Don’t Use Grandma's Computer to See Skin

GRANDMA ON ALERT wrote in to Dear Abby:

My daughter and 12-year-old grandson "Patrick" visit me on Sundays. Patrick watches TV in my office.

Kids should not be watching TV without the adults knowing what they are watching.

I was recently looking at the history on my Web browser after he had been there, and I noticed that Patrick had been visiting free porn sites and chat rooms on my computer.

What I said about TV applies even more to computers. You must be certain nobody else could have accessed the computer to be sure.

I am disappointed that he has been looking at pornography and that he has put my computer at risk for viruses, etc.

Risks can come from any place online. Surely you have protective software, right?

As far as the porn – what are we talking about? Pictures? Videos? Women? Men and women having vanilla sex? Betty White with Larry King? While people shouldn't be supplying any of that to minors, you shouldn't be too concerned that he sought it out unless it is some illegal or extreme stuff. The fact is, the vast majority of adult men these days through the age of 55 viewed Playboy-style pictures, R-rated sex/nudity movie scenes, and even porn films/video when they were 12 or not much older and most of them grew up to be normal, healthy, productive members of society – many of them have great marriages. Just because the material doesn’t appeal to you doesn't mean it will kill him.

These days, 12-year-old boys are getting sent pictures of their classmates on cell phones and in e-mails, or are even seeing or doing worse in-person (sometimes with their teacher). Really, the most dangerous thing he did was visit chat rooms, if he wasn’t careful about what he said in those chat rooms.

Should I talk to his parents?

If you're fairly certain it was him, tell them the nature of the sites he visited. And explain that as a result, he won’t be allowed to use your computer unsupervised.

To him?

Take him over to computer - just he two of you - and bring up all of the websites. Then, scream at him about how evil he is and how the human body and sex are dirty and how wrong he is to enjoy seeing that stuff. Tell him he's going to turn into a woman-hating murderer and grow hair on his palms and his testicles are going to painfully, loudly pop.

Actually, don't so that.

Seriously, no need to talk with him – don’t listen to Dear Abby on that one. Yes, he wronged you by misusing your property, but his parents should handle it. There's no reason to get him to associate sex with grandma.

Eight Postnatal Abortions

Some crazy-evil French woman has admitted to murdering eight of her own newborns and hiding their corpses. Catherine Gaschka had the AP version of the story.

Dominique Cottrez, a 46-year-old nurse's aide by profession, said that after a bad experience with her first pregnancy she never again wanted to see a doctor.

She’s a nurse's aid. She's around doctors all of the time. But putting that aside, plenty of people give birth without seeing a doctor and don't murder their children.

"She explained that she didn't want any more children and that she didn't want to see a doctor to take contraceptives," [prosecutor] Vaillant told a news conference.

Okay, so you’re too dysfunctional to be responsible. How about adoption?

Cottrez and her husband, Pierre-Marie Cottrez, were detained Wednesday after two corpses in plastic bags were discovered in a garden by the new owners of a house that had belonged to the woman's father in the town of Villers-au-Tertre in northern France.

That had to be a nice little find.

Her husband was freed from custody and not charged, although he remains under judicial control. He claimed he knew nothing about the pregnancies of his wife.

"As for Mr. Cottrez, the sky is falling on his head he told us," the prosecutor said. "He told us that he was absolutely not aware that his wife was pregnant."

Vaillant noted that Mrs. Cottrez is quite heavy, making it easy to conceal a pregnancy.

Reason #6,342 to avoid obese women.

The couple's two grown daughters, who are in their 20s, have been questioned, Vaillant said.

Uhm, those would be survivors.

DNA tests are being conducted to establish for sure whether the couple are the parents, and autopsies are being conducted on the corpses to try to determine the cause of death.

It's going to be even more interesting if she was knocked up by other guys. But really, after murder, what's adultery?

I Love You, I Married You, Now Change

OFFENDED STEPMOM IN WASHINGTON STATE wrote in to Dear Abby:

My 50-year-old husband and his 27-year-old son from a previous marriage like to call each other profane names. Neither one seems to have a problem with it, and argue that they call their buddies these kinds of names.

I am personally offended by profanities and find it disturbing that such language would be used among family members, let alone in front of others.

Wow, it is amazing that this all began after you married your husband.

Oh? What's that? They were doing it all along? And you chose to marry him anyway? Then I guess it couldn't have offended you that much.

Or... are you one of those people that figured you were going to change someone – and how they interact with their own flesh and blood – once you got them to sign on the dotted line?

You should suck it up and shut up (or leave). But you won't will you? You're going to nag your husband about this and tick him off and tick off his son. Just imagine what they're going to call you behind your back.

I don't like it. But I would have thought about that before I married.

When you marry someone, you're taking them AS-IS. If they’re not felled by disease or injury, they will get older - but not necessarily more mature or better. You can't count on them changing for the better or to be more to your liking. Yes, people should grow, but they may not. You can’t change someone else. You can only help them as they choose to change.

Keep the Fires Burning

I found a page titled "Protecting and Enhancing Sexuality in Marriage", which gives a brief overview of that subject, but also talks a little about why it is important.

Before we talk any further about the challenges of sex in marriage, it's worth noting that married women and men report being significantly more satisfied with their sex lives than either single or cohabiting people.

Yes, and I've written extensively about this, especially the frequency side of it. The difference is, socially speaking, it is much easier for a person to look for a better/more compatible sexual partner and go after better sex if they're not married. If two people want to stay married to each other and really want to please each other, then it is going to take work, compromise, etc. And in some cases, part of the work is convincing the other person to try in the first place. Some people says that's good, some people don't. God's opinion matters most, but how many people listen to that anymore?

One of the most fundamental challenges is the decline in sexual novelty. Novelty is a major sexual stimulant. Novelty is automatic early in your relationship. Later, sex naturally becomes more familiar and less novel with your partner.

This means that to find novelty, the spouses have to be creative and have to be willing to experiment.

While most couples don’t want to make love while they are in the middle of a fight, it's a mistake to put aside your sex life for an extended period because of disagreements.

This is mainly a wife tactic – cutting off sex because of a fight. Most guys can and will have sex with the wife even if they are ticked off about something. (Heck, guys will do it right before they dump a woman, or right before they hand over the divorce papers.) The exceptions are primarily when there's a disagreement over having a child or the wife has made negative comments about the husband's sexual prowess or his genitals. But if a guy is ticked off before the sex, much of the anger will leave him about the same time his semen does.

Lack of time is one of the most often cited reasons for infrequency of sex. One of the most common myths is that sex has to take a certain amount of time. Of course, leisurely sex can be wonderful. But it’s a luxury that few couples can afford on a regular basis.

Funny – unmarried couples seem to be able to find the time.

Ok, so go for quickies.

Another top myth is that sex must be spontaneous. It’s a fact of modern life that we plan and schedule everything that is a priority.

No, we're not talking about "I expect to get laid tonight." We're talking about scheduling sex like an appointment with your accountant. Marriage is sounding better all of the time, eh?

Ok, so go for quickies but be sure to schedule a long block of time for some extensive lovin'.

Couples often avoid sex because their sex life has become dissatisfying or conflictual.

I think that means things like – he wants her to suck it like she used to and she doesn't want to anymore, or she never did want to and is unwilling to pretend she does, even though she pretended to like it before. Things like that.

Anxiety is another frequent interfering factor. Sometimes anxiety is related to inhibitions acquired earlier in life. Performance is another big source of anxiety. Performance used to be a male concern—now women, too, feel pressure to perform sexually. It's hard for mere mortals to live up to the sexual expectations and images promoted by the media.

Yes, but that's true about just about everything in life. We don't just curl up into the fetal position and die.

Fantasy can be another important source of stimulation and variety for a sex life that has become routine. Fantasy can be anything from reading sexy stories to watching sexy videos to talking about things you’d like to do (whether or not you actually go on to do them).

Wait – isn't that media?

Reviewing together the early days of your relationship and what you found so alluring in each other can be very stimulating.

That's a good tip, just as long as you avoid mentioning appearances if they’ve changed dramatically. Nobody who is obese will get turned on by their spouse talking about how the fact that they were in shape when they met was one of the attracting factors.

Why A Husband Prefers Wine to Sex

LOST THE BATTLE TO CHARDONNAY wrote in to Dear Abby back in February:

The other day I asked my husband a question and told him to be honest. If given a choice between giving up wine or giving up sex with me, which would he choose?

This is asking for trouble. Wine never asks him questions like that.

You guessed it. He said, "Giving up sex with you."

Hmmm. I think even most alcoholics would at least say "wine". For men, sex is like pizza or a hoagie – even when it is bad, we'll usually still take it. He either must really be angry with you in general or you (plural) must have really screwed up the sex life.

I think I knew the answer before I asked the question, but hearing it out loud devastated me.

See – asking for trouble.

I know every woman wants to be No. 1 in her husband's life.

Not every. A wife with a healthy attitude wants to be No. 1 (or, a close second to God). But there are women who don't mind if their husband ignores them as long as he keeps bringing in the dollars or still interacts with the kids.

Am I wrong to feel so heartbroken?

Who can say your feelings are wrong? Is it normal to feel heartbroken? Sure, if you care.

Dear Abby advised:

But now it's time for a follow-up question: "Why?"

Don't ask that unless you are willing to listen and repress your initial inclinations to defend yourself or strike back.

One thing is certain: When you asked your question, you "uncorked" the fact that there's a serious problem in your marriage. And now you have an opportunity to do something about it.

But does she really want to do something about it? Other than hurt feelings, is she happy with the way things are? If she is, and he's not likely to divorce her, then she may not have enough motivation to change.

Why would a man prefer something else to sex with his wife?

Aside from homosexual orientation, hormonal deficiencies, or impotence on his part, there could be any number of reasons. Most husbands would rather have a plain or "ordinary" looking woman who is an enthusiastic lover than a highly attractive woman who is frigid or does an impersonation of a coma patient. We'd rather have bad or lackluster sex than no sex. But if a woman is hostile, emasculating, belittling, highly selfish, too much work for too little payoff (either by reciprocation or by letting him know what a great time she is having), or shows no regard for her appearance/hygiene/health, we may take a pass. For all we know, the letter writer has gained 200 lbs since the wedding.

One other reason: A lack of trust. If a husband suspects his wife is having sex with others, is trying to get pregnant even though she knows he doesn't want that right now, or may abort his child (that was a call to Dr. Laura not too long ago), he may stay out of her.

Guys – can you think of any other reasons? Ladies – have you encountered this problem?

One False Rape Accusation

Here's something else from back in February. A New Jersey woman was sentenced to up to three years in prison for falsely claiming she was gang-raped in New York City. Even if she were to serve a full three years, that would still be less time than the time serve by the man she was key to sending away. It was an Associated Press story by Jennifer Peltz.

Biurny Peguero, 27, pleaded guilty in December to perjury, admitting she made up the September 2005 incident that unjustly put construction worker William McCaffrey in jail and prison for nearly four years. A judge overturned his rape conviction in December, with new DNA evidence also playing a role.

McCaffrey had been sentenced to 20 years.

Prosecutors have said she told them she claimed she was raped to make her friends feel sorry for her. Assistant District Attorney Evan Krutoy suggested Tuesday that she may have lied out of anger at a man who had upset - but not attacked - her.

The way the article is written, it sounds like she at least came forward before she had to.

Defense lawyer Paul F. Callan noted that Peguero came forward to clear McCaffrey, approaching a priest and then authorities this year to recant. Meanwhile, new DNA tests had shown that a wound on Peguero's arm came from at least two women — apparently friends she was fighting with — and not McCaffrey.

What are friends for, after all?

Peguero, who has an infant and a 7-year-old, admitted her lie knowing it could mean prison time for her, he said. He pushed for her to get probation instead.

Probation? For putting that guy away and tying up police and the court? What's more, her criminal actions make things harder for actual rape victims. She has a baby? Did she get knocked up before or after her lies were exposed? Guys, she needs to be on your "do not date" list. She a had minor kid already, so she should have already been on the list.

For his part, McCaffrey's lawyer sent Peguero's judge a letter noting she had made a bold move to right the wrong she had committed.

"Although we are upset about her lies that caused, in part, his conviction, we do applaud her courage in coming forward," the lawyer, Glenn A. Garber, said in an interview.

That's gracious.

Scary stuff. Ladies, you are highly unlikely to be falsely accused of rape, but it can happen your male loved ones. Guys, although it might have been unavoidable for this guy, be careful about where you go and with whom, about women being too drunk, and what happens to your DNA.

Don't Neglect Financial Disclosure and Planning

Kathy M. Kristof writes about finance in the Los Angeles Times. Back around Valentine’s Day, she had a couple of columns about what couples need to discuss about their finances before getting too serious. Here's one.

Passion often blinds sweethearts to the fact that matrimony is, at bottom, a contract. Figuring out how that partnership can prosper is critical for a successful union.

This is a concept well understood by cultures with arranged marriages. Don't kid yourself. A legal marriage is very much a financial matter. Sure, it usually involves much more, too, but the financial aspect is there.

Yet financial differences rank among the greatest sources of marital misery, in part because talking about money before you tie the knot makes many couples uncomfortable.

If a couple can't talk honestly about finances with each other, then they don’t really have intimacy.

Some worry that prying into each other's finances might indicate a lack of trust, or that a prenuptial agreement is a self-fulfilling prophecy for splitting up.

In fact, experts say, just the opposite is true. Spouses who find themselves bickering about finances early in their marriage could well end up hashing out the same issues in divorce court, according to Tina Tessina, a licensed psychotherapist and author of "Money, Sex & Kids: Stop Fighting About the Three Things That Can Ruin Your Marriage."

A pre-nup will not cause divorce any more than car insurance causes accidents. Guys, if a woman questions whether or not you trust her, given that you want a pre-nup, ask her if she trusts that you'll want to stay married to her and vice-versa. If there is never a divorce, the pre-nup won't matter, will it? It is possible that a woman who objects to a pre-nup does not have confidence in her ability to keep a husband (or, perhaps she doesn’t plan on trying to) or wants to have the option of leaving you and treating you like a meal ticket long after she does. Ladies - if she doesn't want to reveal everything, he may be hiding something more than debt.

The tips in the article include knowing the history, airing the laundry (trading credit reports), setting your goals, deciding who does what, getting it in writing, and considering the kids.

Finances are a major reason for marital strife and divorce. My wife is generally great with money, but even in our case, there are things I wish I'd found out about before we married – I definitely still would have married her, but I would have sat down with her and made some different plans based on things she knew but I didn't.

There are many things I think should be part of "pre-marital discussions", when a couple is ready to set a wedding date. The financial considerations include (in no particular order):
1. Exchanging credit reports
2. Seeing the bills paid over the course of a year
3. Seeing the pay stubs
4. Disclosure of any debts or judgments
5. Details of accounts and significant assets
6. Goals and desires about roles, lifestyle, earning income, giving, saving and investing, and significant future purchases (including the wedding events)
7. Visiting a financial planner together
8. Discussing how much marital money can be spent on a purchase without consulting the spouse 9. Developing a pre-nup and wills/trusts

If you're still happy with each other and want to marry each other after that, then set the date. Setting a date before getting the pre-nup may invalidate the pre-nup, as someone can claim they were pressured into the pre-nup.

This stuff may not sound romantic, but getting this stuff out of the way frees up a couple to focus more on each other and less on money. People don't do enough financial planning in general, so these steps put a couple ahead of the game. If all of this sounds like too much of a hassle, then so should planning a wedding and maintaining a marriage. Marriage is optional and you can keep your finances to yourself by staying unmarried.

She Wants a Parent, Not a Partner

Time to reach back several months to a Dear Abby letter I wanted to cover. AT A CROSSROADS IN ILLINOIS wrote:

I have been seeing "Hillary" for a little more than a year. We're both in our late 20s and just starting our careers. We both live with our parents.

Everything was good until that last sentence. You both need to establish yourselves as independent adults.

We've been having problems because I'm not willing to move in with her. I have told Hillary many times that there is no audition for marriage, but she's convinced it would "bring us closer."

She wants you to be Daddy. Shacking up is a bad idea. If you're mainly in it for the sex, you haven nothing go gain and a lot to lose by shacking up. If you're looking to get married, your chances of a lasting marriage are better if you don't shack up.

I admit, I'd like to take things slow (call me old-fashioned), but Hillary doesn't know if she can wait until I feel ready to take this step or propose.

Don't let her threaten you. If she doesn't like the way you do things, she's free to see others.

Our parents are not exactly rooting for us, so we're taking another break from things.

Do you want to be married to someone who 1) never lived by herself (as the letter later emphasizes) or at least on her own with a roommate; 2) tries to pressure you; 3) your parents don't like; 4) who has parents who don't like you? Is that what you want for the rest of your life?

I suggested that we both find our own places for the time being.

Good idea. Do that. If she stops seeing you, fill your time with others.

Even Dear Abby replied:

Neither you nor Hillary seem ready for the kind of commitment she's angling for right now. What's clear to me is that she wants to get out of her parents' house…Your suggestion about getting separate apartments is a good one.

Don't fall into the trap of becoming the new parent when you're looking for a partner – especially when she probably wants the money and protection and attention of a parent, but not the authority of a parent. If you do go ahead and decide to propose to her, make sure you negotiate a killer dowry from her father.

I know that in the old days, women lived in their father or brother's house until they married. But times were different back then. Women often consumed their time helping out around the house or in the family business, and men would court a woman by visiting the home and talking with the family. Women now have equal access (or better) to higher education and the professional workplace and are getting married later. Especially in struggling economies, I understand that some adults move back home for a while. But that is different than never leaving in the first place.

Katrina Brown's Killer Sentenced to Death

Richard Winton reported at LATimes.com that James Heard, 58, of Compton, has been sentenced to death in another case that illustrates all too vividly the danger of exposing your kids to your new honey.

James Heard, 58, killed sixth-grade honors student Katrina Brown in December 1990 while her mother was at work. Heard later said he could not remember the slaying because he had been drinking alcohol and smoking crack for more than a day.

You know, when I was a teen, I used to worry that I wouldn’t be able to get dates unless I had a good job, a nice ride, and was living a fairly decent life. How naïve I was.

But investigators tied him to the crime after recovering a part of his tongue that Katrina had bit off.

Good for her. He had sexually assaulted her, and she fought back in a way that produced evidence. Unfortunately, it enraged him.

It is his second death penalty sentence; the California Supreme Court overturned the first in 2003 because of a "seriously deficient examination of a prospective juror during the jury selection process."

During Heard's trial, Deputy Dist. Atty. Danette Meyers told jurors that Katrina had marked her killer by biting off part of his tongue, and that he stomped on her and poured rubbing alcohol down her throat to get her to regurgitate before he strangled her to death.

The story does not quote the mother or the guy who impregnated her in the first place.

Meyers, an experienced death penalty trial lawyer, has called the case “most brutal crime I have seen perpetrated in my lifetime."

"This is one guy I hope to see executed in my lifetime," she said. "I'm hoping they expedite this."

It's California. He'll die of old age on Death Row. He’ll probably get letters from women who want to marry him.

A woman usually finds herself unmarried with minor children for one of the following reasons:
1) She intentionally got pregnant without wanting a husband to father the child.
2) She's a widow because her good husband was killed by a bad person, fire, or in an accident.
3) She drove away a good husband.
4) She got knocked up by the wrong man (one night stand, boyfriend, shack up, bad husband, guy involved in shady dangerous stuff who ended up dead or in jail).

A lot of these women fall into the last category, which means they may be really bad at picking men. But even the women in the other categories are more likely to attract pedophiles and other child abusers.

And guys – you lose a lot of control over your children and ability to protect them if you're not married to and living with their mother. Be very careful where you stick it.

Hollywood Harlots

Chris Lee and Matt Donnelly at the Los Angeles Times had a long story on "club girls", who are young, somehow attractive women who freelance for tabloid/entertainment "news" media, often while and by partying at the clubs where the celebrities hang out.

"I always say, it's living like a call girl without the sex," former club girl Suzy McCoppin said.

Well, not exactly.

A onetime Playboy pinup who worked as a nightclub reporter for Star magazine for three years before getting "banned from every club in the city," McCoppin said she once sold a story describing a weekend tryst with British pop star Robbie Williams to the London tabloid News of the World for $40,000. She embodies the kind of club girl who goes beyond reporting the story to becoming the story.

"A lot of club girls want to be famous," said Evan Matthew, a former senior reporter for Star magazine who also recruited nightclub reporters for four years. "The hope is, being a club girl will get them closer to the celebrities. And they'll become an actress. Or they'll start dating a celebrity."

This explains a lot about where new stars-of-the-moment come from.

McCoppin, who said she parlayed her club girl days into a series of affairs with athletes and actors, a column in Playboy magazine and an as-yet-unpublished memoir, makes no apologies for her less-than-conventional reporting techniques. She recalled that her first reaction when her editor suggested she could turn her relationship with Williams into a tabloid payday was "absolutely not. This is tacky."

When she discovered the amount of money involved, however, she produced a detailed account of her affair that included explicit descriptions of "total rock star sex." "Tacky aside, I will look tacky for $40,000!" she said.

There's nothing like selling your body and soul.

Most tabloid magazines do not have an explicit policy forbidding alcohol consumption and almost all that hire club girls will allow them to buy expense drinks for themselves and friends.

As opposed to snookering some guy they have no intention of dating into buying them.

But after a few years on the club circuit, the hard-partying lifestyle can take a steep toll. Matthew recalled a reporter who started out "bright eyed and bushy tailed" but eventually let certain temptations overtake her life.

"She started off doing a good job but got in so deep after five years, she hung around with all these major celebrities and didn't know who anybody was because she was on drugs," he said. "She started missing stories and she'd come home with nothing. She became a full-time prostitute and had a couple of different celebrity clients. For those club girls, there's no return."

Famous guys have women throwing themselves at them. They hire prostitutes for one, both, or all of three reasons: 1) They have extreme/unusual tastes and don't want to go through the trouble of finding someone else who will accommodate that for free; 2) They're paying for the women to leave after the sex, not for the sex. 3) For guys in their entourage or at their parties who have no game.

The comments I saw on the paper's website where interesting.

One person wrote:

SO let me get this straight, you have women who are using their looks, and maybe their body to get ahead. Then complain when men only view women as sex objects, then use the very sexism to make a living!?! Sounds like most women are a bunch of hypocrites to me!

A second person wrote:

What a sad, silly superficial town this is... Anyone who gives a rat's behind about what Britney Spears is doing should be culled from the population immediately

A third person wrote:

You make "club girl" sound like another name for hooker. They do, too.

Yup. Starf-----s and attention whores, and some are just plain whores. If you had to guess, how many of them do you think have good relationships with their fathers?

Variety

Everyone has habits and routines. But men generally appreciate variety in lovemaking. Recently, the The Generous Wife had this simple tip:

Ask your husband if there is something new or different that he'd like to try in the bedroom. (I'm not suggesting you agree to something that you think is sinful or that is woefully outside of your comfort zone, just be willing to try something a bit creative.)

I wrote something not too long ago that could be considered related.

When an unmarried man says he likes variety, he often means he doesn't want to be monogamous. For most couples, variety is not going to include involving other people, and I don't think it is a good idea for married couples to include others.

Asking your husband if there is something new or different he'd like to try is different than tellingyour husband you are open to new ideas, which isn't bad either. But asking him creates a different feeling to a potentially difficult thing for him to bring up, especially if you've shot him down before.

He's a different person than you, so you have to be prepared to hear things that sound strange, pointless, or unappealing to you. Try to avoid a knee-jerk negative response.

If something is a turn-off for you (as opposed to simply not being a turn-on), will bring unwanted pain, or is clearly against your beliefs, there are various ways to say no. Some ways are better than others.

Try to maintain a neutral facial expression and body language. Letting a look of loathing or disgust settle on your face, followed by screaming "You sick pervert!!!" will probably not be a good way to handle the situation.

You can simply nod in a noncommittal way and ask, "What else?" Hopefully, that will move the discussion on to something more acceptable or interesting to you.

And don’t be afraid to tell him something you'd like to try. A good husband wants to take care of his wife's sexual desires.

There Are Mothers AND Fathers - Deal With It

On Dr. Laura's blog, she had an entry that featured a letter a woman wrote after being invited to join a group formed to remove Father's Day and Mother's Day celebrations from public schools.

Upon looking further into this group, I found that the founder of this group was a single mom “by choice,” and was angry her child was being made to feel bad because the other children have daddies, and hers does not.

I generally believe people have the right to do with themselves and what they own and the children for whom they are responsible as they wish – without government interference – as long as they are not violating the rights of others, including their children. But I believe that non-interference by the government should go both ways. For example, I don't want to use a cop to stop you from paying a streetwalker for sex – and I don't want to be forced to pay taxes to treat your STD. You want to raise a child created using donated sperm without a father around? That's not illegal. But I should not be forced to change anything or pay for anything to accommodate your decision. You're aware of the world you are dealing with when you go ahead and get pregnant. In our world, we celebrate Mother's Day and Father's Day. Deal with it.

Dr. Laura's listener wrote a great letter to the founder of the group that said, in part...

I find it interesting you “chose” single parenthood for your child, but are not punishing those who did not for YOUR decision. The majority of children have a mother and father and those who don’t will have to learn to deal with disappointment and adapt. You act as though she shouldn’t have to learn to deal with disappointment, but in order to become a productive adult, she will.

Sadly, this disappointment was thrust upon her by you.

As Dr. Laura notes,

The woman referred to in this letter, like so many others, decided: “I want a kid.” “I want a kid” - not “Gee, I’d really like to be a Mom. What’s in the best interest of a child?”

Parenthood is optional. Whether or not someone is going to be mother or father should determine much about how they conduct his or her life. One very important thing it means is bringing a person into the situation who didn't consent to the situation. That means a person to decides to raise children has certain obligations.

Girls, Guilt, and Getting It On

When writing a recent blog entry, I noted that there was a time when I was able to fornicate without feeling guilty. That thought deserves more examination. You're going to get a peek into the mind of a young man... what some of my most private thoughts were.

I was somewhat socially conservative as a teenager. While I had the same raging hormones any other boy had, I believed that sex was for marriage. I knew a lot of people were having sex outside of marriage, but whenever I realized for sure that I knew someone personally who was, whether they were close to my age or well into adulthood, I considered it somewhat of a minor scandal – not one where I would gossip to others about it, but I'd internally think less of the person.

I based my belief mostly on practical considerations that children should not be born out of wedlock and STDs were the end of the world. After all, I came of age when AIDS was killing famous people off, seemingly left and right. I was strongly opposed to abortion. Being the cautious person I was, I considered that the only way to be sure to avoid making babies out of wedlock or getting an STD was to abstain. I was aware of the Biblical prohibitions against fornication, but I figured that prohibition was based mostly on the practical considerations. I didn't consider the emotional, spiritual, or conflict-of-interest implications of sex outside of marriage. My study and understanding of the Bible was minimal at that time, and while my father had taken us (the children) to our musty-dusty mainline church, my mother stayed home, and we didn't discuss theology or religion at home other than my mother talking about religion in the academic sense. So, it wasn't like my parents impressed upon me the Christian virtues of chastity, and they probably figured I was conservative enough, obedient enough (and nerdy enough!) to stay out of trouble. After all, my mother, not even being religious, married as a virgin. Outside of the public school (= secular) teachings on the matter, my official sex education was my mother handing me a secular book (I was a reader) that did not encourage chastity, and letting me know I could ask questions.

I don't recall having questions, but I was modest and could be painfully shy about such things anyway, so even if I did have questions, I probably wouldn't have asked them. I was so modest that I was glad to avoid using locker rooms through much of my schooling, getting to officially avoid gym because I got plenty of daily exercise in a sport I was doing outside of school. And then the two years I was on a school team, I'd often be the first in the locker room, and out before others were in.

So how did I end up fornicating regularly and not feeling guilty?

Looking back, one major reason is that I never had to pressure any of my sexual/makeout partners in the slightest. None were virgins or had expressed any interest in being chaste. None ever slapped me or pushed me away. Most had more experience than I did. They expected regular sex and did not pressure me to "take the relationship to the next level", whether engagement or even just couple status because we were having sex. (There was one who pressured me to propose, but it wasn't because of the sex.) Liberated, forward, aggressive, uninhibited, slutty – whatever you want to call them, all I had to do was spend time with these women, and if they were interested, it would happen. If they weren't interested, they wouldn't agree to a second or third date - it wasn't like I was the one dropping them. With one exception, never did I date a woman for more than a date or two without, sooner or later, moving on to sex or something darn close. It was more their choice than mine, because I was fortunate in that I didn't attract women who would decide to keep dating me for the attention or freebies if they weren't going to have sex with me. The one exception was the woman who became my wife, who told me on our first date she was a virgin and was going to be one until her wedding night. That's not why she became my wife, but it is one reason the we were quickly on the road to marriage. But I wasn't some devestatingly handsome guy that turned heads and thus had a bunch of women giddy to be on my arm.

My first sexual partner was much older and had long had a high sex drive, and had wanted to seduce me, but restrained herself to flirting and hints until even clueless me started to get turned on to her. There was some guilt there because it was all new to me and I figured that a sexual relationship should at least have a marital future. The age difference made that unlikely.

I had a couple dates with a woman who was way too aggressive. I didn't feel guilty that she pulled out my penis and performed fellatio on me until I ejaculated on her. I felt weird that her parents were a mere closed door away.

My second girlfriend was also aggressive, and I thought we were going to get married. After all, I'd found someone essentially my age and we had some things in common. I did hesitate when I realized where the fateful night was going, and I told her I only wanted to have sex with a woman I could marry. She agreed. And we continued. The guilt and concern bothered me throughout, as the relationship was an unstable one and although she insisted she was unable to get pregnant, I was worried that she would. I actually shut things down a couple of times because of my concern, and she was not happy about being denied. She was the one pressuring me for sex.

I flat-out told the woman who became my third girlfriend that I wanted to save sex for marriage. If she told me the truth (and I believe her to this day), she had one sexual encounter with one boyfriend and two with another under her belt, so she was the closest thing to a virgin that I'd kissed. And yet she encouraged me to start staying with her some nights of the week, and from there things almost unavoidably evolved into regular sex. There was still some guilt there, but as with every other sexual partner, she did nothing to bring that feeling about. It was all my own doing.

After that, the guilt was gone, probably because my conscience in that regard had been deadened and I was angry with God over the end of that relationship. I never had another officially exclusive girlfriend until my wife, but I had intercourse with three other women and was a bad enough boy with several others. I did retain memories of how I viewed fornicators when I was a virgin, and so I usually didn't "kiss and tell", almost never actually admitting/telling anyone else when I was sexually involved with someone, even though it didn't take much to figure out I was. My family knew I was sexually involved with my girlfriends, and most of the people around me assumed it, but I maintained silence for the most part.

It wasn't like there were fathers or brothers around to give me withering looks. That's one way dating older women is easier. Heck, the first one's father was doing her himself (and I realize that's rape, not sex) when she was a teen, and I don't know if he was alive when we were dating – she didn’t live near her parents or brother. She was in her mid-40s, after all. I think the brother and the father of my second girlfriend realized that ship had long ago sailed and they were probably happy she was rid of her previous boyfriend, so they gave me no eye. The third girlfriend's mother told her it was good to have sex before marriage, and her mother and father not only didn't bat an eyelash when it was obvious I'd stayed overnight with their daughter, but on vacations they would make reservations and pay for this to happen. These were generally upstanding, kind, well-adjusted, respected people. And there was no brother, just an ex-brother-in-law who stayed around like part of the family. And he didn't give me any grief... because he wished he was in my shoes.

But there's still the inner dialogue – or the little angel on one shoulder and the little devil on the other. The first girlfriend was such a ego-stroker that I figured that while I didn't have certain other things going for me, I knew I could please a woman in bed. When was I was insecure and didn't think much of myself, I sought to please women in whatever way I could.

And this is the kind of stuff that would run through my head to stifle the guilt and dissolve my reservations, some only early on in my adulthood, some with only one of my partners:

Everyone's doing it.
It's no big deal.
You need practice - women want to marry a man with experience.
You're missing out; only a homo would turn this down.
You’re on a decline from your sexual peak; your body will never be more ready or potent – don't let life slip by without using/enjoying what you have. Why let it go to waste?
This could lead towards marriage.
It's okay because she’s not going to get pregnant, and she's clean.
She's going to have sex with someone. Might as well be you.
If you don't do it, that other guy will.
You're thinking about it anyway. Might as well do it.
You orgasmed, so you owe her.
This is the natural, normal next step and everyone expects it – even her parents.
Times have changed since the Bible was written. It's a different culture. Besides, God made your body ready for sex now.

And of course...

But it feels so good.

Do any of these sound familiar?

Do men have a responsibility to restrain themselves? Yes, we do. But as my wife's favorite grandmother once told her, it is a man's tendency to go as far as a woman will let him. It falls on the woman to keep boundaries. That's human nature such as it is. But when a woman is not only inviting, but pursuing the sex, it takes a man with not only a belief that his higher priority is to subject his sexual desires to restraint, but excellent coping skills and a very strong will. I didn't have all three at the same time. As with much of social life, women end up setting the tone. If they were eager beavers, so to speak, why was I going to feel guilty? I was guilty, but I didn't feel guilty for most of the time.

Bad Time to Argue

In what appears to be a self-defense shooting, a 57 year-old woman in Long Beach fatally shot a 25 year-old guy. Kelly Puente of the Long Beach Press-Telegram reports.

Police believe the incident stemmed from an altercation in a nearby apartment complex on 6600 block of Obispo Avenue, and say two men ran from the apartment and then hid on the roof of the woman's home.

A 57-year-old woman and her husband were inside the home at the time and heard people walking on the roof. They shouted for the people to get off their property and soon they saw two men jumping off their roof onto the front lawn.

The man and woman armed themselves with handguns and went outside, where a confrontation took place between the residents and the suspects. When one of the men confronted the woman, she fired two rounds, striking him in the upper torso, police said.

That area of Long Beach can get scary, so it isn't surprising if residents take up arms to protect themselves. It isn't too bright to argue with a couple of armed fifty-somethings.

The Los Angeles Times coverage calls the deceased a "victim", but the folks at that paper don't like cops using guns, and really don't like people protecting themselves with guns.

Sometimes, guns are used for good.

Why Get Married?

Can you explain to your brother, son, nephew, male coworker, or man on the street why he should get married?

Notice, I'm not asking why someone should have a relationship. People can spend time together, have sex, shack up, make babies... and many other things without being married. Legally and in most social and professional circles these days, it's a-ok.

Why should he sign on the dotted line on a state document?

I know why I got married.

It wasn't a matter of developing a relationship, and then deciding to get married because I knocked her up, or because she nagged me to, or because it seemed like the next logical step. Rather, I decided before I met my wife that if (and only if) I found the right woman – and I knew what that meant - I would marry her, because I wanted to be a husband and a father.

In the most stripped down nitty-gritty of it all, I got married to have guilt-free sex and to raise children. As such, I would never have married someone who didn't want to raise children, and I would never have married a woman I thought wasn't in to sex. (Yes, ladies... while those of you who read my blog tend to be kind that really enjoy sex, there are many women out there who merely tolerate it – if that.)

That might not sound romantic. "You mean you wouldn't have married your wife if you didn't want kids?" I’d have to say no. I wouldn't have even met her. And she wouldn't have married me if we had met. Neither one of us had kids out of love for each other. We both knew before we met that we wanted to be parents. So it was more like... we loved each other, in part, because both of us wanted kids.

There are three basic things that strongly influenced me to look for a wife to be the mother of my children. Without the second and third things, I probably would have gotten a vasectomy and enjoyed all of the casual sex women are offering these days.
1) I like the female body a lot and I like sex a lot. (I like the way a woman looks, moves, feels, tastes.)
2) I'm convinced Jesus Christ is my Lord and Savior and part of that package is that sex is for marriage.
3) I wanted to raise children, and believe they are best raised within marriage.

Take away #2 and #3, and I wouldn't have gotten married. Some guys have 2 and 3, but not number 1 – at least not enough to outweigh what they see as the risks or drawbacks to "marriage 2.0" – so they don't get married. It used to be that if a guy wanted sex, it wasn't so easy to find unless he got married or was willing to visit and pay a prostitute. But these days, it is very easy to find, and it often finds the men even if they aren't looking for it.

And, of course, there are guys who want children but don't see a need or marriage.

And there are guys who claim to be followers of Christ but do not believe that sex is for marriage, or at least not strongly enough to let it bother them. There was a time when I no longer felt guilty about fornicating, so I know it is possible for a guy, even if he once believed that sex was ideally for marriage, to get to that point. I could have stayed that way. But getting to that point and remaining in that state was not without emotional and spiritual cost – even if I avoided physical costs.


I got married for the sake of the children I wanted to have.

I got married because there's a difference between lovemaking and fornication, and I believed that, along with the other factors, the trade off of giving up the freedom and variety of fornication for married lovemaking would be worth it.

I got married because I knew the kind of woman I wanted to share my life and childrearing with would want a husband, and would want to be a wife. I could have had women who would have had sex with me, made me dinner, done my laundry, and done many of the things my wife does – without getting married. But I didn't want those women to share my life.

But that's me.

So, again I ask – especially of the ladies but also of the men: Can you explain to your brother, son, nephew, male coworker, or man on the street why he should get married? If you can, can it be done without appealing to God, religion, Scripture, or religious authority?

Husband or ex-husbands, why did you get married? If you're engaged now, why do you plan on getting married?

I'd like to know.

Not a Party Animal

"Abnormal or Private?", who I think is female, but I'm not sure, wrote in to Dear Margo wondering if she is anti-social.

I have always been a quiet, keep-to-myself kind of person. I have a small group of friends and family I spend time with, but I do prefer to do most things alone. I am friendly and quick to smile and always say "hi" to my neighbors. For my kids, I participate in birthday parties, school field trips, slumber parties and play dates.

Sounds good to me.

But since I have never enjoyed the party scene, my ex makes a point of informing everyone (including my neighbors) that I am "anti-social."

And your ex would never have any reason to lie or misrepresent you. What is this, Melrose Place?

Recently, a new family moved in downstairs. They quickly befriended everyone on our side of the complex, and their small family BBQs have escalated to include almost all of our neighbors at least three times a week.

That seems excessive.

They gather at the bottom of my stairs, making it difficult for me to come and go without walking through the middle of their party. Plus, I have to close all my windows and doors to keep the strong smell of weed out.

This is an argument for living in a single-family residence. With lots of acreage around it. Behind high walls. And a moat. And 24-hour armed security. With hungry Dobermans.

Am I anti-social? Is it wrong of me to feel uncomfortable and not enjoy constant ocializing?

Unless you've left out the part where you are killing homeless people and eating them, you’re normal. It is also normal to enjoy that kind of socializing. There's a range of normal going on here.
Dear Margo agrees:

The actual definition is being "unwilling or unable to associate in a normal or friendly way with other people." From what you write, you do not qualify. There is nothing wrong with wanting time to yourself and often preferring solitude to making small talk with others.

I always found parties and social events depressing in high school, or with mostly drunk strangers once I was out of high school. Fortunately, I wasn't popular enough to be clued in or invited to many. I very much enjoy parties with real friends and family. It is bad enough when the neighbors are blasting their ranchera (or whatever it is) music, with the bass turned up all the way, vibrating our windows. Late at night. It would be even worse if they were blocking my driveway and smoking their medical treatments.

What Happened in Vegas

Time for more insight into the male mind. Am I a Prude? wrote in to Dear Margo:

I think my husband is addicted to porn.

People can get "addicted" to anything that they enjoy. But read further to see what she considers porn.

While [visiting Las Vegas], we were going to see a show but couldn’t agree on which one. I wanted to see one of the highly recommended shows like Cirque du Soleil, but he wanted to see one of the erotic nude shows.

As others noted in the comments, they could have seen the Cirque show "Zumanity" which might have been sexy enough for the hubby.

I am not interested in seeing any type of show with naked people in it.

Okay.

I don't know why he thinks I would find that enjoyable, when I could be seeing "The Phantom of the Opera" or something good.

He would find in enjoyable because he has a penis, testicles, testosterone, eyes, and a male brain. Perhaps one of the shows he wanted to see is good, too. Just because a show or movie has nudity does not make it a bad show.

He says next time we go to Vegas, we will each pick a show and then go see the other’s show with them.

That might work. If he's willing to sit through a Broadway style musical with you, then he's a good husband in that respect. I would enjoy the Phantom show, but then I'm not the average straight guy when it comes to lavish musicals - Phantom specifically. Wicked sounds okay, too.

Should I agree and then, when the show makes my stomach hurt, excuse myself to go to the restroom and not come back?

If you are unable to stomach something, then don't do it. But your intolerance could be part of a larger problem. It sounds more like you are unwilling, not unable.

I don't want to see other men naked.

There are probably plenty of shows with nude or partially nude women with no male nudity.

And all I think about is that our daughter is 19 and how would I feel if she were baring her body for hundreds of men?

That's up to her. The people in those shows have chosen to be in those shows. They auditioned to be in those shows.

If I am reading it correctly, the implication she is making that is because she doesn't want to see other men naked in a show, he's not supposed to want to see other women naked in a show. She doesn't offer moral objections, just her personal tastes. If he doesn't want a candlelit dinner, does that mean she shouldn't want one? She wouldn't want her daughter doing one of those shows, but I know people who don't want their adult daughters working as housekeepers. Not wanting your child to do something does not make it wrong per se.

A moral or religious argument could be made for not going to see one of the shows her husband wanted to see, but this woman doesn't even allude to that. I don't think, based on this letter, that her husband has a problem. I write this as someone who has never watched a nude/stripping performance in person.

I wonder if there's more to the story. Is this woman keeping herself in shape and keeping herself up? Is she hiding herself from her husband? The other day I got a look at my wife walking by without a stitch of clothing when there was enough light for me to see her – a rate treat these days. I don't think there is a more beautiful sight in the world. My wife is stunning. Even so, males still tend to enjoy the sight of various women. That a man enjoys the sight of other women does not mean he isn't extremely attracted to and in love with his wife.

And speaking of that, absent other info, it doesn't sound like her husband has an addiction. (Actually, if you read her full letter, I would be more likely to wonder if he has a gambling addiction, but there wasn't even enough info to really lead that way either.)

Here's a checklist I just came up with for women worried because their husband wants to see one of those shows, or looks at images or videos of women or people having sex while on his own time, using his own computer/TV:

1. Ignoring this, is your husband being a good father, good husband, good citizen, and good employee?
2. Is he making love to you regularly?
3. Does he turn you down when you ask for/initiate sex?
4. Is he viewing it in front of minor children?
5. Is he spending anything more than personal allowance/recreation money on it?
6. Is he neglecting any of his responsibilities (chores, errands, appointments, time with family/friends)?

If you answered no to #3, 4,5, and 6, then you have a normal husband who does not have a problem habit. If you answered "yes" to #1 and 2, you have a great husband. (If you answered "yes" to #6 or "no" to #1 or 2, then there could be larger problems and his viewing could be a symptom.)

None of this is to say that there's nothing wrong with a guy (or gal) being involved in that stuff. But I think some people go way overboard in worrying about it, and I think the Christian writers and speakers I generally enjoy damage their credibility when they make it sound like flipping through Playboy will likely lead men down a path turning men into rapists and murderers.

Dear Margo also believes the letter writer was making too much of the situation, and went for the "see one of each together" option.

Here's another solution: Regularly empty the husband's testicles while in Vegas. He likely will have no motivation to spend the time/money on one of those shows.

Letting Them Down Easy

Breaking up can be hard to do if for no other reason than the other person goes to pieces. IN A FIX, PASCAGOULA, MISS wrote in to Dear Abby:

I have been in a relationship with a lady for the past few months. How do I tell her that I want out without hurting her badly?

You can't. Other than getting out of the draft, who ever likes being rejected?

"It's not you, it's me. You see, I don't like you." – Adam Carolla

I have tried a couple of times to end things, but she gets hysterical, starts crying and accuses me of wanting someone else, which is not true.

It really doesn't matter why you want out. If you want out, you want out. You're not obligated to justify yourself to a girlfriend. What, if she doesn't like your reason you can't leave? It is nice if you tell her something constructive, or let her know (if it is true) that there's nothing she did wrong.

Don't be a hostage to her breakdowns. This is one of those areas there Tom Leykis helped me. Sometimes, you need to think like a selfish jerk and stop trying to be so sensitive and accommodating, because it is the best way to deal with how a someone else behaves. This is one of those times.

If she threatens to kill herself, or you otherwise think it would be helpful, schedule a session at a licensed therapist/shrink’s office, letting your girlfriend believe that it is couples counseling. Then, when the first session starts, explain that you are leaving and that she had previously threatened suicide, and then get up and leave. She'll be the responsibility of the therapist.

If she threatens to harm you, then file a police report and get a restraining order, and avoid her completely.

Bait and Switch

Looking to the Future wrote in to Dear Margo:

My husband and I are in our late 20s and have been married nearly five years. It’s been a fairly good and happy marriage.

Great.

Before we got married, we agreed that we would move to my home state (a 12-hour drive away) in five or six years, and also that we would have children in that same timeframe. Now that the five-year mark is fast approaching, my husband is getting cold feet. He is happy with the life we have and doesn’t particularly want children - too much responsibility and money and too many obstacles to being able to go out with friends on a whim, etc. He is also now firmly against moving.

He committed fraud. Very rotten of him. Well, I suppose there's a slim chance that he truly wanted those things and, over time, his mind has changed.

When I bring up that he agreed to these things, he says, "But at the time, five years seemed so far away."

Yeah, so did death, but he vowed faithful marriage until then, didn't he?

Even though I’m fairly happy now and I do love him, I feel I will get more sad and depressed with each passing year, and I’m having thoughts that maybe I should leave him now so I have time to move home, find someone else and have children instead of wasting more time.

Yes, leave him now. Maybe he really isn't all that happy with you. If he is happy now, he won't be once you start doing certain things (and not doing others) because you'll be resenting him. Leaving him will free you up to look for a new husband, one who is right for you. There's no guarantee you'll find one. But the husband you have now doesn't seem to be the right one.

Do not try to get him to change his mind, or go ahead and get pregnant. If someone doesn’t really want children, there is no compromise. Now, as Dear Margo pointed out, do a gut check and see if those things are important enough to you to leave what you see as a happy marriage. Do you really want those things? Don't try to convince yourself that you don't if you really do. And if you do really want those things, and he doesn't, then you should leave.

I speak as someone with experience. No, I never married the wrong person. But I did spend years with girlfriends I couldn't marry if I wanted to keep my goals, and there was a time when I was unmarried and did a gut check and asked myself if I really did want to be a husband & father or not. Either he wants children or he doesn't.

More Childless Women

Amanda Marcotte, who blogs at pandagon.net and rhrealitycheck.org and identifies as a "progressive" said she was surprised by a recent Pew Research Center study showing that the share of American women who are not becoming mothers has nearly doubled since 1976, from 10 percent of the population to 18 percent. She writes in "The Real Reason More Women Are Childless"…

Personally, I was happy to see that more women feel free to forgo childbearing.

Why? You don’t want new labor, inventors, investors, managers, artists, engineers, taxpayers, and soldiers to keep things going? You'd rather American culture be replaced? Yes, it is nice for them to know they have the choice not to become mothers. But that fewer Americans with the capabilities to be good parents are having children is not a good thing.

But there seems to be a pushback...

According to Pew, 38 percent of Americans now denounce childlessness as bad for society. That's up from 29 percent just two years ago.

That some people never have children is fine. If just about everyone didn't have children, isn't it self-evident that it would be bad for society? It isn't good for a team if most of the team dies off and isn't replaced.

So what's behind the increase in women choosing the non-mom route? According to social conservatives, legal abortions are to blame for declining birth rates.

Somewhat, sure. Unless you believe that, even with contraception around, women are getting pregnant at such higher rates than when abortion rates were much lower (say, 40 year ago) that the increase in abortions among previously childless women can't offset that increase. Abortion is the symptom, though – it doesn't explain why women don't want a child (except when abortion damages her emotionally, or physically, so she can't).

My guess is that 1) we've turned children into more of a liability instead of an asset, and 2) women are now more self-centered.

However, that doesn't mean that the passage of Roe v. Wade had no impact on the upturn in childless women. Defense of legal abortion led feminists to create a national discourse around the concept of "choice," which helped legitimize the decision to remain childless. This created a space for women who never wanted children to embrace their true desires.

Yes, talking about what a horrible drag children are – so much of a drag that dismembering them is the best option in millions of cases - can have that effect.

Part of this new self-awareness might mean that women are forsaking motherhood because we're finally admitting that it isn't all it's cracked up to be.

Maybe it isn't, if you're bad at it, or you're bad at picking a father for your kids - or you were delusional about what it was going to be like. Your parents downplay the "negatives" of having children until after they are born, because they want grandchildren. Then once they have their grandchildren, they respond to your complaints about what you don't like about how your life has changed with "Oh.... yeah... well, that happens when you have kids."

As last week's New York magazine cover story documented, parenthood is becoming increasingly miserable because of the exploding expectations placed on mothers—making the child-free lifestyle seem all the more attractive.

Motherhood has always been hard and consuming. Where are these new expectations coming from? Ah, that's right. Feministas who tell mothers they need to have careers, too, and the people who encourage women to raise children without a man, drive husbands away, neglect husbands, or divorce good husbands. That brings on more obligations for a mother.

In 1988, only 39 percent of Americans disagreed with the notion that the childless "lead empty lives." Now a majority-59 percent-disagree that childlessness automatically means you're unfulfilled.

I do agree that someone can be fulfilled without ever raising children. But as Dennis Prager points out, they haven't experienced the most they can. That's true about a lot of things in life, but parenting is a much bigger thing.

Still, a woman who chooses to remain childless continues to face a series of negative stereotypes, from claims that she's selfish to implications that she's too career-minded and self-centered to remember to breed before it's too late.

There are people who have children for selfish reasons as well as people who don't for selfish reasons. And some people have children because they are lazy and had sex without caring enough to do something to avoid conception. That's just reality.

But clearly there are upsides to childlessness. Just looking around my own apartment, I can see the value in furniture that's gone unruined, cats that have gone unbothered, and a distinct lack of toys cluttering up my floor.

That's it? Can’t you come up with more? I sure can. More free time and money, more freedom in general/fewer obligations. Everything is a trade off, though. I'll take my son's laugh over preserved furniture any day.

Gayle, age 30, drolly observed, "My ovaries do not stir when I see a baby."

I hope for her sake she feels the same way when it is too late. Even if she regrets not having kids, it will be better than if she had kids and then neglected them. But I'd prefer everyone be happy with not having had kids if they didn't, and having kids if they did.

Most believed that it wasn't harmful to society and could, in fact, be beneficial. But few spoke about benefits to the environment or women's pocketbooks. Instead, childless women argued that increasing childlessness is good … for the children.

"Honey, me not giving you a diamond engagement ring is good for the ring." How can it be good for a kid for the kid to be aborted, or for the kid to not exist in the first place?

Dana, age 34, made this case forcefully. "Many children are treated bad or abandoned. Some live their entire lives in foster care."

But this doesn't explain why Dana chooses to be childless, unless she's saying she would be abusive or neglectful.

Natalie agreed that her attachment to her disposable income could be considered selfish but said, on the other hand, "When I ask friends of mine who have/want kids what their reasons are, the answers range from 'I don't know' to 'I want someone to love me' to 'I want someone to take care of me in my old age,' which are not only also selfish but poorly reasoned."

I agree. Like I said, some people have selfish motivations either way. However, whether from a Darwinian or a theistic paradigm, having children is not inherently selfish. It is how we continue our society.

Could these childless women be harbingers of a new world, one in which parenthood is considered an active choice and not simply the default state of adulthood?

Uhm, hasn't it been that way for decades now? I chose to have kids. I actively made that choice. There was a time when I considered not ever becoming a father.

Cindy Krischer Goodman also wrote about this. She is CEO of BalanceGal LLC, "a provider of news and advice on how to balance work and life."

A look behind the numbers reveals more of what this trend reflects - a generation of women who are not necessarily choosing career over kids but rather finding that time has passed and their focus has been elsewhere. Women are starting businesses in record numbers, advancing in corporate arenas, and blazing career trails in male-dominated industries. They are the bulk of people getting advanced degrees, and they are getting married later in life.

That’s all fine. I'd rather a woman not have a children only to have that child raised by strangers and MTV.

Many of these women say they are happy and fulfilled.

Good for the ones who are.

Some have made work a priority, but others discovered by the time they found the right mate and decided to have children, they couldn't.

And a lot of those women were playing around with guys who weren't "the right mate" for a good chunk of the time, and a many of those could have found the right mate if they’d really wanted to... they probably even rejected him or he avoided her because she was with some jerk.

At the same time, childless people in today's workplace often feel their personal time is less valued. "If you have a pet in distress and need time off, it's not viewed the same as a child who needs to go to doctor," Lauby said.

Nor should it be. I'm a pet owner, but pets are not humans.

I'm encouraged that women are increasingly exercising their right to choose the circumstances under which they have children.

Who isn't?

While I am a father and enjoy my kids, I'm not one of those "everyone should have kids" people, nor someone who thinks women shouldn't have careers. No woman (or man, for that matter) should have children unless they want to and prepared to be good parents. In fact, I think that women who do get pregnant and don't want to be mothers should give their child up for adoption. I don't want to "punish them with a child" as some would way. Let someone else be blessed by being able to raise that child.

Update on Sexual Assault Convicts

Yay! As Joseph Serna wrote in the Daily Pilot, California’s Supreme Court rebuffed a request to review a petition (got that?) by three punks who assaulted a teenaged minor. They wanted their convictions overturned and not to have to register as sex offenders.

Warning – the details get disturbing.

Greg Haidl, 25, the son of former Assistant Sheriff Don Haidl, was convicted five years ago of sexually assaulting a teenage girl in 2002. Greg Haidl and his two accomplices, Keith Spann and Kyle Nachreiner, both 25, were minors when they sexually assaulted a 16-year-old girl while she was passed out on Haidl's pool table in his garage in Corona del Mar.

The boys inserted a pool cue into her anus and her vagina, where they also inserted a Snapple bottle and lit cigarette, among other items. The group videotaped the attack, which a friend later found and turned over to police.

Note to criminals: Keep evidence of your crime.

The men were seeking to have their convictions overturned because some testimony about the girl's sexual past was not allowed at trial.

I don’t care if she did a chain every weekend. Well, I would care. But it isn’t relevant. It's like saying you are entitled to go into someone's wallet without asking and steal money because that person has previously given away their money to others and you. Only it is worse because it is her body.

If some young man is convicted of running around flashing adult women from ten yards away, and five years down the road he's behaved himself and matured and asks to get his designation as a sex offender removed, that I think is a fair request. But the sex offender registry is made for people who physically abuse other people in the worst ways. These guys had skilled legal representation. They were connected. And they still got convicted. They're guilty.

Read my previous comments on this case.

Leykis Talks Business

The Los Angeles Business Journal caught up with Tom Leykis, who had a high-rated syndicated radio show based in Los Angeles until the flagship station switched in February 2009 from "hot talk" to Top 40 - and made significant gains on the longstanding Top 40, home-of-Ryan Seacrest station of the rival industry behemoth. He looks like he's not doing to well in keeping his weight down, but then as he'd say, he doesn’t need to be physically attractive because his “money, power, and fame” gets him exactly what he wants when it comes to women. "I'm really attractive to women when I'm wearning my suit made of $100 bills."

I think he would have laughed at podcasters in the past, but times have changed.

Since the publication is a business journal, it focuses on the business model Leykis is trying, necessitated by his contract still being in effect and changing conditions in radio. He's producing podcasts out of his home and selling ads on eBay.

Leykis was a colorful personality on the former KLSX-FM (97.1), where his daily show included misogynistic advice to lovelorn males about how they could bed women without spending a lot of money or effort.

Although the word if often applied to him, I’m not sure "misogynistic" is the right word, at least according to this definition: “showing a hatred and distrust of women”.

Distrust of women? You bet. He showed distrust of people in general. He's a "get it in writing", self-reliance kind of guy. But the definition says "hatred and". I know women who called in or women in the media/blogosphere found him infuriating when he called them out for their double standards, logical fallacies, and bad behavior and he correctly explained a set of behaviors men could employ to get more sex while avoiding commitments, obligations, or spending a lot of time or money. But if a woman would call him and ask for advice or explanation and wouldn't try to pull one over on him, he would give it with respect and often cheerfully and generously. I just can't conclude that he hates women as a group after I've heard him tell women callers how to protect themselves from abusive men, or how to make the most of their finances.

His contract with CBS pays his full salary and prevents him from doing his talk show until March 2012. Getting paid not to work sounds great, except that it can hurt his career to be off the broadcast airwaves or so long, lowering his profile. So he's hoping to get this new thing running well and attracting downloaders until he can resume being a talk show host.

“It’s called the New Normal for a reason,” he told the Business Journal. “You can’t run a business with the same cost structure and pay the salaries that you once did. But we have no transmitter, no cubicles, no sales hierarchy – just an Internet server.”

Leykis is now an off-air producer who plans to create high-quality talk and music programming for “cents on the dollar” compared with what it costs traditional radio stations, while also selling advertising for these programs for a fraction of what radio stations charge. His goal is to prove the validity of this business model before his contract runs out. That’s when he can launch a show with his own voice, and capitalize on the distribution system he hopes to have established.

The article notes that former broadcast mainstay Adam Carolla has a thriving podcast model going already - the difference, of course, is that Carolla is the talker.

I have yet to get into the podcast thing. I’ve downloaded exactly one hour of radio – the hour in which Dr. Laura read my letter. Maybe that will change when my newly purchased player arrives.

As for Leykis – I disagreed with him on some important things, but his advice was usually entirely logical for secular hedonists. Women seemed to hate the fact that it "worked" in large part to how a lot of women behave.

Did Aimee L. Sword Read Sophocles?

Looks like we have what could be another case of Genetic Sexual Attraction*. Or maybe the mother is just a pedophile. Tammy Stables Battaglia reports in the Free Press.

A Waterford mother will spend at least nine years in prison for having sex with the 14-year-old son she gave up for adoption when he was a few days old.

She gave him for adoption when he was a few days old – she didn't have sex with him when he was a few days old. I hope.

Aimee L. Sword, 36, apologized for her actions at her sentencing Monday in Oakland County Circuit Court, said her attorney Mitchell Ribitwer.

Judge Daniel O'Brien sentenced Sword to nine to 30 years in prison.

Thirty years! Looks like she didn't get the vagina discount in sentencing.

Sword received yearly updates and pictures from the boy's adoptive family in Grand Rapids, Ribitwer said. But when she didn't get a picture when the boy turned 14, she contacted him online through a social networking site.

And then things got strange. Another example of why closed adoptions (of whatever they call it when there isn't any contact) is a better way to go.

After the teen got into trouble in Grand Rapids, his adoptive mother -- not knowing about the relationship -- agreed to allow him to stay with Sword in Waterford.

So... he wanted to go, or did this woman offer to "help" and the adoptive mother agreed, against the boy's wishes?

Married at the time, Sword shared her home with her husband and five other children, toddlers to late teens.

Five kids, a hubby, and she did the boy in her home? When?!?

This is not just an evil thing to do to the boy, but and evil thing to do to her husband and the children who lived with her.

But after he returned to Grand Rapids, he talked about the incidents to a counselor, who reported them to police.

"It's the first time I've really seen something like that between a mother-son," Oakland County Prosecutor Jessica Cooper said Monday after the sentencing.

Hmmm. I think it happens – it just isn't reported, perhaps in some cases because the boy feels special or grown up or think he is equally guilty because he enjoys it on some level. I'm speculating because I didn't have sex with an older woman – or anyone – until I was 19, and I certainly wasn't sexually abused in any way by a blood relative or anyone else. Even if the child enjoys the activity, it is wrong (people see that more readily when the sexes are reversed). Even if he didn't so much as feel pressured by her, it robs him of some important things and he shouldn't have been put in the position. Aside from messing with his mind - what if she had given him an STD or gotten pregnant by him?

*I can buy the idea of Genetic Sexual Attraction. Someone who is not raised with someone else isn't going to see them as child or parent or sibling. Throw in the fact that your offspring will look like a combination of you (which plays to narcissism... or and/or your parents and siblings who you knew and were fond of) and the person you were attracted to enough to have the sex that made the child. And you want to have some sort of connection or bond with this person you've missed for years. So I can understand - but people have to be accountable for their actions and not act on all of their feelings.

How much more is this going to happen with all of the kids being raised with full or half siblings or with one of their biological parents somewhere else? Aside from adoption, think of all of the out-of-wedlock births, the multiple marriages/divorces, egg and sperm donations, etc.

A Real Housewife of Orange County

Erika I. Ritchie of the Orange County Register reports on some interesting doings in Lake Forest, California. Looks like more script material for Law & Order: SVU. For the sake of discussion, I will assume the article accurately reports the relevant information of a truthful police report and truthful statements from the wife. Remember, everyone is considered innocent until proven guilty in a court of law... blah blah blah...

So the hubby was arrested after turning himself in. He is accused of beating and duct-taping his wife. But there's more. A lot more.

Alireza Sazegari, 31, was arrested on witness intimidation, spousal abuse, kidnapping and assault with a deadly weapon, said sheriff's spokesman Jim Amormino.

Can’t you just see this guy on Dr. Phil?

According to police reports, Orange County sheriff's deputies responded Wednesday morning to the couple's home in the 25000 block of Rivendell after the wife's friend found her beaten and bound in duct tape in the bathroom.

Thank God for that friend.

The 30-year-old wife, who's name has not been released, told police that her husband frequently beat her and didn't let her leave the house unless she was with him or unless she went to work, said Deputy Richard Nelson. She also told them that she is limited to specific rooms in the house.

Please tell me that they don’t have any children. If they don't, one might wonder why she didn't flee while at work. But she’s most likely developed something like the Stockholm Syndrome.

Deputies found 20 cameras in the house that appeared to be remotely monitored by Sazegari via his iPhone, Nelson said.

Freak.

The wife told police that her husband became angry after she spoke to an unauthorized man. She said he beat her and forced her to call in sick at work, Nelson said.

An "unauthorized man"? Unauthorized by her husband, I presume. Or is that some bizarre new euphemism for an illegal alien?

She told deputies that she'd been warned by Sazegari not to leave the bathroom and that if police became involved Sazegari had threatened to kill her. She told police that Sazegari had taken her cell phone and locked the house phone, Nelson said.

Deputies also found $10,000 worth of surveillance cameras and fingerprint-activated door locks, Nelson said.

He'll have better conditions and less supervision in prison.

What are the odds that this marriage was essentially forced?

What are the odds he'll still get chicks?

This is an example of where I would be in favor of a woman getting just about everything in a divorce. Should a guy like that really get half of the marital assets? No way. Just think... their money (which means her money, too) will go to pay for his defense. Ugh.

Father of The Month

Sarah Burge of the Press-Enterprise reports from the inland area east of Los Angeles:

A southwest Riverside County father accused of tying up and using a stun gun on a 23-year-old man who sent his 17-year-old daughter an explicit cell phone photo pleaded not guilty Friday to assault and other charges.

The paper's headline calls the 23-year-old a "teen prankster". I wasn't aware that 23 was teenaged. And prankster? Please.

Authorities allege that William Atwood Sr., 45, angry over the photo, lured Justin Moore to his home in French Valley. He then ordered him to strip down to his boxer shorts, fired a shotgun in the air, bound him with zip ties and shocked him with a Taser, authorities say. Eventually, he turned him over to a Riverside County sheriff's deputy.

So what's wrong with that?

"We don't authorize people to take the law into their own hands," said Supervising Deputy District Attorney Gerald Fineman. "That's why we have law enforcement."

Well, yeah, government agencies usually don’t advocate people do things for themselves that government agencies are supposed do – like educating children. Okay, so perhaps dealing with sex offenders this way is different.

Moore, who lives in Temecula and knows Atwood's daughter and son, told sheriff's investigators that he had sent a cell phone photo of his genitals to the girl and other friends as a joke.

A joke? Well, I guess it would depend on the size of the subject.

Investigators confirmed that Moore sent the photo to several people, including Atwood's daughter. Prosecutors declined to file charges against him.

Where's Chris Hanson?

Fineman said prosecutors would have to prove the photo was sent with a sexual intent. That does not appear to have been the case, he said.

Really? Huh? Have I missed something?

Fineman said Moore did not send the photo out of the blue. The group of friends, which included Atwood's daughter, had exchanged cell phone photos in the past that might be considered inappropriate.

Ah, I see. So I guess acquaintance rape wouldn't be so bad if they'd engaged in heavy petting on a different date.

Okay, so if the father really did everything alleged, then I could see how some people might think he went a teeny bit too far.

Now, can we lock Roman Polanski in a room with him?

Another Rapist Off the Streets

When I saw this story, I knew something rotten was going on. Either a guy was being slandered in the worst way, or a defense attorney was adding to the pain of rape victims. The jury decided it was the latter, finding Carlos Aguirre Jr. of Wilmington guilty on all counts. Long Beach Press-Telegram writer Tracy Manzer reports.

The 25-year-old Wilmington man was initially charged with six felony counts stemming from rapes of the victims - ages 14 to 16 - from 2004 to 2006.

Included in the filing was a count of possession of ecstasy and marijuana for sale - drugs that were used to incapacitate his victims - and a count of possession of child pornography for some 120 images found on his computer - featuring an 18-minute video of one victim being raped by Aguirre and a 12-year-old boy.

Six additional rape counts were added to the case shortly before trial.

Prison was made for guys like this. In the old days, he would have been beaten to death by men in the family of these girls. But we’re much gentler and orderly now.

All the counts stem from incidents in which Aguirre was an adult, though jurors heard from several witnesses that he began molesting his niece when she and Aguirre were children.

I would guess someone did something to him when he was younger. But at some point, a person is fully responsible for their actions and must break the cycle.

Aguirre's niece said the abuse started when was 5 and included her uncle forcing her 8-year-old brother to have sex with her as well as the molestation of she and her half-sister at the same time.

Multiple witnesses testified that Aguirre was convicted of raping his other niece when he was juvenile, resulting in the defendant serving two years in a juvenile detention facility.

It obviously didn't help, other than keeping him from hurting innocent people for two years. But I do have to wonder – what kind of parent, knowing what this guy did, allowed him around their children?

[Defense attorney] Russ argued that victim's problems in high school, her struggles with depression and alcohol and her father's taking away her car prompted her to lash out at her uncle.

People do tend to have problems when they've been raped, or are being raised by the kind of people that allow them to be around rapists. Oh, and yeah... a typical reaction of a teen who is mad at a parent is to accuse someone else of rape, right? I know people have a right to a legal defense, but I don’t think I could defend a client in a case that would require me to verbally attack minor rape victims.

He's facing a sentence of more than 100 years plus multiple life terms. The best thing he can do now is admit what he did, apologize, beg for forgiveness, expose anyone else he knows who aided his crimes, and write from prison to warn others how to avoid becoming vicitims of people like him.

Fantasy

The Generous Wife gave a perspective on fantasy back in February. (I am going through older items I have accumulated for blogging consideration.)

I think imagination is a gift from God. It serves a number of purposes, but, like most things, can be used for good or bad. As believers, we need to be wise about how we use our imaginations. I think there is nothing wrong with writing bedroom stories. I think there is nothing wrong with role playing. I think there is nothing wrong with enjoying sexual memories or creating sexual fantasies. I do think we need to be prayerful about content. We need to understand that where the mind goes the body may follow, where we create an appetite we may want to feed.

I don't mean to throw a lot of fear on y'all, really I don't. I'm for outrageous generosity, including where the bedroom is concerned. I just want to suggest a certain amount of care. I don't think there's anything wrong with fantasizing that you and your husband are young again, that you're deserted on a island, or that you live in another time (goodness, if you want to be aliens, go for it). I do get concerned when folks involve other people in their fantasies or if they imagine doing things that their spouse would never in a million years ever do (that may create a hunger for something that's just not going to happen and end in frustration for everyone).

God gave us imagination. We can use it for good or for ill. One way we can use it is to create even more fun for our spouse. It is okay to pretend. It is okay to pretend while making love with your spouse.

See You Want to Do WHAT?