Dear Margo on Two Marriages

When we read advice columns or listen to radio call-in shows, or read the paper, rarely are we going to see or hear "I love marriage! I love my spouse! Everything is fantastic!" Just something to keep in mind as we look at yet another Dear Margo column dealing with bad marriages.

SEX STARVED wrote:

My wife and I have been married for 25 years. She is 60 and I am 63. For the first 20 years we had what I would call a very normal marriage. Plenty of sex and intimacy. About five years ago she announced she no longer had any desire to have sex. The closest we have come to intimacy since then is kissing when either of us leaves the house, and we hold hands when we go to sleep.

Poor fella.

I tried to talk to her about this, but she is adamant about her lack of interest. I’m actually surprised I have managed to last this long without straying, but as far as I’m concerned, that is not an option, even in these circumstances.

Well, good for him.

Dear Margo rightly told him that she could see a medical specialist to change the situation. Unfortunately, she has to be willing to go. Unless he also wants to be unfaithful (and make no mistake – she is being unfaithful), he's at her mercy.

Some generally good guys read stuff like that and it scares them away from marriage. They'd rather either fornicate (not the Christian thing to do) or be celibate by their choice, not by someone else's. They also maintain more of their autonomy by being unmarried, and don't have to share quarters and finances and decisions. The more of their male relatives, friends, and coworkers they see miserable in their marriages, the less likely they are going to be inclined to marry.

The second letter isn't encouraging, either.

BAFFLED wrote:

I have been married to a truck driver for three years. I know he loves me, but our relationship has become a routine.

Well, yes, that can happen in a marriage. Stability isn't a bad thing, is it? Taking each other for granted is.

I find we no longer talk and I don't feel we are even friends anymore.

Maybe you need a girlfriend?

I have started talking to a gentleman who is 11 years my senior and has become a friend. He now says he loves me and wants to plan a future together.

That's not a gentleman. He's a guy.

I do still find my husband attractive, but this other man says all the right things and seems to be financially secure, which my husband is not.

Is this a new thing that happened after you married? I wonder if she pressured him to propose, or if he made that mistake purely through his own foolishness?

It would be nice to know that all of my bills are paid, and I’d like my partner to be my friend, as well as a mate. What should I do?

Get a job. You didn't mention kids, so if you want your bills paid, get a job and pay for them. He's out working, and she's bored and complaining. Really, how bad are things? She's still attracted to her husband, he's working, and she knows he loves her.

Dear Margo’s advice is decent. I seem to be finding less outrageous advice in these columns, as if men suddenly matter, too. That's a good thing.

Upgrading the Blog

I'm trying to modernize this blog. Yes, it looks a lot different. It will take me a while to restore the blogroll. Thanks for your patience.

Another Darwin Award Candidate

Another vandal has been killed in traffic. This time, it was 17-year-old Blake Locko of Riverside, California. Riverside is east of Los Angeles. Apparently, Blake was vandalizing the center divider of the 60 Freeway. Larry Gordon reports on the LATimes.com blog.

Blake Locko of Riverside was standing in the westbound carpool lane just east of Hall Avenue about 2:30 a.m. when he was first hit by a car and thrown over a 5-foot-high concrete divider onto eastbound lanes, where he was then hit by several other vehicles, the CHP said. Locko died at the scene, and one of the drivers was treated at Riverside Community Hospital for neck injuries.

What, was he up early for work? Had he been up late studying? Where were his parents? Those drivers can sue his parents for psychological damages as well as medical bills and damage to their vehicles – as if losing their son wasn't enough pain.

If your minor child is out at 2:30 a.m. without supervision, chances are they are not doing something legal, productive, or moral.

Stay With Your Husband and Act Like a Wife

Time to check in on Dear Margo again.

DAZED wrote:

I am a married mother of three. My husband loves me and we have a nice life. Unfortunately, I no longer love him.

Of course not. After all, he loves you. That's boring!

I am in love with a man who is five years younger. (He is also married with a child.) We both married for the wrong reasons.

Too late now! You made babies.

Whatever free time we have we spend together

Free time? You have "free time" with a husband, three kids, and a job? The time you should be spending rejuvenating so that you can be a good wife and mother are spent carrying of this affair.

and he has helped me both financially and professionally.

Whore. (It's okay to use that word... it is Biblical.)

He's in the same situation: He does not love his wife, but doesn't want to leave because of his child.

Not to mention the alimony and child support! Oh, and right now, he gets to have sex with both of you.

I don't want to leave, either, because of how devastating it would be for the children. I am torn and don't know what to do.

How about:
1. Stop fornicating with this guy.
2. Stop seeing the guy at all.
3. Love your husband.
4. Mother your kids.
5. Quit your job, which could be key to steps 1-4.

I know he loves me; this is not just a simple affair.

You both loved your spouses, too, supposedly. You only "love" each other because you aren't obligated to each other.

We have so much in common and the same outlook on life.

Yeah, you are both adulterous fornicators.

I can talk to him about anything and be myself when I’m around him … not possible with my husband.

When "being yourself" means cheating, then I can see how that could be a problem for your husband. And talking is what your girlfriends are for.

I sometimes want to end it with him because I feel I should work on my marriage, but when I do try, it is clear things are broken beyond repair.

Really? I haven't read one word about her husband being an abuser, absent, an addict, or an adulterer. In fact, she wrote that her husband loves her. So if "things are broken" it is largely her doing, and she can change that. They aren't broken beyond repair – she just tells herself that so she won't feel as guilty.

I wonder how many of the kids are even her husband's? How many does he know aren't his, and how many does he think are his but aren't? Regardless, sounds like he is a better father to them than she is a mother.

Dear Margo responded:

The real key is whether or not your marriage would respond to "work." I do know that with a lover in the picture it is next to impossible to concentrate on one’s marriage. On the other hand, if there is absolutely no repair possible and you and this man have this wonderful connection, you could either keep the affair going (difficult, emotionally) or realize that divorce need not mean abandoning parental duties and roles.

Cut the crap. Divorce hurts kids and makes it harder for both parents to fulfill their parental obligations.

You would not be the first couple to undo a damaged marriage.

And if I decided to go on a killing spree, I wouldn't the first person either. What kind of advice is that?!?

Another consideration is, what are these various children seeing and feeling at home? If there is frost or fighting, that is not so great for kids, either.

She can change that if she wants.

Try to determine if the sex and secrecy are what’s fueling this romance.

Really, how could she trust ever her adultery buddy? Oh wait, I can answer that. Because she has the one and only magic vagina, so he would never betray her the way he's betraying his current wife. That's called DELUSION.

Is there guilt?

What difference does that make? If there isn't it just means she's a sociopath and perhaps should warn her husband that she is.

My responses would be the same if the adulterous guy had been the one writing in. That guy is a creep.

I'm Glad My Marriage Isn't Like This

"Craig" commented on a previous post of mine about the difference between marital lovemaking and unmarried fornication, and I wanted to call attention to it. I am taking Craig, who says he is a Christian, at his word, but then I have no reason to believe he is lying or exaggerating. (By the way, I require approval of comments not to prevent disagreement, but to prevent libel. If you don't want your comment published, say so in the comment and I will not publish it.)

He point outs as I have that sex, which in the past was a main incentive for men to marry, is now readily and freely available to men without even being in a relationship, and that changes in our laws and culture in recent decades have made licensed marriage more risky for men.

I am now involuntarily divorced.

Many women and men have found themselves in this situation, unfortunately. Men more often than women. While I'm one of the first to say that if you choose wisely and treat kindly, you won't be in this situation, I know that it can be very easy to choose wrong, and in some cases, it is very hard to do discover that before the wedding.

I do not agree with the default we currently have that one spouse can unilaterally end a marriage, especially without demonstrating that the other spouse has broken the marital vows. If two people agree to this condition ahead of time, then fine – and I guess that is what they do when they get married now. But it shouldn’t be that way.

Sex with my wife was not good, it was basically non-existent especially at the end.

This is the 64-Trillion Dollar Question (adjusted for hyperinflation) that I have been mulling over recently. I may do one long separate blog entry about it. The right thing to do is to save sex for marriage. I believe that. But what if, upon marrying, he finds out that the sex is nonexistent or lousy? For just about all healthy husbands, sex is extremely important. It isn't just about needing (and we do need) to ejaculate. It is a way we bond with our wives, communicate with them, and express our love for them. What is a guy supposed to if he marries her and finds out that, for whatever reason (past trauma or low libido on her part, latent hatred for men), it is lousy or way too rare? Is he supposed to divorce her? Take on a mistress? Hire a hooker? Or be happy the rest of his life fulfilling his end of the bargain (financially providing, etc.) while he is denied? While the law will compel him to financially provide for her, it will not - nor can not - compel her to provide consort. She is unlikely to face significant peer pressure to change.

Even when the couple does not save sex for marriage, some (mostly men) have found that sex changes for the worst after the wedding as the frequency, enthusiasm, and physical repertoire diminish.

I have 3 children I am legally forbidden to see, a huge monthly payment I can't meet, and I face jail because the false charges my ex levied and her constant harassment got me fired. I can't ever return home.

Unfortunately, some our laws and those to practice and administer it have created a situation where some women find it to their financial advantage to divorce and fight for sole custody, and they are encouraged to make false allegations to aid in their desired outcome.

Meanwhile the woman I started dating after the divorce I couldn't marry (but wanted too and still do) because of course they would figure in her salary to the child support and alimony and she'd be the one to have to pay my "purge" to get me out of prison if I lose my job, get injured, etc.

If a man can't see his minor children, I don't see the point of delaying remarriage for their sake. However, as Craig points out, remarriage is discouraged because his would-be wife would have to pay some of her earnings to "support" children she has never event met and had no part in bringing into this world; children her would-be husband isn't even allowed to see. Likewise, a custodial mother is discouraged from remarrying (but not shacking up!) unless she can find a man who is much better off financially, because she risks losing the "child support" payments if she does.

The "solutions" proposed by the church are always "marry a believer" and be careful.

Few churches hold spouses to their vows, unfortunately. They can't do anything with any legal weight, but they can certainly apply social pressure. As for marrying a believer - of course we should try to make sure our intended is truly a believer. But how many times have we heard that "only God knows a person's heart"?

Craig concludes:

Fact is marriage as it is now practiced IS NOT BIBLICAL MARRIAGE.

I tend to agree. Studies tend to show that state-licensed marriage benefits children, so it can still be useful, though I wonder if those stats have been compared against couples who underwent a marriage ceremony in a church and live as married but did not obtain a state license? I would like to see the state encourage (and enforce) customized pre-nups to make state-licensed marriage more like Biblical marriage for those who want it.

As it is now, a couple can agree to each other - and before their church and witnesses - to enter into a Biblical marriage when they get legally married, but it is entirely voluntary. The moment one or both decides to get a divorce or otherwise violate the vows, there's nothing (except perhaps church pressure – nonexistent in most churches) holding either one to Biblical standards.

I know there are women who can, like Craig, provide a tale of a marital nightmare – they married a brute, a closet case, an addict, or some other person who turned out to be a horrible husband. But the fact is, if he beats you (even if you started the punching), one call will get him hauled off to jail, and there are shelters for women and almost none for men. If he rapes you, he can be prosecuted. If you assault him, you can claim a hormonal defense more easily than he can. You can obligate him to pay child support for another man's offspring via paternity fraud. You are more likely to be able to get custody of the children. You are more likely to get child support. You are more likely to get alimony. You are more likely to get sympathy and support at church. It doesn't work the other way.

If you have an unmarried brother or son, consider what he is facing today.

Choose wisely and with extreme caution.

It is stories like Craig's that make me so thankful to wake up next to the woman that I do.

Is Finding Love Harder For Smarties?

Melissa Noble wrote for YourTango.com (I found it via Yahoo):

Dr. Alex Benzer is a Harvard and Cambridge educated certified hypnotherapist who thinks "smart people" (his definition: the top 5% of the population) have a harder time dating than the rest of us dim guys.

She then goes on to explain why she disagrees.

I have heard smart women say they have a tougher time finding someone. I don't know if it really is true or not, as I haven't looked up the stats and I'm not a woman. (And how does she know she has a tougher time – has she gone undercover as a "dumb" and found it easier?) But if a woman who really is smart is having a tough time, perhaps the following reasons are at play:

1. Women tend to seek to "marry up". They want someone smarter than they are, more accomplished than they are, and who earns more than they do. Well, if she is scary smart herself (and, as a result, accomplished and earning big bucks), that makes it harder for her to marry up. The pool is smaller. Men usually don't have this problem, especially if they are just (or initially) asking a woman out because of her looks. The guys might not care if she's dumb as a post.

2. In addition to wanting to marry up, a smart woman is going to be more picky. She's smart enough to know that she has a limited amount of time and she doesn't want to waste it on something that isn't going to lead to anything but just temporary physical pleasure at best, or heartache and stress. So, it isn't that there aren't men available, it is that they don't meet her standards.

3. Smart women may get so busy with education and career that they don't take the time to engage in the necessary socialization.

4. Some say that men are intimidated by smart women. But this statement is needlessly specific. Men are intimated by women, and always have been. There are guys who don't want to listen to a woman talk much – mostly guys who just want sex or perhaps a girlfriend - or guys who crave quiet - and smart girls are often prone to talking so as to show you that they are smart. That is great if you want to have intelligent conversation or a healthy debate. No so much if you're looking to get it on. Smart guys do this, too... but their hormones usually override their ego fairly quickly, and they shut up.

Some cynical folks would say this is chicken-and-egg deal. I've heard some say that the reason these women are smart is that they had to be, because they realized early on in their lives that they weren't going to get by on their looks – and that smart and beautiful girls learned early on it was easier to get by on their looks and so stopped growing as much intellectually.

I know there are women who are both smart and beautiful. And have been able to find love. My wife is such a woman. I don't think she married up in the brains department, though.

So - do you know smart people, male are female (including yourself) who seem to have a tougher time than the average person in finding love?

When Divorce Lawyers Get Greedy

Another woman who has "grown accustomed" to the leisurely high life on someone else's earnings and is now getting a divorce and making news. Associated Press Writer Dave Collins has the story.

A 36-year-old Swedish countess divorcing a former CEO says she cannot live on $43 million.

She should have married Paul McCartney.

Marie Douglas-David, a former investment banker, says she has no income and needs her 67-year-old husband, George David, to pay her more than $53,000 a week — more than most U.S. households make in a year — to cover her expenses.

And why doesn't she have any income?

David and Douglas-David married in 2002, but the marriage was in trouble by 2004, court papers show.

So let's see... if you count 2002 until now, $43 million is over six million dollars per year. And those weren't even all good years. That's not generous enough? What exactly did she do during this marriage? Did she cook? Clean? Do any actual domestic management? Raise his kids? Help him with work? Do his shopping for him? Care for him while he was sick? Look out for his health? Pick out his wardrobe? Look good on his arm? Provide consortium?

He could have been better off using that money to hire an image consultant, publicist, personal shopper, personal assistants, a nutritionist, a personal trainer, doctors and counselors, accountants, maids, cooks, an event planner and host, interior designer, professional consultants, and spend all of what would be left over on escorts and a harem.

Amid a series of reconciliations, the couple signed a postnuptial agreement in October 2005 that would give her $43 million when they divorce.

Douglas-David wants the agreement invalidated. She accused her husband of coercing her to sign it by preying upon her fears of being divorced and childless.

Either women are adults who can make their own decisions, or they aren't. The more judges – or Congressmen – toss out contracts, the harder it will be to get anything done. She agreed to the contract.

And notice... they don't have children together, unless they made some after she signed the post-nup. None are mentioned in the article, so my guess is that they didn't have any together and she probably didn't do much around the house, either.

She's asking to be awarded about $100 million in cash and stock, plus $130,000 a month in alimony.

Get a job!!!

David is asking a judge to uphold the agreement and order Douglas-David to vacate their Park Avenue apartment but keep their properties in Sweden.

Gee, what a heartless bastard.

Douglas-David has filed court papers showing she has more than $53,800 in weekly expenses, including for maintaining a Park Avenue apartment and three residences in Sweden. Her weekly expenses also include $700 for limousine service, $4,500 for clothes, $1,000 for hair and skin treatments, $1,500 for restaurants and entertainment, and $8,000 for travel.

1. Sell some of your places.
2. Learn to drive.
3. Wear some things more than once (it’s okay – clothes can be cleaned).
4. Learn to eat at home.
5. Learn how to shop online.
6. Buy some books and a home entertainment center.

You can keep up the hair and skin treatments. They might help you snag another sucker.

At that rate, Douglas-David would burn through $43 million in less than 16 years.

So??? I don’t know what the laws are there, but in California, the alimony rule is essentially one day of pay for every two days of marriage (provided the marriage lasted less than 10 years). So she should only get enough to last for three and a half years anyway - if the laws are the same.

Anne Dranginis, an attorney for David and retired Connecticut Appellate Court judge, predicted that Douglas-David will get much less money in the divorce if she doesn't accept the terms of the postnuptial.

I hope so. She should be punished for challenging a generous contract to which she agreed.

In court papers, Douglas-David said she quit her job as an investment banker for Lazard Asset Management to travel and entertain with David, who still earns $1 million a year from United Technologies.

So she's capable of making her own money. Let her.

When a woman and a man mutually agree to marry and that she'll stop or cut back on working outside the home so that she can take care of their children, him, their home, and some of their personal affairs, and then that husband breaks his vows and decides to leave while she has upheld her vows – I have no problem with a judge ordering him to pay 1) significant alimony; and 2) child support, hopefully to the point where she'll be able to raise the kids until they are grown, keep the house, and move on with her life. In fact, I think women agreeing to take up those roles and thus be out of the workforce should insist on pre-nups that will provide for her needs.

But I do not support gold-digging.

A Neglected Wife?

DESPERATE FOR SOMEONE TO TALK TO wrote in to Dear Abby:

I am so lonely. My husband refuses to communicate with me or do anything with me.

Refuses, huh? He likes being married to a woman he doesn't want to be with or talk with? Why would he put himself in that situation?

The only outlet I have is work and school.

What about girlfriends? Notice she didn't mention church.

I would like to end this misery, but I don't know where to begin. We have been married for 17 years.

She gives too little info. Are they childless, or are there children involved? If there are children involved, she needs to wait until they are grown before splitting up the home or depriving them of their mother or father. Does she engage in lovemaking with her hushband? He she done anything to try to draw him to her? None of this information was provided in what was published.

What could be going on here? What could the possibilities be?

1. He has always been like this, and she either married him without having gotten to know him, or made the mistake of thinking he was going to change. He may have put up a false front.

2. He has an illness or deficiency that has caused him to change. Perhaps a thorough medical and psychological evaluation is in order?

3. Someone else or some event has traumatized him. Again, perhaps an evaluation is in order.

4. Perhaps she has done something or multiple things that have prompted him to treat her this way as a form of self-preservation. Why would a healthy man not want to spend time with and communicate with his wife? Why wouldn't he want to see her beauty and bask in her uplifting, affirmative, edifying conversation? Well, maybe the answer is in my question. Does she neglect his needs? Has she disrespected him? Does her commitment to work and school keep her from being a good wife? Some women, once they are married, let themselves fall to pieces. Their husbands can do and say no good – everything their husband is interested in is stupid, wrong, or worthless according to her, and sometimes she'll tell others that, right in front of her husband. Does she ramble on endlessly about Brad and Angelina and what Oprah said today, and expect him to chime in on that? Does she constantly whine about the same things without letting her husband offer solutions, and without working towards a solution herself?

Men don't usually buy a ring, get down on their bended knee, and propose marriage to a woman they don't like to be around, not unless they feel it is the right thing to do (they knocked her up) or are desperate for citizenship or to appear to have heterosexual feelings when they don't. Odds are, he earns more than she does and is therefore financially subsidizing her lifestyle. Why would he do that, if he didn't want to be around her? If #4 is the main thing going on, one might wonder why a guy would stay. It could be for the children. It could be a matter of convenience. In some places (like the state I live in), once you hit ten years of marriage, the spouse who has earned more can be obligated to pay alimony for life, in addition to splitting all of the marital assets evenly. He could have figured he'd rather keep full access to his stuff and his money, even if that means living with a woman with whom he doesn't connect, or he fears or resents.

Dear Abby responded:

If you think your marriage is worth saving, offer your husband the chance to repair it through marriage counseling -- but be prepared for it to take some time, because old habits are hard to break.

Counseling is a mixed bag. There are some great counselors out there, but also some really lousy ones – like ones who think normal husband behavior and expectations are inherently wrong. We really need more information. The answers could be very simple – and fun for her to implement.
Husbands should treat their wives with love and kindess. But women should not marry a grizzly bear and expect him to turn into a kitten, or expect a guy to be warm and open and receptive and engaging if he continually gets pain in return.

New Implants a Precursor to a Decamp

I love listening to Dr. Laura. She has posted and read my stuff before. There are only a few areas where I have any disagreement with her, and I think listening to her show and reading her books can make your life better. They have made me a better person.

She posts notable letters (some of which she read on-air) to her website, and I read through them every week.

Recently, a caller to her radio show wasn't comfortable supporting his wife's plans for breast enhancement. "S" wrote in to say:

I am a living testament to your response, which was "She's not getting them for you." After a 20 year marriage, the last gift I bought for my wife was a set of new breasts. She filed for divorce about 9 months later, leaving me to raise that now 3rd Class Petty Officer in the Coast Guard all by my lonesome.

So when friends and acquaintances tell me their wives want new breasts... I always grin, wink and warn them... "Before you call the plastic surgeon... call a lawyer...!"

Some women get their boyfriends to pay for their breast enhancement (or some other plastic surgery). Some guys offer. Either way, those guys are fools.

Husbands are also fools for supporting this. Think about it – these guys were already attracted to these women. Why should they pay for her to change her body? She isn't doing it for them. She's doing it because she thinks it will get her a better financial offer, or because she wants more attention from other men.

Of course there are some exceptions to this. A wife who has experienced disease, an accident, or an assault - or even breast feeding or significant weight loss - that has disfigured or significantly changed her breasts may feel like "restoring" them will bring her more confidence or ease the memory of a bad experience.

But in general, husbands can handle the fact that their wife is getting older. Any guy who can't handle that should not get married in the first place. Her breasts may have been what caught his eye in the first place, but if he hasn’t moved beyond that and found passion for her as a whole person, then there's a problem. In other words, I'm attracted to my wife's breasts, but that attraction is now based more on the fact that they are a part of her rather than how they take up space. And yes, I do like how they take up space. But I love the fact that she's committed to breastfeeding, regardless of the effect it will have on how her breasts look.

If a wife really, really insists on getting breast enhancement surgery, and using community property to pay for it, her husband should insist on a legally enforceable post-nuptial agreement (yes, there are such things) that gives him some restitution should she subsequently bolt.

Check Out the Mysterious Mrs. B. Roth

I got tagged/awarded by The Mysterious Mrs. B. Roth. I generally do not follow along with these chain things, with rules like these:

1) Add the logo of the award to your blog.
2) Add a link to the person who awarded it to you.
3) Nominate at least 7 other blogs (or whatever random number you want :)
4) Add links to those blogs on your blog.
5) Leave a message for your nominees on their blogs.

But I did want to call your attention to her site and "award" her back.

She wrote about this blog:

A strange little cubbyhole, try Everything Must Go! Ken likes to deconstruct advice columns and provides, free of charge, very useful bits of dating and marriage tips. Fearlessly weighing in on adult topics without becoming crass or puerile, I find his messages useful and entertaining.

High praise, indeed. Thanks!

I have been interested in what females really think since at least adolescence. The male mind and the female mind do work differently. I used to secretly thumb through my sister's Seventeen magazines to try to get some idea. But whether it is Seventeen or Cosmo, you're still only dealing with a handful of women, who are essentially speaking on the heavily-edited commercial public record to please advertisers.

I do have my wife's brain to pick now. But more perspective can be good. Through Mrs. B. Roth's blog, I get to see the thoughts and experiences of a wife and mother with children a little older than mine. She's a good writer who gives an authentic glimpse into motherhood, marriage, and domestic management, and living out a religion that is somewhat different than mine. I'd rather read her stuff than a celebutant’s blog any day. Indeed, someone who has never been to America could learn much more about what it is like to live in America by reading her blog than they could by reading the New York Times.

I really need to add her to my blog roll on the right. I need to update the blog roll anyway. Heck, I need to update the entire blog.

Some other good sites are already there in the blog roll. One I check with regularity is Biblical Manhood, which is written by an unmarried, male follower of Christ. As he says:

This is a blog about "biblical manhood." I am not here to give Bible-believing men a list of do's and don'ts. Plenty of others already make a living doing that. My intention is provide a scriptural response to anti-male sexism. My intention is to proclaim the truth to the status quo and defend those who have been denied a voice for far too long. In this, I believe I am following the example of my Lord and Savior.

He also links to some other great places to get real male perspectives. You may not be aware of it, but most mainstream media, especially television, is primarily geared towards the sensitivities of women, which are different than those of men. This is because so much of the media is heavily dependent on advertisers, and women are by far the ones doing most of the consumer spending. (Hey, my wife is a darn good shopper so I'm happy to leave most of that to her!) Workplace cultures are also mostly geared towards the sensitivities of women now. The same goes for most of academia and most churches and Christian media, which is what makes Biblical Manhood such a fascinating read. With so many boys being raised without a father in the home, with fewer places for them to go for unfettered socialization with men, with the general bent toward female sensitivities, and with willfull anti-masculinity found in mainstream culture, it is nice to have someplace to go for a different perspective, perhaps a place that a young man may find out that he can be a follower of Christ without being a wimp or always peeing sitting down.

Should She Tell Her Bride Sister the Groom Raped Her?

Can you believe that is even a question?

PREGNANT SISTER wrote into Dear Abby:

I was sexually abused by my sister's boyfriend, "Teddy," three months ago. He is five years older than I am, and now I am pregnant.

Notice the phraseology. She doesn't say that they fooled around. She recognizes what he did as sexual abuse. Although she doesn't give her age, it sounds like she is a minor.

This guy is a creep who should be locked up.

I don't want to tell Teddy or my family because I am afraid of the consequences -- especially because he and my sister are getting married in three months.

Now you know she's immature. She's not realizing that she's about to let her sister marry (and, presumably make babies with), a child molester - or at the very least someone who "cheats" on his fiancée with her sister - or rapist.

I don't want to ruin their marriage, but I can't keep this a secret much longer.

Uh, he is what would ruin their marriage. He is to blame.

I don't know what to do because Teddy is a respectable person and I know they won't believe me if I tell the truth.

No, they think he is a respectable person because nobody has exposed him - and he needs to be exposed. DNA will prove the truth. He'll probably claim that you jumped his bones, but even if it had happened that way, it is no excuse.

Turns out my response is very much like the one Dear Abby gave. I usually read the letter and write my response before I read the actual response, just to compare.

What a creep. If he finds out about the pregnancy, he'll probably try to drive her to an abortion clinic without her family even knowing. And if her sister knows what a creep he is and chooses to look the other way, then she is horrible, too, and has probably passed over some genuinely respectable and nice men. Hopefully, this guy will get prosecuted and the entire family will realize they've dodged a second bullet. Adopt that kid out to a loving mother and father who can take care of a baby, and get this guy away from your family and other families. PLEASE!

Shaving

If you were to stick me on a deserted island without a razor, I would quickly turn into a Sasquatch look-alike. I mean, I have hair growing everywhere, and unless I shave it off or pluck it out, it will take over my skin like weeds.

Other than being a good time to think, I derive no enjoyment from the process of shaving my face. If I lived alone, I probably wouldn't shave on days I didn't have to work with others. Part of that may stem for working in a job for many years that required me to shave.

But I'm married. So I try to get a really close shave, because that makes it more comfortable for my wife when we smooch and when I... uh... when I do one of my all-time favorite things to do.

And speaking of that, I enjoy it when she makes it easier for me to do my thing there by shaving herself.

Now, not all guys dig that. Some guys prefer their women as natural as can be. Or they want something somewhere between natural and bare, or something that is neatly and clearly defined. If they want the Preamble to the Constitution carved out down there, they are definitely asking too much.

It seems like this kind of grooming has become more talked about in our culture (in part, because of swimsuits and lingerie styles) and easier for husband and wife to discuss. Guys, give your ladies positive reinforcement. They probably won't believe you when you remark about how beautiful they are down there, but tell them anyway. If you want them to do something different, ask your wife if it would be too much trouble. But be willing to listen to their suggestions about your grooming, too. Ladies, if you’ve never discussed this with your husband and don't know if he'd like you to try something different, try asking him about it. As I said, some guys don't like the bare look at all, so you never know until he reacts.

And like I said, it is okay to ask him to shave... both his face (provided you aren't in a religion that forbids it) and down there – or to at least groom it more closely. Most reasonable husbands would color it green if it would mean you'd spend more time there. Now there's an idea for St. Patrick's Day.

If you really want to get daring and you both have steady hands, try taking a shower together and shaving each other. Ladies - any guy who lets you get close to him down there with a blade really does trust you a lot.

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.