First Date Advice

I love reading/hearing dating and relationship advice in the media. It is funny to compare the conflicting messages, and to see if what the portrayal of men is accurate or not, or if guys are getting bad advice. It can be helpful to determine just where the advice-giver is coming from – a Bible-based approach, a feminist approach, a pick-up artist approach – what?

This article, about first dates, I found on Yahoo from something or someone called "Foxy". It appears to be what I call The Sitcom Approach, like with the sitcom "Friends". This approach refuses to consider that shacking up or fornication in general is wrong, but still insists on some rules beyond mere law. It assumes that both people on the date are looking for a relationship AND sex, which will happen sooner rather than later.

I believe that sex is for marriage. But I also believe that if a guy is not going to adhere to that and mainly wants a lot of sex (fornication), he should not pretend to want a "relationship" if he doesn't really want one. He should avoid marriage-and-family-minded women and stick to the hussies. My analysis below reflects this. Keep in mind that women can avoid men who just want sex by... not having sex with them, especially on a first date.

Whether you're fifteen or fifty, there's nothing quite like a first date.

I hated dating women I didn't know at all. Especially first dates. On the other hand, if you get to know a woman ahead of time and you end up on the friend ladder, you can’t ever leave it. There's a careful, happy medium. I thank God I don't have to deal with this crap anymore.

If you're hoping date #1 might lead to date #2, here are a few things Foxy thinks you should avoid...

Fakin' It... Why invite a guy to a ball game if you hate it? Or ask a girl to a Bergman festival, when you love bad brutes and big guns? It's great to try new things, but it's most important to be yourself.

If you are dating to find a spouse, for sure. Be yourself, and don't set up the date to include activities you don't enjoy. Either you are right for each other or you aren't, and dating is to try to find that out.

If you just want sex, try to meet her for drinks after dinner. Don't "be yourself", unless you are normally aloof, confident to the point of being cocky, and aggressive. Reveal as little as possible about yourself, actually, because she might use anything you say about yourself as an excuse to not have sex with you. Try to get her to do the talking, and let her fill in the gaps in her knowledge about you with her wishful thinking.

Clean out your car, make it presentable, and get gas -- otherwise your date may end up running on empty.

Good advice either way. It's also a matter of safety.

Screamin', smashin' rock concerts have their own charm, but not for a first date…The same goes for loud bars or restaurants -- who wants to shout all night long while you're trying to get to know each other?

And, if you are just looking for sex, you want to be alone with her as soon as possible, not in a crowd. You don't want to take her to something where you have to pay for her to do something that is going to tire her out before you reach your goal.

There is much to be said for the power of pairs. In the beginning, it's best to keep it to the two of you.

Yes. And if you are just looking for sex, you don't want to meet her friends or relatives, and you certainly don't want them being around as her excuse not to be alone with you.

Five-Star Fancy or Carelessly Casual... Avoid either. Fancy first dates can be a huge mistake… If you end up going low-key, you should still steer clear of cheap chain restaurants and other overly casual joints.

If you are just looking for sex, try to avoid dinner entirely, meeting for drinks afterwards. If you must have dinner together, pick some place inexpensive that serves alcohol, eat before you go there, and then say you're not that hungry and order a cheap salad. What hot woman is going to order a big, expensive meal if you are just ordering cheap salad? Most women who do casual sex in three dates or less will do it with you whether you spend a lot of money or not – so why spend more? If spending more will get her to sleep with you when she otherwise wouldn't, is that what you want to date? You can save your money and still get some by moving on to another date.

If you both like each other, there will be plenty of time for canoodling, caressing, and luxurious mornings lounging in bed. Don't rush it.

This is so written by a woman. I love being next to my wife and embracing her. If you are looking for a spouse, sex on the first date is definitely a bad idea. Yeah, you probably know a married couple who did it. I do. Doesn't mean it is a good idea. But if you are just looking for sex, what do you care if it is rushed?

A first date isn't the time to give your locks a major snip, change your hair color, or do anything else drastic (like try out a pair of ultra high heels you can't walk in). You want to feel your most relaxed and comfortable, so save the experimentation for another time.

Don't cut your hair, ladies.

People can smell a desperate singleton a mile away, so avoid punctuating dinner with not-so-subtle comments like, "My mother would love you!"

Hmmm – depends on whether or not this is your first personal conversation. Some people do talk a bit before they ever go out on a date, and depending on that, it may be okay to say something like that. But it is best not to.

Or ending the evening with, "So, do you want to go out again? Maybe on Wednesday? At six?"

Okay, my wife told me she was confused and disappointed when I didn't do that at the end of our first date. I specifically avoided doing that because 1) we didn't kiss when we had the chance (I later found out she had made a rule to wait until the third date to kiss) and 2) I had been told by my previous girlfriend (note... not the last woman I had previously dated... just the last one that became my actual exclusive girlfriend) that I was clingy and smothering. So from that day forward I never never clingy again with anyone. She later fell madly in love with me (as I did with her), but I digress. The point is, there is nothing wrong with waiting until you've had time to reflect on the date before asking or another one, but there's also nothing wrong with arranging for the next one, either. You can always cancel if you realize things aren't going to go the way you want.

Texting, whether you love it or hate it, don't do it! Even if your date is in the restroom.

Yeah, your date is probably texting in the restroom. Okay guys, if you are just looking for sex, then here's the deal about texting and phone calls. You can do it if you want. But if she does it, especially if you are paying for the evening, get up and leave her there. Why? She's communicating with the booty call she's going to see after you pay for her evening and are left hanging. Think about it. You're not dating a mother with minor kids (right?), so it can't be her kids. Her friends know she is on a date and shouldn't expect her to take calls or text. If it is work, she's too involved in work to be a good prospect for you. If it is a family emergency, then she’s going to be too much work and you're not getting any anyway.

If you're concerned about how the date will go, don't have your "friend" call you with an "emergency" halfway through dinner, stick with something quick like coffee, snacks, or ice cream.

If you’re looking for sex, do not meet a woman for coffee or lunch. Waste of time.

Here are a couple of my suggestions for a first date, assuming that you are a marriage-and-family-minded person:

1. Unless you know this person somewhat already (like you work with this person... but I don't recommend dating coworkers), meet somewhere neutral. I know there are ladies who expect the guy to show up at their place in a nice, clean car and open the door for her, saving her the trouble of driving somewhere. But women should be more careful about letting a guy know exactly where she lives until she knows him better. Driving your own vehicle there means you can easily leave the moment you want to.

2. Let the person you're dating know exactly why you are dating. If you aren't ready to be a spouse yet, then you are dating for entertainment and to get to know more about the kind of person with whom you best get along. If you are ready to be a spouse, then say that you are dating so that you can eventually find a spouse. If your date can handle the truth, you are better off knowing that right away. Or, if your date subsequently acts in a way that goes counter to your stated goals, you have moral cover, as in "I told you from date one what I wanted."

My wife told me early on date one that she was a virgin and she was going to be one until her wedding night. She made no secret of that and I'm kind of anonymous here, so I can write that. If that was a problem for me, I simply would have gotten up and left, saving us both a lot of time, money, and energy. Obviously, it wasn't a problem for me. Marrying a virgin was not a requirement for me, especially since I wasn't one myself – which we also discussed. That honesty prevented us from doing things we would have regretted. I knew that she was going to be upset with me if I pushed things, whereas some women get upset if you don't push things, even if they act reluctant. (I'm not talking about saying "no", "don't", or "stop". I'm talking about women who do want to fornicate but don't want to appear slutty.) Likewise, she knew I didn't always exercise restraint in the past, so she needed to be careful about boundaries. There were times when she told me she needed me to be stronger than her - and that let me know that I had to be on guard, and not to take her behavior as an invitation to ignore what she'd said on that first date.

It wasn't easy, but we made it to the wedding. And now we can make love without guilt and never have to deal with going on another first date.

Five Traits

Cosmo dating blogger Mina Azodi recently had this entry, Dating 101: Five Traits a Guy Should Have Before You Get Serious. (I found it via Yahoo, in case you were wondering.) Consider the source.

Dating Trait #1: He Knows What He Wants - Any guy you're serious about should be able to articulate his long-term goals and passions (sorry, fantasy football and Xbox don't count).

Yes. He must have goals and plans – like how he will continue to make a living, where and how he wants to live, whether or not he wants to be a father and to how many children, etc. You must know what they are, and they must be compatible with yours.

Don't assume he'll work things out, because when he does, you may realize his ambitions don't mesh with yours.

Read that repeatedly.

Dating Trait #2: He Has a Sunny Outlook

Who wants to be married to a depressed or pessimistic person? I know plenty of people do marry that way, but is it really a good idea for them to do so?

Dating Trait #3: He's Open to Changing for You - It's true you may not be able to change a man, but a guy should want to change for you.

Woah, woah, woah. Yes, people are supposed to grow. Yes, we're all imperfect and there is always room for improvement. But a guy who changes "for you" is likely to go back to doing whatever it is he supposedly changed (but was maybe just hiding). Instead, look for guys who can admit their faults and wrongs and want to work on them to be a better person, not to please some other flawed person.

If a facet of his behavior irks you (for example, maybe he's not attentive enough in certain circumstances), he should be game to hear you out, listen to how you'd like him to do things differently, and then act on those suggestions.

Maybe he isn't right for you. And if you're expecting him to do this, then you'd better be prepared to do the same... which will likely involve bedroom matters.

More important, a man needs to have the capacity to transform and grow with you -- e.g., he takes an interest in going to art galleries with you, even if he's more of a couch-and-ESPN kind of guy.

And what about vice-versa? You know, spouses can have their own interests. What's wrong with him watching ESPN while she is at the art gallery?

Dating Trait #4: He's Still a Little Mysterious - The beginning of a relationship is always exciting because you're just getting to know each other. But even after the newness wears off, it's essential that a man keeps you guessing. "If you can never quite pin down what makes him tick, that's actually a healthy thing," says Kirschner. Although at first you might feel more bonded to a guy who shares tons of personal info with you, over time, you risk losing the intrigue that pulled you to him initially.

Okay, he shouldn't tell you things you shouldn't or don't need to know, like personal things about other people, or talk endlessly about every thought he ever has or every little thing that happened to him that day. But keeping secrets from your spouse is a really bad idea. You're supposed to have intimacy. It's okay for a guy to be secretive about, say, where he finds your gifts, or his plans to pleasantly surprise you, or how much he admires another woman's body. Fine. But otherwise, trouble brews. If you want mystery... stick to casual dating.

Dating Trait #5: He's Responsible with Money - Besides giving you a heads-up about money-related conflicts you might encounter in the future (one of the topics long-term couples argue about most), how a guy handles cash reveals a lot about his character.

Definitely. And guys who are responsible with money should continue that by only marrying women who have been responsible with money.

But you also don't want to be with a tightwad. If a dude doesn't splurge now and then, it may mean he'll be stingy in other ways, such as compromising during a fight.

Hmmm. The more compromise needed, the more likely you're not a match to begin with. Splurging occasionally is good – especially if it is on the both of you together. If he's just trying to buy you off with pricey things, then watch out.

What about five traits she should have before a guy gets serious with her, if that's what he wants to do?

1. She's Attractive. This will mean different things to different guys. But she should be attractive to you – in her physical appearance, her personality, how she behaves, and her worldview. If you don't want to be around her, if you don't miss her when she's not around, if she doesn't turn you on, then it is going to be very difficult for your relationship to last.

2. She's Responsible With Money. Marriage is essentially forming a corporation, as far as the state is concerned.

3. She Has Plans, Major Life Goals, and a Lifestyle Compatible With Yours.

4. She Is Reasonably Secure. Insecure women do not make good wives.

5. She's the Best You Can Do. If you think you can do better, you may be right or you may be wrong. If you're right, you are selling yourself short by committing to her and you will be stunting yourself and resentful. If you are wrong, then you think too much of yourself and/or too little of her, and she deserves someone who will appreciate her more than you.

California Marriage Amendment on Trial

Will a court that is supposed to be bound by the state constitution place themselves above the constitution? Or will they affirm the California Marriage Amendment, voted in as Propostion 8? The Playful Walrus explains.

Don't Be an Ice Queen

From a recent Dear Abby column, here is another example of why some men don't want to get married – and my suggestions about not being like the letter-writer.

CONFUSED IN PENNSYLVANIA wrote:

My husband, "Warren," and I are happily married.

Does he tell you that? Or are you just assuming he is happy in the marriage? Even if he says it, it could be just a stop-gap for him, which he shouldn't do.

We love each other.

Great.

We are both hardworking career professionals and have raised our family.

So the kids are out and you're both working. Are you both working a lot? How much time to you get with each other?

We have always been faithful to each other.

You're assuming or believing, in his case. And it could very well be true.

Warren is very open with his emotions and often tells me how much he loves me.

Sounds good. That's what many women say they want.

He is also very passionate during our intimate moments.

Likewise.

The problem is, he expects me to act the same way -- which I can't.

You can't? Why not? I'm sure he'd like you to feel passionate, but he will have to settle for act. At least until you get into it.

Although I love my husband and always will, I do not feel comfortable expressing myself the way he does during our lovemaking.

Huh? How long have you been married? If you can't express yourself passionately with your husband or for your husband, then what does that say about your ability to fully enjoy your marriage?

I am content to just "get it over with" while he yearns for the kissing, hugging and talk.

Ahhhh - you mean he likes foreplay and cuddling - which many women wish their partner would do more - and you want to treat lovemaking like a chore?

Despite an active sex life with Warren, he has told me many times he wishes I were more expressive and open with my feelings.

He is TELLING you explicitly what he wants. You don't want to make him happy? You don't want him to keep being open with you about what he wants?

I respond by telling him, "I am who I am." He is not happy that I refuse to change.

Why did you get married? Normally, I say people should not expect their spouse to change for the better – they are marrying them as-is – and thus if there is something you do or do not do that is a problem for him, he shouldn't (or shouldn't have) marry(ied) you in the first place. But when it comes to lovemaking issues, if couples adhere to Biblical/traditional morals of saving sex for marriage, I don't see how they can know everything they are getting – or not – before they marry. Therefore, spouses are obligated to try to accommodate each other in this area, with "ties" broken towards "more" or "yes" (as long as it isn't illegal, immoral, or harmful – or unless we're talking conceiving more children when one spouse is reluctant).

Warren is a wonderful man.

So reward him!

Dear Abby responded:

I think it's time you considered the fact that by "refusing" to change, you have limited some interesting and rewarding possibilities in your marriage. One important aspect of "performance" is receiving feedback, as anyone in the arts can attest. Lovemaking is an art, and partners need to know when they, too, are doing something right.

She is so right.

I wish you would have this discussion with a therapist who specializes in sexual issues.

Preferably one that doesn't try to convince you that your husband is wrong for wanting this and telling you he wants it.

It isn't just about him. She can be better in this regard, and he will be more satisfied, and since, as she points out, he is a good guy, he is very likely to make her life even better as a result.

While men have a wide spectrum of specific and nuanced likes, dislikes, turn-ons, and turn-offs, there are a few things that generally apply to most healthy men. For example, heterosexual men like the female body. We enjoy seeing the female body. We enjoy touching the female body, and feeling the female body. This is especially true if that body belongs to our wife. Morally upstanding men try to concentrate on her body to the exclusion of other female bodies, and least in this sense.

Most of us do not need expensive gifts. We don't need constant doting. You don't have to wine and dine us, or cater to mood swings. You can satisfy most of our desires by having fun with us in marital lovemaking.

Here are some things that most men like. It is especially hot if you enjoy doing them in their own right, independent of the fact that we like it. If you don't, don’t let on to that. Act like you do.

Enthusiasm, Passion – It is okay to be "submissive" and let him take the lead (though, if he doesn't object, try initiating and leading some times), but that doesn't have to mean doing an impersonation of a coma patient. We like it when you show enthusiasm. Move. React. Smile.

Aural Sex – Lovemaking isn't just about pressure/friction or touch in general. All of the senses are involved in creating the overall experience, and none should be ignored. Vocalize your desires, your encouragement, your constructive suggestions, your needs. Tell him what you want him to do. Tell him you want him. Use his name or your special nickname for him (unless is is "Shorty" or "Quick Shot" or "Limpy", or something similar). I'm not talking about self-degradation - calling yourself a slut, whore, or whatever... that kind of thing actually turns me off, though I can't speak for your man. Cooing, panting, gasping, moaning, screaming... any or all of those are good. Affirmation and encouragements are helpful. Sure, this can be tough with the kids in the house. There are times you are just going to have to be as quiet as possible – but not always.

Teasing and Flirting – Be playful about your lovemaking and your love for him, both in and outside of the bedroom.

Show the Bod – No, you aren't perfect and flawless, and you may have seen better days. Even so, your body is one of, if not the, most beautiful sights he ever gets to see, subsequent only to (if anything) his offspring or the name of his favorite sports team in the same headline with the phrase "World Champs". So don't always be hiding under the covers in sweats and in the dark. It is okay that your body isn't perfect. Really. And you can make it even better when you do a playful reveal (like a strip tease).

Move the Bod – I'm not just talking moving with him, but also as you approach him or try to get him to approach you. You know - the hip sway, the hand drift, the head tilt, the "come hither" or "hey, look at these!" gestures... your feminine wiles.

Use the Bod – Your lips can touch him in more places than just his lips. There are many ways your body can bring pleasurable sensations to his organ. You're getting the idea.

Oral Sex - I wrote a lot about this here, at least as far as wife-on-husband. In the case of husband-on-wife, don't be crazy enough to discourage him. You may be afraid that you look funny or smell or taste bad at that moment, but if he's going there it is because he wants to. Enjoy it! Tell him how to make it better! (If you are worried, try to wash up before.)

He Made It, and it Isn't a Waste Product - In addition to what I wrote about how oral sex can be finished... in general, wherever it is going to go, treat the product of his loins like it is liquid gold and its "emergence" as an event (because it is for him). Watch it emerge and positively indicate that you are seeing it, or let it land somewhere on you (even just your hand) and act like that's a good thing, instead of like someone just shot your dog. Extra points for playing with it, like licking it off of your finger.

You may feel silly about doing these things, but that will change when you get into it and get just a tad of experience doing them. There really is no need to feel silly – it is just the two of you and God, and God invented sex. He's seen it all. Between people who look much more funny than you. You can always tone certain things back down if you go over-the-top. Your husband isn't going to fault you for trying too hard. If you've been married for a long time, you can explain your newfound "love" for whatever you add to the mix or what he'll think are your changing (improving) tastes by citing newly deepened or renewed feelings for him. Or hormones. That will be a good enough explanation for him. Doing these things will likely make him deliriously happy.

C'mon, ladies. We're talking lovemaking here, not scrubbing bathroom tile.

Oh, and if your husband is a good man, then he wants to know what HE can do to make you deliriously happy, too. So tell him! Women vary a lot more in this area than men do, so it is harder for him to get good tips off of a blog.

Did I just write a Cosmo article?

All The Good Men Are...

...looking for good women, if those good men are interested in marrying and being fathers.

How many times have you hear a variation on the old line that "all the good men are married or gay"?

I'm not a woman. I haven't even played one on TV. But I notice some women complaining about a lack of quality men to marry. Let's assume that's true, and that the complaining woman hasn't been busy fornicating with bad boys or getting several advanced degrees or climbing the corporate ladder until she is well past the ideal age for marrying and bearing children. It could be the result of guys deciding they don’t want to be married for any number of reasons. Some guys are involved in an intentional marriage strike. Some are avoiding marriage for hedonistic reasons, some for professional reasons, some because they prefer living alone. There is no shortage of reasons, actually. There are men who do have a desire to marry, but are reluctant to do so because of a combination of the culture in general in which they live and the women they encounter.

But when people point to guys who are fornicating with women – either one woman for a very long time, or lots of different women – and his reluctance to marry, they are forgetting something: The women who are willing participants.

It makes no sense for a woman to continue to fornicate with a guy and complain that he won't marry her. And when her "sisters" complain about the guy not popping the question, they give her a pass – sympathy, even.

Some guys are not marriage material, for whatever reason. It could be something as basic as enjoying living alone more than having a desire to marry. It could be that a guy cares more about having control over his own earnings than tending to the needs of others, or even human life (hence the guys who kill their wives rather than divorce). Or maybe he's not motivated to earn more than what barely can keep him afloat financially. There can be any number of reasons. I do think our society is creating fewer marriage-and-family-minded men for various reasons, including "rewarding" men who avoid marriage and "punishing" those who marry, what it takes now to excel at many careers, and more guys having been raised in home where they didn't have a good father who was happily married to their mother.

I am a marriage-and-family-minded man, but I cringe when those on "my" side insist that everyone should be.

Permit me to get back to the issue of some men wanting to marry but not doing so because of the culture in general and the women they encounter. Especially with our current culture, including laws and the tendencies of our courts, marriage is riskier for men then it ever has been before. (The same can't be said of women.) In most cases, a man marries someone who earns less than he does or will be earning less than he does. This means that he will be legally obligating himself to two things: 1) payments to his wife should there be a divorce; 2) responsibility for any child his wife births, whether or not he is the biological father. (If a man earns less than his wife, he is only obligating himself to the second.) He does not get any legally-enforceable promises in return. If he gets into a fight with his wife, even if she is the aggressor, he is far more likely to be carted off to jail. A man has the cultural expectation of financially supporting his wife – and that is not reciprocated, nor is it generally held anymore that a man who is the sole breadwinner should expect that his wife will make sure his children are cared for, the laundry is done, dinner is made, and that he's going to have a good time in the marital bed. There is no requirement that the marital vows be honored, that any promises or agreements be kept (except, sometimes, some things in valid pre-nuptial agreements).

I bring all of this stuff up again because I am making a point – men today can complain that they can't find a good woman to marry, because a man needs to be more careful than ever about the woman he marries, and he has more "not marriage material" women than ever to deal with. I truly believe my wife is extroardinary - that's why I married her. I do not expect that any other man is going to be as fortunate.

Men get married for sex, because they want their children to have a good mother, friendship, companionship, because they want their girlfriend in their lives permanently, because they want someone with whom to have a household with shared and delegated responsibilities. A man does NOT get married so he can hear about a woman's catty girlfriends or their drama. He does not get married because he's tired of having so much free time and money to spend, or because he wants someone around to argue with or tell him what’s wrong with him or everything about him. He does not get married to share a bed but not a robust sex life.

How many generally eligible women are there out there – women who are really marriage material for a man who wants to raise kids? Let’s look what makes a woman marriage material.

Attraction - Let me get this out of the way right away. She needs to be attractive, because a man needs to be attracted to her to function sexually. Not all men have the same tastes, but some traits will make a woman more attractive to more men (thus increasing her options) than other traits. Strangely, plenty of very attractive women don’t think of themselves as attractive, so if you are reading this and that’s you, you probably don’t have anything to worry about. And, as I've said many times, attitude can do much to make a woman more attractive. It isn’t all about looks. But looks do also matter when it comes to thinking about the children, because attractive people do generally have an easier time in life. A woman does have some control over her appearance.

Age range - Yes, the ticking of the biological clock matters. But also on the other end – unless they are mature and have a lot of peer and community pressure (think of committed Baptists, Mormons, etc.), women under the age of 25 aren't as promising for a long-term marriage.

Sexual – Has she been unable to orgasm? Does she have a problematically low, untreated libido? Is she sexually jaded from too much history? If a woman isn't able to give herself an orgasm (with "aids" or otherwise), it will be very hard for her husband to give her one. If her attitide is "been there, done that - I'm apathetic", her husband will see that some other guy got the best of his wife. These things will make married life very difficult, unless the guy is asexual.

Domestic – Either she is willing and able to take care of things at home – including children, or she will be able to still respect her husband if she is the primary earner and he is the one who takes care of most of the domestic duties. If she is driven to climb the corporate ladder or otherwise excel professionally in a way that is very time-intensive and can't respect a domestic husband, then what is the point of getting married? You’re both going to be busy working all of the time instead of being with each other and your kids. Same goes for if she wants to be in school full-time, or wants to be out partying all of the time. It isn't a good time to be married.

Socially accommodating – Most likely, her husband is going to need time with the guys, and may also want to bring people home for the sake of personal reasons or business networking. Can she handle all of that without punishing her husband? Is she reasonably secure and confident, so as to not be worried about what her husband is doing when he's not under her supervision?

Health – is she physically, mentally, emotionally, and fiscally healthy? Some health problems can be accommodated in marriage, but others make a woman a bad bet for a man who is looking to have and raise children. A woman with a load of debt or bad credit who has trouble living within her means is also not marriage material.

No signficant baggage in general – Women who should be focused on raising their existing minor children are not marriage material. If Post Traumatic Stress Disorder or sexual assault or abuse history or psycho exes are not being dealt with well enough, she is not marriage material. Unfortunately, these things can result from actions that were no fault of the woman, but a woman does have a choice of whether or not to seek treatment and whether or not to get married. For every divorce a person has been through, the chances of subsequent marriages lasting drop, so a woman who has been divorced multiple times is a bad marital prospect.

Those are what make a woman generally eligible for marriage. Women who date bad boys and abusive jerks, run up debts, or are out partying all of the time aren't really marriage material. In addition, each man has his own specific needs that make some women compatible with him or not. He should have some darn good reasons for buying that ring, getting down on his knee, and asking a woman to be his wife. Taunts of "where are all the good men?", family pressure - including questioning of sexual orientation, and needing a replacement for "mommy" aren't good reasons. Having dated for a couple of years isn't automatically a good enough reason; maybe it is time to say goodbye rather than proposing.

If a woman has a desire to marry, she should make sure that she is prepared to be a good wife. Then, by all means, she has whining rights if she can't find a good man to marry, especially if she discourages, rather than encourages, marriage-killing behaviors in her friends.

A Messed Up Teen and a Woman Fearing Spinsterhood

Two interesting letters in this Dear Margo column.

HELPLESSLY BROKEN wrote:

OK, so I am in high school, right? Freshman year.

Totally.

Then my grades started slipping, and eventually I cheated on a quiz to bring my grade up because I was tired of looking like a failure.

Not a good idea, because that is a temporary solution that lacks integrity.

Unfortunately, I got caught, and the teacher and counselor called my parents.

Good. That is not unfortunate.

When I got home, my mom took my phone and read everything on it.

She should do that anyway.

By invading my privacy,

Hold on! Your mom probably pays for that phone. Everything you have is probably on loan to you – it isn't actually yours. There is no expectation of privacy. Get used to this – the same will be true when you get a job and use phones, gadgets, laptops, and desktops provided by your employer, or and an e-mail address provided by your employer.

she found out I was bisexual,

At your age, you should be asexual – at least in action.

used to cut myself,

Of course, this is completely unrelated to being "bisexual". It's not like they are both signs that there is a larger problem here, or anything.

stopped eating or forced myself to throw up,

Of course, this is completely unrelated to being "bisexual", or cutting. It's not like they are all signs that there is a larger problem here, or anything. By the way - if your parents are paying for your medical care, then these things are definitely their business. (If you get an abortionist to cut you, though, or make you throw up, then you can hide it from your parents indefinitely – for some reason abortionists are special.)

and thought I was in love with my best friend - who is a girl, I might add.

Would she want to be with someone who also likes guys, cuts herself, has eating disorders, and is an academic cheat? Would she want to be with someone who keeps all of this information in a phone?

Now I am stuck in counseling.

That can be a good thing. Who should be in counseling, if not you?

Also, she discovered similar problems going on with two of my best friends.

Yes – that is why you are friends with them. You're all a mess.

Now she won't let me see them until they tell their parents what's been going on and see a counselor.

Good for your mom! She’s being a parent!

One friend was already in counseling when this happened, but the other refuses to say anything, even if it means we can’t see each other anymore.

I guess she isn't all that devoted to you.

My problem is that I feel angry and terrible all the time and just want to cry every second because everything is ruined:

Uh, you never felt that way before?

I can’t see the girl I've fallen for,

You should be focusing on learning to be healthy, and your studies, and a hobby or sport or some such activity.

and my parents are trying to convince me that I am not bi, but merely curious.

Maybe you are homosexual. Or maybe you just don't have boundaries.

If I were simply curious I wouldn't be feeling this way toward another girl, would I?

Actually, yes, that is possible.

I don’t know what to do anymore and feel like there is nowhere to turn.

How about your counselor?

Hey, high school boys: There's your prom date! Be sure to save up!

Dear Margo responded with generally good advice, but of course throws this in:

I suggest you don’t look at the therapist as the enemy, but make use of your sessions to hash through your feelings. This person could even become an ally in helping you understand who you are and explaining to your mother that your sexuality, whatever it is, is hard-wired.

I see. But the cutting and eating disorders aren't?

HD wrote:

How long does it typically take for a man to propose marriage?

There is no typical. Some men never propose marriage. I'm wary of engagements that happen too quickly and ones that happen after many years. Good thing I'm married and don't have to deal with either situation.

I've been dating a man for over two years,

If you have been dating him as in seeing him in-person regularly, and both of you are finished with your education and he is financially/professionally established, and you have paid off your debts (other than a mortgage or maybe a car payment) then it is time.

and my mother and sister are nagging me, saying I am wasting my time, and that if he were serious, he’d have asked me by now.

They aren't the ones who would be getting married to this guy. It is quite possible they are more interested in having bunch of parties associated with a wedding. Or, maybe they see something you don't.

When I have raised the issue of a time frame, he has said he believes we will marry but doesn’t want to rush things because, to his way of thinking, marriage is forever.

Has he ever brought up the subject – in a positive, optimistic way? If you are fornicating with him, especially if you are shacking up with him, he has little incentive to get married to you. His main incentive would be for the sake of any children he wants. Which brings up the question... has he ever brought up the subject of being a father - in a positive, optimistic way?

I love him and don’t mind waiting, but I am also aware that at 34 years old each year that passes means potential future prospects diminish, as does the chance of having a baby.

This is a good example of why people should refuse to commit to an exclusive relationship unless engagement is eminent. If she was dating other men, this guy could wait as long as he wants – and she could marry someone who is ready and wants to be married. She could have been vetting other potential husbands.

Darwin Award Candidate Announced Today

I know we're not supposed to take glee in the death of another human being, but I can't bring myself to shed a tear for Darwin Award candidate Jaime Herrera, 25, of Los Angeles.

You see, today he was defacing public property with spray-paint graffiti - a traffic sign, no less, which is important for traffic safety – and then he ran across notoriously busy Interstate 5 near downtown Los Angeles. Yes, that freeway is busy even and 4:30am.

While he was running – trespassing after "tagging" public property - he was struck and killed by someone driving a Toyota Camry. A buddy who was with him survived, and I'm sure will have lots of good memories about what a brilliant use of their time they made with their morning today.

Here is the real tragedy in all of this:

The freeway was backed up for miles this morning as three lanes were closed for more than an hour.

Click through to read the LATimes.com blog entry by Corina Knoll, and whatever comments have been approved.

Graffiti is one of my biggest pet peeves. And crimes of ignorance or omission or even desperation or passion are one thing. I have no sympathy for someone who chooses to engage in such senseless criminal activity such as tagging and then gets injured or killed as a result.

When Worldviews Strain Friendships

I have a friend who has left his wife and his daughter for a younger honey.

I should explain the extent of the friendship.

We had a common interest (essentially a hobby, not anything deep) starting when we were teenagers that lasts to this day. We met and kept in touch because of that common interest, hanging out together doing activities more or less related to that interest. Since we were not in school together and didn't live too close to each other, it wasn’t like there was the issue of making sure we were in the same sorts of cliques.

We became friends about the time we were both establishing our distance from families of origin, so it wasn't like we hung out with each other's families. It wasn't a problem that I became full-time university student and he didn't go to college at all.

He eventually found a woman he wanted to marry. She lived out of town. We (his friends) told him that he didn't need to leave town to be with this woman, but he insisted – the plan at the time, at least from what he said, was to eventually move back to town together. It never happened. He moved to where she was to shack up with her (not something I would do) and eventually marry her. I attended the wedding with my girlfriend at the time, and there had even been some talk about me being one of the groomsmen, but that didn't turn out to be necessary.

They had a daughter. They had actively sought to get pregnant (they had no qualms about using contraception).

I visited their city (by then I was unattached again) and crashed at their place for a few nights. He was one of my (many) groomsmen when I married, and his daughter was a flower girl. They gave us a great wedding present. They also let us crash at their place for a night when we visited their new city to which they'd moved.

It is when you do things like get married and have kids that rubber meets the road when it comes to your worldview. My friend and I do not share the same worldview. We don’t believe the same things about God, the Bible, life, and death. We don't share political views. We don't make the same lifestyle choices – and when you’re in your relatively carefree bachelor days, as long as nobody is terminally ill or engaging in crime, such differences don’t really matter all that much. I can be friends with him even though he would never want to go to church with me. I can be friends with him even if he votes in direct contrast to every vote I make. Nor does he make our friendship contingent on me agreeing with him.

But when you talk marriage, children, family (or even crime) – you are talking about how you treat other people.

I had refused to get married unless I found the right woman. "Right woman" didn't mean "I'm attracted to her, she's attracted to me, and what more do we need?" It meant we were fundamentally compatible – our goals, our priorities, or personalities, our lifestyles, etc. We were attracted to each other in body, soul, and spirit.

I also knew that once I married, it was no longer between me and God. It was between me, my wife, and God – not in that order. Likewise, when we decided to have a child, we knew that our lives could never be the same because our priority for at least 18 years would have to be that child (and any siblings – with the clock being reset with each kid).

I'm convinced that, absent actual danger, I should stay with my wife no matter how miserable my marriage gets (thankfully, it is great), at least until our youngest child is 18, and I should model a peaceful and loving home to them, even if I don’t feel like it. That's because my children should come before my personal happiness. And should things go sour, I can probably help make them better with such an attitude and commitment.

Which takes me back to my friend. I don't know his wife's side of the story. All I know is what he tells me. And he tells me that his marriage was hell from "I do". If that's true, I suspect things were bad before, but he chose to ignore them and get married anyway. I would attribute part of that to the fact that he never established himself, always living with a woman – first his mother up through most of his 20s, and then with the woman he ended up marrying (his mother getting remarried and moving, forcing him to find new living arrangements, was probably a factor in him moving in with the woman he did). His jobs never lasted more than a few years, and most of them were McJobs anyway. It seemed like he would inevitably go from being excited about the latest job to being thoroughly disillusioned, usually burning bridges at the end. Mind you, he does have some real talent. He's just never made a living using it, usually trying to get a "day job" so he can keep toying in his off-hours with his talent.

And even though his marriage was "hell" from "I do" (something I had no idea about), he went on to intentionally impregnate her. He chose to make a baby within that marriage.

About a year ago, I started noticing a change in him. Since we lived in different cities, it was hard to get the real picture. He denied having an affair, but did say there were some problems in his marriage. I would expect there would be, with him going from job to job and pissing money away on a vice and wanting to spend time and money on a pet project of his that never seemed to go anywhere. His wife was probably thinking, "Either do it right or give it up and stop wasting time and money." Plus, there was the matter of moving to that new city, taking her away from her family and not getting any closer to his.

Finally, several months ago, he announced that he was leaving his wife and returning to town. He claimed that things were just too dysfunctional and that it was causing his daughter to act out. He tried to leave with his daughter, but his wife prevented him from doing so by calling the authorities. So, he left without his daughter. He left a job for a possible job, which he got, but it didn’t last due to the recession. He was able to crash at a place owned by his mother. His wife and child returned to where her family lives.

We've discussed things since his move back to town. I urged him to at least go live near his daughter. He hates that city too much, he said. I also told him that even if he is sure he will not get back together with his wife, he should avoid dating and especially getting into another relationship, because he isn't going to make the best decisions in that area right now.

Well, after I put the pieces together, I realized he had been having an affair with someone in town for about the past year. He finally came clean about that. He swears his marriage was dead long ago, and that he and his wife didn’t even share a room for the past few years, and that his new young thing wasn't the reason for him leaving his wife. He says that, without this new young thing, he would likely be dead - another example of how his worth is tied up in the woman in his life instead of seeing himself as a child of God.

Even granting all of that – he chose to make a baby with his wife, and I believe he has an obligation to his child, even if he feels that his wife broke their vows long ago.

We discussed things more, with me urging him again to go live near his daughter because she needs her father. He can probably get a real career in that city by using his connections. He doesn’t want to pull his new honey away from her family. He ended the discussion by saying that his daughter would understand and that he refuses to live in that city. So, the bottom line is that he ditched his daughter for the new honey, or that he hates that city more than he loves his daughter. He doesn't have a job or family or housing keeping him here (his mother lost her rental property she was letting him use). He isn't willing to pull his new honey away from her family but he’s letting being here for her pull him away from his daughter. Oh, his daughter will understand alright. She will understand that her daddy left her – and if what he says about his wife and her family is true, he left her with people who have serious problems.

Out of all of the mistakes I have made in my life, thank God I haven't made this one.

I can't help but think part of the reason he fails to see how much his daughter needs him is that he really wasn’t raised with his own father.

And now he's told me that "when the time is right" he will have more children with this new young honey. I pointed out to him that this young girl got involved with a married father who is broke and jobless, and that doesn't bode too well. Of course, he refuses to see the problem there – of course she fell for him, and to imply this may have been due to something being wrong with her is an insult to his ego, so it is ignored.

I want to kick him in the crotch until I'm sure he will not be complicating his daughter's life with any half-siblings that get to live with her father while she doesn't get to. I wonder if his estranged wife will be giving his daughter half-siblings, or exposing her to a bunch of men coming in and out of her life? Why would my friend consider making more children when he isn't able to care for the one he already has?

The situation makes me sick.

And it is an example of how it is easy to have "diverse" friends when life is about having fun and maybe studying or starting a career, but the conflicts in worldviews make it harder to maintain those friendships when spouses and children and innocent people are getting hurt, and when you speak out about it you are met with cries of being judgmental.

It is easy for me to say my friend is doing a bad thing. I have a happy marriage and it is easy for me to go home to my wife and child (in no small part, I'm convinced, because of what I did differently than my friend). But I can't imagine I would ever abandon my daughter no matter what my wife did.

I am someone's daddy. That comes before a job, before good sex, before ego stroking, before preferring to live one place as opposed to another. You may have also heard the saying "bros before hos" (what do women say – chicks before dicks?). Well, I put the well-being of a child ahead of patting a friend on the back and saying, "whatever makes you feel good."

Young Female Doesn't Want a Big Wedding

Yet another recent Dear Abby column caught my eye. RELUCTANT BRIDE IN NORTH CAROLINA wrote:

I am 21 and have been with a great guy, "Albert," who's 20, for more than a year.

Strike one. You're both too young for a serious, exclusive relationship.

We're engaged to be married

Strike two! Uh, we're not in the eighteenth century anymore. People live into their 70s and beyond. People are rarely established before their later 20s. The odds are against your marriage lasting (unless they are strong Evangelicals or Mormons living within an Evangelical or Mormon community – which is disproven by what comes next...)

and live together in a condo we recently bought.

Strike THREE! Shacking up together and making a major joint purchase together. Yuck. Now you've really lowered your odds.

We both work full time and support ourselves comfortably.

Okay. Good. Are you both finished with school? What college degrees do you have? Are have you let playing house take up your time?

While I would love to marry Albert, I feel we are young and I see no need to rush into it.

Then why are you engaged? You just wanted a nice ring? Or you couldn't say "no"? Either way, it shows you are not ready to be a good wife.

Things are wonderful between us, but I'm not really looking forward to a wedding.

Have you always been an atypical woman, or is something wrong here? Odds are on the latter.

Albert wants a formal wedding with family in attendance.

Why bother with tradition when you're already living as though you're married?

He says his parents and other family members would be upset if we eloped and
would have trouble forgiving him.

That's because he's still a boy. Otherwise, it would be about what the two of you want, not what his family wants.

Dear Abby responded:

What you should do is talk with your clergyperson.

Ah yes. A clergyperson who will be okay with the fact that they are shacking up? Church of the Redacted Bible?

Get out. Don't date for a while, and then start dating different people casually, not getting serious with any of them, at least for a couple of years. You're not ready to be married yet, and you shouldn't be engaged.

Valentine's Day Is Not Enjoyable For Most Men

A reminder from The Playful Walrus.

Risky Business: Workplace Romances

Ellen Wulfhorst has this Reuters story about an office romance survey for CareerBuilder.com.

Forty percent of U.S. workers have dated an office colleague, with 31 percent of them going on to marriage, according to a survey released on Tuesday.

Coworkers may have a lot in common, and they spend a lot of time together. In the past, it was natural to find your spouse on-the-job, and I've known many people who have done that.

However, in the post-Anita Hill era, it is VERY risky (especially for a heterosexual man) to date a coworker. It is so risky that it is stupid to do so.

Those eyeing a co-worker was skewed between the sexes, with 14 percent of men but just 5 percent of women saying they would like to date a colleague.

Probably because most women would only date someone earning more than themselves, which limits the choices.

Of those who dated a co-worker in the last year, a third said it was someone with a more senior position in the company. Of those, 42 percent have dated their boss, said.

Those bosses are idiots – that is, if they care about their jobs at all.

Since men are usually (and expected to be) the initiators, sexual harassment laws and polices are designed to punish less attractive men. They are arbitrarily applied based on the subjective feelings of the person approached. Two male coworkers could say the exact same thing to a woman, and if she likes one, but not the other, the one she doesn't like could get fired for saying the exact same thing as the guy who doesn't get fired. When it boils down to "he said/she said", guess who is favored by the female-dominated Human Resources staff?

Welcoming women to all levels of the workplace was generally a good thing. Unfortunately, instead of asking women (the newcomers) to adopt to the workplace cultures that had long been established according to male standards and tendencies, everyone had to readjust to things being set by feminine standards and sensitivities, emasculating men.

Am I saying I would like some creep being lewd towards my mother, sister, wife, or daughter? Of course not. But I would hope that the women in my life could handle themselves like adults instead of running to someone else to make things right and comfortable for them. When I was a kid, my parents taught me how to deal with other kids who said or did things I didn't like - it was usually along the lines of "ignore them" or "have a good comeback".

I find the very phrase "sexual harassment" curious. We don't talk about (much less have training about) "nutritional harassment" when a vegetarian chides someone for eating meat. If sexual harassment is to be condemned in the workplace, shouldn't all forms of harassment be prevented and punished? And if it is wrong because it makes someone uncomfortable, then I want to know if anyone is allowed to object to having to take sexual harassment prevention training on the grounds that the training sessions make them uncomfortable? Why is that person's discomfort any less valid? I suppose the fact that we have the phrase "sexual harassment" is just another example of how sex is different and not just another activity or body function (like how guys will pay to see a woman strip, but who pays to see a steak slowly unveiled and waved around)?

Hedonist male-targeting radio talk show host Tom Leykis reacts to sexual harassment issues in the workplace by advising his listeners not to interact with female coworkers any more than strictly necessary, not saying one word more to them than absolutely essential to get the job done. No small talk, no compliments, no joking, no greetings, no socializing. How boring things would be if everyone followed that rule. But having a boring workplace is preferable to being fired. Leykis can work that way due to the nature of his work. Most of us would have a very difficult time doing that.

Aside from sexual harassment issues (not to mention charges of favoritism), there's another reason to avoid dipping your pen in company ink. Most relationships do not last as romances, and the fallout from a breakup, even if it isn't nasty, can be tough to deal with – not just for the participants, but for their coworkers. Also, some (potential) spouses have a hard time dealing with the idea that their spouse is working with someone they used to date.

People don't always think things through, so I expect workplace romances will continue to happen. But I will tell any guy who listens to to me to avoid them.

Sister of Dumped Wife Vents to Dear Abby

HURTING FOR MY SISTER wrote:

A few months ago, my sister's husband of 20 years suddenly left her for a 23-year-old girl.

I'm generally against a spouse leaving another spouse. However, in some cases, the spouse being left already "left" – if not by geographical abandonment, then by some other form of abandonment or unfaithfulness, such as an affair, abuse, addiction, or physical "abandonment". But we're not given more information, so we don't know.

He is living openly with her, even though he is still married to my sister.

Not the best way to handle things. It is possible he doesn't want to deal with the financial implications of divorce, but if the marriage is over and there is no hope of reconciliation, then a divorce is needed. The wife can file.

What is most disturbing is some members of his family are openly supporting this affair.

Some people put blood connections over all morality and automatically side with family members. That could be what is going on here. Or maybe the writer is automatically siding with her sister. If her sister was a horrible wife (and horrible to her in-laws), then maybe these people have some reason to be supportive of the errant husband.

Are those people ignorant or just plain evil?

You wrote in to Dear Abby to ask a question like that? Let's see - the economy is not so good, so infidelity isn't okay. (I learned in the 1990s that it is okay - if the economy is good.)

Not only are we given no details about the marital dynamics, we're not told if there are minor (or any) children. Probably not, or they likely would have been mentioned. If there were children, maybe he was staying in a miserable marriage for their sake until they were adults? (Maybe the wife was always closer to her sister than her husband?) Or maybe this was a man who suffered a bad wife for as long as he could and finally had enough, wanting to experience his sexuality? Or maybe he’s just always been a creep. If so, why did this writer's sister marry him?

Like I said - I don’t support spousal abandonment. I also don't support fornication, or mocking marriage by staying married while shacking up with someone else. But there are two people in that marriage – and likely, both share some blame. The question is – does he deserve almost all of the blame, or just a slight majority? Because if it is just a slight majority, then there are things the wife can do to attract him back – if she still wants – even though she doesn't have the youth of the hussy.

If a woman chooses wisely and treats kindly, it is very unlikely that her husband is going to run off. Granted, some men "need" a young woman, and every woman grows older. Those men are not marriage material.

As for the hussy - if she is interested in marriage, it doesn't bode well for her that she is shacking up - with a married man no less - who is older than her and either was a bad husband or picked a bad wife (or both!). My guess is that she either didn't have a father in her life or had a really bad one. If she does think she wants marriage, she probably believes that she has the magic vagina that will keep this man from leaving her like he did his wife. Of course, if it was mostly a matter of the wife being a shrew, then perhaps he will stay with her if she treats him right. But considering the circumstances, I just don't see that happening.

Be Up Front About Purity Commitment

Yesterday I revisited part of a Dear Abby column from a few months back. Today I look at another part of that same column.

DEE IN SAN DIEGO wrote:

I am a sophomore in high school, and I need help with something. I am a die-hard Christian who strongly believes in the whole "no sex before marriage" deal.

Great. I hope it is really due to your faith and not some hormonal abnormality or psychological problem. If it really is because of your faith and convictions, than good for you.

All my old boyfriends have tried to take advantage of me.

Take advantage? You mean like you were asleep or drunk? Engaging in an activity that is mutually enjoyable and/or mutually sinful is not taking advantage of you, in and of itself. And you are only, what, 15, 16 years old? Why have you had ANY boyfriends, let alone multiple boyfriends?

When I say I am saving myself for true love, they always dump me.

Which is why they shouldn't have been your boyfriends to begin with – only your dates. And they are doing the right thing by dumping you. You are not what they want. Why should they waste your time, emotion, and energy? So they can pay for your entertainment and meals ad buy you gifts?

Do I tell the guy straight out that he's not getting any, or do I just wait until the subject comes up and casually mention it?

Tell him straight out ASAP. If he primarily wants sex or feels like it is a necessary thing for him, he may leave and you will not waste each other's time. If he's an idiot, he will spend a lot of time trying to change your mind or break down your resolve when he could be off getting serviced by easy girls. If you're an idiot, you will give in to him and he will get what he thought he wanted, only to realize that taking someone's virginity means dealing with someone who is inexperienced (and thus, less fun when what you really care about is fornication) in bed, and then that you'll always try to stay connected to him, long after you have broken up, because he was your first.

My wife told me on our first date. I was glad she did.

Dear Abby responded:

I see no reason to announce upon meeting someone that he "won't be getting any."

Maybe you think females should be able to get free entertainment, meals, and gifts under false pretenses. Or maybe you a re just delusional or ignorant about what these guys want.

Give the person a chance to know you, and while that is happening, avoid situations where you are alone and tempted.

Oh, so a horny teen male is going to change his mind about what he wants because she is so special? Look, if someone I barely knew said they wanted to take me for a drive in my car because it would be fun, and I really didn't want to consent to that, what sense does it make to hang out with that person who is fixated on that, in hopes that they would see other aspects of me?

Think about it. Why does a guy date a 15 or 16-year-old girl? Unless he's looking for a "beard" to cover up his homosexual feelings, or is part of a religious group where everyone tends to marry by 19, then he primarily wants to fornicate. Oh, he may be shy, lack confidence, or not really know how to get the situation there, but that’s what we wants. Otherwise, he would be focusing on his studies and perhaps a job, filling up his time with sports and hobbies. He can get companionship from his male friends. You really think guys that age want to go to a school dance to dance, or go watch chick flicks, and listen to some girl ramble on about her silly friends, or how hard she finds trigonometry?

She should be hanging out with other purity-pledge females and males in groups, in public or at least with a responsible adult keeping watch – if she wants to "date". Otherwise, she should be focusing on her studies and hobbies.

Hair Today, Gone Tomorrow

A recent Dear Abby consisted of letters responding to a column from this past November that I'm sure I wanted to address at some point, so I'm taking the opportunity to do that.

SHORT AND TRENDY IN WEST TEXAS wrote:

How do I make my husband understand that how I cut my hair has nothing to do with him?

Actually, it does. Men are visual creatures. We get turned on, in part, by appearances. We need to get turned on to function sexually, unless we have an implanted pump. We aren't like women, who can use a lubricant if self-lubrication isn't forthcoming.

I am 30 years old, and I have a full-time job and three kids who are involved in everything.

Ah. I see. Maybe she doesn't care whether or not her husband gets turned on because she doesn’t have the time or energy for lovemaking. Doesn't her husband work? Why is she working full-time if she is a wife and has three kids to raise? Liberation?

Because I am always on the go, I need a hairdo that is easy to manage and cute, so I ended up getting my hair cut short. I love it. It makes me feel younger, cuter and trendy.

When my husband and I started dating, I used to have long, thick hair -- but I was not aware that keeping my hair long was "part of the deal."

Should it have been stated in a pre-nup?

Isn't it MY hair?

It's your hair as much as his paycheck is his and his penis is his. If he wanted to take a lower-paying job because he enjoyed it more, should he respond to your objections with "It’s my job."? You pulled a bait and switch.

Too many women are utterly unconcerned about what their husbands want, yet he is supposed to cater to all of her wants – and he is supposed to know them without her explicitly telling him. How many women do you know who have changed (cut short, usually) their hair soon after he signed on the dotted line? Yes, there are men who strongly prefer short hair. They date women with short hair. If they first noticed you with long hair and dated you with long hair, they expect you're going to stick with the long hair.

Dear Abby responded:

You cut your hair "purposely to go against what he wants"? I wouldn't call your husband selfish. I would call him controlling.

Okay, so then husbands should be able to groom themselves - or not - any way they want that's different than when dating, or their wives are controlling? And maybe she has a history of doing other unnecessary things knowingly against his wishes.

You are no longer the carefree girl you were when you were dating. You are a woman with real responsibilities. And it's time for your husband to grow up, too.

Husbands could say the same thing about romancing their wives. You want flowers or chocolates or a nice dinner out? Too bad! We're not "carefree" daters any more.

She needs to put her husband and children before her work.

Here are the letters from the other day.

BEN IN HUNTSVILLE, ALA wrote:

I, too, like my wife's hair long, and I see nothing wrong with urging her to keep it that way. Personally, I hate shaving and have suggested to my wife that I might like to grow a beard. She said, "No way," so I keep shaving.

Oh, but that’s different, because husbands are supposed to do what their wives want.

LONG HAIR NO MORE IN COLORADO SPRINGS wrote:

I had long hair when my husband and I first were married. It was his desire that I keep it long, but as time went on it became a big hassle with the daily grind. Finally I told him that if he wanted my hair long, he would be the one taking care of it. So for one week my husband got up at 5 in the morning to wash it, dry it and style it. At the end of the week he told me, "Honey, you can do whatever you want with your hair."

Nice. How about you also go to work for your husband, mow the law, fix the car, and move the heavy objects? How was it that you were able to have long hair before you married? It smacks of "I got him to sign on the dotted line, now I don't need to try anymore."

J.B. IN WINNSBORO, S.C. wrote:

I had the same problem with my husband. My response to him was if he wanted long hair, then he should grow HIS out. He hasn't bothered me about it since.

Probably because he found a woman with long hair.

Geez. It isn't like these men are asking these women for something unusual or unnatural. Ladies, you can’t help getting older. You can't help the sagging and the wrinkling and all of the other things that come with age without surgery. But you can keep you hair long.

Women like these, believe it or not, are a significant factor in why some men have called a marriage strike. If they are unwilling to keep doing something so simple to keep their husbands happy, it doesn't bode well for husbands.

Nervous About Tests?

Imagine if your whole life really did rest on the results of a test. Alan Zarembo of the Los Angeles Times had an article on how DNA testing is revealing lies and secrets, including adoptions and paternity fraud.

In one case, two brothers were surprised to discover they had different fathers. They confronted their elderly mother, who denied the most obvious possibilities -- that she had been unfaithful to her husband, the man they had always known as Dad, or that one son was adopted.

Perhaps she was raped. Or maybe she is an adulterer and a liar.

How many of us are not our fathers' children?

The question has fascinated researchers as a window into the gap between a society's stated values and its behavior. A 2005 analysis of 17 studies -- based on blood and DNA tests of various groups -- concluded that the answer varies depending on country and culture. But the average rate is 4%.

Some studies show as high as 20%. But even at 4%, that means one in twenty-five kids are assigned to a man who isn't really the father and wasn't given the choice.

Breaking the news falls to genetic counselors, who often must balance competing ethical imperatives.

How ethical is being complicit in hiding the truth from a victim?

Ana Morales, a genetic counselor at the University of Miami, recalled the case of a child diagnosed with a type of albinism that can be accompanied by lung and kidney disease.

The mother "told me she was having an affair," Morales said.

"She said she would be in physical danger [if her husband found out]. He had threatened her if she was unfaithful."

Morales did not tell him.

If she was truly scared that he would be violent, she wouldn't have had the affair in the first place. If she wasn't scared enough to refrain from adultery, then the counselor should not be too scared to tell the guy he is a chump who is being defrauded. The adulterous woman can go to a shelter. She shouldn't be with a man who is violent anyway. Where is the proof that he is violent?

But withholding the information means that the woman's husband lives with the false belief that he is a carrier of a genetic disorder.

That sort of information is far from benign, said Dr. Wayne Grody, a UCLA geneticist. It could convince him to give up on the idea of having children. And in the event that the wife becomes pregnant by her husband, perpetuating the lie could require unnecessary prenatal testing.

"Why would you expose the next fetus to the risk of amniocentesis?" Grody asked.

To protect a woman's prerogative to cheat, of course.

DNA testing for newborns should be mandatory unless there is a sworn statement of it being against both "parents'" conscience (religion). If the DNA matches, assign paternity to the man. If it doesn't, give the man the choice of denying paternity.

Men can now get DNA testing kits and find out for themselves. Ah, how sweet it is. Unfortunately, even if he finds out that his wife is cheater and a liar, in most places and in most cases, he'll still have to pay her alimony and pay child support for another man's child should there be a divorce – even if she is the one to file.

Michigan Charges Unmarried ‘Fathers’ for Delivery

What's up in Michigan?

The state of Michigan is giving a father a choice: pay the medical cost of his daughter's birth or marry the girl's mother.

I can tell you right now which would cost him less.

Gary Johnson was billed $3,800 for the birth of his daughter JaeLyn, The Flint Journal reported in Sunday online editions.

And how much was she billed? Unless this was rape, having a baby was her decision as much as his - more, given all of the post-conception options women have.

Johnson is not married to the child's mother, Rebecca Witt.

Assuming the child is biologically his, this means they were fornicating. Sounds like they are shacking up, too.

The Michigan Legislature amended the state's paternity act five years ago to waive birthing costs for a father, if he married the child's mother. A year later, Witt gave birth to JaeLyn. The state paid for the hospital costs because Witt was on Medicaid at the time and is now trying to recover the money.

So married people get to pass along the costs to everyone else?

Jack Battles, the Genesee County Friend of the Court, said the law is an incentive to maintain the sanctity of marriage.

"It's totally up to them," said Battles, whose office enforces paternity rulings, child support and other aspects of family law. Until Johnson can produce a marriage license, "they have to pay."

Sounds like he has to pay. If they are not married, and he is billed, she is not being ordered to pay.

Johnson and Witt said they want to marry eventually, but Witt said she wants her marriage date to be her choice.

"I don't think anybody should tell me when to get married," said Witt. "I would like to have a nice wedding, and I can wait for it."

Your child needs married parents. You forfeited your moral right to a nice wedding on a date of your leisure when you got knocked up and then kept the child instead of adopting the child out.

Johnson said he understood the state wants to promote marriage for parents but he respects Witt's position. "It's a woman's dream to have the best wedding she can have," he said.

We all want something. But when we drag kids into it, our wants need to wait behind their needs.

Engagement Ring Pressure

Michelle works for a Los Angeles-based talk radio station, specifically the morning drive program. She has a blog on the station's official website, and I wanted to share some of her comments from a recent entry. I couldn't detect a permalink, but the entry is currently found here.

Michelle recently accepted a marriage proposal, and shows uncommon sense about engagement ring and sympathy for her intended.

Here's the thing. From the get go, when we got serious, I told him I was not one of those girls who would insist on a big, fat ring. I originally wanted to use my grandmother’s first engagement ring, a tiny diamond set in a classic band of white gold. Unfortunately, that got stolen when my home was broken into when we first got our home...Other than that ring, a ring really didn’t even come into play much, it wouldn't have bothered me even if I didn’t get one for an engagement, a wedding band alone would have been fine if that's what we chose to do.

I wish more women were like her in this regard.

So I told him, when, and if the time comes, don't stress about it. You know me, you know the person I am, don't stress out about it.

He should have taken her at his word, and her opinion should have been more important than anyone else's on the matter. But he let other people get to him.

Well, apparently, he wasn't stressing until a bunch of people at his work made him question his choice by saying

'Oh no, you can't buy THAT ring, you have to buy a big diamond.'

To those people, I would have asked, "Why?"

"No, you have to spend at least $2000 or she's going to be upset!"

Why, is she a prostitute?

'What will people think about that ring? All her friends are going to be looking at it and judging you!'

That is one of the worst. Who cares what they think, if that is the way they are?

Then he started looking into it and was bombarded with the whole idiotic business that's been set up to suck men into the ridiculous notion that you have to spend at least two month's salary on a ring to prove to your girlfriend that you love her.

That's a marketing slogan and has no basis in reality. We are not obligated to listen to it. If a woman thinks a guy should have spent more on the ring and tells him so, he should run away from her as fast as he can.

In my personal opinion, any woman (or man) who is 'upset' with any engagement ring or other jewelry that their significant other buys them for any reason because it’s not 'big enough' or the 'clarity' isn't right, isn't anything but a shallow materialistic gold digging moron who cares nothing about the real meaning of love...If your personal worth is tied to a piece of jewelry, there's something wrong with you...All of you girls who want big, flashy rings, are missing out on some VERY good men out there, so think twice about what's REALLY important.

She should print that on t-shirts and sell them. He got the ring at a Costco, and she's happy about it.

Now, from what she wrote, it sounds like they have been shacking up, which I'm convinced is wrong and makes the odds less favorable to their marriage being a lasting, happy one. But on the plus side, she does not let materialism or the herd mentality turn her into a ungrateful little girl. Instead, she's happy about the ring. Good for her!

My wife was happy to figure out, when she was going through bank records, that I'd purchased the ring I presented when I proposed for about a third of the retail price. That kind of sensible frugality on her part is one of the reasons I proposed.

Side note to any guys planning to pop the question: In some states, it may be advantageous to avoid doing so on her birthday, Valentine's Day, Christmas, an "anniversary", or any day that can be construed as a gift-giving day. This may prevent her from being able to keep/sell the ring should she divorce you or leave you before the wedding, and compel her to return it to you. If that doesn't sound like a romantic consideration… well, it isn't very romantic to go through divorce, either, and have her profit at your expense on top of that. The matter will only come into play should there be a divorce – so she shouldn't have an objection unless she is planning to divorce you. Or, if she insists on shopping for the ring with you, or to get it on one of those gift-giving days, make sure she pays for it with her money and she can have as big of a ring as she wants and do whatever she wants to with it. Should you give her the ring unconnected to any other gift-giving occasion, a court may see her possession of it as being conditional to your impending marriage. Should she leave you before the marriage or divorce you, it may be easier to get it back.

Phone Calls and Dining Out

A couple of recent Dear Abby situations caught my eye.

Okay, this guy never explicitly says what he's looking for, but from what he did write, it sounds like he is looking for a relationship. That makes a difference.

HURT IN VERMONT wrote in to talk about a date:

One night I was at her place when she received a phone call. Trish made it short and sweet and hung up. A few minutes later, I asked who it was, and she told me it was her boss.

Unless you are paying the phone bill, it really isn't your business who calls her. Keep in mind, though, that if you were on a date with her, she shouldn't be taking any calls, especially if you are paying for the date. But you are in her home, and it is her phone.

Abby, I know how she answers the phone when it's her boss -- and it wasn't him. When I said, "That was NOT your boss," she admitted it was one of her boss's clients, but said nothing was going on between them.

When I first met Trish, she mentioned that a client had come in one day, had wine and cheese, then leaned over and kissed her. It's the same guy that called -- and he's married.

Her mistake was not telling you from the start that it is none of your business. By the way, that works the other way, too. If she asked you who you were talking with on the phone, it would be perfectly okay to tell her that it is none of her business. Can't handle that? Don't let the door hit you on the way out.

I don't think she has cheated, but she lied to my face.

She didn't handle the situation right and she is flirting with a married man. Is that relationship material to you?

My first instinct is to dump her, but I love her.

So what if you love her? You're paranoid and she is a liar who flirts with a married man. I can't believe this is in his 40s and writing like this to Dear Abby. What's wrong with him? I would be shocked if he was raised with a father in his home and a faithful mother.

Dear Abby responded:

Are you and Trish in a committed relationship? If not, you had no right to question her about who was calling.

Even then... as long as it is her phone, paid for by her, he should not question it. If he can't trust her, they shouldn't be together.

That said, a person who would lie to you once would lie to you twice.

Yes.

She may not be having a physical affair, but something is going on or she wouldn't have tried to mislead you about who was on the phone.

Maybe he freaks out over nothing and she didn't want to deal with that? If so, she should dump him.

SOLO IN SHERMAN, TEXAS wrote:

Is it proper for a married woman to go out to eat alone when her husband refuses to take her?

Why does he refuse to take her? Is he a hermit? Is he embarrassed to be around her? Is he hoping she'll cook, instead, or is he willing to cook? Is money tight? We don't know.

Absolutely, if she can afford to pay for it and there is enough pet food in the doghouse.

[Emphasis mine.] Wow, did I find an example in Dear Abby where the woman was given the same response a man would have been given? Good!

In the Lion's Den?

I've read about XXX Church (which reaches out to porn workers and users) before, and I haven't seen red flags in regard to their teachings or tactics, but then I haven't looked too hard. They did a great job of getting themselves portrayed well in a place that can be somewhat hostile to their message – an LATimes.com blog. Blogger Richard Abowitz caught up with them at the annual Adult Entertainment Expo in Las Vegas.

Notice that when the blogger asks Gross if he thinks the porn workers and fans are going to Hell, he replies:

It is not my call to make. I screw up everyday in the things I do, and I am not a porn star. And I don't feel better than someone who is in porn.

Later, he says:

You can't blame the dark for being dark, you need to blame the light for not shining on the dark.

I hope their ministry is being used by God to bear good fruit, and that they are able to be "in, but not of" in this case.

A Dispute in Bed

Time to check in with Dear Abby again. CREATURE OF HABIT wrote:

My boyfriend and I have a wonderful relationship, but there is one big problem. I don't like to share blankets at bedtime. The truth is, I like to sleep comfortably with my blankets tucked all around.

Well that won't be a problem until you are married, right? So you are trying to work this all out before you get married? If so, that's very good, thinking ahead like that.

I have honestly tried sharing, but I can't sleep that way or even get comfortable.

Wait, you tried sharing? You mean you are fornicating or shacking up?

My boyfriend thinks I'm weird and that I don't like being close to him at night. Isn't sharing a bed enough?

More than enough.

Dear Abby wrote back:

Getting enough sleep is important for maintaining one's health, and studies show that people aren't getting enough of it these days. Try explaining this to him, along with the fact that intimacy is what happens BEFORE you hit the sheets.

Hmmm. I wonder what Abby would say if this was a guy writing in to explain why he doesn't like to cuddle after sex, but instead takes off and goes home? Somehow, I doubt it would be "intimacy is what happens BEFORE you hit the sheets."

If it is really that big of a deal to either one of them, then they shouldn't get married to each other. They've already lowered their odds of staying together anyway.

As a general rule, never marry someone if you can finish this sentence with a "red flag" or a "can’t stand" or a "deeal breaker" or anything that you couldn't happily live with the rest of your life without complaining or being resentful: "I love everything about him/her and everything is great between us, except _______."

These people apparently like fornicating with each other. That's different from sleeping in the same bed or being married, and they should not marry each other solely based on mutual enjoyment of their fornication or some other compatibilities if there are any significant areas where they are incompatible.

AOL Piece on Attracting Men

The Biblical Manhood blog has been updated after a vacation, and called my attention to this AOL piece on how women can be more attractive to men. No, it is mostly NOT about physical appearance.

Of "neediness", it says:

Relentlessly saying, "I miss you," throwing (not so) silent temper tantrums when you don't have his full attention and feeling an insatiable desire for his approval are all classic needy behaviors.

Those are not good. Yes, most men love being the hero. But you can let him do that without being needy.

One of the pieces of advice I disagree with is "Trash Your Perfect Man List". Keep the list. Just do not make the boundaries impossibly narrow. Unless there is some odd, specific need, requiring that the man be exactly 6'2" is too narrow. If you are 5'7", anything from 5'9" upward should be okay. If you insist that he is earning six figures or more, then you’d better be under 30, attractive, and not overweight. I recommend that men and women come up with a list of what they need in a spouse, and what they'd like, but don’t need. What they'd like would be an extra bonus. What they need is non-negotiable. For example, I knew that if I was going to marry, I needed to marry a follower of Christ. I would have liked it if she had the same musical tastes as me. If you find someone who meets all of our needs in a spouse, you are being too narrow if you reject them in hopes of finding someone who also meets what you would like. If, however, you have multiple prospects who meet your needs, then of course you persue most strongly the one who meets more of what you'd like.

The writer also advises that you "Drop Your Story":

There are the basic facts (education, politics, spirituality) and there's the various ways in which you label yourself: I'm bad with money. I'm unattractive. I'm too old. When you drop your story and allow yourself to be simply who you are right now, you instantly become more alive, more engaged and more irresistible.

I can see the point being made, as we should put out best foot forward, but do not hide who you are. Rather than hiding that you are bad with money, why not improve your financial behaviors? If you hide anything significant about yourself, you are setting yourself up to have an angry man on your hands who will hold back from putting all of himself into the relationship.

As the BM blog notes, there are comments on the website by women essentially insisting that they should be able to be self-centered nags exhibiting serious personality flaws and still be taken care of by the perfect man. Those women can't possibly have happy husbands, and the ones with unhappy husbands may not care, but the fact is, their lives would be so much better if they started being kind and caring towards the needs of their husbands.