Revisiting Hank Hanegraaff and the Bible Answer Man

This entry may be of no interest to my readers who aren't "evangelical" Christians. Sorry.

Stop That Clock

I don’t like to see people divorce. That's just one reason I don’t like to see people get married when they aren't prepared to be spouses or aren't right for each other. For followers of Christ, divorce is allowed (certainly not commanded) for unfaithfulness, which can translate into the "A"s – adultery, abandonment, abuse, and addiction. I would also include fraud in that. Abuse isn't a husband telling a wife she has enough shoes or that she should probably skip that extra scoop of ice cream. Abuse involves physical force, terrorizing, etc. Addiction doesn't mean that your husband likes to play video games or masturbate to nude pictures of adult women when he's sexually rejected. Addiction means drinking himself into a stupor repeatedly, spending the savings on crack, etc.

While divorce is never the ideal (the ideal would be not marrying the wrong person in the first place), if divorce is justified and almost certain, the laws of your state may behoove you to avoid delay. In states like the one I'm in, two more days of marriage mean one more day of alimony, and ten years of marriage means lifetime alimony.

With that in mind, check out the plight of "Broken Heart in Michigan" writing in to Dear Margo:

I am a 24-year-old male who’s been going through a pretty tough time for quite a while. I’m a former serviceman who got married during my military tour. While I was still in, I had to be away for a period of two weeks, unable to leave my command. I was able to call my wife every day when my daily shifts were over, and everything seemed to be OK. However, when I was finally able to return home, the house was cleaned out, except for my uniforms and very few other objects.

At least she didn't mess with his head while he was at his command. I'll give her that.

A letter was on the counter stating she had left for her home state to be with another man. Six months later, I was discharged and returned to my own home state. All of this happened three years ago.

When he was 21. That was young to marry.

Since then, we have been in limited contact via email, and every time the topic of divorce comes up, she gets dodgy and disappears for weeks if not months. At one point, she sent me a package of divorce papers from the state we were married in,

I wonder which state that is? It matters.

and I filled them out on my end and sent them back to the state’s court system. However, nothing happened with the proceedings. I again filed for divorce through my home state and had her “served.” She blatantly refused to answer them, and the courts will do nothing until she does. What can I do? I need to move on.

I don't know how things work in Michigan*, and neither does Dear Margo. She tells him to get a lawyer, and that's good advice. The marriage can't be anywhere near the ten year mark, but it is possible that she's trying to extend his alimony requirement. She could also be lowering his credit rating. This is a case of abandonment and there's no good reason to delay. He obviously made a mistake marrying her.

*When the Muslims take over the state, he may be able to marry four women and get them beheaded if they get out of line.

Merry Christmas!!!

Here we are again.

Merry Christmas, everyone.

Thanks for reading this blog and for all of your feedback.

I pray that you are having a great and meaningful Christmas.

Don't spend too much time online, especially if you could be spending that time with framily and friends during this special time of year.

Can't Have a Wedding Without a Groom

Well, a few US states and a few countries say you can. But I'm talking about real marriage, not activist-invented piggy-backing.

"ROB IN TOMAKOMAI" wrote in to Dear Abby:

I am beyond tired of the number of women I read about in your column who refer to their wedding day as "my special day." News flash, ladies: You should be using the term "our special day"!

I agree, but most of these women writing in have been shacking up with the guy for years, and in many of those cases, he’s already had everything he wanted, and he’s agreed to get married and have more than just a bare-minimum wedding ceremony because she’s been nagging him for it, or his family or others around them want it, even if just to have a party. In those cases, it really is her special day, and he would rather it not even happen. Most of those guys will not actually say that, for fear of upsetting her. After all, the reason they are going along with it is because they didn't want to have her move out.

If you're so focused on your dress and hair and any faux pas -- real or imagined -- your guests may commit that you lose focus on the life you and your husband are beginning, perhaps you should buy a pet rather than get married.

One of the problems is when the "wedding machine" gets cranking after the engagement, and life for her is all about planning the wedding. She isn't devoting her attention to make sure she isn't making a mistake marrying this guy, and she has an incentive to ignore any red flags she does see – to avoid the hassle and embarrassment of calling off the wedding.

Any person who has stayed married for more than a few years knows the marriage ceremony is the easy part. The self-absorption that permeates today's wedding scene ranges from embarrassing to sickening.

Well said, Rob! A wedding is an important event, and it is understandable why a bride would fret about the details. But the reason a wedding is important is that it is the legal, social, spiritual, and often religious uniting of the couple; it is supposed to change many things about their lives. When that is forgotten in the planning of what becomes a theatrical event, a party, and a vacation, marriage is trivialized.

Dear Abby responded:

Weddings (and funerals) can bring out the worst in people because they are times when emotion sometimes trumps common sense.

And they are events that can bring together people who may share blood or (past) legal ties, but don't like each other.

The majority of American brides are gracious, polite, loving and hardworking. They are also prepared for the realities that come after the fairy tale wedding.

Eh... the statistics say otherwise. Actually, most people (regardless of sex) who are getting married for the first time don't truly know what they are getting themselves into, no matter how much they've read, talked, and thought about it. It is like becoming a parent. You can know on an intellectual level, but you don't really know until you're in the middle of it.

Please don't judge all American brides by the ones you read about in my column. The weddings that go smoothly I don't hear about.

Good point!

My MIL actually tells the story of walking down the aisle as a bride and noticing how nice it was to have all of her friends and family there, and was struck with the thought of, "Oh, he's here, too" when she saw her husband-to-be waiting for her at the altar.

Kobe Bryant: Another Poster Boy For the Marriage Strike

None of us really know what was going on in the marriage of Kobe and Vanessa Bryant. Let's get that out of the way up front. However, we can make some educated guesses and note some realities that we're sure about:

1. They got married young.

2. NBA basketball players, especially superstars, have women constantly offering them sex; that is only part of the hero worship and butt-kissing they get. They are on the road a lot of their careers.

3. Kobe Bryant admitted to infidelity; at least one woman accused him of assault/rape.

4. Everyone knew Kobe Bryant was going to make hundreds of millions of dollars between his pay for the NBA and endorsements.

5. There was no prenup. In California, generally... ten years of marriage or more generally means lifetime alimony and everything acquired during the marriage is "community property" and split 50/50.

6. They have kids, and I expect Kobe will have to pay "child support" on top of everything else he will be paying. I put child support in quotes because it will be many times the amount it takes to actually support a child.

7. Kobe Bryant fulfilled the "traditional" role of bring home income... very, very well.

8. Vanessa Bryant probably didn't have to do much cooking, cleaning, laundry, or many of the other things homemakers have traditionally done. Did they children ever not have a nanny around?

An elite few men will ever make anything like the money Kobe does, or be the best in their field. But as extreme of an example as it is, this situation is still an example of why some guys do, or should, avoid marriage, or at least have a prenup.

This is what Janis Carr and Sean Emery reported in the Orange County Register...

According to Orange County Superior Court records, a petition to dissolve the couple’s marriage was filed by Vanessa Bryant and response was filed by Kobe Bryant on the same day.

As is the case with the majority of divorce, she's the one who filed.

A report on TMZ.com said the Lakers guard, who was accused of sexually assaulting a Colorado woman in 2003, was unfaithful again.

It is a rare man who can resist the temptation thrown at an NBA superstar.

The Bryants have been married for 10 1/2 years, having wed April 18, 2001 in a small ceremony in Corona del Mar. They have two daughters, Natalia Diamante, 8, and Gianna Maria, 5.

The couple reportedly does not have a prenuptial agreement, which means Vanessa could be entitled to half of Bryant’s net worth, estimated at $360 million. He signed a three-year contract extension in last year worth nearly $90 million that will keep him with the Lakers through the 2013-14 season and he has endorsements with Nike, Turkish Airlines, Nubeo watches and Vitamin Water brand of drinks.

Call me cynical, but I'm highly suspicious of the timing. Why not a year ago? Could it be because if they split after nine and a half years, she would have stopped getting alimony less than five years down the line?

Whatever you think of professional basketball, it involves a lot of hard work and is high-pressure. This isn't a matter of a couple of people looking at a middle-class life in which the wife could have had a career that paid as much or more as the husband's, and they jointly agree that she would take care of the kids and he would take care of her. Vanessa not only wasn't out there sprinting back and forth all night, jumping, throwing, etc... and appearing in ads... but she couldn't possibly have done it. And yet she's going to get half... more than half, really... of what he was paid.

And before anyone comes back with "but he cheated - he deserves to pay"... How do we know she didn't cheat? How do we know what kind of wife she was? She may or may not have broken other vows. But none of it matters because California is a no-fault divorce state. It doesn't matter if Kobe was cheating with Shaq, or if he had been the perfect husband. His mistake was either getting married or not getting a prenup. Because if she truly is leaving him over infidelity, rather than the lure of autonomy over hundreds of millions of dollars, the odds were overwhelming that he was going to cheat. He should not have married, or he should have married someone who didn't expect monogamy.

Hopefully, for the kids, they will reconcile. If not, may they both focus on raising those kids instead of being tabloid fodder running around with different lovers. Kobe: stay away from the Kardashians.

Most people should get prenups, because even if you marry someone who is loyal, dedicated, and against divorce, everything can change with a brain injury (accident, tumor, some disease) that changes their personality. The laws of the state and the judges sitting in the courtrooms already have a prenup for all of us. Why let strangers decide?

Blogging, E-mail, Pony Express?

It wasn't all that long ago that blogs started as a communication form. And it wasn't all that long ago before that that e-mail started as a communication form.

Both have been partially replaced by Facebook, Twitter, and text messages.

If someone wants to broadcast their thoughts they can do so on Twitter or Facebook, and on Facebook it is easy to control who sees it and who doesn't on an update/note per update/note basis. With blogs such as this one on Blogger, it is either "subscribers only" or "everyone can see".

I get a much fewer legit e-mails these days. I used to check each of my "important" e-mail accounts about three times a day. Now days go by and I realize I haven't checked some of them. So much more of the communication that used to take place that was is done on Facebook. I also notice that updates on our family blog have grown less and less frequent.

I don't want to see blogs or e-mail go away. I love the formats and other particulars of both.

I do enjoy Twitter and Facebook. Maybe I need to set up a Twitter account associated with this blog? I have deliberately kept this blog isolated from most of my online presence for personal and professional reasons. Twitter would be good mostly for calling attention to articles I think are helpful or interesting when I know I will not have time to pick through them in detail on this blog, and to comment on an a concurrent event or television show.

It's not that I think everyone should read what I have to say. I'm just one man with one man's life experiences and opinions. I like having the outlet. I like being able to get things off my chest. It's therapuetic for me and helps me think.

It just occurred to me that it has been many years since I wrote a journal entry in a hardcover paper sketchbook. Wow. I used to always carry one around with me.

Do you think techology is moving too fast for people to adapt?

Thorns on the Roses

The time my wife and I had together without the kids was good, for the most part. But let me back up. This entry isn't pretty, but it is honest.

There's a reason I asked recently about verbal abuse. Part of what was rough recently was that my wife was saying the kinds of things to me I'd never say to her. It doesn't happen often, but she has given me the finger, threatened to withhold sex (more on that below), and many more things (mind you, I am the one with the anger problem, right?).

I've worked in jobs where I have had to take a lot of insults and yelling, and just shrug it off. But I don't live with those people and trust my finances and very life to those people, or share children with them.

But she apologizes for everything. Some of the stuff she apologizes for is stuff I have not felt I could bring up. And then I'm supposed to accept the apology, but in doing so for some of those things, I’d basically be accusing her of screwing everything up and marrying me under false pretenses, and I don’t want to kill the marriage or hurt her, because despite my gripes there are many things I like about the marriage and I love her.

She's been bitchy and has had little patience lately in dealing with the kids. She's also been having a pity party. I look at her attitude and how she's not keeping herself up and I wonder what happened to the woman I dated. She recognizes that there has been a problem, and is going back on her favorite antidepressant. You should see her collection of medicines. More on that later, too.

I'm Still Here

There's been so much I've wanted to blog, but I have had enough time. I wanted to give you an update on my marriage, and I started to write it, but I'm not going to have time to finish it until next week.

Things got a little rough there. They are doing a little better right now. We're about to spend a few days together without the kids. Hopefully, they will be good days so I'll have a happy ending to my update instead of it being such a downer.

We did have a fairly good Thanksgiving, at least. How about you?

Question For My Readers

What constitutes verbal or emotional abuse?

I pretty much have a zero tolerance policy for physical abuse in my advice to others an in my personal life. I haven't ever been physically abused in a dating relationship or my marriage, thankfully.

I'm not talking about self-defense or defending children through force. I'm not talking about someone being completely unhinged and an open-handed slap being needed to get their attention. I'm not talking about literally pushing someone away when you don't want them touching you. I'm talking about actual domestic violence... hitting, biting, kicking, throwing things at you, scratching, aggressive pushing, etc. If someone does that once, they shouldn't be given the chance to do it again, no matter how many times they apologize.

But what about with verbal or emotional abuse? And what would constitute such things?

I think, perhaps, I have accepted apologies for those things in some of my relationships. I wouldn't accept an apology for physical abuse. Why did I accept them for verbal abuse? But again, does anyone have a good definition or examples? Can they be excused as "saying the wrong things" if an apology has been given, while physical violence can't be excused?

A Bad Choice With Permanent Results

I recently went to a gathering/reunion of sorts. It was hosted to remember someone with whom I use to work who took his own life.

Aside from the fact that I do not believe we are, in the ultimate sense, our own (I believe we belong to God) and this kind of suicide is morally wrong, I also believe that life is way too short as it is.

But "John", I'll call him, obviously didn't feel that way. I don't have much information with which to work, but from what I understand, the suicide could have been motivate by the fact that he'd essentially been unemployed for the last four years.

He was a handsome, friendly guy with a great smile and a great sense of humor, and he did have artistic talent. He just wasn't make a living with it.

For most men, being unemployed that long is spirit-crushing. Career women are an extremely important part of today's world, and for some women, their careers are everything. But the fact remains, women tends to marry men who earn more than they do. Quality women who want a family tend to look for men who will provide enough "security" for them to not have to work full time. When a woman hears from a female friend that the friend is seeing a new man, the first, or one of the first questions will be "What does he do for a living?" if it wasn't immediately stated. Men don't care all that much what each other's girlfriends do for a living (a guy will boast about his date's job only if it implies she is beautiful/sexy).

For men like John, not having a successful career is devastating.

John had a brother and countless cousins. He probably looked around him and saw all of them in their marriages and raising children. He was in his mid-40s and hadn't been able to build enough stability or savings to support a family, and probably realized that even if his career were to take off tomorrow, it was going to be too late for him to build a relationship, marry, have children, and fit in to the culture of his extended family.

It is too bad he didn't see the good possibilities ahead, even if he never married, even if he ended up working a low-level job for the rest of his life. It is too bad that he did this to his family and friends.

I've known too many people who have taken their own lives.

Life is too short as it is. There are always good times ahead. There is help. Get help instead of doing this to those who love you.

Thank You, Veterans

There really aren't words to describe how thankful I am for our military veterans. Thank you to all who have served.

Where Are the Good Guys Going?

It's understatement, and a late statement. It would be like saying the federal government is starting to go beyond Constitutional mandates. Mark wrote in to Dr. Laura, prompted by her monologue on women being attracted to bad boys:

We 'good guys' eventually become more than a little bit misogynistic when we see our 'bad' brethren basically having their way.....over and over and over again......with women, while we often become neglected, and taken for granted, in our relationships. It's always been said, "Good guys finish last," but, frankly, I think it's never been truer than it is today.

Just about every heterosexual guy wants sex from women. There are a few who, for whatever reason, have no sexual desire or a superseded sexual desire. The vast majority of straight guys want sex from women, even if they believe it is best to wait for marriage, or engagement, or "commitment" or "love", or whatever. Because of those beliefs, some men will resist temptations. But more men do find it more difficult to resist temptation when there are fewer worthy women. Men will see the guys around them having sex with few or no strings attached, with little effort spent... and what are they supposed to do? Save themselves for a woman who was out bed-hopping and is now of the attitude "been there, don't that", and make vows to her to lay down his life and financial security for her? I realize that this is the carnal way of viewing these matters, and that we're supposed to obey God regardless of the results, but how many people out there think that way?

Women who act this way do so at their own peril, in my opinion. It's becoming more and more apparent that ALL guys are losing more and more respect for women everyday. The bad boys never viewed them as being more than sexual objects and we good guys question whether or not staying true to the traditional values and mores is even worth it anymore.

There are men out there who were good and would treat a woman with the utmost respect, love, affection, and kindness, but have had their hearts hardened and now take the casual sex freely offered without strings, picking the more plentiful easy women over the increasingly rare virtuous women. Such a man doesn't appear to suffer any consequences for doing so. Some men will be good men regardless, but many men will be only as good as women encourage them to be. Women do have that kind of power.

Previously: Thoughts on the Marriage Delay and Marriage Strike

A Refresher About What To Do

Let there be no doubt about what you are supposed to do when you witness (or have other proof) that someone is molesting or assaulting a child: call the police.

If you see the head of a charity molesting a child, call the police.
If you see your boss molesting a child, call the police.
If you see the coach of a championship team molesting a child, call the police.
If you see an educator molesting a child, call the police.
If you see a daycare (day orphanage) worker molesting a child, call the police.
If you see a police officer molesting a child, call other police.
If you see a pop music superstar molesting a child, call the police.]
If you see a member of the clergy molesting a child, call the police.
If you see a scout leader molesting a child, call the police.
If you see a neighbor molesting a child, call the police.
If you see a movie director molesting a child, call the police.
If you see a judge molesting a child, call the police.
If you see the President of the United States, or a candidate for such a position molesting a child, call the police.
If you see your spouse, shack-up, lover, or date molesting a child, call the police.
If you see your parent molesting a child, call the police.
If you see your sibling molesting a child, call the police.
If you see your grown child molesting a child, call the police.

Call the police. THEN you can call others. But call the police yourself. Don't rely on others to call the police or "take care" of the situation.

Protect children.

Got that?

(No, I was never molested.)

It All Started With That Dagnabit Telegraph Machine

As usual when I nitpick about something on Dr. Laura's radio show, I'll state that I love her show and books and agree with almost everything the says. She's made my life better and that of so many others.

On to the nitpick.

Dr. Laura's made no secret to her listeners of her concerns about technology. She had made comments about grown, married men being on Facebook ("even though" she tells her listeners to comment on Facebook). She recently noted what our technology is doing to our personal relationships and culture, and I think some (not all) of her concerns are like being concerned that the invention of the spear was cutting down on fathers showing their sons how to hunt without a spear.

On this past Friday’s show, she talked about "online dating". I don't think people really date online, though. They may communicate, they may have exhibition/masturbation sessions, but the issue that was really being addressed was finding a date online.

She tends to put research into her commentaries, and this was no exception. She said "1 out of 10 sex offenders uses online dating." My initial reaction to that stat: Is that all?!? I would think most sex offenders, like 7 or 8 out of 10, would use online dating, the rest either being too old to "get" technology or not wanting to violate probation.

This also brings up the question I always have with the phrase "sex offender". Are we talking about a 35-year-old man, now a model citizen, who, when he was 18, was prosecuted for having sex with his 17-year-old girlfriend? That's a far cry from someone who rapes a stranger or molests his relatives. It's like saying "sexual harassment". There's a difference between complimenting a woman on her new hairstyle and telling her you're going to fire her unless she does you.

I'm confident more than 1 in 10 sex offenders walks the aisles of supermarkets, so if someone asks you for your number or e-mail address when they meet you in a supermarket, look out!

Then Dr. Laura, based on that stat, made a common statistical error by saying it means that "one out of ten guys you find online is a sex offender". Nope! At least, not based on the stat she cited. That one in ten sex offenders uses online dating sites does NOT mean that one in ten guys on those sites is a sex offender. I won't bore you explaining that, but if you don't see what I mean, just trust me. Or ask someone who understands statistics.

She went on to say that online dating industry is bigger than the porn industry (which is good, because we all know that porn can lead to terrible things, like... dancing).

She cited a stat that said one of three women who meet men online, have sex on the first encounter. I do not think that has anything to do with online dating. The use of websites in general, and online dating in particular, are so common now that it is safe to say that these women would be doing this no matter how they met guys. Dr. Laura's comment reflected her overall attitude towards fornication: "Men are making out like bandits." That, as I've said before, implies that women don't enjoy fornication or get anything out of the dates. Yes, women tend to enjoy married lovemaking more (as do men), but many of them are getting orgasms, attention, ego boosts, free meals, or other things they want that they would not be getting if they weren't fornicating.

Anyway, the tips Dr. Laura went on to give about online dating, such as meeting in a neutral location, were very good. Even the best matchmaking services are simply ways of meeting people, and may be a way to keep in touch while dating. Nobody should assume that what someone has said about themselves is true or that the personality that comes across through the online communication is a thorough representation of the person. It takes spending time in person together in different circumstances to get to know that other person and see if they are what you need in a girlfriend/boyfriend, partner, or spouse.

High Holy Day For Attention Whores

Did you go to a party over the weekend? Did you see the attention whores? Females of all ages use Halloween as an excuse to wear way-too-revealing "costumes". Hey, it can be great eye candy for guys (and gals) who want eye candy, or want to see females they know in near nudity.

The festivities continue all through today and tonight, of course.

Now, far be it from me to tell adults how to dress when at a private party. But if a woman dresses with her boobs nearly hanging out, she wants people to look at her boobs. Maybe she just wants one person in particular to do it, but she doesn't get to pick and choose when she is in a room full of people. If she wants to pick and choose, she'll do it in private.

What is up with those parents who let... or even encourage... their little girls to dress as wanna-be porn stars just because it is Halloween, or All Saints Eve, or Reformation Day?

Don't get me wrong. I think it is great in general to be able to dress up in costumes and have some fun, but let's not kid ourselves about the sexually-charged stuff. It's like when a woman says it doesn't count as sex (cheating) when it happens out of the country, or in another state, or while on vacation... as long as it is them or their friends doing it.

Won't Somebody Please Think of the Children?

"Colleen", in a letter to Dr. Laura, wrote about her disapproval of a pilot that ran on NBC. The title character, Whitney, was seen taking a shower with her boyfriend. That was the opening scene.

A little bit later I went back to see if anything had improved - wrong it was far, far worse. As Whitney's boyfriend was talking to his friend that he and Whitney had broken up, the friend was scornful he would even care- "What, you like having the same VAGINA every night?" As I quickly turned off the set, I was so disgusted. This is what we've come to in America, women are just interchangeable vaginas????

Well, "yes" in the sense that there are some guys who just want sex. "No" in the sense that the reason they don't mind being out of a committed relationship is that they can easily get sex from a variety of women, all whose bodies are different. If your "vaginas" (really, the whole body, the attitude, the sex) were really interchangeable, then the guys would stay put because there would be no reason to try other women. These days, vaginas are cheap, not interchangeable, due the law of supply and demand. They have always been in high demand. But beginning with the culture of mobility and urbanity, growing with contraception, functional atheism (in which people behave as though there is no God) and then "liberation" of women, easy access to many vaginas is widespread... so to speak.

Now, as I've previously written, it is more enjoyable to make love than to have casual sex, all other things about the sex being equal. But the guys in these scenarios do not want everything that comes along with being in that kind of relationship, which is harder to find anyway because much of the female population has changed in attitude.

It makes me sick to think of the children watching garbage like this.

I am a parent myself, and yes, it is hard to protect them from a lot of the bad influences, but discernment and filtering are very important. So is innoculation, which works much better than isolation or indoctrination.I agree that parents should not be letting their children watch something like that. However, are you proposing that everything in society be designed and operated so as to be child-focused? Children should be a top priority to their parents, and society as a whole should value children, but not every aspect of life should be appropriate or appealing to little kids.

Volunteering for Abuse

BRUISED AND ABUSED BOYFRIEND wrote in to Dear Abby:

I have been dating "Carmen" for a few years, but in the last year she has started becoming violent when we are having an argument.

First of all, why has the dating been going on for "a few years"? Do you have no intention of marrying?

I think this is domestic abuse, but she claims it isn't because I'm a man.

WRONG! Geez, so much for equality. The first time she got violent, you should have left immediately, and only returned to her if you were convinced, for good reason, that it was an aberration. The second time should have meant it was over. I'd say "call the cops" but you'd probably be the one arrested, so you should have 1) left, telling her never to contact you again, and 2) if she did contact you, filed a restraining order.

So far, I have restrained my instincts -- but eventually I know Carmen will cross the line and I'm going to snap. I have the potential to hurt her badly.

And then there would be a Lifetime Original Movie about how evil you are.

I have tried everything to make Carmen understand how I feel, but she continues to insist it doesn't matter because I'm so much bigger and stronger than she is.

WRONG! And there's no getting her to understand.

When she hits me, it doesn't hurt physically, but the anger I feel is indescribable.

What she does now doesn't hurt you, but she might do something worse later, or when you’re sleeping. And were you planning to have kids with her? Children are easier to injure, and they don't need to see their father abused anyway.

Stop rationalizing and LEAVE!!!

I'm at the end of my rope and considering breaking up with her before I hurt her.

Considering? It is bad enough you are still there.

I don't want to end the relationship, but I think it's the only way to make her see things from my perspective.

Who cares if she sees things from your perspective?!? I’m sorry, I know it isn’t a Biblical word, but this guy is a p---y. My guess is that he's rationalizing it because crazy chicks give wild sex. And that's all good, but only until she cuts it off and puts it into a garbage disposal.

Or should I call the cops the next time she hits me?

While that is exactly what a woman should do (call the cops), it isn't advisable for men, unfortunately.

Dear Abby told him to end it.

Please think ahead -- if Carmen resorts to violence when she becomes upset with you, then she very likely will with any children you would have together.

Yup!

Some experts are now saying men are more likely to be subject to dometic violence than women. I don't know if there is a way of knowing for sure, but we do know who is more likely to be arrested, and who has the shelters and assistance programs waiting for them, etc.

The sex of the perp and the sex of the victim doesn't matter. Do NOT tolerate abuse. It is better to be alone than to be in a bad relationship, but there are billions of fish in the sea anyway, so chances are, you'll find someone a lot better.

Blog Tinkering

I decided my blog was not easy enough on the eyes. Trying to fix that.

The First Session

The counseling session was not as bad as a visit to the dentist. It's a very experienced male, by the way, so hopefully he's not an idiot with a bias against normal male behavior. I felt awful laughing at some of what my wife said, but at least I wasn't yelling. If the laughing bothered her, she didn't let on. Rather, she was very thankful that I agreed to go, and has been in a good mood and sweet to me ever since I "agreed" to go. Yes, I agreed after my money was already committed to it. It was interesting because...

1. I found out she considers me a "rage-aholic". That was a surprise. I couldn't help but think of Homer Simpson's line, "I'm a rage-aholic! I'm addicted to rage-ahol!"

2. When she described what happened on vacation, she was going to make it sound like I had just started yelling like a madman. I had to break in and point out that she had been yelling at me, and I yelled back, then her sister yelled at me, and I yelled back, and that I was in a situation that I would never had subjected her to in the first place.

3. She's now upfront about the reason we live where we do - to be close to her family. The same family she is now avoiding. She used to say to me (and others) that we're living there (as opposed to closer to where I do most of my in-person work, or closer to my family) because she liked the house and the layout fit our needs. This is connected to why I yelled at her a few months back "because she got sick". I didn't yell as her because she got sick. I yelled at her because she was insisting I was going to take time off from work to take care of her, to which I asked why in the world we were living where we were, so far away from my family members who could (and wanted to) help out without taking any time off of work. When we were deciding to buy that house, I pointed those things out to her... we were going to have to live with the problems the house had because we weren't going to be asking the bank to take care of them, and we weren't going to have the money to do much to fix the place up. And we were going to be far from my family and work. Yet, these things continue to be issues, which is why they may prompt my yelling. We didn't quite go over all of this in session. But when I yell about something related to the house, she takes it as a personal attack on her and her family.

4. The real problem with my yelling may be that her mother yelled when she got drunk. She equated my alleged "rageaholism" with her mother's alcoholism. There's no comparison. Yes, there are some superficial similarities... we both deny our "addictions" are as bad as my wife says they are. But that would be true if she found a complete stranger and accused them of being addicted to gambling and the stranger denied it. See! Just like her mother! She focused a lot on the tone of my voice when I yell. So, perhaps if I yell in a different tone it will be a-okay?

5. She clearly conspired with my sister (and her own sister, obviously) to set up this counseling session and not tell me until it was too late to cancel. I have talked with my sister and also my mother on separate phone calls. After each call, my wife asked me if I told them about the counseling. And when I told her I hadn't mentioned it, she asked me why. Why bother? They both surely know about it. They can bring it up if they want. I'll likely not talk with them about it.

6. It sounded for a while like my wife was going to directly ask me to further cut back in usage of the desktop computer and mobile device. She said I would be happy if I didn't have her and the kids and all I did was sit on the computer. If I didn't have her and the kids, I wouldn't be on the computer all of the time, I'd be out with friends some of the time. But yes, since I'm a reader and a writer, and that can all be done on the computer, I can keep myself entertained by sitting in front of the computer. Mind you, all of the DVR space is taken by her shows and the kids' shows. I like to be productive rather than sitting around, and when the kids are occupied and my wife is occupied, I take the chance to get online. Technology is the only way I can still keep in touch with my friends at all. I pointed out that if the goal was to reduce my stress, doing something to increase my stress was a funny way to do it. Late in the session, she told me she was not asking me to cut back, but c'mon... she made her feelings known, and now I'm going to be some uncaring jerk who keeps right on... reading the news and barely keeping in contact with my friends.

Again, she was very appreciative that I had gone. Jump through the hoop, get a biscuit. That's a good boy.

Opening a Can of Worms?

Things have been good since the trip. My wife even said something that, in the past, would have gotten me riled up and perhaps yelling in response, but I handled it well.

But after that, she told me that she's going to have a marriage therapy appointment, and wants me to go. She told me this too late to cancel, so even if I could convince her it would be a waste, we'd still be out the money. Her sister (the one who I got into the fight with) and brother-in-law are going to babysit. We'd be better off using the time to go on a date.

I had made it clear to the party matching us, and I know my wife knew this before we dated, that I wanted someone who was healthy, not someone who was always treating an illness, real or imagined. When I met my wife, she was working full time, on her feet, with kids. On our first date, we talked about career and having a parent at home. I was open to being the one staying home. She said she wanted to be the one to stay home. She always wanted to be a hands-on Mom. She grew up with younger siblings. I took all of this to mean that she would be able to handle being the parent at home, and I was willing to be the sole income earner in exchange for having someone taking care of the kids.

But it hasn't worked out that way.

I can't bring this up in counseling, because she would take it as a personal attack on her due to her disability (again, I could not have known before we had kids how it was going to impact her ability to care for them). There would be no going back from that. And what would be the point? I'd never leave now. I made vows, we have the kids. She'd be badly hurt emotionally, and I'd rather not have to deal with that, in addition to not wanting to hurt her. She can't change. Well, she could change her thinking, if not her body, but she won't.

So I won't be able to be fully open and honest in counseling, at least not in front of her. So it is going to be waste.

And will she like the results? She's said repeatedly she loves her life and it is the way she's always wanted. Well, it is going to have to change a lot for me to get the things I'll need in order for me to get my yelling under further control.

This could get really, really bad.

More time and money spent that we don't have free to spend. That means more stress on me, even if the counseling itself is neutral. And what if it isn't? What if it does more harm than good?

Turning Down the Volume

I gave a recap of our horrible vacation here.

At the end of that one evening that started out with me trading shouts with my wife and her sister, my wife kept me awake begging me to get therapy and get drugged for my "rage". I calmly and quietly asked her if I had ever... ever... come out of the blue and just started yelling at anyone. She had to answer no.

It is true, my temper has been a problem for me in my life.

It was a problem when I was a kid, and I learned to control it by the time I was a teen. Now that I think about it, I think I got a handle on my temper about the time I started masturbating to orgasm. Coincidence?

Anger has never been a problem for me professionally. If anything, there are times when I should have displayed anger and didn't.

It hasn't been a problem while I drive (no road rage from me).

As an adult, it has never led to a physical fight or violence.

I don't throw things, hit things or people, kick things or people, push people, or break things.

I don't berate or insult others.

I scream... loudly and angrily... often I'm screaming questions... "Why did you do that? What do you expect me to do?" Or refusal, such as "I'm not going to do that!"

It was never a problem in any of my past relationships – I don't recall that I ever yelled at a girlfriend except perhaps with one who would have already been yelling at me. But sometimes with my family, and that now includes the family I have made, I yell. My wife has correctly noted it is when I think I should have control over something, but don't.

With the kids, it was "STOP [fill the in blank]!" I say "was" because when my wife sat me down to point it out and why it was a problem, I stopped.

Even when the yelling is a response to an angry or yelling statement from another adult, I shouldn't be yelling as often as I am.

But I refuse to drug myself when I know behavior modification can work.

My mind is the last thing that is mine.

I'm not sure I have a need for outside help based on something that happened under very unusual circumstances, and things got better after that, as least as far as I'm concerned. I haven't yelled since. But my wife would argue that it has been a pattern.

Maybe it is.

Didn't Chevy Chase Do a Movie Like This?

The vacation I was dreading has come and gone, and it could have been a lot worse.

But yes, it was a disaster. My wife said it was the worst week in her life, and that’s saying a lot.

So here I am, poorer, with a backlog of work, and strained relations with my in-laws.

A lack of sex is enough to make things horrible for me, and turn me into a cranky guy. The lack of alone time made it worse. Travelling and not getting enough sleep piled it on.

I was stressed out with work, house, and car stuff leading up to the vacation, and I knew the car problems were going to be waiting for me when I got back. Plus, I ended up having to do some work while on this "vacation".

Travelling was such a hassle.

My kids got sick. One of them vomited all over me and my seat on the first flight. My wife got sick. Her sister got sick. Her sister's husband got sick. Their kid got sick. I didn’t. We were sharing a suite, which means my family was in one room, her sister's family was in another room. Their parents and brother were in another suite.

There wasn't a lot of sleeping, at least not on the part of me or my wife.

I discovered that my sister-in-law is annoying. I have no doubt I was annoying to her, too, but I really have no idea how her husband, who is supposedly not a chubby chaser (she didn't want one), can get it up for her. I think she's crossed the line from obese to morbidly obese. Not a lot of morbidly obese women can snag a husband who earns as much as her husband. She should treat him very well. And that gets into what really is irritating about her. Someone being morbidly obese is not irritating to me. But I can't stand the way she talks to her husband, their kid, or my kids. She also makes assertions about things like politics, history, and religion that I know I can counter effectively and thoroughly, but rather than argue, I kept looking for the common ground to keep the peace. She never shuts up. She's always "sick" with something and only "happy" when she's miserable.

There aren't a lot of people who just generally irritate me, but perhaps part of the problem was that we were in the same suite. When at a normal family event, there is so much else going on and I can always move away from one area to the other, and it is only for a few hours anyway. Not so in this circumstance.

We spent a lot of time in our suite, driving, hitting chain stores and restaurants, and swimming in a pool. All of that I can do at home for a lot less money and less hassle. Sure, there was sightseeing, but I can see the same stuff online and get a better view.

The kids were unusually high maintenance and I got vomited on again while out and about.

At least mother-in-law did not embarrass us in a drunken episode out in public. Instead, she spent much of the week drunk in her suite as my father-in-law made trips to the market to keep her supplied. So much for this trip being for a family event.

My wife and I did get one moment to ourselves. We slipped out for dessert and a badly needed quickie in the back of the rental vehicle.

One evening, while getting ready for a dinner that everyone was going to, I refused a request by my wife (a request that most men would refuse) and my wife, who was having a bad time and was tense, yelled at me. I yelled back. Her sister yelled at me. I yelled back. Then it devolved into arguing about anything and everything. It wasn't good. It was in front of the kids.

It actually wasn't difficult for my wife to come up with an easy solution to the original problem.

My sister-in-law and I have not talked since, and that has been WONDERFUL as far as I am concerned. Unfortunately, it isn't going to be as fun for my wife.

Our flight back was an overnight. I don't sleep on flights, so this was a bad bookend to a horrible "vacation".

In general, the trip was a rotten thing to put the kids through. It was bad enough for the adults. Thankfully, my wife never wants to do anything like that again. We even skipped a family event that has already taken place since the trip.

Teaching Your Daughters About Men and Making Boys Men

Perhaps you have seen this on Facebook:

We need to teach our daughters to distinguish between a man who flatters her - and a man who compliments her. A man who spends money on her - and a man who invests in her. A man who views her as property - and a man who views her properly. A man who lusts after her - and a man who loves her. A man who believes he is God's gift to women - and a man who remembers a woman was God's gift to man...And then teach our boys to be that kind of a man."

As I've written before:

There IS a shorter supply of good men who are also marriage-minded, because such men are usually forged by 1) a combination of good mother figure AND father figure who are themselves in a good marriage; 2) participation in nonfeminized programs and events where men socialize boys without interference or constant observation from women; 3) women who demand the men they socialize with be good. How many men are raised and exist in such a situation these days? Being raised in daycare, sharing an address with a never-married or divorced mother, not having man-oriented socialization, and being surrounded by immodest, easy females is not a recipe to make good, marriage-minded men.


How many of the people you've seen posting the first quote have stuck their sons in daycare, or made babies with the wrong man, or have passed up good men and fornicated with jerks? How many of them, if they do have a husband, let their husbands raise their sons with masculinity? How many people who have posted that first quote as their status update have behaved in ways that contradict the quote?

Major Retailer and Employeer Announces Male-Friendly Initiatives

Wow, Wal-Mart has announced several initiatives to promote men workers and men-owned businesses, since men have been hit harder by the recession.

These are some of the things included:

It will source $20 billion from men-owned businesses in the U.S. and will double its sourcing from such businesses in every market globally.

It will also offer training, market access and career opportunities to 60,000 men working in factories to help them "develop the skills they need to become more active decision-makers in their jobs and for their families."

In markets around the world, Wal-Mart will work with major professional service firms and merchandise suppliers with more than $1 billion in sales to increase male representation on Wal-Mart accounts.

Wait... wait... Aw, shucks, I got that wrong. I had to go back and read the story by Andrea Chang at LATimes.com again. Switch the sexes, of course. Uh,except that men HAVE been hit harder by the recession.

But Wait, There's More!

Recently I blogged about how I was not feeling great about our upcoming vacation.

Well, things have gotten even better.

A few weeks ago, everyone was over at the in-laws' home for an event that involved my wife's family, my family, and my sister-in-law's in-laws.

As a sister of mine was leaving, my father-in-law essentially made a verbal pass at her, albeit one that might possibly be chalked up to being a clumsy, and thus inappropriate, compliment. That possibility would normally be slight, but considering the guy's history, the possibility evaporates. He doesn't get that benefit. When Tiger Woods was busted? My FIL got in trouble. When Arnold Schwarzenegger was busted? My FIL got in trouble.

My sister, a sweet woman but no paragon of virtue, was creeped out enough to have nightmares about it. She told me about the incident several days later. I told my wife as soon as the timing was right (meaning, the kids were asleep and I could hold her hand and talk with her calmly, face to face.

My wife was horrified.

She told her siblings.

It was decided by all that it was best not to tell my mother-in-law. She would not do anything positive or protective with the information, and would almost certainly use the information as an excuse to get drunk and go into a rage.

My brother-in-law said he'd talk with his father about it.

I figured... okay, that's over and done with. We even got together again with no big deal.

But then my wife decided to call her father (when she knew her mother would not be around) and chastise him. He apologized repeatedly with qualifications. Then he apologized without qualification. Apparently, he let the call change his mood, and later in the evening my mother-in-law noticed, asked him what was going on, and rather than going with some other, easily available explanation, my Ivy League-genius father-in-law confessed to her.

This is going to be very interesting, going on this trip with them. Will we even make it, considering we were planning on sharing rides to the airport? Will something happen on the flight? Will the timeshare unit be mildly chilly or a minefield?

Stay tuned! Provided I survive, I will tell you what happens.

I Still Don't Want to Go on Vacation

Last summer, I wrote this. It didn't happen.

Short of something dramatic, though, we are going on a vacation soon. I'm not looking forward to it. Is something wrong with me?

Here's my thought process.

On the plus side, we're going someplace to which I've never been, and it is a major tourism favorite. If you were to ask me to name the top five places I'd want to visit before I died, this would be one of them.

Now for all of the other stuff.

We're going as part of family thing for my wife's family. As such, our lodging arrangements are set. Due to these arrangements, the highly-touted "vacation sex" is out. I just don't know how it will be possible to get even a little bit of time with a little bit of privacy somewhere in order to even have a quickie. So, NO SEX for over a week. Granted, if we have sex before the trip and after the trip, it will almost be keeping our pace anyway, but at least at home I can masturbate every day that we don't have sex. (Wanna lecture me on how married men shouldn't be doing that? Have at it.)

This also means I'm not going to be getting any alone time to do other things, like reading or all of the other things I find easier to do when I don't have a bunch of noisy people hovering around me.

My routines will be disrupted. This almost always comes with the territory for any vacation, and I understand this should not keep people from taking vacations. Still, I'm a wee bit obsessive-compulsive and I'm a creature of habit, and most of the stuff I don't do while on vacation I will want to do when I get back, so that means I will have a backup of things to do.

Now, many of those things are voluntary, but work isn't. Work piles up. Most of my work will not be done by someone else while I'm on vacation. It will be waiting for me when I get back.

Then there are the costs. I'm currently the sole income earner for my family. We're not destitute, but we have my income flowing into our regular bills, our investments, and our giving. We don't keep much in our basic banking accounts, and I like having an emergency buffer. Tourists often get gouged, and the costs of this trip are depleting our buffer (we didn't have time to plan far enough in advance to budget for this trip).

There are also the usual hassles that come along with taking a vacation, and I've haven't flown since the groping started, so this is going to be an interesting experience. I almost never use public restrooms or those on airplanes, so a long day of traveling is fun. I can hold it just about all day (it’s a gift, or the logical result of paruresis), but as I get older, that's another discomfort.

Our kids are still at the ages during which we have to constantly watch them, especially where there's water around (such as a pool).

In summary, I'm not expecting this vacation to be relaxing for me, but just the opposite. There will be some nice views, but other than that, I will pretty much be doing what I would be doing at home – watching our kids, but it will be costing me a lot more than living at home.

So yes, there are some things wrong with me. But put aside the OCD and paruresis, which never stopped me from taking a vacation before I became a father, and is there something wrong with my thinking about the vacation? Is this normal?

Tactics in Breaking Bad News

When someone has been seeing someone who threatens suicide if there is a breakup, my advice, stolen from Tom Leykis, is to schedule a session with a licensed therapist with that other person, under the pretense of getting relationship counseling, or with the claim of needing therapy yourself and wanting them along for some of the sessions. Once they are in the session, the dumper needs to tell the therapist what the about-to-be dumped has said as far as harming themselves or others, tell the other person it is over, and walk out. Then the dumped person is legally and morally the responsibility of the therapist.

We (the wife and I) might have to break some bad news to her mother, which will almost certainly send her mother into a drunken rage. Who knows... I need to talk with my wife about it more - maybe there is no good reason to say anything.

But this got me thinking. Besides dumping a suicidal person in a therapy session, where and how are other good places to break bad news that is likely to bring a destructive response?

Well, thanks to the post-9/11 America, I'm thinking a long commercial flight might be a good place, at least for your own protection.

Let's say you're going to dump someone who has not threatened suicide, but threatened (or conducted) violence to you. Why not dump them during a flight? But only if you can remain totally calm. If they go into a rage on the flight, they'll likely commit federal crimes. They get arrested and taken away once the flight is over. You may end up held for questioning for a while, but you'll be protected.

What do you think?

I can imagine the TSA and flight attendants are thinking, No, please, don't let this become an increasing trend.

Deserving

A female relative of mine who recently divorced her (most recent) husband and has spent a lot of time over the years as a single/divorced mother recently had this as her status update on a social networking website:

Every woman deserves a man who calls her baby, kisses her like he means it, holds her tight like he never wants to let go, doesn't cheat, wipes her tears when she cries, doesn’t make her jealous of other women, instead makes other women jealous of her, is not scared to let his friends know how he really feels about her, and lets her know how much he really loves her.... Re-post if you agree.

Every woman? Really? Even those women who murder their own husband and kids? What if she is a horrible woman and treats men like crap?

Notice that the wording is not "everyone woman deserves a husband".

I think I've seen this status update posted before, including by women who make the kinds of choices that allow men to treat them like crap. You know the type... they will sing along the loudest to "I Will Survive" and still go on to jump into bed with jerks. Women may say they want one thing, but often treating them a different way gets a guy what he wants. Sometimes, the more of a jerk a guy is, the more a woman will keep having sex with him and doing anything else he wants.

As for jealousy – some women are especially insecure and jealous, and nothing a man does will change that.

I do believe in the inherent worth of every human being, including every woman. Even those girls who are still in their mother's womb have inherent worth. But I also believe in personal responsibility, and that there are things some women do to bring crappy guys into their lives and drive away loving men. I also believe a relationship between a man and a woman is a two-way street.

If I were going to post an equivalent of the status update, it would be:

Every man deserves a woman who respects him to his face and behind his back, doesn’t cheat, doesn’t sexually reject him but is an enthusiastic lover, keeps herself together, doesn’t make him jealous of other men, instead makes other men jealous of him, sends him off to have time with the guys with a smile instead of eye-daggers, lets him do things for her, doesn’t treat him like one of her girlfriends, tells him what she needs instead of expecting him to read her mind or decipher hints, is not scared to let her friends know how she really feels about him, and lets him know how much she appreciates and respects him...Re-post if you agree.

Is This Outrageous or About Right?

Richard Winton at LATimes.com reports that a guy in his 30s caught molesting his 13-year-old goddaughter (police think it started when she was 12) has been sentenced to just three years in state prison after pleading no context to two felony counts (two other counts were dismissed). And if you know anything about the current situation with prisons in California, he's probably gonna get out plenty early, after spending the most of the time in county jail.

Wait...

Let me check that again...

Oh!

I knew something had to be wrong with that. I didn't think a guy would get only a three year sentence for something like that. It wasn't a guy with his goddaughter – it was a woman with her godson. This is an update on a story I noted on here before:

The operator of a South Los Angeles day-care center convicted of molesting her 13-year-old godson was sentenced Tuesday to three years in state prison.

Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Terry Bork sentenced Chelsea McClelland, 35, to state prison and ordered her to register as a sex offender for the rest of her life for the assaults that occurred in December 2010.

So much for "thirteen will get you twenty".

Checking Up On Your Classmates

Men and women are different, and life works out accordingly.

Ladies, you’re three paths towards making it to “the good life”:

1. Being born into it (over which you didn’t have control) and not squandering it (over which you do have control).

2. Serving the needs and wants of others in financial transactions (employment, investments).

3. Attracting and marrying a successful man before your looks fade too much, and keeping him for the rest of your life, or at least long enough for the laws of your state or the provisions of a prenup to leave you well off.


If this stark reality sounds awful, look at it this way: It is one more option than men have. Academia and the workplace are now oriented towards the needs and tendencies of women. Female CEOs earn more than male CEOs. The workplace is your oyster.

The good news for men is that it is still true that a man's attracting ability tends to increase as he gets older, at least into old age, while a woman's attracting ability tends to decrease. That's because when it comes to initial attraction, men are visual and women want a man with money, power, and/or fame (or "security and confidence", but it is the same thing thing).

Guys, if you're in your later 30s or older, you can have a good laugh by looking up your high school classmates (Facebook) or especially by attending a 20-year, 25-year, or 30-year reunion. Time (and calories) haven't been kind to most of the girls who were considered the most beautiful and were ever so popular when I was in high school. There are a couple of exceptions, to be sure, and there are those girls who were awkward in high school who became beautiful, poised, confident (and more than capable) women. But there are women who wouldn't give me the time of day back when we were in high school who are unrecognizable now, and not in a good way. And if they got used to getting by on their looks, they're in trouble now. I can honestly say that my wife, who didn't go to my school (and if she had, it would have been after I had graduated anyway... heh heh), is easily more beautiful than any of my high school classmates.

More importantly, though, is that she's an excellent wife in most and important respects. Reading some of the Facebook updates, I can see that some of my classmates aren't or wouldn’t be.

I'm so glad I didn't get into a "high school school sweethearts" thing with one of those girls and get married. Ugh. I shudder at the thought.

Thank you, Lord, for saying "No!" to my foolish, childish prayers back then.

Why Would a Grown Man Have a Facebook Account?

As I've mentioned many, many times, I listen to Dr. Laura Schlessinger and I agree with her on just about everything. This is one of those instances where I disagree with her.

She asked a recent caller, a wife, why a grown (married) man would have a Facebook account. (Not that she wants kids to have them, either.) The implication, based on other things Dr. Laura has said, was that Facebook is only for women, since they are social and all, and for men who are looking for sex.

So I suppose married men shouldn't make comments on her Facebook page?

I've noticed before that she seems to be technology-averse in many cases, and yes, she wants people to get outside and exercise and go see people in person. I get that.

But there are many reasons a grown, married man would want a Facebook account. Most of my male contacts on Facebook are married. Facebook, like MySpace before it, are essentially organizing tools. Long before MySpace, people were using online communications to network; store and share pictures, videos, and other files; e-mail; chat; have group discussions; express their opinions and relate their experiences; plan events; and keep contact information. Social networking services like Facebook allow them to do that all in one place.

A grown, married man such as me can use Facebook to keep in touch with family, friends, and professional contacts. No, it isn't possible for us to all live close to each other, drive to each other, or bicycle to each other. Sorry!

The reality of my life right now, given professional and family demands during this phase in my life (I haven't even been able to blog nearly as much as I'd like), is that I'm simply not going to see many of my/our friends and professional contacts in person very often. To keep in touch with each other, our options are: 1) writing snail-mail letters; 2) phone calls; 3) e-mail; 4) social networking such as Facebook. This most recent option is the most efficient, convenient, inclusive, and customizable. I can use Facebook when I first wake up or when I'm about to go to bed; those aren't good times to be visiting others. I use Facebook to leave little love notes to my wife. I use Facebook to share pictures of my children with my parents. Surely, Dr. Laura wouldn't want grandparent deprived!

I have never, ever used Facebook to flirt with, hit on, or enter into an inappropriate emotional relationship with a woman. (Or a man, for that matter.)

So let's not cause undue suspicion on married men who are current in their use of technology and communications.

Homeless Guy Scores Jailbait

What am I missing here? Tony Barboza reports at LATimes.com.

A registered sex offender living in a tent in Moreno Valley has been arrested on suspicion of having sex with two underage girls, police said Tuesday.

James Russell Watkins, 29, was arrested Saturday after police responded to a tip about a possible sexual assault of two teenage girls near Alessandro Boulevard and the Old 215 Freeway.

He was arrested, essentially, for statutory rape. He's not being charged with forcible rape, or kidnapping, or unlawful detention.

After interviewing Watkins, police said, they determined he had had intercourse with the girls at various times throughout July.

So, not twice, as in once with each girl. Various times.

Watkins, a parolee and registered sex offender who told police he lived in a tent in the area, was booked on charges of unlawful sexual intercourse, child abuse and violation of parole.

Okay. So it sounds like the girls willingly had sex with him. I know, they are too young to consent and I'm in no way defending this creep. But what's up with these girls? I would think they were junkies, but there's nothing about him being charged with supplying them with anything. That implies to me that these girls were willingly visiting this guy for sex.

I remember when one of the reasons young guys wanted a nice car was score with the young women. This guy is a bum. What's going on with these girls? If they wanted sex, they could no doubt get it with guys who aren't homeless. There's something missing here. And what are the odds these girls aren't from homes with good fathers? Fairly high, I'd think.

Irony? Hypocrisy? Or What?

We have a daughter involved in a voluntary group activity. My wife had some reservations about how this activity was being organized. The final straw was that the woman running the thing got knocked up with no plans to marry her boyfriend.

So, we moved our daughter to a new group.

But at our final event with the old group, the expectant mother, who was unaware at the time of our plans to leave, made a comment to everyone about how one set of girls meets Friday nights, which "keeps them out of trouble".

Huh?

What kind of trouble is she talking about? Surely, she can't be talking about getting knocked up with no marriage in sight.

Or is it supposedly different because she's an adult?

That points out the different reasons why different groups bemoan teen pregnancy. I don't think teen pregnancy is a problem when say, a mature, family-minded 19-year-old wife is pregnant by her 24-year-old husband who is earning a good living, and these people are right for each other. I would guess that this woman's problem with teen girls being pregnant is that it would limit their ability to party in their early 20s. My biggest problem with unmarried teens (or unmarried women of any age) getting pregnant is that it is bad for the child and bad for society.

Interesting Poll of Men and Women

Chris Michaud reported for Reuters on a poll conducted by AskMen and Cosmo. The headline was “Half of men would ditch woman who gained weight?” This is how it starts:

Men are more concerned with their partner's body type than women but they also seem to value family more highly, according to a new survey released on Tuesday.

Is it really news that men are more concerned with their partner’s body? Only to those people who have had so much "education" they believe there is no real difference between the sexes.

Nearly half of men questioned in the poll of 70,000 people said they would ditch a partner who gained weight, compared to only 20 percent of women.

A lot of the other half of the men are lying. I’ll get back to this below.

Two-third of men also said they had fantasized about their partner's friends, while only one-third of women had done so.

Two-thirds of men admitted this. A typical man only avoids fantasizing about any semi-attractive unrelated female through actively, intentionally stopping himself.

While only 18 percent of women said they would want their mate to be better endowed, more than 51 percent of men said they wished they themselves were.

A Problem With Same-Sex "Marriage"

As you no doubt know, New York became the latest state to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. There’s nothing I have to say that isn’t already said at The Opine Editorials, except for a few notes.

For example… Did you know that this is causing a problem for courts when it comes to divorce?

It's true.

When lesbians divorce, the courts have to do extra work to find men to ding for the alimony.

It's no easier when gays divorce. The courts have to do extra work to find a woman to assign custody of the kids.

Thank you... I'll be here all week.

She Might Have to Go Younger or Older

It's not easy for a 50-something woman in this position. MISSING OUT IN WYOMING wrote in to Dear Abby:

I am a 54-year-old woman who, after a long marriage and unavoidable divorce, is ready to date.

Sorry you went through that. The divorce could have been avoided by choosing wisely and treating kindly. Choosing wisely, thought, can be difficult if someone hides who they really are before you marry them.

I work out daily, am active in my church, take classes, and socialize with women and married couples. I'm in excellent shape and am told I'm attractive and fun.

All good things.

There are few available men my age (or a little younger or older) and almost all of them seem to be looking for women in their 40s, 30s or even 20s.

This is true - that there are few available men, since almost all people get married. A heterosexual man that age is likely to be married or remarried, or divorced at least once.

Here's the heart of this letter:

Why are men my age so unwilling to date women their age?

The short, brutal answer is: Because they don't have to. Men tend to gain money, power, and fame, as they get older, and that makes them more desirable to women. The more of these things a man gets, the more and hotter women he has available to him. Sure, women appreciate hunks, but the bottom line is that the kind of women these men want (young women who will provide sex for little effort/time/money invested) are usually going to choose the guy with money/power/fame over the younger, hunky guy who is living paycheck to paycheck. These men have those women available to them, and they are going to pick those women before picking you.

"Hotter" for most men often unavoidably means "younger", because men are visual creatures who prefer tighter, perkier, less damaged/aged female skin.

When these men get older, they may look or a woman who will be able to take care of them in their old age, but for now, they want sex with hotter women. A lot of them have been married before and it isn't what they want right now, or, even if they are looking or a wife, they want her to be hotter and deferring to his age and experience.

They don't want another friend. They don't want someone with whom they can discuss politics or deep subjects. They want a younger, hotter, fresher body.

I write all of this as a guy who, during my wayward younger years, thoroughly enjoyed the company of a woman your age. The older women I dated were attractive, sexy, and a lot of fun and could carry on an intelligent conversation. But I wasn't looking to marry any of them, or travel with them, or anything like that. It was conversation, perhaps a movie, perhaps dinner, and most definitely about fornication.

Am I destined to spend my life without romance?

There is probably a man your age out there who is right for you and wants you. Maybe you've ignored a few of them already because they are "boring". Chances are, though, he'll be of modest means because the guys your age who are better off do have the option to go younger. If it really is romance you want you'll increase your odds if you are willing to date men significantly older than you or to play the cougar by seeing younger men… who can't find women their age because they are dating the men your age. If you want a husband it is going to be difficult, but not impossible, to find someone your age; it will be nearly impossible if you expect him to be much better off financially than you.

Dear Abby responded:

I can't speak for "all" older men, but many of them in our youth-obsessed culture look for women considerably younger because it helps them fool themselves into thinking they are younger than their years.

That might be the way a woman thinks, but not the way a man does. It really is as simple as younger generally = hotter. Yes, there are unattractive 20 and 30-somethings, but few women have hotter bodies at age 54 than they did at 34 or 24. Like it or not, a man's ability to attract someone in the dating world tends to increase as he gets older (to a certain limit) and a woman's tends to decrease. This is one of the big reasons why marriage "protects" women and is advantageous for women.

When you're 54 and you’re with your husband of 20+ years, he has that love and bond and history and experience and memory and vows with you. Your body turns him on in part due to these factors. That isn’t the case with the unmarried men who are strangers to you, who will have a more difficult time being turned on by the mere sight of you across the room. It is easier for them to be turned on by looking at that 20 or 30-something they don’t know either, and that makes them more likely to approach that other woman rather than you.

You are physically, socially and intellectually active, so stop allowing yourself to be marginalized and consider dating men who are younger. It worked for Demi Moore.

Not a bad suggestion.

Deflation and Sagging

This is one of those brutally honest posts that necessitates my anonymity, to protect the innocent (not me… my wife). It is about body parts, not the economy. You are warned.

File This Under No Good Deed Goes Unpunished

Or, perhaps, be more cautious. Chino Hills is located just outside of Los Angeles County in southern California’s benighted Inland Empire, kinda in the heart of the four-county block of LA, the OC, and the Inland Empire. Phil Willon reports at LATimes.com:

A Chino Hills woman who was trying to hang a bird feeder from her second-story patio lost her balance and fell to her death early Monday morning, authorities said.

The woman, who was not identified, died after an unsuccessful attempt by a Chino Valley Fire rescue crew to resuscitate her.

Sad.

According to a report by the San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department, the woman was trying to hang the feeder from a wood beam directly above her patio ledge around 3:45 a.m. She fell two stories down, landing on a concrete floor near the base of a staircase.

That was awfully early in the morning. Did she work a night shift? Was she unusually tired? That can impair perception, coordination, and judgment.

Sometimes we get complacent in familiar surroundings, such as home, and aren't as cautious as we should be. She may have put up bird feeders like that many times with any close calls. My sympathies to her loved ones.

Change VAWA to VAPA

Phyllis Schlafly, a favorite target of Leftist feminists who usually "forget" to explain where and how she is wrong, talks about the problems with the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) in this installment of her column that calls on WAVA to be rewritten.

For 30 years, the feminists have been pretending that their goal is to abolish all sex discrimination, eliminating all gender differences no matter how reasonable. When it comes to domestic violence, however, feminist dogma preaches that there is an innate gender difference: Men are naturally batterers, and women are naturally victims (i.e., gender profiling).

Starting with its title, VAWA is just about as sex discriminatory as legislation can get. It is written and implemented to oppose the abuse of women and to punish men.

Ignoring the mountain of evidence that women initiate physical violence nearly as often as men, VAWA has more than 60 passages in its lengthy text that exclude men from its benefits.

Schlafly isn't just complaining. She has specific recommendations.

For starters, the law's title should be changed to Partner Violence Reduction Act, and the words "and men" should be added to those 60 sections.

The law should be rewritten to deal with the tremendous problem of false accusations so that its priority can be to help real victims. A Centers for Disease Control survey found that half of all partner violence was mutual, and 282 scholarly studies reported that women are as physically aggressive, or more aggressive, than men.

Currently used definitions of domestic violence that are unacceptably trivial include calling your partner a naughty word, raising your voice, causing "annoyance" or "emotional distress," or just not doing what your partner wants. The law's revision should use an accurate definition of domestic violence that includes violence, such as: "any act or threatened act of violence, including any forceful detention of an individual, which results or threatens to result in physical injury."

If refusing meet a wife's every request is considered domestic violence, the concept is trivialized. There are women who are beaten by their shack-ups or husbands, and their plight should be taken seriously, not equated to disagreement.

Women who make domestic violence accusations are not required to produce evidence and are never prosecuted for perjury if they lie. Accused men are not accorded fundamental protections of due process, not considered innocent until proven guilty and in many cases are not afforded the right to confront their accusers.

Here's another specific problem:

Feminist recipients of VAWA handouts lobby legislators, judges and prosecutors on the taxpayers' dime (which is contrary to Section 1913 of Title 18, U.S. Code), and the results are generally harmful to all concerned. This lobbying has resulted in laws calling for mandatory arrest (i.e., the police must arrest someone -- guess who) of the predominant aggressor (i.e., ignore the facts and assume the man is the aggressor) and no-drop prosecution (i.e., prosecute the man even if the woman has withdrawn her accusation or refuses to testify).

She goes on to cite the same thing Michael Barone cited in a column I discussed here.

Victims of actual domestic violence have an obligation to 1) remove themselves and anyone for whom they are responsible from the situation, and 2) document the abuse, and, depending on how serious the abuse is, 3) following through in prosecution. Law enforcement should definitely cooperate, but not abandon the "innocent until proven guilty" approach. This will not only protect the victims (and thus allow them to leave the victim status behind), it will also protect others from becoming victims.

Becker and the Pecker

This is going to be... big... news. Maybe you've already heard it. From the Orange County Register:

A woman is behind bars after police say she poisoned her husband, cut off his penis and threw it in the garbage disposal because he "deserved it."

He probably "deserved" it the way some women "deserve" to be beaten or sexually assaulted.

At about 9 p.m. Monday, officers went to a home in the 1400 block of Flower Street [Garden Grove, California] after a woman called 911 and reported a medical emergency, Garden Grove police Lt. Jeff Nightengale said.

Officers found a 51-year-old man tied to the bed and bleeding from his groin, he said. The man, who has not been identified, underwent emergency surgery at UCI Medical Center in Orange and was listed in serious condition, Nightengale said.

The 48-year-old woman, Catherine Kieu Becker, is accused of using an unknown poison or drug in her husband's food to make him sleepy, Nightengale said. She then tied him to the bed and, as he woke up, she cut off his penis with a knife, Nightengale said.

That would make it premeditated. Perhaps a lawyer will still manage to come up with a hormone defense.

The victim told detectives that he believed there was something wrong with the food Becker prepared for him, Nightengale said.

So he was complaining about her cooking? Is that why he deserved it? Oh, wait, he means that he was poisoned.

Becker and the victim are going through a divorce, he said.

Okay guys, one of the first rules about divorce is STAY AWAY FROM HER!

Becker was arrested on suspicion of aggravated mayhem, false imprisonment, assault with a deadly weapon, administering a drug with intent to commit a felony, poisoning and spousal abuse, Nightengale said.

What, no "illegal dumping of biological" waste? Let's see if she is actually held accountable.

Crazy women are fun in bed. Until they cut off your pecker.

By the way, it's California, so even if she is guilty, she is STILL entitled to half of the marital assets, and, if he earned more than her, alimony. Now, he can certainly sue her for what she (allegedly) did to him, and I hope he does.

Men, choose wisely. Add this woman to the "Do Not Date" list.

A Case of Alimony Fraud

Any government program is going to have abuses, fraud, waste, etc. That is one reason why I support the idea that the best government is tightly limited government. Government-decided alimony is no exception.

FURIOUS IN THE PACIFIC NORTHWEST wrote in to Dear Abby:

My parents divorced 20 years ago. The court approved a mutual agreement that Dad would pay monthly alimony until Mom remarried or one of them died.

In states like California, this is standard if the marriage lasts ten years or more. It is ridiculous. There are very few cases in which this is warranted.

He has never missed a payment.

Sounds like a law-abiding man. You're not going to see his face on a billboard. You're not going to see his story on Lifetime.

I have recently discovered that Mom secretly married her live-in boyfriend 11 years ago, but has continued receiving the alimony without telling my father.

On the plus side, at least she didn't continue to shack up like some women do to take advantage of the insane alimony system. This is why the "until marriage" thing does not work in alimony.

Is she committing a crime for which she could be arrested? And is her husband guilty of any wrongdoing?

Well, see, there's the negative side. Your mother is a fraud. That's the nicest word I can use about her. Other men might use words that rhyme with itch and blunt, but not me. I'm not a lawyer; I have no idea if her husband can be held criminally responsible for aiding her fraud or "receipt of stolen property." She is likely a tax cheat as a result of this, and he could be as well.

I am extremely upset over this and want to do something to correct this injustice.

Good for you. Even more so if you are a female. I have no idea if you are.

It isn't fair.

Welcome to the battle of the sexes as far as the law goes.

Dear Abby responded:

Marriage certificates are public records, so get a copy of your mother's and mail it to your father. He needs to stop paying the alimony, and he can sue her in family court for any money she wasn't entitled to. His next move should be to consult an attorney and decide how he wants to handle this.

Exactly. Good advice.

I WONDER why feminists have not been vocal in attacking alimony policies - not all, just some - which presents women as unable to take care of themselves? It is a throwback to when women didn't have equal access to the workplace, property ownership, and the academy. If a feminist truly cares about equality and women not being treated as property, shouldn't she be against lifetime alimony in most cases? I get the importance and purpose of alimony in cases when the agreement was for a husband to earn in the income and for the wife to maintain the home and raise the children; she'll need time to establish herself in the working world. (This should all be required prenuptial stipulations, IMO) But for life?

Isn't there some way this situation can be made better? Perhaps through a "divorce insurance" policy? I could see having a policy where if the spouses stay married until one of them dies, the policy pays the survivor, provided the survivor didn't kill the deceased. If they divorce, the policy pays the "alimony". I'm no insurance expert, so feel free to tell me I'm smoking crack.

I really do think that this is one of those things couples should have to state in writing before getting married what the agreement is going to be. A husband-to-be should be able to voluntarily agree, before marrying, to lifetime alimony, but I think it is a bad thing to have as default in most cases. Especially in states with no-fault divorce.

I'd be curious to know the circumstances of the marriage and divorce.

Will the Academy Get Even More Hostile to Men?

Townhall.com can be a great place to find conservative opinion on current issues and breaking news. They feature a wide variety (and thus sometimes they disagree with each other) of columnists who fall under the "conservative" designation (which means they might be in the GOP, or libertarians, or fiscal conservatives, foreign policy conservatives, social conservatives, etc.). The site is part of Salem Communications, which is a media company that has a lot of radio stations and syndicated programs with some of the best talk show hosts.

Today, I wanted to point out a column from a couple weeks back by Michael Barone.

He points out the university used to be place in society where you would find the widest allowance of free expression. But things have changed:

Today, we live in an America with enormous cultural variety in which very few things are considered universally verboten. But on campus it's different. There, saying something considerably milder than some of the double entendres you heard in cable news coverage of the Anthony Weiner scandal can get you into big trouble.

What brought this on?

These reflections are inspired by a seemingly innocuous 19-page letter on April 4 from the Department of Education's Office of Civil Rights to colleges and universities. The letter was given prominence by Greg Lukianoff, president of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, which has done yeoman work opposing restrictive speech codes issued by colleges and universities.

OCR's letter carries great weight since there are few things a university president fears more than an OCR investigation, which can lead to losses of federal funds -- which amount to billions in some cases.

In my opinion, the only institutions of higher learning that should be getting federal funding in the first place are ones doing work (such as training) for the military, or some other Constitutionally-stipulated federal government work.

The OCR letter includes a requirement that universities adopt a "preponderance of the evidence" standard of proof for deciding sexual harassment and sexual assault. In other words, in every case of alleged sexual harassment or sexual assault, a disciplinary board must decide on the basis of more likely than not.

That's far short of the requirement in criminal law that charges must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt. And these disciplinary proceedings sometimes face charges that could also be criminal, as in cases of alleged rape.

Uh-oh. This means things are going to get even worse for men - a minority on campus already.

Lukianoff notes that campus definitions of sexual harassment include "humor and jokes about sex in general that make someone feel uncomfortable" (University of California at Berkeley), "unwelcome sexual flirtations and inappropriate putdowns of individual persons or classes of people" (Iowa State University) or "elevator eyes" (Murray State University in Kentucky).

All of which means that just about any student can be hauled before a disciplinary committee. Jokes about sex will almost always make someone uncomfortable, after all, and usually you can't be sure if flirting will be welcome except after the fact. And how do you define "elevator eyes"?

Simple. "Elevator eyes" are when a man looks in the general direction of a woman and she finds him unattractive or dislikes him for any reason, and she wants to complain about him. Isn't that easy?

As Lukianoff points out, OCR had other alternatives. The Supreme Court in a 1999 case defined sexual harassment as conduct "so severe, pervasive, and objectively offensive, and that so undermines and detracts from the victims' educational experience, that the victim-students are effectively denied equal access to an institution's resources and opportunities." In other words, more than a couple of tasteless jokes or a moment of elevator eyes.

Now now, the Supreme Court is only to be listened to when it says something these people like.

Look, fully half my ancestors were women, I have sisters, I have a wife, I have a daughter. I don't want them to have to deal with sexist hate or crude behavior. But this is being ridiculous and downright dangerous. You may be sympathetic to this cause, especially if you are a woman who has been subjected to crude comments, but do you want your brother, your son, your husband, your male friends to be railroaded off campus on the whims of a, perhaps, emotionally or psychologically unstable woman?

For sure, throw violent people off campus and into prison. Remove anyone on staff or in the student body who is proven to persist in actual harassment. But if it is going to be merely "he said vs. she said", her word is going to be given more weight.