Two Calls in the Same Hour of Dr. Laura

I found the proximity of these two calls especially interesting. To be clear, they might not have actually been handled mere minutes apart, as the presentation of the program would imply, because 1) Dr. Laura does take some calls off-air, to be recorded for use in the program, and 2) previously aired calls are rerun. And both of these things happen unannounced, letting listeners believe this is all happening live.

May 13, 2025, Hour 2.

“Diane” called, age 70, married 37 years. We’re never told how old her husband is; we’re left to assume he’s about the same age.

In the last year, her husband has said he “doesn’t like” their sex life, it’s “too traditional”, and he’s “much more kinky”, wants “more exciting sex” and wants a girlfriend on the outside of their marriage.

Diane suggested she could do “some of” the things he wants to do, but since he knows she isn’t into it, he doesn’t want it with her. He doesn’t think it’s natural for her.

“He wants acknowledgment from another woman.”

Dr. Laura asked Diane if she’s willing to stay married to someone who’ll have sex outside of the marriage.

Diane was unsure, but of course Dr. Laura pushed for a decision. She does this even though it would be easy to give Diane both advice for staying as well as advice for if she is going to leave.

Dr Laura said that, if all this time of being married, they hadn’t done anything kinky, then it would be out of his nature, too.

Huh??? That’s dung. He could have very well struggled to contain his desires and feelings for 37-plus years. Dr. Laura knows that! But she just wants to beat up on the guy.

Dr. Laura goes on to say he’s at a point in his life he just wants to go out to play, and this is why men go to a prostitute or watch porn; so they don’t have to satisfy a woman.

Where did she get that? There was no indication from the call the caller isn’t satisfied, that her husband doesn’t want to satisfy her, and that he won’t want to satisfy any other woman he’s with. But Dr. Laura repeated it. She hasn’t talked with the husband at all and yet she made this assertion. The husband even said he wanted someone who was into it, so at least his claim is that he cares about the woman’s enjoyment.

Diane said her husband wants S & M.

She also said he’s been a good husband.

Dr. Laura, who has deemed many men who’ve done all sorts of things “good husbands” overall, said “Good husbands are not defined by the behaviors you just described to me.” First, no, Diane was referring to other behaviors. If she had tried describing all of those good husband behaviors at the start of the call or at any other time, Dr. Laura would have stopped her, perhaps with the uberannoying “WOO HOO!!! WOO HOO!! Diane’s husband has treated her well for decades, apparently. Two, talking about his desires isn’t being a good husband? No, if you maintain he’s just supposed to never talk with his wife about his desires. But isn’t it better he talked about his true feelings with his wife instead of simply sneaking out to cheat, hiding it from her?

Diane said she is “torn” because otherwise she loves the marriage. Kudos for Dr. Laura for not going on a long side rant about the word “torn.” I guess she was too focused on badmouthing Diane’s husband.

“Why do you want to stay with a guy who doesn’t want to sexually fulfill you and make love, he wants sicko sex?” Who said he doesn’t want to fulfill her? This is a contrarian assertion by Dr. Laura.

Diane said he says he wants to make love with her and have crazy sex otherwise.

In an attempt to distract the listeners from the fact she’d been messing up, Dr . Laura pivoted to saying she feels sorry for the caller for even debating it. That’s something Dr. Laura does when she’s losing - pivots to disapproval and shaming. She’s the great Dr. Laura, so her feeling differently from the caller is supposed to either change the caller’s position or make the caller feel lowly.

Dr. Laura called it a fact that Diane’s husband going to bring home STDs. See, since it’s “not a religious show,” it’s hard for Dr. Laura to say what exactly would be wrong with this arrangement if Diane was OK with it. Her husband could have had a vasectomy and “I’m Dr. Laura, and I don’t like it” doesn’t seem to be working, so the STD card gets played.

The problem with that is: This isn’t secret. He’s talking with his wife about it. There have been studies showing that people who are upfront about these things are LESS likely to spread STDs, because they get tested regularly and take precautions.

Then Dr. Laura mocked the idea that Diane’s husband would be able to separate out making love with her and getting kinky with someone else. What does that even mean? That he’d still try to get his wife to do S & M? I highly doubt that. Most men are very good at compartmentalization. Dr. Laura knows this! But she ditched that in an attempt to convince Diane and listeners that, somehow, it would be a problem. Maybe it would, maybe it wouldn’t. The alternative is guaranteed to be a problem: he’s either going to leave or be resentful.

Dr. Laura continued by asserting the caller won’t be horny for her husband. How does Dr. Laura know? On the contrary, maybe the caller would get off on it?

When Dr. Laura said women Diane’s age want to maintain the nest, the caller elaborated on that and mentioned being alone. Dr. Laura said “you’re never alone” because of friends, family, activities, etc. Um, what does she tell people who don’t want to marry? “You’ll be alone.” 

Case in point, she went on to say that the husband’s other lovers won’t care to be there when he’s dying (right after calling him a “sh!t” and “creepy.”) Yet again, Dr. Laura doesn’t know that. It happens more often than she’d ever want to admit: a lover who isn’t their spouse and never was a spouse being there as a husband is dying. I can think of someone I knew in such a situation, off the top of my head. I know Dr. Laura, instead of admitting she is asserting something that might not be true, would pivot to calling that strange or disrespectful. And who’s to say his wife will be there when he’s dying? She might die before or she might have divorced him for reasons unrelated to his desires.

Dr. Laura asks if she knew he was into S & M while dating. Diane said she knew he was into “kinky stuff like threesomes.”

Dr. Laura likened it to knowingly marrying a serial killer. I mean really. A guy wanting some sexual adventure has her thinking about murder. Oooookaaay.

Dr. Laura went on with her often-repeated “this is why I do this on radio, so that other women will be warned.” Right, that’s it. Not at all that it pays much more and if she’s in a room with a client/patient she can’t mute them, put them on hold, or hang up on them.

For sure, ladies, don’t marry a man who’d ever want a threesome, or sex with another woman, or an open marriage, or swinging, or BDSM, or whatever. (Spoiler: Almost all men who don’t have a low libido want at least one thing you’d find a turnoff or unacceptable, and even if he genuinely doesn’t at age 28, he might at age 48 or 68. So be sure to avoid this by never marrying.)

Society doesn’t say Diane’s husband’s desires are wrong. Some religions say they’re wrong. But again, the program “isn’t a religious program.” Most of society would say it’d be wrong for him to pursue his desires without his wife’s permission or at least making sure she is informed. Most of society would support him divorcing her to pursue his desires, or never having married.

Do with that reality what you will.

Dr. Laura has made it clear over the decades she is completely opposed to anything but monogamy in marriage. I can’t ever recall her articulating why, though, other than “you took vows to forsake all others,” which isn’t always true. However, I’m certain she has praised callers, letter writers, and others who’ve have been polyamorous, or swingers, or in an open marriage, or have done threesomes, or some other similar things: she just didn’t know the person she was praising had experience with those things, because it wasn’t the topic at hand.

*****

The other call during the same hour was from “Benjamin.”

Benjamin was married for 25 years and he and his wife were both virgins when they married.

He said their sexual relationship had been “tenuous” throughout their marriage because his libido is much more active than hers.

Dr. Laura didn’t jump in and point out that it’s normal for husbands to want sex more often than their wife, so he continued, saying three or four years ago, he said to his wife that had he known they’d be fighting back and forth about this he doesn’t know he would have entered into the relationship.

Notice that this is another example of how men are NOT supposed to be honest or share their feelings. They’re supposed to just shut up and keep being a butler and bank account.

Dr. Laura asked him about watching sex scenes in movies and whether he was doing all of the really exciting things the male characters were doing. Huh??? What does she think the characters are doing in these movies? And she knows they’re fiction, right?

Ben didn’t really say. He probably had no clue what she was talking about: romantic dinner? Passionate kisses? Sneaking out in the morning?

He said for him it was a matter of frequency and satisfaction.

Apparently based just on that, Dr. Laura said “Well that made you a crappy lover.” A good lover is primarily concerned with her satisfaction, not yours.

Uh, he didn’t say only his satisfaction. Also, what if Ben’s wife is a lesbian, or into a kink? Dr. Laura didn’t know anything relevant, unless Ben wrote a letter, in which case that should have been mentioned. Notice she didn’t tell the other caller, Diane, to be focused on her husband’s satisfaction.

Dr. Laura then went on to say the wife likely didn’t know much about her own body, even though the opposite could be true: she might have masturbated a lot before marriage to avoid having sex; she might be masturbating a lot now.

Dr. Laura went on to tell Ben that “probably you’re terrible at it and she has never gained an appreciation for it.”

Poor Ben. He has no way of knowing if he’s bad at it. For Dr. Laura to quickly assert that based on next to nothing is not OK. It’s a common tactic women use against men who say their marital sex life isn’t good. It’s been used against me. Except I know from experience that isn’t the problem. Dr. Laura KNOWS there are many wives who don’t have the same libido she apparently had (which had her doing things she now pretends never happened); many wives aren’t sexually attracted to their husbands. She wrote an entire book that’s mostly about that!!!

Anyway, she went on to tell Ben he and his wife should go to a sex therapist together.

Hmm. I’m guessing Ben and his wife were VERY religious and might still be. What are the odds they’re going to go to a sex therapist?

Dr. Laura continued, saying “Or you’re going to be divorced.”

What is she basing that on? It’s been 25 years. They made it this far. She then asserted again that Ben is a bad lover and turned his wife off. She wants to send him a “tape” of the conversation to play for his wife. Oh, no. No no no.

Now, it’s possible Ben is a bad lover. Sex is a learned skill, and he hasn’t had much opportunity to learn. But it’s also possible his wife simply has little interest in having sex with him or anyone else at all, and it has nothing to do with anything he did or didn’t do. She might have what Dr. Laura would call “trowma” or maybe she has hangups.

Poor Ben. He’s likely never going to experience a good sex life.

Well, there you have it. Two more examples among countless examples of why it’s better to avoid marriage in the first place.

. 

Is That Really in the Good Book?

I added a link in the right column of this blog. It's for a website called Biblical Sex. Maybe you don't consider the Bible an authority on matter of sex, but you probably interact with people who do. Some people try to base laws on it. We often hear people appeal to what they think the Bible says about sex, erotic media, erotic fantasies, and looking at the bodies of other people.

The Biblical Sex website tries to clear up what the Bible actually commands and doesn't command, in doing so, the website often disagrees with that is taught in certain conservative religious organizations and movements. I'm not saying I agree with everything the website says, just that it is worth reading the articles there.

Continue to read this entry if you have any interest.

Is College Part of a Racket?

Yes, college is part of a racket, in most cases.

But sometimes, people have to go along with a racket.

I have a Bachelors degree.

Charlie Kirk didn’t, and he was way more successful in his short life than I have been in my longer life.

But… Charlie Kirk was a rare man. Very few people are going to be able to make a living speaking and debating at colleges, doing a podcast/national radio show, leading organizations like Turning Point USA, and whatever else Kirk did. Few people have what it takes, and there’s only a few spots that exist for someone like that.

Employers demand degrees for many of their higher paying positions. For some, it’s legitimate. For others, it’s a lazy screening technique. But it’s a fact of life.

If you have a way you can make a legit, good living without getting a college degree, especially if you’ve already made a good living and didn’t get a degree (comment to tell us about it), good for you. That’s great.

But we shouldn’t pretend most people, especially most men, will thrive without a degree.

Yes, colleges are often Leftist, especially misandrist, indoctrination centers. Yes there’s a lot of waste and inflated costs. But as long as employers have degrees as a requirement for being hired or promoted, it’s a racket that must be endured.

I highly recommend anyone going to college but without a scholarship that covers all or most of it spend as little as they can by using their community college and state college systems. Yes, the “elite” schools enable lucrative networking. There are other ways of networking, though.

If you’re no longer in your late teens or early 20s, don’t let that discourage you from going “back to school.” If your goal requires a degree, go for it.

On the other hand, if you can thrive without college, and if you’re good at learning things other ways, don’t think you must go to college because you were “supposed to” or your parents always wanted you to.

It’s your life.

Are You Worried About Lower Fertility Rates in Your Country?

Then YOU have more children, OK?

Stop trying to convince people who aren't enthusiastically seeking to have (more) children to pop out babies.

If you're so concerned, you have more children. You pay to raise them. You make the sacrifices. After all, it's worth it, right?

See these posts:

We Are Not Going Back

Having A Family Doesn't Guarantee Happiness

Is It Now Irresponsible To Have Children?

Why Are They Surprised?

The Costs of Raising a Child

Oh No! Not Lower Fertility Rates!

Mother’s Day is THIS Sunday, May 10

Don't forget the mothers in your life, unless they've torn up their mother card.

Don't forget people like your stepmother, if you're trying to keep peace with her/your dad (or your mother, if she’s taken on a wife) and she expects to be celebrated by you, even if she tore up her mother card.

And those of you who are foolish enough to be in a relationship with a woman who is a mother, you'd better do something for her, unless you want a fight.

Don't expect much reciprocation in June if you're a father or have taken on the role of a father.

Are There Really Seven Million American Men Refusing to Work?

Senator Josh Hawley was on Hour 2 of the Tuesday, June 20, 2023 Dennis Prager Show to promote a book. [This entry is being bumped up because I just saw the claim in the post title again -things haven’t changed in years?]

Senator Hawley and Mr. Prager were lamenting the "crisis" that supposedly seven million able men of employable age are NOT working in the USA, and that is supposedly NOT including men who are on Unemployment. Of course one of the biggest problems they see with this is that women don't want to marry guys who aren't gainfully employed, because Heaven forbid women not get whatever they want and some people NOT marry.

The assumption is that these men are sitting around playing video games, watching adult media, and getting high.

Curiously, there were no figures provided for women who aren't working to provide as a comparison. That's because it is OK for women not to work. It's not OK, in the minds of some people, that a man doesn't work.

It is unlikely that there are really seven million men who are perfectly healthy who are sitting around just doing whatever they want and nothing else even though they're financially dependent on family, a girlfriend, a wife, etc. There might be a few men doing exactly that, but if I was a betting man I'd bet that almost all of those 7 million men have one or more of the following going on:

• Undiagnosed/untreated/unregistered physical and mental disorders
• Homeless
• Retired, even if unofficially and early
  
• Stay at home dad or house husband (yes, some women agree to this, and some men are with other men who agree to it)
• Helping to care for younger or disabled siblings, elderly or disabled parents
• They own enough (investments, real estate, etc.) they don't need employment
• They have their own business but haven't officially registered their business
• They work gigs
• They buy, sell, and trade without being registered as a business
  
• Under the table work
• Work in the family business, off the books 
• They consider themselves artists and are supported by others enough (even if just their parents) they don't need a registered job
  
• They're getting their education
  
• Black market
• Going through the criminal justice system
  
• Traveling or exploring
• Working on their skills outside of formal education
• Jobseeking while not formally on Unemployment 

Obviously, men being in some of those categories is a bad thing, but for other categories, it's not a problem at all.

The fact is, the overwhelming majority of men who play games, watch adult media, and/or do drugs are employed. Most of them are married or in some form of romantic or sexual relationship.

If a man has gotten the message that he's not needed or wanted in workplaces and doesn't want to sign a terrible state contract, and he's found a way to stay off the public dole that isn't destructive, good for him. I don't see a need for him to change to please a Senator, a talk show host, or a woman.

The Senator claimed this has been building for fifty years. Now why would that be? What happened 50 years ago? Hmmmm…

He also says America needs you to get a job and start a family. How about... America needs you to not be dependent on government. We don't need every man out there to start a family. Want more men to marry? See what I wrote here.

Answering Marriage Seller Assertions, Talking Points, and Questions - Part 1

 

 Marriage sellers are varied. The ones I'm familiar with include:

• religionists (who are usually trying to get you to marry within their denomination or cult, but if you're not going to they at least want to behave in their approved way)
• sociologists who are likely to be religionists or dependent on them for funding/publicity
• your mother
• Dr. Laura Schlessinger
• Michael Medved (basically a combo of his wife being a sociologist and them being religionists)
• Dennis Prager (religionist, but might be a religionist because of his emotional fixation on marriage)
• Matt Walsh (religionist)
  

While I list specific names here, most of the tactics they use to sell marriage are used broadly by marriage sellers that might include your aunt or your pastor. Just to be clear, I am what many people would call a religionist. I'm a Bible-believing, praying, churchgoer. But since I do read my Bible, I'm aware that there is no clear Biblical command in effect for all Christians to marry, certainly not for them to get a license to do so from a secular state.

If you're going to discuss why most men should avoid marrying, especially if you're going to have an audience, it might drive the point home if you say "terrible state contract" instead of "marriage."

I plan to post [have since posted] a series providing answers and responses to common talking points of marriage sellers.

I'm starting with a very common one used by almost all of them.

Married men earn more, are wealthier, are happier, are healthier, live longer, and have more sex.

Response:

Like so many claims of marriage sellers, these claims rest almost entirely on perceived correlations and statistical trickery, not provable causation. Marriage sellers want you to think that if you marry, you'll be better off in all those ways. However, what is really going on here is that all unmarried males are lumped together, including divorced men and men who are unable to attract a wife. Women are more likely to marry and stay married to a man who has/earns more money, is happier, is healthier, and with whom she is having a lot of sex. Poor, sickly, unhappy men are less likely to be having a lot of sex or attracting or keeping a wife. Also, males who die young are less likely to have married. Duh!

These claims never separate out men who have their act together and intentionally avoid marriage. Many of them are better off financially, have better overall well-being, and have more and better sex than most husbands. Plus, they are free, with their residences and overall life the way they want, not the way some woman wants.

What marriage sellers don't point out about finances is that my never-married counterpart only has to earn 51% of what I do to be better off financially than me, and doesn't spend money on goods and services that aren't to his personal benefit; he gets to make all spending decisions for his earnings, and nearly everything he buys is less expensive because he only needs to buy for himself.

The one thing I'm willing to concede is that a wife nagging her husband to go to the doctor can help him live longer. However, men can be nagged to go to the doctor without signing a terrible state contract. I cut out the "middlewoman." Also, consider: What are those extra months/years like? Should a man trade a lifetime of freedom for those months?

The fact that married men are taller is a clue of what is going on with these statistics. Marrying won't make you taller. Women marry taller men.

The fact that divorced men are usually lumped together with all other unmarried men is misleading. Family laws, family courts, ex wives, and their lawyers often work a man over, leaving him in terrible shape, at least for a while; even before divorce, marriage might have hurt him a lot, but since he escaped or was dumped his conditions are attributed to the "unmarried" in the stats.

It’s dangerous to imply or outright tell someone that signing a terrible state contract or marrying will make them better off or happier. When it doesn’t, they might make their spouse or others miserable or otherwise harm them.

That's a lot to say. If you only have a few seconds, say:

None of those studies separate out men who have intentionally avoided marriage, who can be much better off than most husbands.

Read Part 2 here.

A Detrimental Partnership

Some things in your life, you do well. You know a lot about those things, maybe from experience, maybe from formal education and training, maybe from educating yourself. You do those things well and will likely be able to do those things well until you die or unless you get serious dementia.

Imagine if someone came into your life who clearly, objectively, provably, wasn't very good at doing one of those things, or at least nowhere near as good as you, yet you now were compelled to partner with them in the matter, meaning they would get to make a lot of the decisions, or you were expected to clear every significant decision with them.

This is what can happen when a man who has his financial act together marries.

A Change in Perspective

At the opening of her Wednesday, January 18. 2023 program, Dr. Laura read something written by a man with the title of  "All The Wrong Reasons I Pursued Love with Women Why I'm Changing Now".

Here's what it said:

*****
I was taking women out because I lacked the confidence to say no.

I had a fear that if I didn't spend a lot of money or time on them they wouldn't want me or see me.

I was using dating to get my needs met. Sometimes I was just horny and needed some fun or relief, but I wouldn't communicate that.

I felt that nobody would give me that, so ultimately I would end up paying for an expensive date out and about, listening to her babble on and on, and buying her gifts.

I also had a belief that my value was tied to my wealth.

I also learned that when I was horny and not having sex, I wasn't able to think clearly anymore.

It no longer became about enjoying life, but about ego. Will she stay with me? Am I good enough for her?

I never asked myself if I was enjoying these relationships.

I also learned that I could do and have what I wanted without giving up so much of my time, money, and freedom.

We have a tendency to spend and do tasks to keep a woman because of fear, and this is something I wanted to challenge.

I want to see what it is like to stop paying costs I didn't have to, and trust I will have a better life if I learn to limit my dates and learn to enjoy my own company.

And I have a feeling that will be much more rewarding than I can imagine.

I've also learned that my hard work and resulting earnings are sacred. I want to keep control over my wealth.

I will no longer take women on lavish dates who don't want to have the kind of fun with me that I like.

Staying free has helped me develop my own set of beliefs and flourishing into someone I can respect.
*****

Just kidding. That's not what it said. Everything above does have an analogy to the sentences Dr. Laura read. But what she read was from something written by a woman and the title was "All the Wrong Reasons I Slept with Men Before and Why I’m Changing Now." Dr. Laura DID NOT cite on the air where the essay was posted and who wrote it. Instead, she was very limited in what she actually read from the essay, even removing important phrases from some sentences.

Dr. Laura left out the parts about how this involved supposedly Buddhist meditation, from someone raised as a Southern Baptist, and how this person doesn't believe in a need for get a state license for marriage, nor for marriage to be permanent; check in frequently to see if the relationship should continue. What we have here is a woman who rode the carousel. And now that she's older, her hormones are changing, and the men she can attract aren't as high in their social status, she's basically saying she's only going to have sex if she feels an emotional connection, rather than just for recreation. She can still go through many men per year, but she's going to pretend it's much more profound than what she was doing before.

I'm not faulting a single woman for thinking she's going to put more meaning behind when she has sex. But let's be clear about what's going on here, and what Dr. Laura did with the text.

And what we have another example showing that men can get young women with no strings attached and little time, money, and effort spent by running game.

The Men Who Are Beaten Dogs

The best humor contains a lot of truth. Check out the late great Sam Kinison's first appearance on national broadcast television, on Late Night with David Letterman:


That was in the 1980s. Things have gotten worse since.

Beaten Dogs are the opposite of Free Men.

They are emasculated. Their dreams have been killed.

We all know beaten dogs. Some of us are beaten dogs.

Beaten dogs deny themselves, or are denied, not only their dreams, but peace, quiet, autonomy, freedom, and many joys. They are often denied the ability to enjoy the fruits of their own labors. Their current lot in life is quiet (at least usually) desperation, servitude to an irrational and often abusive creature in the form of a wife, girlfriend, or babymamma.

Quite often, what accompanies this, if not retired or on disability, is employment in bleak conditions, often until they die. They are lucky if they have one space at home that is truly their own, and any time with the guys, apart from the clucking hens, shrill shrieking shrews, and ungrateful brats.

If a Beaten Dog has a job they enjoy, they will try to spend as much time on that to avoid being home. Otherwise, they might take up golf or bowling or try to find some other way to hang out with guys.

Make no mistake. Beaten dogs put themselves into this situation. They believed what was sold to them about relationships, marriage and/or parenting. "They didn't choose the right woman," say many observers. For most of these men, there was no such thing. The problem is that they didn't take the necessary steps to be and stay Free Men.

Can a Beaten Dog become free? Yes. But it takes changing just about everything, takes a lot of time and energy, and a whole lot of money. It almost always means needing to move and get a divorce. It means the loss of a lot of supposed friends, and possibly losing relationships with their sons and daughters, and maybe their parents and siblings as well.

Prevention is best. Stay free!

Running Game as a Father

If you have children, you need to make them your priority. If you're no longer with their mother and reconciling isn't possible, don't bring more chaos to their lives via new women and the children of those women.

Running game can help with that, because it minimizes the amount of time, money, and energy you spend on women and keeps those women separate from the rest of your life.

Get a vasectomy if you haven't already. Your kids don't need you making half-siblings for them to deal with.

Date when your kids are not with you. If you have full custody, see if your siblings or parents can babysit, but accept that you're not going to have as much free time or freedom as if you were a completely free man. Do not date when your minor children are with you, even if they are teens who can stay home without you. They need your attention.

Never bring any of your lovers around your minor children. Don't make the mistake of thinking you need a girlfriend or wife to be a mother figure for your children. If their mother isn't in their life, and you think they need a mother figure, move next to your sister or mother. Even if you'd foolishly want to marry (again or for the first time), marriages in which there are stepchildren have a very high failure rate.

If their mother is bringing her new lovers around them, if she even makes more babies, you can't control that, and it is all the more reason for YOU not to add chaos to the lives of your children. Make sure your children are aware and will report if any of their mother's lovers or the lover's children abuse or attempt to abuse them, because according to reported statistics, abuse is more likely in such situations.

If you didn't avoid creating a broken home for children, consider running game as how you handle dating.

Who Is Right About Staying Together For the Kids - Dr. Laura or Dennis Prager?

Dr. Laura's priority is the well-being of minor children. She has experience as a marriage and family therapist, although she's far more experienced as a radio talk show host and author dealing with family problems, moral dilemmas, values, ethics, and more.

Absent actual abuse, she tells married parents who want to divorce to wait until the youngest child is 18 years old, up and out of the home. Her reasoning is that this avoids breaking up the child's home and bringing chaos into their lives while they are minors.

Dennis Prager, who says people should divorce instead of living in misery, says that it can be worse for the children to be in their (adult) late teens or early twenties and then have their parents split, because then the now-grown children think of their family life as fake or a lie, and they can still get extremely upset about the divorce.

It should be noted that Dennis Prager, who has no formal experience as a marriage and family therapist and has written much less on parenting/family and spends fewer talk show hours discussing those issues, has had more children than Dr. Laura and one more divorce than her (Dr. Laura was not a mother when her first marriage ended).

It's one of the things I would very much like to hear these two radio talk show host veterans discuss directly. I doubt that will ever happen since their shows aren't part of the same company. Also, because Dr. Laura refuses to argue/debate on her show, and my guess is that would also include any other show as well (this is probably one big reason she didn’t appear anyone else's show for many years, except for one on the same channel as hers - on which she doesn't argue.)

Unlike either of them, I would advocate most people avoid this question entirely by not marrying.

We Are Not a Project

I found a column by Suzanne Fields at conservative site Townhall. With a headline of "A Good Man Is Still Hard to Find" I took notice. [This entry has been bumped up.]

Women have been complaining since the original Adams family was evicted from the Garden of Eden that "A good man is hard to find."

Whining, complaining, nagging... yep.

Despite radical feminist mockery of the very idea of manliness, that men are natural sexual predators, most women -- with very few exceptions -- still want one.

Of course they do! It's nice to have the cash flow, the bodyguard, an errand boy, and a receptacle for your whines and gripes and thoughts.

The #MeToo movement has nevertheless changed a lot of things in the wake of the sexual harassment-scandal season. One of them is the regard in which men are universally held by women. It often seems we're back to the '80s, when there was a similar assault on the idea of manhood and some women decried all sex as rape.

Radical feminist activists Catherine MacKinnon and Andrea Dworkin were widely credited with saying that "all sex is rape" and "all men are rapists." They both deny the statements, but Dworkin conceded that she did say, "Penetrative intercourse is, by its nature, violent."

No wonder men are choosing to To Their Own Way (see MGTOW).

An Answer to Dennis Prager's Question

Dennis Prager, who, perhaps, prioritizes promoting marriage over everything else, used his Wednesday, June 29, 2022 "Male/Female Hour" to talk about ultimatums to marry.

Men, if she gives you such an ultimatum, do NOT give in.

Dennis Prager asked "What's the rational response to 'If you love me, you'd marry me.'?"

Here it is. Put on your glasses, Dennis. Look closely.

"If you love me, you won't encourage me to enter into a terrible state contract that is detrimental to me."

There it is. That's the rational response.

It is rational to refuse to enter a terrible contract.

A man and woman can love each other, still commit to each other, still share their lives, still take care of each other and do everything good any other couple does, without that terrible state contract.

They can even draw up legal contracts, if they'd like, including cohabitation agreements (never do it without a lawyer, guys).

Dennis Prager also said he can't think of any reason to not marry someone you've been with for years. I know Dennis Prager is a better thinker than that. Here you go.

An open letter still awaits. I've been listening to Dennis Prager and reading his writings for years. I have yet to hear or see him fully address why the benefits unique to marriage outweigh the unwanted obligations and disliked limitations of that bad state contract.

Stay free, men!