Dr. Laura Modifies Her Show

Call-in talk shows, especially those relying on drivers for a good chunk of their audience, are dealing with generations who are not making as many phone calls in general. Tom Leykis dealt with this problem on his live show.

In recent weeks, Dr. Laura was telling listeners she had open lines on a daily or almost daily basis, something I can't recall hearing on her show before. Heading into the Memorial Day weekend, she announced this past Friday that, rather than restricting calls to those she'd begin with "How may I help you?" that were strictly about moral dilemmas and relationships (how to handle a mean coworker, what parent is to do about their troubled teen, should the caller keep dating this person) with the occasional "Just want to tell you that you've helped me so much", she would open it up to broader, seemingly apolitical topics. "What do you want to chat about?" became the opening of each call.

It's really a contrast from just a few months ago, when she'd say "No more calls today about your husband cheating on you or your adult kid being a snowflake who won't move out", which further narrowed the acceptable calls.

Rather than resuming the previous, long-term format after the holiday on Tuesday, she kept the newly adjusted format going.

Another huge, simultaneous change, is that she's being softer and more mellow in her voice and tone. Whether this is due to market research, a lack of calls (people being afraid to be chewed up and spit out), or some good thing in her personal life, I don't know. But the result seems to be positive. A majority of listeners commenting like the show better this way, and I agree it is easier on the ears.

If our culture moves further and further away from phone calls to other ways of communicating, Dr. Laura might have to, reluctant as she may be, incorporate some live social media involvement in her show. Calls and letters from listeners are great, but adapting to more might be necessary.

I hope her show is around as long as she has said she wants it to be.

Does Saving It Make it Better or Divorce-Proof Your Marriage?

A letter was printed at drlaura.com from someone who endorses saving sex for marriage:

Abstinence until marriage is the best!!! It's also the BEST gift you could ever give your future spouse.

To say you WAITED for them, instead of shacking up and throwing the benefits and blessings of marriage to the wind. If you do have sex without the blessing of marriage, you rob yourself and your partner of the best blessing you will ever know.

Its not anything special if you don't wait.

No indication is given as to the sex of the writer, but I think it is safe to say it is a written by a devoutly religious married woman who is happy with her husband, at least for now.

Let's look at it bit by bit.

Provocative Women on Twitter

Dr. Laura has repeatedly told wives who call into her show who don't like their husbands watching porn that it is OK for him to watch as long as he's not neglecting his obligations and the porn is of women or women with men, and not of "children or small farm animals". (It's still OK if he watches gay male porn, but it means he's gay, so it was bad of him to marry her.)

During the first hour of today's show (May 8, 2019) she got a call from a woman upset that her husband follows "provocative women" on Twitter. Without hesitation, Dr. Laura responded like this was not acceptable.

Why?

What is the difference between "watching porn" and "following provocative women on Twitter"? In some cases, there is no difference! Some men watch their porn on Twitter. The "provocative women" are probably models who post pictures and videos.

I have to wonder if there was information on the screen Dr. Laura didn't share with us?

More likely, though, this was simply a part of Dr. Laura's bias against technology and especially social media. She makes it clear that, although her show has a Twitter account, she doesn't use Twitter and doesn't handle the show's account. So maybe she just doesn't know enough about Twitter?

She probably doesn't realize that some of the previous "my husband watches porn" calls were about husbands watching on Twitter, or Tumblr, or some other social media. She probably just assumed it was the husband going to website that isn't social media, or watching videos on discs or streaming services.

So, it sounded like this caller got a different answer than Dr. Laura has given so many others due to a misunderstanding.

Fortunately, she continues to have a great show and help a lot of people. (Also, at the end of the call, the wife was saying she was going to stay, so hopefully a marriage wasn't unnecessarily broken up.)

June Is Coming

Wedding season, gentlemen. Maybe you’re scheduled to be the groom.

Maybe a man you care about is scheduled to be a groom.

Maybe a woman you’re "seeing" or "with" is expecting you to be her date for a wedding or weddings.

Obviously, the first situation is the most dire.

No, Don't Get Rid of Your Video Games

The last call Dr. Laura took during the first hour of her Thursday, April 18 2019 show was a husband and wife. Dr. Laura finished the call insisting repeatedly that the husband get rid of his video games, even though that wasn't what the call was about and was mentioned almost in passing.

Rather than repeat myself, I will refer to these previous entries:

Go Watch Your Musicals, Ladies

Some Real Men Play Video Games

Is Dr. Laura The Only Talk Show Host Who Does This?

Over the last three decades plus, I've listened to a lot of audio talk shows that take calls. I still listen to many.

I have to ask: Is Dr. Laura the only host who either doesn't understand normal over-the-phone dialogues, or does she simply reject the standard etiquette?

Cross talk in such situations is extremely common (as it is with normal phone calls people make to each other). It probably happens on more calls to audio shows than not. There are going to be times a caller starts talking before the host has finished what they were saying (often because it sounded like they were done), or the host will jump in to say something while the caller is still talking and the caller won't notice that the host has started talking. Stuff like that.

Usually, the host or the caller will repeat what they said, or the host will invite the caller to repeat what they said.

That's every show that takes any calls.

Except for the Dr. Laura Show.

She takes it as a personal insult if the caller says anything while she is talking, even if it is just "I agree" or "Right", and she also gets upset if the caller doesn't stop talking the millisecond she cuts in, even if it is the middle of their sentence.

"You can hear me, I know you can hear me!" she'll insist. "You're talking over me!"

She think they're talking over her out of a lack of thoughtfulness or respect. Or, the only other possibility in her thinking is that there are technical problems with the phone lines so that callers aren't hearing her. I feel for the technical personnel who are handling those phones, because every once in a while she'll say on-air that it needs to be taken care of, and if she's saying that on the air, she's probably said it many times during breaks, but not as sweetly. It sounds like nobody has ever sat her down and said that crosstalk, especially on call-in talk shows, is normal.

I've said many, many times on this blog how great her show is and how much I appreciate her. If I didn't listen to every minute of the show, I wouldn't know this stuff about the show. It's a bit sad that she lets this get to her so much. She should listen to a few other shows, especially the kind where things can get heated, and she'll see how common crosstalk is.

A Terse Bottom Line on Marriage

When it is the case that a husband does or will earn more more than his wife (which is the majority of marriages), the only benefit a man gets from marrying that he couldn't get as an unmarried man is at the voluntary generosity of his wife, while women benefit by law. Actually, he could get all of those things at the voluntary generosity of a woman who isn't his wife, too. That voluntarily generosity can be rescinded at any time without legal or financial risk, while a husband can be ordered by a court to keep providing benefits to an ex-wife.

The Prom Is For Girls and Gays

Here we are again. I'm hearing about The Prom again.

Every year now, I note this ritual, which has become another day, along with "Sweet Sixteen" (or other birthdays for certain cultures, at 13, 15, etc.) and wedding days (the the related events) that are all about feeding the narcissism and sense of entitlement of attention-whores and attention-whores-in-training.

Refer back to my "Beware the Prom", and this look at a Dear Abby column, and this look at a different Dear Abby column and now this entry on increasingly showy proposals ("promposals") for dates.

Stop it, guys! Unless you're gay and want to rub it into the noses of some uptight school staff or parents by taking someone of the same sex, you don't really want to go to a dance, do you? You don't really want to take girl to the prom, do you?

It a nutshell, here are my problems with the prom as it is these days:

1) Boys wasting money.

2) Another event where females are princess-ized, which is a problem as long as males are prevented, culturally/socially and often legally, from events that cater to them and are focused on them in a similar way. Go ahead and tell me... what event gives boys the equivalent of the prom, where the activities are all about things he wants to do, with the boys dressing the way they want to dress, the girls dressing the way the boys want them to dress, the girls paying for it and escorting the boys, and where the boys will go hang out with their friends during the event?

If you already have a date for the prom, break up with her. If you were planning to ask a girl, especially with some elaborate production, don't!

Some of you guys think that taking a girl to the prom means she will have sex with you. If she hasn't had sex with you yet, paying her way and being her display piece for the prom almost certainly will NOT make it happen. If she really is the kind of girl who will finally have sex with you because you took her to the prom, it's probably not worth it. You're far better off going straight to one of the "after parties". But even then, you're just asking for trouble, even more so if she's underage (even if YOU are underage). 

You're better off doing something else that night, even staying home and sleeping. If you're a very bad boy, you might want to track down a neighborhood "single" mom whose daughter is off to the prom that night and it has her (the mom) feeling nostalgic and over the hill. Just be careful or you'll end up a very young father.

Limits

It's hard for me to make long-term plans or plans months in advance. I'm not talking about finances. I have multiple investment/retirement accounts going, although I'd like to save more. I'm talking about making plans to be at certain places at a certain time, whether in a professional capacity or a personal one.

It's not a calendar issue. I maintain calendars for both my professional and person life, the latter share with my wife, thanks to technology.

No, the issues are:

1) Between school, activities for the kids, medical and therapy appointments, and of course my work, it's hard to clear any time without feeling like we'd be taking a big risk or neglecting something.

2) The kids fight each other and their mother, which means spending "extra" hours away from home is risky.

3) My wife's mental problems and those at least one of our kids inherited can make for unpredictable problems, which also is a risk and anxiety-making. My wife also has physical problems that can suddenly, unpredictably, prevent her from driving, meaning she won't be able to drive any of our kids somewhere or pick them up.

And aside from these issues, anything that will take both me and my wife out of town is hindered by:

4) The kids not being able to stay together, and the people who are might, possibly, (separately) take them are 45-60 minutes away (so if school is in session, it's not possible).

5) Multiple pets I very reluctantly allowed us to take on. (I've refrained from writing much about that on this blog, but I probably should.)

I never know when there will be a serious problem. Countless times I've had to stop working and drive home or somewhere else, often an hour away.

Sure, something can happen to anyone, but it is more likely to happen to my family or me than the average person.

Only for very rare occasions can we plan well in advance with a determination that one of us will follow through.

I often feel like I'm treading water and have a long to-do list. I think about things I've wanted to do with my kids or offer for them to do (think things like a particular sport), but I already feel so worn out and exhausted and know I'd need my wife to be able and willing to help facilitate their participation, and I simply can't rely on her.

You might read this and think, You have too much on your plate. Drop something.

I need to work, so that can't go.

I'm not dropping my wife or the kids.

I don't get together with the guys (not in person, anyway). I don't take classes. Other than work, what I do outside the home is run errands and do weekly personal therapy at the demand of my wife. I obviously do blog, but I'd go crazy if I didn't.

There's one thing. It's a personal project that will bring in a very small amount of extra income. But I just can't bring myself to drop it. It doesn't take up much time, and it is very important to me.

Sigh.

Don't marry, guys. Don't marry and do get a vasectomy.

Hold Those Hormones

I'm a follower of Christ, and I generally fall in line with the positions held by "conservative Christians" or "the Religious Right" (with a libertarian lean when it comes to government involvement), with a few notable exceptions, such as discouraging rather than encouraging men to legally marry, and not thinking that watching pixels of nude women and people appearing to have sex turns people into serial killers. I'm very familiar with the positions and reasoning used in these circles.

That brings me to something I find a bit frustrating, but I have to paint a detailed picture to explain it.

Here is a composite list of rules, based on what you can find in media featuring prominent leaders of this sort:

Confidential to Anonymous

Someone has sent me a couple of anonymous comments (not for publication) and I wanted to offer you thanks for your comments and I wanted to encourage you to stay strong.

There's nothing wrong at all with your status.

That some people think it is somehow negative or that you're lacking is erroneous thinking on their part.

Continue to think critically. Continue to think of what is best for you. Getting married and having children, if done "right", is about self-sacrifice. Sacrifices shouldn't be made for lost causes. What I mean is, you'd sacrifice yourself and, chances are, the outcome wouldn't be worth your sacrifice.

Remember these pages and posts:

Why You Don't Want to Do That
https://tunasafedolphin.blogspot.com/p/why-you-dont-want-to-do-that.html

Quiz For Men: Should You Get Married?
https://tunasafedolphin.blogspot.com/p/blog-page_30.html

To What Should Males Aspire?
https://tunasafedolphin.blogspot.com/2016/12/to-what-should-males-aspire.html

Why We Should Use the Death Penalty

Here's another one of those all-too-common cases to remember when you see people encouraging others to become parents. It's from Alejandra Reyes-Velarde and it was in the Los Angeles Times:

A Fontana woman previously convicted of child abuse has been charged in the death of her 3-year-old daughter, who died days after being taken to the hospital with injuries that authorities said stemmed from abuse.

Fontana is in the "Inland Empire", which is the part of California that east of Los Angeles county and the OC and west of the border with Arizona and Nevada. There are some fine people who live in the Inland Empire, but it's also home to a lot of people who are wasting their human potential.

Miriam Sandoval, 37, and the child’s father, Richard Rojo, 34, were arrested Feb. 27 after Fontana police responded to a medical aid call in the 9500 block of Madrona Avenue. When they arrived, officers found a 3-year-old girl who was not breathing, authorities said.

Nice. Notice he's the "child's father", so I guess that means they never bothered to marry?

The girl was taken to the hospital and died Sunday, Fontana police spokesman Jay Sayegh said. 

It’s unclear how the girl died, but Sayegh said she had “significant visible body injuries.”

Infuriating.

Sandoval previously was convicted of child abuse after the girl, as an infant, suffered broken bones, including a broken pelvis.

A broken flippin' pelvis. On an infant.

“It’s extremely frustrating,” Sayegh said, adding that the woman was put on probation after a plea deal. “This is a woman who should have never been around those kids again. It’s heartbreaking.”

Gotta love those plea deals. Imagine the life that kid lived.

Sandoval and Rojo have two other children: the dead girl’s twin sister and a boy about 6, Sayegh said. The children are now under the care of the county’s Children and Family Services Department, police said.

Let's hope they don't end up with abusers.

Authorities do not think Rojo participated in the abuse, but Sayegh said the man was negligent.

He knocked the woman up at least twice knowing she was an example of toxic femininity.

“The father took no actions to protect the children,” he said. “That’s his obligation.”

There's something to remember, guys. If you don't protect the children, you're also held responsible. This is something I've had to remember myself. As far as I know, my wife hasn't physically or sexually abused our children, but physical and sexual abuse aren't the only forms of abuse.

At least one of these adults deserves the death penalty, which California still technically has, but it's a joke because the thing has been thwarted by cruel people.

Dr. Laura Gets a Lot of Calls From Shackups

Shacking up is so common and accepted these days that people who don't listen much to Dr. Laura might be surprised that she's against it, and how strongly she condemns it (as do I). She will even hang up on some male callers who are shacking up without bothering to let them ask their question. For other callers, she will usually make an example of them.

During the first hour of the Wednesday, February 27, 2019 show, she took a call from "Michelle" who said she has a boyfriend of a few years and she's moved in with him to what had been his former marital home. She had also been previously married. They both have grown children.

But before Michelle could really get that out, Dr. Laura started in.

So She Has Moved On - Now What?

Guys, has she just dumped you, officially or not?

This is the time of year when a lot of men find themselves dumped, left, served with divorce papers, or that "the woman in their life" has checked out from the relationship or is with other men (online or in the flesh). You were with her for Thanksgiving, maybe with her at your family's place or you being her guy-to-show-off at her family or friend's place. You got her Christmas presents. You were there for her on New Year's Eve, maybe even spending a lot of money. And you made a big deal about Valentine's Day.

But she was planning to leave after she got what she wanted. Or you didn't jump through the hoops right (in many cases, nobody can).

And now you're finding out why I told you to become scarce in November, and you should have listened to me.

So now what?

We're Almost to February 14

Men, if you're not already married, don't let the marketing get to you. Don't let any peer pressure get to you. Don't let any "hints" from women get to you. Unlike most married men, you can survive February 14 without jumping through hoops and spending a lot of money.

If you have a fiancée or girlfriend, you need to think very soberly about what you're facing by allowing that relationship to continue. You CAN back out. Most likely, you should.

You should at least get scarce between now and February 15.

From just before Thanksgiving until February 15, you should not be seeing any woman who is expecting you to marry her, propose to her, impregnate her, move in together, or make a big deal about February 14. And if you're seeing someone whose birthday is in late February or who counts a day in late February as an anniversary with you, avoid her until after that day.

If you were with her through the holidays, that makes it all the more important you get very scarce until at least February 15, if not outright ghosting her permanently.

What's the risk, really? That she'll get with some other guy? Or move on? So what?!?

Let some guy who doesn't value his earnings or is desperate pay for what she wants. You don't want to get suckered into spending a lot of time, money, and effort to get something you can get without doing so. There are attractive, available women who will gladly take the open spot in your rotation if you play your cards right. Whether you want to keep getting with women or not, you probably shouldn't get into a situation in which you're heading for marriage.

Most men shouldn't marry. Most marriages are not both lasting and happy. Having a woman live with you is asking for trouble. You don't need a wife.

Do things right, and you can have a full social and personal life year-round without going to ridiculous lengths to make Valentine's Day, some woman's birthday, anniversaries, and winter holidays (like Christmas and New Year's Eve) some sort of worshipping of a woman.

Problems With Statistics in Selling Marriage to Men

Statistics are about a population, not individuals. What happens in your life either will happen or it won't (usually depending on your choices) - so it is either 0% or 100% for you. Statistics can tell you the odds, all things being equal, but things aren't equal. Let's take college graduates, for example. The average person with a Bachelor's degree is going to earn more than the average person without a college education. Yet some of the people with the highest incomes or the most wealth never graduated from college. This includes tech leaders, professional athletes, entertainers and authors, and various businesspeople. [Please note that this entry was posted several years ago. It still holds up pretty well.]

Statistics usually can't tell you why something is the way it is. For example, statistics will tell you that if you compare 200 people in a hospital and 200 people in an apartment complex across the street, you'll see that you're far more likely to die in the hospital than in the apartment complex. What are we to think as a result? That hospitals are harmful to our health? Or that people who are seriously sick and injured go to a hospital, where some of them are going to die, but more of them would die if they hadn't gone to the hospital?

Talk show host Tom Leykis, like a lot of other people, will tell you that half of all marriages end in divorce, and that more adults are unmarried now than married, as if this is some profound shift in how people look at life. However, most of the shift in married vs. unmarried involves people getting married later in life, such as their late 20s or early 30s instead of their early 20s. Although there is a growing percentage of men swearing off marriage, it is still a small group and most people will get married at some time in their lives. As far as divorce, Leykis has had four divorces. I've had none. If you average us together, that means the average person has two divorces. That's a little misleading. First marriages have about a 40% divorce rate, which is still way too high, but it isn't 50%. It is the high divorce rate for second, third, etc. marriages that skew the statistics. (On the other hand, perhaps even MORE marriages would end in divorce if it were for fatal illness and injuries, murders and suicides ending someone's life before they could divorce – so just because a marriage didn't end in divorce does not mean it was a good marriage.) 40% is the rate for all first marriages. I wonder what the divorce rate is for people who marry into a first marriage: 1) without children from other lovers or a current pregnancy influencing their decision; 2) after about 18-24 months of being a couple (but not too much longer than that); 3) without having shacked up OR being "long distance"; 4) after six months of intense premarital counseling with a LMFT; 5) with the same or compatible religious beliefs or practices and plans for children; 6) with no credit card debt; 7) without substance abuse problems. My guess is that divorce rate for such marriages is very low.

Conversely...

Still Waiting

Another comment was left by another Anonymous woman who didn't bother to address what I actually wrote in this blog's most popular entry, but instead tried (and failed) to shame men for actually caring about their own well being.

Since she left it as a response to another comment, I will look at that comment first.

Here's the original comment.

I'm a man, engaged to the mother of my two children.

Why? Clearly you can have kids without being married. Why bother marrying? What we've been told over the last 25 years in our courts and culture is that marriage isn't about children. So there must be some other reason you're engaged to her. (And that she's the mother of YOUR children, and presumably not another man's, that colors your comment.)

And even in this situation, the children always take priority. You (the significant other) won't always be the priority; and that's fine. We a still love eachother and we're to be married September in 2016.

I wonder how they're doing now? For the kids' sake, I hope well.

I think most of this article is trash. Not wanting to be with a woman because she doesn't have a pre-pregnancy body is incredibly shallow, and speaks poorly to your character.

It's a good thing women aren't shallow, like, say, not dating men who aren't taller than them, or preferring men with fatter wallets. The body issues were a small part of the list. There were many more reasons given, some that should be deal breakers by themselves. Nobody should kid themselves, though. If a man isn't turned on by a woman, it is unlikely their marriage will be a good, lasting, happy one.

If you're really worried about the possibility of a divorce, and the woman getting half of everything you have? Sign a pre-nup.

Judges throw out prenups all of the time. Men should avoid signing a marriage contract or any contract with a woman, especially a single mother.

Into the New Year, Mid February is Coming

Guys, did you make it through Christmas and New Year's Eve without getting engaged? If not, you need to think very soberly about what you're facing. You CAN back out. Most likely, you should. You shouldn't have even been with a steady girlfriend on those days.

February 14 is rapidly approaching. You should not be seeing any woman who is expecting you to marry her, propose to her, impregnate her, move in together, or make a big deal about February 14 - until at least February 15. And if you're seeing someone whose birthday is in late February or who counts a day in late February as an anniversary with you, avoid her until after that day.

What's the risk, really? That she'll get with some other guy? Or move on? So what?!?

Let some guy who doesn't value his earnings or is desperate pay for what she wants. You don't want to get suckered into spending a lot of time, money, and effort to get something you can get without doing so. There are attractive, available women who will gladly take the open spot in your rotation if you play your cards right. Whether you want to keep getting with women or not, you probably shouldn't get into a situation in which you're heading for marriage.

Angry Mom Checks In

Another comment (that didn't actually demonstrate where I was wrong) was left on this blog's most popular entry, which has received hundreds of comments.

I'm assuming this comment was directed at me and not someone else who'd left a comment. This is what SaEatonmomof3 had to say:

You are the most self centered, must be narcissist that I have ever read crap like this from.

Remember guys, if you won't want to ruin your life via someone else's children, you're a narcissist!

How Many of You Are Sick?

Dr. Laura's mind tends to go places most people's minds don't. I love her show, I love her books, and she's usually right but sometimes I scratch my head.

For example, during the first hour of today's (Wednesday 1/9) show,  man called to talk about an annual family vacation for him, his wife, and their grown kids (two daughters and a son).

Since the eldest is now married, he was wondering about room sharing arrangements and he asked Dr. Laura about having (no doubt since the married daughter and her husband would be sharing a room) the other daughter and a son share a room for a week since the daughters would no longer be sharing a room.

Dr. Laura quickly, emphatically, and repeatedly called it "sick". She acted like she was shocked.. She stated she was "horrified".

I can understand calling it impractical, even unfair, or whatever, but why did she call it sick? Why does she apparently think sleeping in the same room equals sex? Many married people who share a bed know it's not true. We can go months, years sharing a room and not have sex. I mean, she's used the work "sick" for other situations before, but I don't think she could possibly mean that the kids are mentally ill or that they'd be beating up on each other, so I assume she's talking about sex.

She continued the call briefly, then decided to pretend it was a phony call.

For most of history, people have NOT had their own rooms. I guess everyone was sick?

I've noticed before that she usually treats the presence of a bed or touching a bed as akin (no pun intended) to having sex with the person who uses it. For example, kids aren't supposed to touch their parents' bed.

Presumably, the brother and sister would not even be sharing a bed. I distinctly heard they would be sharing a room.

I have to wonder what Dr. Laura does with the fact that some people have sex on the couch, on the living room floor, on the kitchen table, in the family minivan, in the shower (which she sometimes recommends), you name it.