Scan barcode
silverhawk3799's review against another edition
1.0
I liked the premise of this book, however the presentation was crude. The writer too often offered his own opinion as to what a victim or suspect was thinking. Also, the style was at times childish and took me out of the flow of reading. McConnell offered his opinion on things often enough that I started to think more about what he thought than the actual content of the book.
mnboyer's review against another edition
3.0
A true-crime book that examines several prominent murders that involved homosexual men who were killed by idiots that thought they had a right to kill gay men that came onto them.
McConnell begins by discussing the "gay panic" defense, which has roots all the way back to a paper in the 1920s that discussed "homosexual panic" (look up Edward J. Kempf's article if you're interested). Basically, this short-lived legal defense proposed that several men that attacked and killed homosexual men did so not because they were murderers, but because they had to do it to defend their own honor after gay men came on to them, or showed sexual interest in them. For awhile, many thought that this defense was used only by 'repressed homosexuals' but this was not the case.
The "Jenny Jones" case began on a popular television show (think Maury, Springer, Oprah, etc.) when a homosexual man came on the show to announce he had a crush on a heterosexual friend. Jon (the straight man) was so angry over the situation and its possible implications (that others might suddenly believe he was homosexual because another man had a crush on him) that he ended up killing his admirer.
McConnell also discusses the Williams Brothers, convicted of murdering a homosexual couple (1999). Matthew Williams professed that God told him to kill homosexuals, and/or that God's law is above man's laws... so killing homosexuals should be allowed. (What a disgusting human!). Ben (Tyler) Williams would later kill himself.
The Steve Domer, Brad Qualls, and Darrell Madden case is also discussed (2007). Darrell struggles with his homosexuality his entire life and ends up killing, once with Qualls (Steve Domer). It is a grotesque kind of murder where Domer was abducted, beaten, tortured (imho), and then killed.
The Katehis/Weber case is also discussed (2009). Katehis was a 16-year-0ld minor that on the side went on Craigslist and posted in the m4m section. He replied to an ad posted by Weber (who enjoyed suffocation play) and went to his home, where he then decided to murder him. Despite the brutality of the murder, Katehis was only given 25-to-life instead of the death sentence.
The book does a good job of shedding some light onto each of these cases, and discusses how certain groups of men (now murderers) believe they're entitled to kill homosexual men that show any interest in them. It is a type of honor killing, which I don't think McConnell actually delves into enough in his text. I would have preferred a deeper analysis of this. In fact, I very much expected a deeper analysis (the title kind of promised it, as does the book's back cover).
The stories/cases/crimes are all interesting and are definitely worth exploration. My issue is there is a lot of author commentary throughout the text and it would have been nice to see more factual evidence of certain things. While McConnell is not a journalist, I do often expect to have source material (citations, end notes, a bibliography, something!) at the end of true crime books. Here we don't get that so sometimes it is hard to interpret where information is coming from. I don't mind speculation by authors, but I expect to be able to tell what is their words and what belongs to documents, witnesses, interviewees, etc.
Overall, right in the middle. 3 stars.
McConnell begins by discussing the "gay panic" defense, which has roots all the way back to a paper in the 1920s that discussed "homosexual panic" (look up Edward J. Kempf's article if you're interested). Basically, this short-lived legal defense proposed that several men that attacked and killed homosexual men did so not because they were murderers, but because they had to do it to defend their own honor after gay men came on to them, or showed sexual interest in them. For awhile, many thought that this defense was used only by 'repressed homosexuals' but this was not the case.
The "Jenny Jones" case began on a popular television show (think Maury, Springer, Oprah, etc.) when a homosexual man came on the show to announce he had a crush on a heterosexual friend. Jon (the straight man) was so angry over the situation and its possible implications (that others might suddenly believe he was homosexual because another man had a crush on him) that he ended up killing his admirer.
McConnell also discusses the Williams Brothers, convicted of murdering a homosexual couple (1999). Matthew Williams professed that God told him to kill homosexuals, and/or that God's law is above man's laws... so killing homosexuals should be allowed. (What a disgusting human!). Ben (Tyler) Williams would later kill himself.
The Steve Domer, Brad Qualls, and Darrell Madden case is also discussed (2007). Darrell struggles with his homosexuality his entire life and ends up killing, once with Qualls (Steve Domer). It is a grotesque kind of murder where Domer was abducted, beaten, tortured (imho), and then killed.
The Katehis/Weber case is also discussed (2009). Katehis was a 16-year-0ld minor that on the side went on Craigslist and posted in the m4m section. He replied to an ad posted by Weber (who enjoyed suffocation play) and went to his home, where he then decided to murder him. Despite the brutality of the murder, Katehis was only given 25-to-life instead of the death sentence.
The book does a good job of shedding some light onto each of these cases, and discusses how certain groups of men (now murderers) believe they're entitled to kill homosexual men that show any interest in them. It is a type of honor killing, which I don't think McConnell actually delves into enough in his text. I would have preferred a deeper analysis of this. In fact, I very much expected a deeper analysis (the title kind of promised it, as does the book's back cover).
The stories/cases/crimes are all interesting and are definitely worth exploration. My issue is there is a lot of author commentary throughout the text and it would have been nice to see more factual evidence of certain things. While McConnell is not a journalist, I do often expect to have source material (citations, end notes, a bibliography, something!) at the end of true crime books. Here we don't get that so sometimes it is hard to interpret where information is coming from. I don't mind speculation by authors, but I expect to be able to tell what is their words and what belongs to documents, witnesses, interviewees, etc.
Overall, right in the middle. 3 stars.
pelicaaan's review against another edition
3.0
Very very interesting book about murders of men (perceived to be gay) by other men. The cases described by the author are fascinating.
McConnell doesn't go very far, however, in figuring out what the cases have in common and what that says about American culture, masculinity, etc. He says at the outset that he's not going to do that.
I think it would have been a stronger book if he'd gone out on a limb, formulated an argument and defended it - made this a book about something larger, instead of a collection of true crimes. He was almost there, but he didn't take that extra step. Nevertheless, worth reading.
McConnell doesn't go very far, however, in figuring out what the cases have in common and what that says about American culture, masculinity, etc. He says at the outset that he's not going to do that.
I think it would have been a stronger book if he'd gone out on a limb, formulated an argument and defended it - made this a book about something larger, instead of a collection of true crimes. He was almost there, but he didn't take that extra step. Nevertheless, worth reading.
marcosduran's review against another edition
3.0
An overall interesting book about the rage behind several killings involving victims and young perpetrators. I don't think that honor killing is the perfect term but its use is based on the idea that these men killed to honor not their families but masculinity or their twisted idea of what it is.
t_bone's review against another edition
3.0
I'm not sure why this book was on my to read list - I had no clue what it was about until I got started. I assumed it would be about men killing women, but it turned out to be about men killing men, specifically, killing gay men, or at least men the murderers perceived to be gay. My qualifier about perceived gay men hints at the book's main point: that crimes typically grouped together as hate crimes, or gay panic crimes, or repressed gay man kills openly gay men crimes, are often more complex than the labels applied. I don't know much about murders of gay men, but I do know a weak argument when I see one - having put forward so many myself - and this is a pretty unremarkable argument. The author freely admits that the book doesn't have a thesis - he just wants to preserve the details of these crimes. In that case I think it may have been better to examine one case in detail instead of describing half a dozen or so murders in one reasonably short book. There is not enough detail to become truly invested in any one case and there are not enough cases to recognise similarities or patterns in the different crimes. In the end it seemed like a true crime short story collection. Still not a bad read for sad individuals like me who like to read about sex and violence.
expendablemudge's review
5.0
I give 5 shuddering stars to AMERICAN HONOR KILLINGS at Shelf Inflicted (http://tinyurl.com/lyh4jzg). Discussing the high cost of delusion and the role of "moral" conviction; Akashic Books, this is a brave book to publish.
ehmannky's review
challenging
informative
sad
3.0
This book reads like an anthology of toxic masculinity, particularly when that mindset is turned towards gay men and abetted by internalized homophobia. It makes a few really good points about our culture's tendencies to infantilize violent white men and how nothing in these people's pasts justifies or even truly explains their horrendous actions.
But I found the in-depth recreations of the murder with little to no commentary voyeuristic and a little off-putting. It might be because I am not particularly enthralled with true crime, but I just didn't find it necessary to recreate the steps of each murder in such detail. And I also dislike how the centering of the perpetrator of homophobic violence often seems to work to create a sense of empathy with that perpetrator, even as McConnell is acknowledging that they have done awful things in the name of their masculinity.
But I found the in-depth recreations of the murder with little to no commentary voyeuristic and a little off-putting. It might be because I am not particularly enthralled with true crime, but I just didn't find it necessary to recreate the steps of each murder in such detail. And I also dislike how the centering of the perpetrator of homophobic violence often seems to work to create a sense of empathy with that perpetrator, even as McConnell is acknowledging that they have done awful things in the name of their masculinity.
More...