Perfect Timing

It is amazing how my wife "just happens" to pick fights or lays out a long list of complaints about me and/or makes demands about how I need to change (things I never do to her, by the way) a couple of hours before we're due to have sex. Yes, due to have sex. Oh, I wanted sex the days/nights before, but she kept putting it off. Yes, men, get married, and you too can schedule sex, but be prepared for that flight to be canceled. Scheduling makes it all the more easy for a wife to figure out ways to avoid sex with you.

It's funny, all of the women I fornicated with in my wayward youth seemed to want to have sex with me. They're the ones who initiated it into our relationship to begin with, and if we'd subsequently spent any amount of time together in private and did not have some form of sex, they would be concerned and want to know what was wrong.

It is times like this I can't regret having fornicated, because if I hadn't, I'd be damn near suicidal at this point thinking I must be completely repulsive and a terrible lover.

Yes, all of you guys who aren't married but haven't ruled it out of your future - you too can sign a legal document that will: 1) obligate you to give up more than half of everything you'll ever earn and make lifetime payments to a woman who will hate you; 2) automatically assign you paternity of any children she has, even if she conceived them with some genetic basket case while you were working your ass off at the office, and 3) give her default status as your beneficiary and the person who can make decisions for you should you become incapacitated. In return, the law guarantees you... uh... the responsibility of making decisions for her should she become incapacitated. What a deal! What are you waiting for??? You must be some immature boy or immoral cad to not want that!

Oh, by the way, the thing that apparently (who really knows with such irrational creatures) set her off this time? I kid you not, she is upset I did not perjure myself to get out of jury duty because it might... might... interfere with her social plans for a day - social plans I was key to facilitate in the first place by begging like a dog for a favor I can't possibly repay. I did it to make her happy. How ironic is that?

Questions For Dr. Laura Schlessinger (and others) - 3

Please read the essential introduction to this series.

4) In an era where women now have full access to every area of educational, training, and professional life, earning income, investing, banking, credit, and financial management, and women are able and expected to move out of their family home and pay their own way through unmarried life, why should a man be required, let alone expected, to always pay for a date (unless she cooks a meal for him)? If your response is "men value what they pay for" are you saying women value things other people pay for, but not what they pay for? If you say "in nature, the male demonstrates", why are we to adhere to that aspect of nature but not so many others? Why is her time more valuable than his?

5) You have said that a man should not be dating unless he is prepared to financially support a wife and children. You have also said that dating is to discern if someone is a match to marry. Does this mean that people who will not ever marry should never go on dates, even with people of like mind? Does this mean that men who will never be in a position to support a wife and children should never go on dates, even with women who will not be having children (or have grown children) and who plan to continue to support themselves? It now takes most men at least until their late 20s to be in a position to support a wife and children (if they ever will be). Should he never date at all before that, even to learn what kind of person he gets along with, or for mere entertainment?

6) You say a man should not be having sex with a woman without marrying her or at least being engaged with a ring and date. How did you arrive at that conclusion? If you cite the possibility of conception, does this mean it is OK for a man to have sex with a woman outside of marriage if at least one of them is incapable of having children?

7) You only find strict monogamy acceptable – for example, that having a one-night-threesome is an absolute no. I agree that married monogamy is what is moral. My primary basis for this is the Christian Bible. What is the basis of your rule? If you cite marital vows, what if "forsaking all others" wasn't one of their vows, or wasn't vowed with the meaning of excluding all sexual contact with anyone else?

8) You sometimes ask how a man explains it to the father of the woman with whom he's fornicating. Yet you never ask how she explains it to his mother. Why should an explanation be needed in one case but not the other?

9) With your principle (and mine) of reserving sex for marriage and that men should be the income earners, your touting of community property, use of the term "unpaid whore" for women who shack up, your suggestion that unmarried women get $250 for each session of sex, your statements that "you're not even making him pay for dinner" and "you girls are giving it away for free", and your insistence that men pay for almost all dates, aren't you saying that men should pay for sex? Doesn't that imply that women do not enjoy sex and should only engage in it as a means for material gain? Doesn't that imply that men shouldn't care whether a woman enjoys sex or not? After all, are we to care if our hired help likes their tasks or not? You (like many others) refer to mutual consented fornication as a man using a woman, but never say they are using each other or she is also using him. Why is that? If a woman who shacks up is an unpaid whore, why doesn't that make a married woman a paid whore? Why do you call them unpaid when, in some cases, he is paying all of her expenses and buying her gifts over and above that?

10) I agree that sex is for marriage and that shacking up is a bad idea. Here is a question I have for just about anyone: How is a man supposed to know about what kind of a mother or sexual partner a woman will be before he "lays down his life" for her? People aren't always consistent, so a someone being generally reasonable about most things in life and willing to negotiate and being compatible through dating/courtship and planning a wedding doesn’t necessarily mean they will be generally reasonable when it comes to parenting or willing to negotiate about sexual issues. Some hangups and quirks will not be discovered until actually having sex or actually living together.

11) You have said shacking up can’t involve any commitment, regardless of the explicitly stated mutual agreements of those involved, even if they have children together, because marriage is what makes the relationship committed. Thus, a caller has no right to complain about what the shack up honey is doing. You have also said that if someone has married, thus making public vows and signing legal documents, they have no obligation to work through marital problems if they have no children. For example, you tell women who call you with a problem in their marriage to leave and go home to their mother, So is marriage the commitment or is having children the commitment? Or does a commitment only exist if they have married and had children? With wide cultural acceptance of no-fault divorce at the will of only one of the spouses, is marriage actually a commitment to anything other than having a community property financial partnership? Also, do no other vows, promises, or stated commitments in any area of life have any moral weight unless they include a legal contract? For example, if someone said they were going to do something useful for your sailing hobby, do you really have no moral right to call him on it if he doesn’t, because he never signed a legal contract?

A Generational Divide

I interrupt my series of questions for Dr. Laura with examples from yesterday's show that might explain some of the questions in the series.

The Call of the Day yesterday was from the first hour:

Shane (caller, female): I'm calling about a dating situation. I've been seeing someone for a little over a month. I've developed feelings for him. I'm definitely not ready to be a relationship him, because I don't trust him enough to have sex with him yet. I find myself-

Laura [Interrupting]: Shane, stop. You're not even ashamed of what you just said.

Questions For Dr. Laura Schlessinger - 2

Read the introduction to this series here.

3) Along the same lines as question #1, what exactly are you expecting fathers to do when setting right their teen children, their daughter's boyfriend, etc.? Yes, a father can beat his chest, flex his muscles, clean his guns, talk in a loud, commanding voice, give stern looks, get in someone's face, etc. But if push literally comes to shove, the father faces arrest for child abuse and/or assault. Fathers are obligated to provide for their children. They can’t kick them out. They can't physically restrain them. They can't slap sense into them. They can't refuse to take care of them. The authorities will side with the teen, and so will many wives and the other parents. Young males today know this. So while they may not want their girlfriend's father yelling in their face, they know if her father touches them, he (they boyfriend) will own the father.

This macho dad stuff may have worked back "in the day" in certain places, but these days, a husband/father has no power if the others involved do not "let" him have any. I wish fathers still had the kind of power you tell them to act like they have. They don't. Not legally, anyway. This is the world we've created.

If you have answers to ANY of these questions, or you want to make a comment, please do.

Questions For Dr. Laura Schlessinger - 1

If you read this blog, you know that I love the Dr. Laura Schlessinger Show, and I think Dr. Laura is great, and I agree with her almost all of the time and I think she’s doing a heckuva lot of good. She's made my life better, she's helped me be a better person, and she's done the same for many, many people.

It is because I am such a fan of her show, books, etc. that I know what she says well enough that I can have these questions for her (unlike people who have no clue and mockingly ask questions). These questions are not intended to be traps. I am not playing "gotcha". I'd really like to know if there are answers. It is difficult to give commentary and take calls for 3 hours per day, 5 days per week, plus everything else she does and to never misspeak or never put things in a way that could have been put better or never misunderstand what a caller has said.

I value consistency, basing things on principles, values, etc., and Dr. Laura is almost always consistent and clear about principles. Maybe there is some principle or bit of knowledge I am not seeing that would clear up my questions. Maybe she will give clarification on her show in a commentary, since she doesn’t take questions like this as calls – she only deals with a supposedly real-life situation faced by the caller. I think answering these questions would make her show even better because I'm probably not the only listener who has these questions.

I was going to do one long posting of all the questions, but that would take too long, I couldn't wait any longer, and people tend to skip over lost walls of text anyway, so I've decided to turn this into a series, starting with what was probably the original question I wanted to ask anyway:

Messing With Talk Show Callers

I'm a sucker for some of the ways audio talk show hosts mess with callers. While the newscast of Robin Quivers was my favorite consistent feature of the Howard Stern Show (which I haven't heard since it went to satellite), one of my favorite occasional bits was when Howard would take a call from someone like Ian the Drunk and put other callers on with him, or when he'd take two callers on hold and connect them with each other, priming the pump with the occasional drop. Nobody beats Phil Hendrie, of course, who made a career out of messing with callers.

Two things Tom Leykis does that have always made me laugh hard:

1) When the caller asks "Is this Tom?" or says "I want to talk to Tom" right after Tom has started the call by identifying himself, and Tom handles it by saying, “Oh, did you want to talk to Tom?” and then does his whole set-up again, which includes the buffer music. I've heard him keep that up for an entire segment so that the caller never gets to say what he or she wanted to say.

2) When the caller has not turned off the show on their listening device, and rather than telling them (again) to turn it down/off, Tom tells them to turn it up - as loud as it will go. I heard one time, back when he was on FM radio, when he let the call loop back on itself what must have been a dozen times.

I guess I’m still a 13 year-old boy in some ways.

Jumping the Shill

I think he's dead wrong on certain things, but the Bill Handel Show is a regular part of my morning radio habit. I enjoy the rest of the on-air staff, including the traffic/aviation expert Mike Nolan, and Handel himself is often the perfect target for jokes by his cohosts. It is more the show itself than Handel that gets me, as evidenced by how I still enjoy listening (and often enjoy it more) when someone is filling in for Bill. With most other shows, the moment I hear that there's a guest host I catch up on my backlog of podcasts. I 've always liked Walter E. Williams filling in for Limbaugh, and I'll often listen to Mark Steyn, too.

Anyway, Handel reads a lot of the ads that run on his show, often including his personal testimonials, sometimes live but often recorded. Maybe I'm just grouchy, but in recent weeks his ads have jumped the shark for me. It's not like I was rushing out to buy the stuff he was advertising anyway, but I've been turned off the last couple of weeks. I'm finding his ads irritating and annoying. It probably isn't Handel himself, but rather the copy. For example, he's been promoting a weight loss company that has brick & mortar locations. He says the reason it works is "accountability". Since you have to show up and be weighed in front of the people who are helping you to lose weight (mind you, you are paying those people) you don't want to disappoint them. Really? Really? People who don't give a rodent's behind about how their spouse feels about them gaining and retaining weight are going to care what someone they're employing thinks? In some of the ads, he's even used the word "magic". Get out of here. In another ad, Handel is trying to convince people to buy advertising on the station, which is owned by Clear Channel. Maybe it is a sign of desperation from a corporation that has tens of billions of dollars in debt? Part of what irritates me about the ad is that is claims to tell us what the "smart" people are doing. Because, you know, you are a flipping idiot.

Maybe it isn't Handel, because there's a McDonald's ad that various people, like different traffic reporters, have been reading that has been irritating me. I don't care if their coffee is made from "real Arabica beans" or the eggs in their breakfast are "fluffy". In fact, I'd rather the word "fluffy" not be used to describe meaty food.

I'm rapidly turning into a grumpy old man, apparently.

Thanksgiving Reminder

Oh, there's so much I could tell you, so much I've wanted to say, but I haven't gotten around to editing my thoughts into a publishable post, because I've been too busy with them mundane things in life. I did have a very nice day that was out of the ordinary recently, but other than that, it has all been about grinding away at the job to support the family, and doing my chores, errands, and parenting stuff. The wife seems happy enough, she's pleasant enough to be around, but I think things could be a heckuva lot better. Ah, but before I know it, barring something happening even sooner, I'll be an old man and dying and it really won't matter. That's something that has been weighing on my mind a lot lately. I could easily live as long as I have so far. Time passes by more slowly when we're younger, perhaps in part because so much of what we're experiencing is new. And if it seems like just yesterday that I was a kid, then it'll seem like tomorrow that I'll be a dying old man. Nice thought, eh? Anyway, below is an annual reminder I'm now running for the third time. If you haven't done so already, you should really really how my Thanksgiving went last year. [- November 14, 2013]


It is that time of the year again - when married people endure problem in-laws and everyone has to deal with their own problem family members, and when some unmarried people sitting around a Thanksgiving meal endure from family the questioning, nagging, teasing, and whatever else about why they're not married or why they don't have kids yet.

Don't get me wrong. I think it is acceptable to ask a family member who is currently expecting a child and will not be giving the child up for adoption about getting married. But if someone isn't in that position, they should not have to endure yearly or more frequent pressure from other family members about getting married.

See a previous posting of mine on this subject and a more recent one.

If you have endured such questioning, have you come up with any good things to say that stop the questioning and pressure?

The answers would likely be different depending on one's personal beliefs and the general family's traditional belief. For example, if the family is very religious and so are you, you can say, "God just hasn't brought me the right person yet."

But if most people at the table aren't religious, especially not you, it is very easy (at least for a man) to reply honestly with, "What would I get by being married that I can't get being unmarried?"

Either way, perhaps a good response is...

"I like my life the way it is right now. I get to do what I want when I want. Nobody argues or fights with me, or nags me in my own home. I never have to sleep on the couch. I get to have my place the way I like it. And I get to come here and endure this line of questioning from the likes of you instead of having to spend the holiday with someone else's family."

Two common questions asked of those with no plans to marry are, "Aren't you worried about growing old alone?" and the related "Don't you want someone to take care of you?"

But plenty of people who marry and have children end up growing old alone and in a horrible nursing home. Most of the people who sit in nursing homes with little or no visitation from family had children. And as far as being alone, there are these wonderful people called... friends. And when your friend gets mad at you and decides not to deal with you any more (or you decide not to deal with your friend anymore), you don't have to lose your home and pay that friend money.

Have any of you endured this line of questioning? How have you handled it?

Previously:

Practical Advice For Men Avoiding Marriage

How Do You Decide if You Want Kids?

Avoidance and Being Caught

My wife, who has told me before that although she tries not to show it, claims she is really flattered and encouraged when I make a big deal about her appearing nude before me. Yet she seems to have no interest in basking in my mesmerized stare of awe.

I want to be desired, admired, appreciated for my physical appearance. It seems like she should couldn't care less about being the focus of such passion.

I'm very sensitive to not being wanted, and I've told her so. I told her I'm more perceptive than she might think when it comes to that.

Recently, my tentative indications of interest in making love were met with her asking to defer to our regular weekly session.

Okay, fine. As long as she will allow me my privacy, I will tend to my health myself.

But then the appointed date came, and she deferred again to the next day.

You Did NOT Enjoy What You Chose to Do For Ten Years

Had to check in about a call during the first hour of Dr. Laura's show on Tuesday, September 17, 2013. Whenever I have a bone to pick with Dr. Laura, I point out that I listen to every minute of her show and I follow what goes on with her website and Facebook page, and I read her books. I think she usually hits the bullseye and I think she has done so much good for many people, me included. Blah, blah, blah...

Dr. Laura's advice and comments over the years have made it clear that she, like many other people, subscribes to the idea that men should have to buy sex one way or another, preferably by signing a contract that shifts over half of everything they’ll ever earn to a woman. That is not how she would put it, but it is the end result of what she says (including that men always pay for dates) and the use of phrases like calling women who shack up or otherwise regularly fornicate as “unpaid whores”.

She took a call from a woman who'd not been honest with her husband about her sexual past (as the husband had supposedly been with her) in that she had previously not disclosed to him that from her late 20s to her late 30s, she'd had a lot of one night stands as part of evenings stated off by clubbing. The caller said the encounters had been fun, at least for a few minutes each time. Dr. Laura denied they had been fun. Isn't it interesting how Dr. Laura can speak to whether something was fun for another person and tell that person they didn't have the feelings they did?

Shattered Delusions

She hasn't filed for divorce – yet. I'm fairly certain she hasn't committed paternity fraud (or if she has, my brother or father knocked her up.) She hasn't had me arrested. I would never attack her, but plenty of men have been arrested without even pushing their wife in self defense.

But she's done enough of the textbook behavior that MGTOW, MRAs, Marriage Strikers, and Leykis 101 all warn about that I guess I can be categorized as a "beaten dog."

Whenever I get some time alone, I love it. I've always enjoyed my alone time, but now I appreciate it more than ever. I set my alarm and get up earlier than I "need" to, despite not getting enough sleep, because it is the way I get time to myself. I'd rather be tired and have had time to myself than tired and not have had time to myself.

The other day, it was two weeks since I'd had any sexual contact with my wife, and that session, a week after the previous session, had been stopped short by my wife. Now, during my wayward youth, when I was in long-term relationships with girlfriends, if we would have ever gone a single week without sex (after we’d become sexually active), I know any of those girlfriends would have freaked out and demanded to know why I was holding out on them. It never happened. Because I wanted sex and so did they. So… did… they. They wanted sex… with me.

Anyway, this other day was the day my wife will usually condescend to let me make love to her. Ah, but many hours before that would typically happen, she told me she was on the rag. Now, she was also not taking one of her meds, which she claims she does to help her enjoy sex more, but not taking the meds also makes her more bitchy. When menstruation and a lack of medication combine, my wife can literally go crazy or she will get vicious and say the kinds of things to me that marriage therapists say will kill a marriage. She reacts disproportionately to things I do in a negative way. (And I'm constantly reminded in my own thoughts that I made it clear before we even had our first date that I didn't want someone who needed – or thought she needed - ongoing medical treatment. This warning, I no longer have much doubt, prompted her to hide the truth from me.)

Yahoo E-mail Grab

You may or may not be aware that Yahoo! has "recycled" e-mail addresses that were not used for what the company considered to be too long. It had been at least several months since I last accessed an e-mail account I set up for this blog, and so when I went to check on it... POOF... it was gone, along with all of the e-mail messages I had been sent and that I had sent. Gee, thanks Yahoo. Then again, I didn't pay for that account, but still... I would have at least liked to have retrieved the messages. Surely there is some way Yahoo could have set it up to say that they were making the address available again, but if I entered the previous password I would be able to retrieve my messages for the next seven days. Or something.

Self-Inflicted Wounds Can Be the Most Painful

On our very first date, the woman who later became my wife asked me for my thoughts on how children should be raised. I told her that strangers would not be raising my children.

If that sounds like strange first date banter, that's because our fist date happened a few months after I was introduced to her and after we'd since communicated some important things about ourselves to each other, including that we were looking for an eventual spouse.

After I told her that strangers would be raising my children, I told her I was flexible about how that would be accomplished. I was open to being the one to stay with the kids, for example. She quickly said she'd be the one to stay with the kids. As it turns out, her three main goals in life were to work in the profession she did, to marry, and to be a mother, and by be a mother she wanted to mother, not hire other people to babysit/raise her kids five days a week.

The other day there was a call to Dr. Laura from a woman who wanted to put her four year-old into a weekday program at their church that took preschoolers several hours a day three days per week. Dr. Laura quickly identified it as daycare, insisted that children do not like such programs, and pointed out that nobody cares about a child as much as that child's mother.

I agree, at least with the last phrase. However, I do think some children may actually prefer these programs over being with mom if being with mom means being stuck at home, without friends at that.

The problem is, when Dr. Laura is making these comments, she's thinking of only one child being involved (she only had one) and she's envisioning a mother taking their one child on bicycle rides and walks, to the park, etc. That also what I thought I was getting - a wife who'd be that kind of mother to our children. After all, she had a full-time job working with children and knew about child development and the needs of children, and she wanted to be a stay-with-kids mother.


Our daughter is in grade school. My wife is homeschooling her. We also have a son. My wife wants to stick our son into pretty much the same program the caller described, only for two days a week instead of three. She says it is just too difficult to teach our daughter when our son delights in interfering, especially when it is to torment his sister (at which he excels). And she says it is just for this school year, since he'll have his own schoolwork to do next year.

I can hear Dr. Laura's first solution in my head: do the schoolwork at a park where the boy can play nearby.

But my wife doesn't feel she can do that safely - not with two children.

Then how about letting grandma take the boy twice a week?

My wife's mother is a drunk and forbidden by my wife (with my full support) to look after our children. My own mother lives an hour away and has other responsibilities.

Why not move closer to my mother?

This is the house my wife wanted.

Why not move closer to her now?

Our excellent credit has been tarnished due to decisions by my wife. We're not moving anywhere.

Why not stick the daughter in school?

Public schools suck in our neighborhood and our state has turned public schools into madhouses in general.

Why not stick the daughter in private school?

I don't have the money. In part because of all the money I pay to fund the unusable public schools.

Why not become a stay-with-kids dad and have the wife go to work?

She is done working. She's not going to go back full-time, and we can't disrupt my work situation because we need the insurance due to my wife's medical situations.


Why did you pick her to be the mother of your children if she is incapable?

She seemed capable. She had no children yet, so how could I be sure? There's much she and her family did not reveal to me until after we were married and had children.

Why did you have two children instead of one?

My wife insisted that she didn't want our daughter being an only child, and I had no idea that having two children instead of one would be such a problem for her.

Tell her to bite the bullet and be a mother to her son.

Well, yeah, except she has the trump card.

I expressed my opinion, even though it resulted in exactly what I figured it would - she's feeling hurt and upset, and nothing's going to change for the better. Everyone in my family has always urged us to stick the kids into "pre-school". It is clear they think she's a crappy mother, or at least unable to be a good mother. Yet my sisters also urge me to discuss my concerns with my wife - whether with this or anything else. But it is pointless. The only thing it changes is that it diminishes her happiness/satisfaction, and I take no pleasure in that. Why make both of us less happy?

As unromantic or selfish or otherwise wrong that it seems or may be, I married because I wanted (one of us) to raise my own children in the best circumstances and because I like sex and I wanted an enthusiastic lovemaking partner who would enjoy how I loved her and would enjoy loving me, and I wanted to live by what I'm convinced is the the truth: sex is for marriage. How many Christian men are in the same boat? Don't give me "You're supposed to marry someone because you can't live without them." Please. Most marriages in the Bible and in history were not about that. And clearly, considering how well I was doing and how long I had lived on my own, I could live just fine without any woman as my wife.

Both of those reasons I married are dead. The kids will grow up, and if they turn out badly, they'll be society's problem, not mine. I don't count on the situation with the sex getting any better. Ever. It's not important to her, and what I want isn't as important to her as her own preferences, and again, talking about it will not change that, it will only make her feel bad.

Here's where things get a little more adult. You are warned.

Lie to Me

Is acting a form of lying? Where’s the line between acting or pretending or “living a lie”?

I know there are people who claim to be “radically honest” to the point of almost never ever telling a lie, no matter how “little” or “white” it is. If someone asks a question you don’t want to answer because you think it will hurt their feelings or start a right, these people advise using ways of responding to the question without lying.

Most people do not follow such a method.

Even if they did, I’m not sure most marriages could possibly be happy ones if someone always told the truth.

For example, when a woman dreamily asks a man, “What are you thinking?”, chances are, she doesn’t want to know the truth, unless the truth is that he’s thinking about a blissful future of catering to her every whim and or he’s remembering how they fell in love. Most likely, he’s not thinking about that. “I was thinking about how nice it was when you were giving me the silent treatment” isn’t an answer that will help.

When someone asks, “How are you?” or Howsit goin’?” they usually don’t really care. They are just being polite. Even if they do care, is it really a good idea to answer with, “Not so good. My wife is being a real bitch.”? Not if she is there! And not if you think is is usually not a good thing to complain about your wife to others.

I did NOT get married because I needed my wife, or any woman, to be happy and get through life. I got married because I wanted to be a father and raise children in the way best for them AND because I like sex and, convinced that sex is for marriage as part of the design of God, I couldn’t be an honest, sincere Christian going through life fornicating. I didn’t want to go without sex; I like sex, I like pleasing and experiencing a woman sexually, especially one I love, and so I found what I thought was the right woman for me, and married her. That isn’t exactly something to say to your wife.

As far as the mothering part, things are much better than they used to be, but I still think my wife is doing things right, or enough things, or enough things right. I think the children are spending too much time in front of television. My wife sleeps in long after the kids are up. She thinks she can only take them out together under certain circumstances. Her parents and a brother are the only family a short drive away, but we won't leave our children with her parents and her brother has a life. So, too often the kids are stuck at home. Then I get home and I'm tired and would really like some alone time, but I need to tend to the needs of the kids.


As far as the sex, we've been down to about once per week for a while now, scheduled. If anything happens she doesn't like during the day two before our standing appointment, then I’m "punished" with her telling me I can forget about sex. For the longest time she was going without orgasms (on top of lack of desire/enthusiasm), and she blames her medications. Sure enough, after talking with one of her doctors, she started going without that specific medication for two days in a row each week (unless she forgot to NOT take her med), in anticipation of scheduled sex. And, that worked. Unfortunately, it also makes her bitchy. In fact, it has been when my wife has had problems with her meds that she has been all too honest with me, saying and doing things she may not even remember later, but that I won’t ever be able to forget. Someone may argue that the lack of meds was making her say things she didn’t really believe or feel, and I’d like to believe that to be the case, but I don’t believe it is the case.

So, I need her to lie to me.

An Arrest Warrant For What?

There was an arrest warrant issued for Ric Flair for failing to pay spousal support or alimony - thousands of dollars per month.

If you don't know who Ric Flair is, read on.

Regardless of what anyone thinks of what is known as professional wrestling, it is not an easy profession. It is part of show biz, live theater-in-the-round, and that is where my mostly sporadic, casual interest has come in over the years. I've read a couple of Mick Foley's nonfiction autobiographical books and own the documentary "Beyond the Mat". Making it big in the industry not only takes skill and lots of hard work, but it takes luck and an ability to navigate the politics. Making it big can be lucrative, but it also means a lot of hard work, working day in and day out almost every day of the year, lots of traveling to get from one venue to the next, and a lot of pain from very real strains and injuries.

Ric Flair is someone who had a major back injury in (if I recall correctly) an airplane crash, but he managed to go on to have multiple of a top-notch career after that. Men and women like him have worked liked dogs. This guy is going to be living with serious aches and pains the rest of his life.

Like many other top professionals in his industry, his personal life has not been a smooth one. His latest wife he married in November 2009. About 34 months later (less than three years, Sept. 2012) it was over and Flair was headed for his fourth divorce.


Why is he supposed to pay a grown woman thousands of dollars each month because she was married to him for almost three years? Is that part of a prenup? If so, it is a lousy one. This isn't the 1920s. She has access to education and employment and banking so she can make and manage her own money. It isn't like he's had her at home for the last 20 years cranking out babies and raising them. His income today is based on scores of years of literally backbreaking work on his part, accumulating a professional legacy and achieving legendary status as a money-making draw for his employers. He's to pro wrestling what Kobe Bryant is to the NBA or what John Williams is to the world of Hollywood film scores. She played no part in that. Why is she entitled to his earnings?

I'm not saying he shouldn't live up to contracts or abide by court orders.

I'm saying there's a problem with premise that she is entitled to $4,000 a month to begin with.

Clooney's on a Marriage Strike

[I am bumping this up because Clooney continues to prove this to be true with a recent breakup.]
 
I saw on my online portal something about "why George Clooney won't get married". I didn't need to read the story. The reasons why Clooney won't get married should be readily apparent. He's considered one of the sexiest men alive. He's rich and famous. In my estimation, he won't get married because there's nothing in it for him, in his way of thinking. He can get everything he wants without being married. In fact, not being married makes it easier for him to get everything he wants. Nobody in the public or the media is going to give him grief no matter how many women he has sex with. Contrast that with Tiger Woods. Because Tiger Woods was married, it was a problem. Nobody would have given Woods grief over all of his flings and affairs if he hadn't been married.

Clooney is one of those men who women will admit they would have sex with him if all the time they'd ever have with him would be ten minutes. Some of these women insist they need romance, wining and dining, and a lot of foreplay, maybe even a "committed relationship" to have sex, but within a minute of meeting Clooney they'd be naked and on top of him.

George's retort: "I hate to blow your whole news story, but I was married, so I gave it a shot."

This is not why he won't remarry. If failing or having a bad experience at something caused Clooney to quit it, then he would have stopped acting long ago, because even the best actors have the projects they regret – if not because of the final product then because of the process of creating it.

Clooney and Italian actress/model Canalis, 32, have been dating since 2009.

And when he's done with her or she's done with him, he won't have to pay her alimony. If they actually stay together, then what has he lost (in his eyes) by not being married to her? (When we no longer shame sex outside of marriage, this is a natural result.)

Actually, by saying he's not going to get married, it's like a challenge to some women who are convinced that if they just try hard enough (= give him a lot of good sex and doting and no drama), then he'll change his mind and marry them.

All kidding aside, I have heard from someone who has dealt with him in person. We're not talking about a model or someone Clooney needed to butter up. From what she said about him, it sounds like he's a genuinely nice guy who really does care about people. I wish him the best, and I hope he's gotten snipped. If he doesn't want to get married, he should make sure he's not going to get anyone pregnant. Especially at his age.

Knocking Up Teacher

Melissa Pamer and Tony Shin at NBC’s Los Angeles O & O has this story which has been all over the news around here:

A Redlands high school teacher accused of having a baby allegedly fathered by a teen student pleaded not guilty Tuesday to 41 counts of sex and oral copulation with a minor.

Laura Elizabeth Whitehurst, 28, was arrested July 1 after the mother of a Citrus Valley High student contacted school officials about the suspected relationship between her son and the English teacher.

She was charged Monday with crimes alleged to have involved the boy -- who was 16 when the relationship began, according to police -- and two other teen students who are now adults.

Later:

Authorities said Whitehurst had given birth June 18 to a baby fathered by the student with whom she had had a nearly year-long affair. The boy attended the baby’s birth, according to court documents.

Later:

Then, at least two other men came forward and said they had had sexual relations with Whitehurst in 2007 and 2008.

One of the alleged victims spoke to NBC4 Southern California, saying he never felt victimized but wanted to share his story so that others might come forward to tell police about their experiences with Whitehurst.

Finally:

Whitehurst is charged with 30 counts of unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor, and 11 counts of oral copulation of a person under 18.

If convicted as charged, Whitehurst could face up to 29 years in state prison, the District's Attorney's Office said.

So there's yet another criminal case that's hit the news lately about a young female teacher "having sex" with multiple minor male students. Unless the teacher is decidedly unattractive (this latest one isn't), one of the common responses to this is along the lines of:

On the Couch

I'm getting counseling.

My wife has repeatedly demanded I get counseling for the times I have lost my temper and yelled. I resisted, figuring if I had time to get counseling, I should instead spend that time doing something I wanted to do. Previously, every time she demanded I get counseling, she dropped the demand or forgot about it completely, because each time she made the demand it was she, in retrospect, who had a problem.

My wife even took video of me during one of my rants. This was to show me how awful I was. I knew that even as it was going on. She demanded I watch it and sent it to me (we weren't in the same place when she made the demand). So I did. And you know what? While she was expecting me to see that things were worse that I realized, when I saw the video I didn't look nearly as bad I had in my own mind.

Anyway, I agree I can handle some situations better, and choosing my battles, I recently relented and agreed to get counseling. So now, for a hour each week, I sit on a couch and talk with a man without anyone else around. Heck, even if he wasn't a therapist that hour would be better than an hour being given marching orders at home, or with the kids fighting with each other and petitioning me for this or that. Sure, let me talk with another man for a hour!

Still, I'd rather be doing something else with the time. Even getting a nap, since I don't enough sleep. Gee, I can't imagine someone is who sleep-deprived ever losing their temper.

The Factory is Closed

I wanted to do it, but my wife was even more desirous of it than me.

I got a vasectomy.

Things are still a little tender, but other than the sharp pain of the initial needle stick to start the local anesthetic, it wasn't painful or uncomfortable at all. Cold packs and over-the-counter pain medication helped.

I know some devout folks are completely against vasectomies. I haven't read or heard a good explanation as to why. On the Bible Answer Man radio program, Hank Hanegraaff likes to answer calls on the subject by citing his own large family (because, you know, each of us can take a six-figure salary running a ministry) and says that God opens the womb and closes the womb. However, most people who say we should "leave it up to God" whether or not we have more children don't take that attitude with just about anything else about their bodies or life in general. Hey, God gave you those wrinkles and age spots! No more makeup for you!!!

"But children are a blessing" a lot of people say. Uh, yeah. Eh... look, I love my children but I don't have time to unpack that one right now.


Why get a vasectomy? Because we don't think we can responsibly parent any more children, but we do get around to having intercourse every week or two. We have a girl, we have a boy, they are both very stubborn and strong-willed. My wife is in no condition to mother more children. (I have thought she isn't holding up her end of the deal as it is, in terms of being a Stay-With-Kids-Mom who gives the children what they need.) I'm feeling old, and when I get home from working the children want to do things with me and I try to engage them, but I'm tired out and want nothing more than to be left alone after that initial welcome home. So, I go ahead and engage them but inside I'm griping and wanting to just sit down and rest. Money is tight and I don't foresee a significant rise in my income.We don't have the money, time, energy, space, or desire to have more children. That's why.

Calm Down

Dr. Laura handled a call so well during the second hour of her show on Thursday, May 16 that she should put the call on her website for other women to listen to as needed.

There was a woman who called who described her husband as a generally good man. She was very, upset, however, that he was viewing porn. As Dr. Laura's questions revealed, it was garden variety heterosexual adult porn, and the hubby had been stressed lately. Dr. Laura explained that he was relieving his stress while trying not to bother his wife, who is tired out from a newborn. He was not neglecting her.

There are many socially conservative talk show hosts and commentators who would have played to the woman's insecurities (and many of the women in the audience) by strongly condemning the husband as though what he was doing the the worst thing ever and prescribing "rehab" for his "porn addiction".

Instead, Dr. Laura confronted the issue head-on. She told the caller that yes, those women have better bodies than her. She darn near rubbed it in. She also went on to explain male sexuality and emotion (something very few women understand) to the point where I think the caller was no longer on a ledge, and gave the caller advice on how to handle the situation.

I'm sure a lot of women listening were upset that it didn't become a male-bashing session. However, it would have been a very different call if he had called. Dr. Laura would have steered him towards better ways to relieve his stress. Dr. Laura has to deal with the callers. She can't give advice to someone who is not calling. It was the wife calling, so Dr. Laura told her what to do, not what the hubby should or shouldn't do.

Dr. Laura is not a Christian, but she deals with a lot of Christian callers and is listened to many Christians. It is very popular in evangelical churches/media these days to  constantly rail on about porn being one of the worst things possible. Meanwhile, I hear very little about what's wrong with gossip, romantic comedies, soap operas, greed/overspending/impulse buying and gluttony/sloth/obesity. Could that have anything to do with the churches appealing to women and not men? Naaaaaah.


Most men like to see well-placed molecules, images of well-placed molecules, images of people having sex. That's male biology, as fallen as it is. However, for most men, there no sight they'd rather see more than their own wife naked. No model, no porn star, no other woman can compete for a man's attention when his wife is naked in front of him.

Obviously, there are other ways for men to relieve stress and I'm not giving a blanket defense of porn. Perspective is often lost when we deal with this topic, though. Dr. Laura and Dennis Prager are very helpful in providing that perspective.

The Silent Treatment

How sad is it that my life is made better and easier when my wife gives me the silent treatment?

This is how the silent treatment works around here:

She sends me texts that are absolutely necessary, but other than that she avoids me and stays silent.

If I post something sincerely nice on her Facebook, she deletes it. Then she posts a sarcastic comment on my Facebook, which will appear to anyone who isn't clued in to be a sincere thanks. She hasn't unfriended me this time... yet. What is this, junior high school?

Anyway, the silent treatment is great. No orders. No requests. No instructions. No complaints. I have much more freedom to do what I want, how I want, when I want. I like it quiet. Who suffers more form this? Oh, sure, the kids suffer. It's her choice, though. Between the two of us, I mean, who suffers more?

Yeah, I don't get sex during the silent treatment. So I miss a weekly session. Big deal. With all of the restrictions she has on it, it's not a big punishment to deny me.

It's even better when she takes the kids to her parents' place without me. I do like her family, but I very much enjoy being alone. So, no wife, no kids.

If you'll excuse me, I'm going to go eat - something of my choosing. I'll probably get to sleep early, too. Nice!

How Do You Decide If You Want Kids?

"Stumped" wrote in to Dear Margo:

Almost everything about my relationship is perfect. There is one thing, however, that’s not. And I can’t decide whether or not it’s a big deal. My fella’s older and already has a child - who has kids of her own.

So he's a grandfather.

I've never had baby fever, but I think about it more lately than I ever have. How do I know if I’ll regret not having a child of my own?

She didn't mention marriage. Should we assume she isn't marred to this guy? He should not be having any more children because he is too old, unless we're talking about a fit, healthy 40-year-old man with a 21-year-old daughter who has made babies.

But the question of whether or not to have children is one of the top three questions a person must face in life. I struggled with that question myself. If you're not reasonably certain you want to be a mother, then don't be one.

Can that change? Of course it can. The four basic scenarios are that you get to be past childbearing age and you find that what happened over the years was...
1) Wanting to be a mother and becoming a mother.
2) Wanting to be a mother and not becoming a mother
3) Not wanting to be a mother and not becoming a mother.
4) Not wanting to be a mother and becoming a mother.

#1 and 3 are best, of course. #2 is bad for you. #4 is bad for the child, and we definitely want to avoid that one.

You should spend a lot of time babysitting your boyfriend's grandchildren. Imagine you had to deal with that 24/7/365 for 18 years – dealing with illnesses, injuries, doctor visits, potty training, education, discipline, etc.

So how should a woman decide if she wants to have children? Here is a checklist:

1) Do you find yourself with way too much free time?
2) Do you find yourself with way too much free energy?
3) Do you want to reduce your chances of ever getting a good, full night's sleep?
4) Do you think you have too little to worry about in life?
5) Do you find yourself with way too much extra money?
6) Do you want to make your sex life much more difficult and restricted?
7) Do you want to get sick more often?
8) Do you want to make it more difficult to do just about everything you do in life, from taking a shower, to going to dinner, to traveling, to moving?
9) Do you want to be forced to deal with your current lover or any other man and his family for the rest of your life? (Or can you imagine finding someone else and putting up with that person and his family for the rest of your life?)
10) Do you find that your breasts are too perky?
11) Do you want to significantly change your body into a less youthful state?
12) Do you want to spend a few years changing diapers and potty training?
13) Do you want to watch another human being going through all of the pain, frustration, embarrassment, and heartache of growing up?
14) Do you want to forgo books, movies, television shows, and songs you like to have to read/watch/listen to ones that drive you crazy or bore you to tears – over and over and over and over and over and over again?
15) Is your home too quiet, clean, and organized?
16) Are you willing to a) put a career on hold for at least several years and restrict your husband's career, or b) let your husband put his career on hold, while restricting your own career?
17) Do you want to drive a "family car" and wear mom jeans?
18) Do you want to live a life in which taking the children anywhere will mean constantly watching them and tending to them so as to keep them from maiming themselves, maiming another child, breaking something expensive, or getting kidnapped, raped, tortured, and murdered (a crime for which you will automatically be a prime suspect)?
19) Do you want to frequently be told by others, family and strangers alike, you're not doing what's best for your child?
20) Do you either want to be a homeschooling teacher, pay for private school, or condemn your children to the absurdity and dysfunction of public education?

If you can answer yes to these questions, then maybe you should have kids.

Let's face it. Yes, babies are freakin' adorable, but most kids born throughout history were born because they were the natural result of sexual intercourse. Parents did find kids handy as labor to help on the farm or in the family business. But we don't use child labor anymore, except in that oh-so-progressive entertainment industry. Instead, we send kids to school for 13-19+ years, thus turning them into a personal financial liability rather than an asset. (Collectively, we need more children to keep the government ponzi schemes funded... so it is strange that many of the same people who love those ponzi schemes encourage trending towards fewer births.)

Seriously, it is more important to ask what you have to offer a child, because parenthood isn't about you, it is about the children. But parenthood can be enjoyable, despite all of the drags implied by my list. I do get enjoyment from being father. There's a lot about my childless life I miss... a lot... and sometimes I wonder if I shouldn't have condemned my child to having me as a father, but Nature's God does something to the brains of some men, like me, so that when we become fathers we develop this kind of amnesia and restructuring, so we don't mind so much that we're not doing hardly of the things we enjoyed so much before we became fathers. Really. It's bizarre. Don't think this happens to every guy with offspring, because it clearly doesn't.

I find my children entertaining. Watching them learn new things, the funny things they say... their giggles, gifts, and hugs... they're priceless. I never thought I was going to enjoy changing diapers, but I even had fun doing that, and being a father has certainly taught me a lot about thinking of myself as God's child. Being a father has definitely caused me to learn more about myself. If nothing else, I have continued the long chain of my family line another generation, and I'm influencing a least a tiny portion of the next generation through people who will hopefully outlive me.

So, I guess the bottom line is that if you care mostly about personal freedom, personal pleasure, career, and amassing material wealth, then it is a good idea not to have kids. But if you care more about loving others and continuing humanity, then give serious thought to becoming a parent.

Dear Margo (oh yeah... almost forgot) responded:

You don't mention this man's preferences.

That's a very good point. Even if he is fit and 40, he might not want to start another round of kids.

(This was bumped up from 2011.)

It's Up to Her

At the end of yesterday's show (Monday, April 29, 2013) Dr. Laura was yet again dealing with a guy she noted was acting like a boy rather than a man and not being alpha, because his wife was disagreeing with him about the daughter's boyfriend being in their home while they were not there. Essentially, the wife was giving her encouragement to their 17 year-old daughter to have sex with another 17 year-old.

The sad fact is, that legally speaking, a husband only has as much power as his wife allows. Even if he's willing to endure the loss of domestic peace, loss of companionship, loss of sex, divorce, misandrist family courts/laws, the loss of over half of every material thing for which he's worked, a requirement of (sometimes) lifetime alimony payments, and paying "child support" more than what is required to raise a child... the wife can still get her way by simply calling the authorities and claiming domestic violence, and he will be hauled away. The daughter can get her way by calling the authorities and claiming abuse. The daughter's boyfriend can ignore whatever threat the husband makes, because should the husband harm him, the daughter's boyfriend can have him arrested and can sue him.

This is the world we've created, and if his wife knows it, she has the power. Whatever power the husband has is at the permission of his wife.

Even if a man chose a wife wisely, his wife can suffer a brain injury, disease, or hormonal imbalance that turns her into someone who misuses the power our system gives her.

Another Example: Don’t Date Women With Minor Children

Not long after I posted my last entry on Dr. Laura, I heard something on her show that made me cringe. On Wednesday, April 17, during the third hour, she got a call from someone going by "Devon", age 42. He got married in October, which I know a lot of men would say was enough of a mistake in the first place. He;s been with the woman for five years.  He states that he loves her three children (12, 11, and 6) as his own. THREE CHILDREN for whom another man is supposed to be paying (that other man walked out on the family), but Devon has been covering the bills for them. He never should have dated this woman in the first place, but they had a child together born four years ago. WHAT A MESS!

He goes on to tell Dr. Laura he bought a house in Florida, a different state, a month before getting married. He'd had a house in Michigan, but he got another electrical engineering job in Florida, hence the new house.

Please note that Florida has no-fault divorce. Also, under Florida law, any property that was acquired before the spouses married or that was received as a gift or inheritance is not considered marital property. The house was acquired before the marriage. Dr. Laura has repeatedly noted that inheritances are separate. Does she stick the the law when it comes to what is brought into the marriage? Let's see...

Florida divorce laws require an "equitable distribution" of the marital property. That really means "whatever a judge decides". Let's see… a woman with four kids vs a man… hmmmm. I wonder who a judge is likely to favor?

Back to the call.

Calling Dr. Laura

There's a book now by that name, but this has nothing to do with that book. I haven’t read the book and I wasn't planning to.

I love the Dr. Laura show because Dr. Laura cares about children, cares about the needs of both women and men, rejects radical Leftist feminism, generally promotes conservative morality, marriage and family, patriotism, fiscal responsibility, and individual liberty, and helps people, including helping people do better over and above making them immediately feel better. She also now gives commentaries at the start of the show, usually with useful, practical information. I listen to every minute of her show, thanks to podcasting. It's the only show I listen to with such dedication. So keep that in mind as I have a little fun with this "public service" announcement to potential callers of her talk show. (For advice about calling in to call-in shows in general, I recommend reading this.)

Dr. Laura has lost patience and I don't blame her. She's right to be fed up with the stupid choices people are making (especially when it is compounded by bad caller etiquette). There are times when some hapless person who has just discovered her show calls in and starts shamelessly painting a picture of their own immoral actions in an effort to get to a trivial question, or one about how they can continue to be immoral with the least amount of inconvenience to themselves. I feel like pausing the podcast and getting some popcorn, because I've listened long enough to know what will be coming. Once in a while, she deals with the caller by abruptly hanging up on them without answering their question (sometimes before they can get around to asking it), perhaps with a curt, seething, "And you have a good day sir/ma'am." You know that could be coming when someone says something like, "I need your help. My boyfriend, who lives with me, is on drugs and I need him to stop because it bothers the four children I have by three other men." Usually, though, she will use the caller as a example to the wider audience, admitting she is doing this because she is unable to "fix" the situation because some situations can't be, but listeners need to be warned before their situation gets as bad. That is why she can be so rough on those callers.

If you don’t want to end up as one of those Examples of What Not to Do, then don't call her for help unless:

On Perspective About Relationships, Gambles, and Boundaries

Dr. Laura's third hour from yesterday (March 12, 2013) was especially notable to me for a couple of reasons. She tore into a caller (and many women) for fornicating and shacking up. She said she doesn't understand what is wrong with them for, in my words, having sex for free.

Now, I do agree with her that the best thing to do, especially for a woman, if one wants sex and/or wants to be married to is save sex for marriage. That's the ideal, that's what is morally correct as far as I can discern. But Dr. Laura is speaking from the perspective of a 66 year-old woman, long married, successful, confident, assured of who she is, and dealing with calls from women who have gripes or problems.

Nobody is going to call her up and say, "Uh, yeah, I just wanted to tell you that I used to have a lot of sex outside of marriage, and now I'm married and life is great now. I never got pregnant before I was married, I never got an STD. I have no complaints or regrets. I just wanted to call and tell you that." Those people do exist, but they're not going to bother to call, they wouldn't get cleared to be put on the air if they did, and so they're never going to get to say that on her show.

Also, perspective is so much different for a 20-something or 30-something woman who is not even sure if she does want to get married, and/or whether or not she wants kids, or wants to climb the corporate ladder; a woman who is not married, but gets horny and lonely, who is far from certain what the future holds. Dr. Laura knows that, barring (God forbid) someone's death, she's going to wake up tomorrow next to her husband, and if she wants sex with him, she can have it. She has a son. She has a career. The women calling her aren't in that position. They may be with men who they want to be with for the rest of their lives, who are good citizens, doing well in their careers, who want the same things out of life she does... and expect sex to be a regular part of a dating/couple relationship and will not stick around if it isn't. (I haven't forgotten what is like to get advice from happily married men who were getting sex on a regular basis when I was inexperienced, lonely and worried I'd never have a good, lasting relationship... it's a little like being told "you're time will come... someday" from a guy who is stuffing himself with an all-he-can-eat meal of his favorite foods while you're standing here desperately hungry.)

I touched a bit on these topics in this previous posting.

Subsequent to a few calls like that, Dr. Laura got a call from a woman who was with a man for a year and a half. He has a lower sex drive than hers; very low, from the sound of it. Everything else about the relationship was great, according to the caller. Dr. Laura asked her if she wanted to spend the rest of her life without sexual intimacy and that the caller knew he was like that for a year and a half.

Wait... how was the caller supposed to find that out when they were first dating, since Dr. Laura (like many other marriage-and-family-minded commentators) says they're supposed to save sex for marriage, and definitely not hop into bed right away?

Anyway, after a year and a half it was clear.

The problem with Dr. Laura's question, though, is that it assumes the woman definitely will find satisfying sexual intimacy with another man, who will also have the other necessary qualities, if she leaves the relationship she's in now. There is no guarantee of that. Now, if Dr. Laura had gone on to say ..."because you'll drive him crazy if you stay with him, because you will continue to make an issue of his lack of drive"... then I might agree. But that wasn't addressed. It was all about the needs of the caller. The sad truth is, the caller may never find anyone better for her. On the optimistic side, she may indeed find a much better match.

If she doesn't, though, she'll never be put through on the air to say "I wish I would have stayed with that guy you told me to dump."

Remember, the only reason I can nitpick like this is because I think Dr. Laura is, for the most part, awesome and I listen to every minute of her show, read her books, and read the stuff on her website. May she continue for decades.

Dr. Laura Gone Deist, or What?

(Updated... see below.)

Happy (now belated) Birthday to Dr. Laura! I listen to every new minute of the Dr. Laura Schlessinger show, thanks to podcasting...and OCD. I have made no secret of that. And I also make no secret of generally agreeing with her and seeing that she's doing a lot of good for a lot of people, including me.

Every so often, though, I have my quibbles and questions.

Listening to Tuesday's show, I had these observations...

1) A wife used the magic words in complaining to Dr. Laura about her husband. She mentioned he plays video games. That's always enough for Dr. Laura to dismiss a guy's manhood and side with the woman. If the caller had said her husband watches movies, watches television, plays Solitaire (actual cards, not on a computer), reads pulp fiction, tosses horseshoes, collects bottle caps... that would all be OK. But Dr. Laura has a thing about video games and technology in general. For example, she frequently tells people, especially adult males, that they should not have Facebook accounts... even though she invites people to comment on her show's Facebook page. If they don't have it already, her staff should post instruction on maximizing Facebook privacy so that she could refer people to that information and thereby not have to be contradictory in telling them not to have Facebook pages.

2) In relation to the above-referenced call, in which the young couple was childless and had been together since they were 16, I noticed that Dr. Laura's advice actually may contribute to the statistics she cites about the divorce rate of people who marry the person they've been with since teenagers or marry someone with minor children. I perceive her position is that having children together is a much stronger deciding factor than marital vows, at least in one direction: people who have children together should stay married (and get married, if not already), provided we're not talking about an abusive person/substance abuser, etc. The marital vows don't seem to carry much weight if there are no children. If someone "made a mistake" by marrying someone who isn't being a good spouse (perhaps he plays video games?) then her position, as I perceive it, is that the promise/vow was a mistake and it is OK to break that promise or revoke that vow, lest the person stay in a bad marriage or have to get some things sorted out moving forward. I suspect Dr. Laura's biggest fear is that they will have children together if they stay married, and then the children will suffer, and so she advises they divorce rather than running that risk.

If everyone in these situations (or who blended families and is having the typical complaints) followed the advice and divorced, the divorce statistics would then be reinforced. It becomes self-fulfilling.

3) Sometimes she tells people to do things as though everyone makes at least as much income as she & her husband do/did... "Get a lawyer and..." and live in neighborhoods like the ones she does. "Put the kid in a pram and go running." Kind of hard, risky, or impossible to do in certain neighborhoods. I know, I know... she'd tell them to move. But again, that assumes they have the cash to do so. She is, rightfully so, into prevention, so her advice would probably be not to get pregnant if you're living somewhere like that to begin with.

4) The biggest thing that prompted me to blog about her show again is that she increasingly sounds like she's gone Deist, if not Atheist. I don't include "Agnostic" because she said on yesterday's show that Agnostics are just gutless Atheists. She's still decidedly socially/politically conservative, with certain exceptions (although yesterday's show once again demonstrated that calling her "anti-gay" is a vicious lie or incredibly ignorant). She has spoken and written about some of her religious journey in the past, considering herself Jewish by birth to her father, but not practicing until some questions by her son led to them becoming Orthodox, and then some difficulties and disappointments with people/organizations (according to her) resulted in her no longer identifying as Orthodox. She even has at least one tattoo now.

Her statements, in content and tone, have been noticeably different lately when a caller says something about God being involved in their life or someone else's life. In the more gentle moments, she simply states something like "I don't think God is going from person to person and saying 'you get this, you get that'." In the more forceful moments, it is something like "I don't think God cares about that" or "Oh, so you think God protected your kid from getting sick but made another kid sick" or things like that. Guessing, I suspect this recent tone has something to do with watching a good friend of hers die of cancer, which of course is a terrible thing. Cancer sucks. Watching people die of it sucks, unless they're unusually evil people. I don't know if Sandy Hook or other events have contributed to this, but it is at the point now where she is more or less treating the attitudes of some callers (or the people her callers are talking about) as delusional or narcissistic when it comes to God (and some of them may indeed be).

Christian theology does describe God as imminent, omnipresent, omniscient, omnipotent, sovereign, and personal, and Christians (anyone who has been born again by repenting and following Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior) as having a personal relationship with Him. It is in keeping with that understanding that Christians give credit to God for every good thing, think God cares about everything in their lives, and that He is involved in their lives. Surely, a God powerful enough to create the universe is not incapable of being involved in our lives.

I understand that, Dr. Laura, apart from being baptized in a Roman Catholic ceremony when she was an infant, does not identify as Christian. The question I'm asking, and I realize it isn't necessarily any of my business, is what is she now? Deists believe, more or less, that God is Creator and that otherwise stays out of things (for now, anyway). Pantheists (such as Hindu believers) believe God is all/in all and.or all is one.

When answering a caller about which traditional Protestant denomination's church her family would attend, Dr. Laura said "I don't think God is in one of them and not the other." and that He's in all of those buildings. that really doesn't shed any light on her personal beliefs about God, because someone could believe that God is nothing but a mental concept and say that. Dr. Laura went on to reaffirming her priority that a family have unity in their religious practice, saying "as long as you're doing it together I'm happy." She didn't say why this time, but from past statements it is for the sake of keeping the family together and the children grounded and part of a voluntary community. So, again, we see she doesn't have a belief about God that includes a strong conviction that people have a certain theology. Her goal is not to spread her theological beliefs or religious practices, but help people of many different faiths.

I would very much like to see Dr. Laura, or anyone else, find joy in being a follower of Jesus Christ. Yes, there's evil and pain in this world. No, it doesn't mean that God is absent or either unloving or limited in power. We're not going to fully understand the why of everything, at least not this side of eternity, but we can know that He is there, and that He cares, and that ultimately, everything will turn out for the best. Regardless of whether or not Dr. Laura agrees with that, she has a great show and does a lot of good for a lot of people.

UPDATE March 13, 2013 Example: During yesterday's third hour, Dr. Laura said "I don't think God cares about your marriage." She went on to cite kids dying of cancer and other common objections to the idea that there's a God is who is, at the same time, involved, omnipotent, omniscient, and loving. She said God is busy. She also, however, supported having faith in God.

Quick Question

Consider this scenario:

You're married.

You've been telling your spouse you should be doing things as a couple more.

You've been telling your spouse you know you need to make more of an effort to increase the frequency of lovemaking.

Lovemaking is down to about once per week.

You last made love about four nights ago.

Your kids have been an hour away with family since yesterday and won't be back until late tomorrow.

Today, while away working, your spouse texts you saying he'd like to take you out for dinner (or she'd like to be taken out for dinner) or, if not that, at least bring something home for you.

You:

A) Accept.

B) Decline because you plan to make wild passionate love in several rooms of the home the moment your spouse gets home.

C) Accept, on the stated or unstated condition that you will make wild passionate love in several rooms of the home after dinner.

D) Decline so you could have your spouse help you with chores (you've been doing chores all day), then after your spouse has been home for a while, you send that spouse out to bring back some fast food, then you have the spouse do a few more chores before your spouse goes to bed too late to get a full night's rest.

Which would YOU choose?

She chose option D.

Hands Off

It has been a while since I brought up a Dear Abby column here, even though I have been a regular reader. This time, "GRIEVING GRANDDAD" wrote in with:

My two adult granddaughters have rejected me, their doting grandfather. Their father gave me this explanation: "They are uncomfortable with the way you rub their shoulders and necks."

These girls and both parents have misinterpreted my innocent expressions of affection, which haven't changed since the girls were little. The only change is in their perception of my actions.

I am devastated. I asked twice to meet with these family members to discuss their concerns. It has been three months; no meeting time has been offered. There has been no contact, and neither girl has called me for any reason this year.

I can't just stop loving those with whom I have forged a 20-year bond of affection. How can this rupture be repaired?

I'm going to assume he's not a pervert or otherwise inappropriate, or leaving anything important out of his letter.

Something happened that the letter writer hasn't been told about. Maybe one or both of the granddaughters was attacked or molested by someone else. Perhaps they hate/suspect men in general now thanks to higher education. Or, maybe they "recovered memories" in a counseling session.

How many lives have been ruined by bogus "recovered memories"? Each life ruined is one too many. At least some such memories aren't really memories at all. Dr. Laura states on her show she doesn't believe ANY of them are real, stops calls when the caller claims that there was a recovered memories, and cites PTSD in soldiers as her reason, and other people who've been molested, along the lines of "If people could me made to forget memories we could make a lot of money selling that."

The problem I have with this is this:

That some people are haunted by traumatic events they are unable to forget does not necessarily mean nobody is ever able to "forget", and later remember, an actual traumatic event. But, this is more Dr. Laura's area of expertise than mine and she may be right... I just don't find her short explanation entirely convincing.

Anyway, I have point when it comes to men.

Heterosexual men are rapidly being marginalized in our culture and are increasingly at risk for being publicly humiliated and vilified, fired, sued, fined, and incarcerated for normal male behavior or based on mere accusations. Some prominent Christian leaders have refused to meet with women behind closed doors; the door must always be open and witnesses nearby. People like Tom Leykis advise men to avoid accusations of sexual harassment by either working for themselves or keep interaction with women in the workplace to the absolute minimum possible. Many others have said a man should never be a coach to anyone else's children or otherwise be in a position where they would be alone with some else's children or touching those children, so as to avoid accusations. And now, we see an example of how a man is taking a risk by having his own children.

At some point, the risks are just too high. A man protects himself the most by being self-employed and avoiding situations with women, by not marrying, by not having children, by not being around children. But what kind of society does that leave us with?

Gazing at the Horizon

There's not really much I look forward to these days.

For as long as I can remember back into my childhood, I was not one of those kids who wanted to be older. I didn't mind being the age I was. I didn't mind not being able to drive, or buy booze, or whatever. In fact, I didn't run out and get my license as soon as I could, like so many other teens did. I knew that time was a one-way arrow, and that I was never going to be whatever age I was again.

Even so, there were events, milestones and goals to which I had to anticipate, plan, prepare, or strive:

• Every year, there was Halloween and Christmas, which were always fun for me. Birthday... eh... I think my parents gave each of us one big party during our childhoods, and the rest of the years it wasn't a big event. 
• Get through the school year so you can enjoy Summer Vacation. 
• Going on family trips/vacations
• Sports in which I was participating
• Do well in elementary school to prepare for junior high (we didn't have middle school back in the dark ages). 
• Do well in junior high and high school so you can get into college. Where I lived, the question was never "Are you going to college?" It was "Where are you going to college?" We were also told that unless we get all As and Bs, had all sorts of extracurricular activities, and saved a life, we'd never get into college.
• Get a girlfriend. I didn't really get a serious girlfriend until I was 19. I was painfully shy and mostly pined after girls from afar, not really ever going to parties (not aware of most of them until after they happened) but rather buried in schoolwork, you know, because otherwise I'd never ever get into college and I'd end up living under a bridge.
• As I got older, events related to my hobby, which was tied in to my professional ambitions. Even the job I got while in high school was related to this.
• Get through college so I can get a job. I didn't really look forward to moving out. I had it pretty good at home. In fact, my parents found me an apartment near campus and I moved out to make attending school easier.
• Get an internship in the career of my choice. Did that while still in college. Didn't lead to a job.

Before I knew it, college was over and I was still working in pretty much the same job I had when I was 17. I tried to get hired in my chosen career. Despite my relevant experience, my degree, and my connections, it didn't happen. Considering how the industry is these days, with everyone either being hired as contractors with contracts that never last more than a few years to employees who are constantly let go and bouncing from company to company, it is probably just as well because I wouldn't have done well with the instability.

Needing more income and what would be considered more professional experience, I took one of those jobs considered "professional", but not something/somewhere to which people aspire. Nobody you ask in college would say, "That's what I want to do and where I want to work!"

And I did well enough.

I wanted to get married and have kids. I did that.

I wanted to buy a house. I did that. Well, I'm paying a mortgage on a house anyway.

Now what?

I spent so much of my life trying to get from one point to another, and then I'd finally arrived "there". Oh sure, that ideal professional ambition will probably never be fulfilled, and I'm not actively trying to make it happen. Not only do I need stability but my family sure as heck needs stability.

Our house isn't in the best neighborhood, but we have no plans or aspirations to move. We bought the place with the expectation that we'd die there.

My wife says I gave her the life she's always wanted.

I don't really have time or money for my hobbies.

So, I literally have nothing for which I am looking forward.

Oh, sure, someday I hope to retire, and I'm making investments towards that end, but I'm not expecting that the Mrs. and I will be doing a lot of traveling or anything like that after I retire.

And someday, should the Lord tarry, I will expire, and I look forward to being free of the "old man" and being with Him, whether He returns before I die or not.

My work is not the sort for which there are things to which I look forward. I do my work. I finish this and that. And on it goes. I do it for the compensation, not personal satisfaction or enjoyment.

So I suppose what I have to look forward to would be the milestones for my children.

More immediately, the only thing to which I look forward is lovemaking with my wife. No kidding. And that's rather sad and depressing, because:

• she has zero libido these days
• she now rarely has orgasms (which I've always enjoyed giving)
• it happens less than twice a week
• when it does happen, I feel pressured to hurry up and get it over with because it is just an obligatory chore for her, per the first two points
• there are things I enjoy that are not unusual that she's not willing to do/go along with, and other restrictions that make the lovemaking less appealing to me and more difficult

At this point in my life, all I want besides the basics for my family, is a good sex life with my wife, and it's not going to happen without some radical changes and a whole lot of work.

If I was a pessimist, I'd say she'll probably become one of those horny middle-aged women (like the one who broke me in) just after I'm struck with some health problem that kills me or leaves me impotent.

Sorry that this entry hasn't been more uplifting. How's this? I live in the USA, I have my health, my family, my home, a job, and enjoy attending a church, and can do so with a reasonable assurance I won't be killed or jailed for doing so.

Presiding Over the Death of Terrestrial Radio?

Tom Leykis is rapidly approaching a full year of doing his daily show again.

A lot of people call it radio, but it isn't radio. Radio is a transmission method. His show is delivered through the Internet. His show left radio in 2009, when CBS Radio decided it was going to flip the format of the FM talk station he was on in Los Angeles into a Top 40 format, to compete with the ancient existing Top 40 station, owned by Clear Channel, and featuring Ryan Seacrest in the mornings. CBS did this because they needed a station with more female listeners, as their other stations in the market were not very effective at getting women. The ratings did go up. Meanwhile, due to his contract requiring it, CBS payed Leykis his salary until a certain date in 2012. Immediately after that was over, Leykis' show was back, only without corporate dictates and FCC restrictions on language.

He does the show live during the same afternoon timeslot that his radio show ran, for three hours. Commercial breaks are much shorter, and there's no traffic reports, so a lot of content can be packed into those three hours. There's an hourly "News for Guys" presented by two of the guys on his staff. If breaking news or audience response makes it worthwhile, he'll do a fourth "bonus" hour. That's flexibility he wouldn't have on corporate radio. (He will also, on occasion, do the show early or late, and inform listeners via social networking). Speaking of audience response, because of the technology he's using, he can see how many people are listening at any given time, allowing him to adapt immediately.

In addition to ad revenue, his venture brings in income by:

• subscriptions to his premium content (subscriptions also allow access to past shows)
• an Amazon link on the website (his business gets a portion of whatever is spent by the person clicking through to Amazon via that link)
• selling studio services for anyone wanted to use the studio for recording/producing audio content
• donations... I think.

His venture doesn't have the overhead a radio station has, or the massive debt accumulated by the merged/acquired/leveraged corporate radio giants.

If someone is not a premium subscriber, they can either listen live or catch the replays, which run constantly between live show - for free. More and more people will be able to access the show through their smart phones and their automobile dashboards as technology is adapted.

I like the show better now because it is more honest. I think he's figured on the best way of adapting to technology and changes in media. Leykis speaks and length about his own life and the radio business. The insights into what's happening and previously happened with radio is informative and something I actually care about. Of course, Leykis is still an abortion and atheism promoter, which I don't like. However he tried doing "Ask the Atheist" again and it didn't generate enough interest. Leykis claims, and often promotes, libertarian philosophy, but has a populist streak. He encourages others to do what he did: rebuff the Big Corporate world and start their own businesses and buy from small businesses.


He's still telling men how to avoid being the guy everyone else (especially women( walks all over, which is generally good, although I can't go along with some of the specifics. He has sworn off marriage (four times was more than enough) and has no living children (they were all slaughtered in abortion clinics) and doesn't want any, and he's a good salesman for never marrying and remaining childless. As he long has, he discourages shacking up, too. A new part of his instructions is that if a man truly wants to have a child, he, alone, should hire a surrogate mother (and, presumably use a donated egg) so that there's no risk of an ex-wife or ex-girlfriend taking the child away.

Because fewer people are going to tune into the show "accidentally", he can't do hours of talking to people who hate him or his show. He addresses current events that interest him when he's not doing he regular features. Among his regular features are:

• Money Monday, which is money-saving and financial advice for part of the show
• Leykis 101 at 5pm Pacific on Thurssdays, which tells men how to get more tail for less money and tells women how men think
• Leykis 201 for guys who failed Leykis 101 by getting married, becoming a parent, shacking up, etc. and are now having problems
• Be Funny, during which callers can call up and say something funny, whether a joke or whatever, no matter how offensive it is
• His sponsor divorce lawyer taking calls
• Ask a Mexican, which is inspired by a popular column of that name with the columnist himself
• Someone calling in on Fridays to warn of the various drunk driving checkpoints listeners might encounter
• Flash Fridays during daylight savings time, during which drivers turn on their headlights and loyal female listeners are supposed to show their breasts to such drivers. Leykis now uses social networking to solicit related pictures 

As narcissistic, misogynistic, cold, and crass as he might sound at times, you hear his softer side when a woman calls and needs advice on escaping an abusive relationship, investing, starting her own business, or just about anything else in life. He'll spend a long time with listeners, male or female, telling them how to make something of themselves and stop their self-defeating behaviors.

I take the good, and I know why I disagree with the bad. I listen regularly enough that I can be considered a fan.

As your favorite radio hosts disappear from the airwaves, when your favorite radio station flip formats, you should know... Tom said it would be like that.

You can read my previous entries on Leykis by clicking on the tags below.

Hey Edward Furlong - It's OK to Live Alone

Another domestic violence arrest for Edward Furlong? Ugh.

Attention Mr. Furlong: It is never OK to assault a woman, or anyone else for that matter. It is OK to act in self-defense, although the cops are still likely to arrest YOU if they get involved.

I know you haven't had the best foundation in life. We've actually crossed paths. Don't ask me in what context. But here's the thing. You're an adult njow, and you have been for a long time.

It would be a very good idea to live alone, or at least live with some male roommates. Why this need to have women at your place? Sex? You don't need to have them in your place for that. Sheesh. Go talk with Tom. Ask to sit in with him on an hour of Leykis 201. I disagree with Tom on some very important things, but some of his advice can be very helpful.

Happy New Year

Yeah, I'm being quiet. There is so much to say here, but work and personal things are keeping me busy. My two sisters and my mother are each taking their turns right now calling me on what seems like a daily basis telling me how I should be running my life. Their scenarios seem to involve shoving my kids in public school (not going to happen) and some other significant changes to life that would take away responsibilities from my wife, who at least one of them fears will pull an Andrea Yates.

In the wake of her hospitalization, we've made some changes (mostly more stressful on me) but still "need" to make more if we're going to do what my wife and I discussed. One of the major differences right now is that my wife on a different antidepressant. Also, I'm being more cautious, asking my wife more questions about how she's feeling and whether or not I have to drop the rest of life and stay home on any given day.

Stay tuned.