in civil and respectful conversations.” He led about 175 people, about ¼ of them children, NOT 400, (yes, I was sitting right across the street counting and watching as they paraded off to pride.)

Yes, the water bottles DID say “Jesus Loves You” AND they, along with the matching red tee shirts and rainbow bracelets handed out, pointed to a reparative therapy site, Exodus International. So the message was actually -- Jesus loves you and He wants you to stop being LGB or T. Now recall please, that EVERY professional medical and mental health organization in the U.S. asserts that homosexuality is a normal variation of human sexuality, and trying to change that, they assert is destructive. So, was this a “loving” action? Apparently Brown thinks so.

I wrote a post about this event on my blog, though I cannot link it here according to rules, it is easily findable. Search “God Has a Better Way” on Canyonwalker Connections.

For several chapters of “Outlasting,” the moral decay in America is linked to those who are LGBT or those who support those who are LGBT. This is where researching social history would have been an asset to reasoning. Unfortunately, in their absence, presumptions became “truths.”

The core event that shifted the sexual and social roles of men and women in American was the feminist movement of the late 1960s. Oh hold on naysayers who would love to put the clamps back on women – I would suggest reading a few or even one excellent foundational history book about that period of history. ANYTHING by Stephanie Coontz is well researched and highly respected. Start with her work.

Amusingly, a hundred years before the feminist movement, social commentators were predicting the end of marriage and the family unit as the culture shifted from economically based (and sometimes political) to love matches. Again, Coontz gives a wealth of insight on this issue. Quoting 1927 studies done well before women had equality echoes Brown’s pervasive lack of understanding of the dramatic cultural shifts caused by women seeking equality in the U.S.

And what is with the term the conservatives keep on yammering on about “sexual anarchy”?

Being romantically, emotionally and sexually attracted to the sex which is NATURAL for a persons orientation is hardly “anarchy.” Anarchy is when things are OUT of order. Again, this seems to be a tough one for Brown to understand. EVERY professional medical and mental health organization in the U.S. asserts that homosexuality is a normal variation of human sexuality. It has been out of order to expect LGBT people to be solely opposite sex attracted – THAT is anarchy!

My goodness, Principle #3 lays and conflates all sexual immorality to gays. By merely offering the mess up together, it becomes a wonderfully mixed bag laid on the backs of gays. How deceptively convenient?

Principle #4 – again, read some social history. Marriage was radically redefined in the late 1800s when women started to crawl out of the role of a man’s property. THAT was the biggest shift in the definition of marriage in thousands of years of history.

I’ve written some well thought out posts on marriage, again, easily found on my blog. No one is ending marriage, or erasing husband, wife, mom, dad from vocabulary. We are expanding the right to those who wish to share in it. Why on earth should we deny gay people the benefits of stronger relationships and better protected families? It thought those were GOOD things for societies – all studies indicate stability is a benefit.

Then there are three pages with a poem from a sperm donor baby turned adult? Come on. There are about three times as many infertile people or those who have problems getting pregnant as there are gay people in the US. And some of those gay people HAVE had children the "natural way." Keep the plight of the hard-to-get-pregnant folks in perspective as the condemnation for “not natural” families are formed.

#5 Gender distinctions -- is it really THAT scary to consider that everyone is not cisgender male or female? Take it up with God; He is the creator. I offer a 78 minute audio chapter on my blogsite giving the latest understanding of sex and gender. It’s science and biology and that in my thinking would be God’s doing.

Principle #6 – tell the truth until the lies are dispelled. Believe me, I am TRYING!

Principle #7 – the God Factor. Psssssst – pay attention to the LGBT Christian movement. The grace and mercy I see in my gay and trans* brothers and sister may well be the seed of ushering in a movement of God. This ideology infused political/religious mess of the last 45 years has been the seed of destruction of the church. It is time to end the whorish alliance. Confused? Read Chapters 5-10 in my book. (To address those who WILL say “Oh, she just wants to sell her book.” To you I say, I am just as worthy of offering input as is Brown. The major difference is that I do not conveniently ignore history to support my theology or ideology.)

#8 – Write the Last Chapter. When people come back in a decade or two and order “Outlasting” on Amazon for a penny as part of their research to see how the conservative church got it so wrong and as badly as it has – “Outlasting” will be part of the record.

_________________________________

If any Christian author refuses to address the subject of the intersection of faith with sexual orientation and gender identity with academic integrity including acknowledging: the cultural shifts in the status of women of many millennia, the progression of understanding and input from experts in human sexuality, the merger of conservative politics and religion since the late 1970s with its destructive impact, each significantly influencing the ability to take an honest look at biblical translations, then why should that author’s opinions be respected or influential?

When Christians finally acknowledge the ignorance with which they formulated opinions and doctrine concerning the LGBT community and LGBT Christians in particular, they will then regret the harm they caused resulting from their ignorance.

Ethical reflection of such ignorance WILL come as it did on issues of women and civil rights for people of color. Brown’s writings will hold an embarrassing place in that legacy.
_________

I gave the book 2 stars rather than 1 because any book project requires work; I do not dismiss such efforts

[Carol Ghattas]

Written in 2015, there is already so much more that could be said on this topic, but Michael Brown does a good job giving background to many of the issues we hear in our culture today. This allows me, as a Christian, to put things into perspective. Ultimately, I think the greatest takeaway for me was in seeing the importance of standing firm in my Christian faith and avoiding compromise.

Even in writing this review, I know I take a risk, but the quote from Dr. Martin Luther King Jr, which Brown shares proves relevant: "Cowardice asks the question, is it safe? Expediency asks the question, is it politic? Vanity asks the question, is it popular? But conscience asks the question, is it right?" I am thankful for this book that leads me to asks questions of conscience rather than, as society prefers, not asking questions at all.

The book is full of great quotes on both sides of the issues, but I'll end with this one by G. K. Chesterton: "Don't ever take a fence down until you know the reason it was put up."

A helpful read.

[Etienne OMNES]

Je conseillerai le livre d'Albert Mohler "We cannot stay silent" plutôt que celui-ci, mais tout de même: je n'ai perdu ni mon temps ni mon argent à le lire.

La meilleure description de ce livre est "un long cri d'alarme". Michael Brown a beau être un docteur, il n'est jamais meilleur que dans la prose de combat et de mobilisation. Il décrit exactement l'étendue des dangers auquel fait face l'église, et communique efficacement l'urgence qu'il y a à ne pas céder mais au contraire s'enraciner contre la révolution sexuelle. Elle ne s'arrêtera que si nous l'arrêtons, et elle ne respectera aucune liberté. La bonne nouvelle est qu'elle est creuse et commence à manquer de carburant. Il nous suffit simplement de lui survivre un jour de plus.

Je suis sorti de la lecture de ce livre énergisé et bien décidé à s'engager dans l'arène. Vous seriez comme moi si vous aussi vous lisez ce livre quels que soient vos doutes et vos peurs.

[Justin]

This book was okay, I felt 80% were on topics he's already written on, topics his readers would already know. That's why I gave it a 3 out of 5. I was hoping the book would be 80% of okay....we're here in this "brave new world" as Christians how do we navigate this now? How do evangelize, train our children, interact with those who disagree with us, and how do we relate with the LGBT in our places of work and life etc. So there's good information, a little encouragement at the end, but it lacked for how we move onward to "outlast the gay revolution."

[Don Incognito]

This was arguably the most disappointing book I've read this year, since I actually bought a copy of this one.

It's almost like two books. It is just under 220 pages before footnotes, and approximately the first 170 pages are mostly a waste of time, focusing on statistical and anecdotal evidence of sexual anarchy in our society; on social and political public bullying tactics used by gay marriage and alternative sexuality advocates; and rather obvious advice to traditional marriage supporters such as "hold steadfast." I read enough news and commentary to have heard it before; that's why I call it a waste of time. The subtitle of the book led me to expect predictions of the ultimate result. They're present in the book but not greatly focused on.

So I was surprised and pleased to find the last two chapters insight and information I hadn't thought of or had no idea of. Such as:

Same-sex marriage is not a new concept. Ancient Jewish rabbinical tradition, existing at the time of Christ and possibly much earlier, claims same-sex marriage existed among the Egyptians and among the Canaanite peoples peoples God commanded the Israelites not to mingle with.

Mainstream gay advocacy groups (the author cites GLAAD) are "working themselves out of a job," making themselves less relevant and "edgy" due to their sheer success in mainstreaming their cause.

There actually has always been a fault line of disagreement between the mainstream groups and more militant, radical homosexual organizations (the author cites ACT UP as one). The radical faction considers groups like GLAAD conservative, and completely disagrees with their goal of convincing the public that gay marriage is no different from heterosexual marriage, instead believing in and emphasizing a complete lack of similarity with heterosexual lifestyles.

The time immediately after the American Revolution was a time of widespread irreligion, immorality, increased crime, and massive shrinkage in church attendance far greater than any decline occurring now. The Second Great Awakening circa 1800 reversed it.

Nevertheless, so much of the book bored me with information I have seen many times before, and already knew well, that I can't recommend it.

[Dakota Stead]

This book like Dr. Michael L. Brown's previous book "Can You be Gay and Christian?" is filled with two things Love and facts. This book like its purpose is very encouraging to those who are Christian that live in a culture that is pressed by a heavy gay revolution. It encourages me in two ways. First, it encourages me that this will not last forever, that history shows that this gay revolution will not be something a culture can and will be able to hold for long term. Second, the author encourages me and other Christians alike to not sit around and feel like the battle is over but to continue to stand for God and His Word. That this culture is not too far gone to turn back around and that the only way it can turn around is by people standing up against this movement with Love, Grace, and persistency.

[Robert Eby]

Well, this book was different. First, I didn't like the vast amount of stats that took up the first 5 chapters of the book. They paint a very bleak state of affairs. maybe that how it is, thou as a reader I was bombarded with so much, that reading was a chore.

Second, from the 6 chapter onward, there was an uphill to the gems of the book. A little to late for me. While I enjoyed what I learnt from this book, and I have some great take aways from it, it's his style in writing the book that I found hard to really enjoy. Having said that, I am picky, I think this book is a real eye opener for the information it gives, and it is essential and educational. I am glad I read the book.