Libel is Fun

And you can largely get away with it when your target is famous.

I could make a full-time hobby out of countering erroneous attacks on Dr. Laura that can be easily found in the blogosphere. I guess that goes to show just how pervasive she is. (Some of her critics are going to think I just called her a pervert.)

Why do I care at all? Because I enjoy her stuff, and by following her advice I have made my life better and my family's life has been better. I hate to see her libeled because so much of her message is important. As I've said before (see HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE, and HERE for some examples), I do have some mostly minor quibbles with her, but for the most part, she is right and effective, so much so that she bugs the crap out of some people.

"Kate", wrote about The Proper Care and Feeding of Husbands in this blog entry about books she read in 2009:

There were a lot of duh! forehead-slapping statements in it, like how one should treat their spouse nicely if they want niceness in return.

Yes, that concept should be obvious to people, but a lot of wives haven't been acting that way. Other women want to act that way as wives or when they become wives, and the book tells them how, since they aren't getting the message elsewhere.

So when I checked, there were a couple of comments of note:

"~~Silk" wrote:

Dr. Laura is a pompous ass.

I don't find her to be one. But I don't think either of us have met her in person, so how do either of us really know?

She's nasty to her callers, rigid, unsympathetic, and a total hypocrite.

Hypocrite? I have seen that applied to Dr. Laura so many times, yet I can't recall one instance in which is was applied correctly. Click through to The Playful Walrus and scroll down to see a write up on hypocrisy.

As far as being "rigid" – I wonder what this person means by that? Unless we're completely dysfunctional to the point of actual insanity, we're all rigid about some things. Where is she rigid when she should be more flexible? In telling women to protect their minor children? Where are the examples???

Then there's Dr. Laura's tone – she has precious few moments to get the point across to the callers. This is radio, not a private uninterrupted therapy session. If she'd let them, a lot of her callers would ramble on repeating themselves and talking in circles and making endless excuses for their own bad doings.

Not to mention stupid.

Stupid? How so? This is not explained. If she is stupid, she's managed to do quite well for herself on a consistent basis despite being stupid.

She's into her shtick for the money that controversy and nastiness brings.

Interesting guess.

She has made some major mistakes in her own life, and I could respect her if she admitted her mistakes and said she'd learned from them, but instead, she lies and claims it all never happened.

I have no idea what this person is talking about, even with the person's link to a nasty libel site (talk about the pot calling the kettle black!) She's repeatedly admitted mistakes, and has warned others not to make them. And she gets called a hypocrite (wrongly) as a result.

"Kate" then added:

I had heard about the nude photos.

I don't get why people bring that up, as if it means anything other than Dr. Laura made mistakes when she was a "feminista", from which she learned some important lessons. I hope these people are consistent and thus dismiss any comments about anything offered by anyone who has ever been photographed nude.

I just don't get how a female radio personality with a career of her own can bash women for choosing to work outside the home.

Kate, she doesn't bash women for choosing to work outside the home. She bashes women who neglect their husband and children. They aren't necessarily one in the same. She praises Stay-At-Home-Moms. Praising SAHMS need not mean bashing others. That's the false thinking too many people in society have bought into where, if one person gets a trophy, everyone has to get a trophy.

I figured the Marriage book would be more balanced than the Husbands book, but they were both pretty much focused on blaming women for not catering to their husbands.

Actually, Dr. Laura rightly points out that women have more power – for good or ill - when it comes to personal relationships and family dynamics. Men legally, financially, and socially cede a lot of power to their wives when they marry.

Meanwhile, over at this discussion forum, someone complained about getting a Dr. Laura book as a gift. Some of the responses have been interesting.

"Big Gay Sam" lied:

That woman gives me gas. Her take on gay people?

"Homosexuals are a mistake of nature."

That's not what she said.

"RachelJ" wrote:

I haven't read the book, but excerpts. Dr. Laura suggsts to avoid getting cheated on to be "your husband's best girlfriend" i.e. making sexy phone calls to him at work, get "dressed up" when he comes home, always wear lipstick, that kind of crap.

If this woman is married, I feel sorry for her husband. He made a poor choice if he was looking for a woman who would care about his desires.

Even the title suggests that men are as dumb as dogs and can be trained and easily manipulated and women are the grand manipulators.

Men are easily to please. That is the point.

I love it that while she's giving all this advice about staying home and taking care of your family (ONLY) that she is the ultimate working woman on the radio, writing books on book tour. How in the world is she "taking care of" her husband?

This tired charge is again repeated subsequently by "aslapintheface" – completely ignorant of the reality of how Dr. Laura structured her life and her book publicity. But I guess people want to hold on to their mean thoughts because it gives them, in their minds, and excuse not to deal with the truth of what Dr. Laura says.

We all know Dr. Laura's real "crimes" that upset most of her mouth-foaming critics:

1. Many years back, she referred to the homosexual orientation as a biological error.
She did not call homosexual PEOPLE mistakes or errors. She did not say they were CHOOSING to be homosexual. She was not disparaging anyone. She treats her callers who are homosexual with respect, and advises concerned family members to accept their homosexual relatives.

2. She notes that men and women are different, and says that children do best being raised within a marriage where a husband and wife model a loving relationship.

3. She notes that abortion kills an innocent human being.
She advises adoption. Actually, she advises avoiding intercourse when unprepared to be a parent, but adoption if one has failed in that.

4. She tells parents to put the needs of minor children before their own wants, including that they should raise their children themselves.

5. She notes that men have rights and feelings, too, and wives should behave accordingly, just a husband should care about his wife.

If you click on my Dr. Laura tag, you'll see I’ve written up a lot on stuff like this already.