I owe this book a re-read; I was probably twelve my first time through. I remember it as a book that might now be characterized as "evangelicalism's counter to mainstream toxic masculinity." Evangelical culture has, of course, its own breeds of toxic masculinity, but if memory serves (I hope it does) you'd find no support for that kind in Weber's book either.
It ought to go without saying (but probably doesn't) that any book which isolates men or women, or compares/contrasts them, in order to propose an ideal model for any gender, is necessarily complementarian, at least implicitly binary, and almost always unconscious of the extent of cultural influence on the author's views.
(Complementarianism: the view that persons of each gender have unique and particular strengths to contribute to any cooperative social unit, rarely so available to persons of another gender; as opposed to Egalitarianism: the view that persons of all genders are potentially fully interchangeable in all social and collaborative respects, except reproduction. And it's really difficult, if not impossible, to address either of the basic assertions "men and women are essentially different", "men and women are the essentially same" in the abstract, because of how deeply and indelibly culture influences gender).
I suspect, however, that there are many ways to be "ideally human," and that people are, so to speak, "kitted out" for a subset of these ideals through a combination of biology, personality, formative experience, and individual aspiration. If so, then books which point to a particular subset of human ideals, like Weber's, are valuable and worthwhile for persons of a particular kit, who need good models to shape the raw material of themselves toward; and only become harmful when touted as a singular ideal with universal application. Books like these are written to serve the mainstream, not the outliers. Whatever their good intentions and good effect on the mainstream may be, they don't - and can't - help outliers determine who they should become. That requires a more nuanced learner - or a more nuanced guide.