Although Tom Leykis insists his decision to end his show came early this year, after he got sick and some fans got snarky, he also insists that was very low on list of reasons and keeps saying his fans "tested" him by dragging their feet on (re)subscribing in 2017. They did reach 1,900 subscriptions like he demanded in order to return in 2018, but apparently it wasn't fast enough for him, despite it being before his deadline. So he's "back for 2018" but only as long as the show is generating enough revenue to break even or better. He'll no longer beg for subscriptions (which is entirely understandable given how much time and effort it took last year), other than mentioning that the show will end its run when the subscriptions fall to a level that won't cover expenses. He's also said the library of past shows will be available to subscribers after the end of the show's run as long as subscriptions cover those expenses.
He's admitted he thought he could be dying when he was sick. I think that has more to do with his decision to end the show than he's indicated. He knows he's got less life to live than he's already lived, at least chronologically, and the fact is, like anyone else, he could die tomorrow. I'm sure he wants to travel and party and relax and not be obligated (by his own word) to do 12+ hours of live shows every week (and all of the related work, which we don't hear) when he can't be certain he's got many years of good health left. As I said before, even though he hasn't said so, he probably got a little bit excited last year at the thought of starting another chapter in his life if the subscriptions didn't reach 1,900, which would have meant January 2, 2018 would have been the end of his show.
Wednesday, February 28, 2018
Monday, February 26, 2018
It's Cold Inside
Recently my wife said we had to talk about our sex life. She had texted me that from the other room. So I joined her in the room where she was, and then found out she'd been expecting it to be a text conversation. I should have left the room right then and I'd have a verbatim account of the conversation to share with you. My memory is excellent though.
I knew from past conversations that this would be her telling me things and me agreeing. Anything else, such as me disagreeing or me telling her things or making requests would result in things getting worse.
To briefly recap what's going on as I've previously explained here, we are having sex about once every three weeks or less now, and the sex is generally not as enjoyable for me as it was with a couple of girlfriends and flings I had in my wayward youth. I don't dare tell her that, though.
Thankfully, she didn't take the opportunity of this conversation to state again that she doesn't really like sex or eliminate anything from menu of acceptable elements/acts, which is narrow enough as it is.
Her requests were simple enough:
I knew from past conversations that this would be her telling me things and me agreeing. Anything else, such as me disagreeing or me telling her things or making requests would result in things getting worse.
To briefly recap what's going on as I've previously explained here, we are having sex about once every three weeks or less now, and the sex is generally not as enjoyable for me as it was with a couple of girlfriends and flings I had in my wayward youth. I don't dare tell her that, though.
Thankfully, she didn't take the opportunity of this conversation to state again that she doesn't really like sex or eliminate anything from menu of acceptable elements/acts, which is narrow enough as it is.
Her requests were simple enough:
Thursday, February 22, 2018
Another Day, Another Silly Scold
In what is probably easy-cheap hits bait (check the number of comments on his Twitter post and his column), or a kiss-up to his wife or old biddy followers, Matt Walsh is again dealing with the pressing issues of the day by bemoaning that some people (mostly men) like to see depictions of people in revealing or no clothing and people having sex by arguing for a "ban" on "porn" at The Daily Wire.
If you had asked the average person 50 years ago whether it should be legal to distribute grotesque, hardcore pornography through a medium where people of all ages, especially kids and young teens, might have easy and free access to it, he probably would have been shocked that you even needed to ask the question.Straight out of the gate, Walsh goes to the extremes. What does this have to do with a video featuring, for example, one man and one woman having sex being watched by a middle-aged man? And is Walsh unaware that "stag films" were a thing?
Wednesday, February 21, 2018
Florida Lawmakers Buy Into Pixels Panic
Dealing with the pressing problems of the state, lawmakers in Florida House of Representatives made fools of themselves. Amanda Prestigiacomo reported on it at The Daily Wire:
On Tuesday, Florida lawmakers in the House of Representatives declared pornography a public health crisis.We've been over this. It isn't a public health crisis.
The approved resolution states that "there needs to be more education, research and policy changes to protect Florida residents from porn," reports the Associated Press.More "research". Yeah. How many of those lawmakers are already "researching"?
Monday, February 19, 2018
Stop Adding Chaos To Your Child's Life
I've listed many reasons why most people should avoid having children, getting married, or even being in a relationship at all.
I know full well most people will still do these things.
If someone doesn't want children, they should ensure they won't. Men who don't want children should get vasectomies and women should get tubal ligation or have their ovaries and/or uterus removed, whatever is best for them given their health considerations.
But if someone is going to have children, they have a moral obligation to set up the best situation they can to raise those children, who have no choice in the matter except to go along with what their parents set up.
That means:
1) Finding a suitable person of the opposite sex. [1]
2) Marrying them. [2]
3) Treating that person well. [3]
4) Building a stable, suitable life for raising children. [4]
5) Then having children.
Unfortunately, there are plenty of people who do #5 before (or without ever doing) the others, even before #1. And there are also people who, because they didn't really do #1 or #3, they end up divorced or widowed or separated (physically even if not legally). So there are many children now living in what we call a broken home, meaning mom and dad are not living together, raising their child together.
Dr. Laura (and maybe others?) insists that parents of minor children should not remarry until their youngest child is grown and certainly not make more babies. She goes further and says that the existing minor children should not even be exposed to a parent's new lover. So many people think this stance is bizarre. It just sounds so radical to them because parents of minor children getting into new relationships is so common these days.
But I agree with her.
I know full well most people will still do these things.
If someone doesn't want children, they should ensure they won't. Men who don't want children should get vasectomies and women should get tubal ligation or have their ovaries and/or uterus removed, whatever is best for them given their health considerations.
But if someone is going to have children, they have a moral obligation to set up the best situation they can to raise those children, who have no choice in the matter except to go along with what their parents set up.
That means:
1) Finding a suitable person of the opposite sex. [1]
2) Marrying them. [2]
3) Treating that person well. [3]
4) Building a stable, suitable life for raising children. [4]
5) Then having children.
Unfortunately, there are plenty of people who do #5 before (or without ever doing) the others, even before #1. And there are also people who, because they didn't really do #1 or #3, they end up divorced or widowed or separated (physically even if not legally). So there are many children now living in what we call a broken home, meaning mom and dad are not living together, raising their child together.
Dr. Laura (and maybe others?) insists that parents of minor children should not remarry until their youngest child is grown and certainly not make more babies. She goes further and says that the existing minor children should not even be exposed to a parent's new lover. So many people think this stance is bizarre. It just sounds so radical to them because parents of minor children getting into new relationships is so common these days.
But I agree with her.
Tuesday, February 13, 2018
More Attempts to Arrange the Deck Chairs
This summary is not available. Please
click here to view the post.
Don't Fall For the Valentine's Day Trap
Men, whether you're in a new relationship or a long-term one, don't fall for the trap of proposing or marrying on Valentine's Day.
If you proposed over the holidays, it was probably a mistake to do so and you should seriously consider backing out.
It's generally a good idea to avoid exclusive relationships to begin with, but if you're in a relationship in any given year, it's a good idea to break up or become very scarce before Thanksgiving and to keep things that way until at least February 15. If her birthday or any of your "anniversaries" with her are just before Thanksgiving or just after Valentine's Day, extend that "off" period to cover that.
But here we are. Valentine's Day is about a month away as I write this, and so if you're in a relationship, then if she's like most women, she's going to expect you to put a lot of time and money into celebrating. You're expected to jump through hoops. Why???
Get out. Hit the eject button. And seriously consider not getting back into the relationship.
[This has been bumped up because you need to see it.]
If you proposed over the holidays, it was probably a mistake to do so and you should seriously consider backing out.
It's generally a good idea to avoid exclusive relationships to begin with, but if you're in a relationship in any given year, it's a good idea to break up or become very scarce before Thanksgiving and to keep things that way until at least February 15. If her birthday or any of your "anniversaries" with her are just before Thanksgiving or just after Valentine's Day, extend that "off" period to cover that.
But here we are. Valentine's Day is about a month away as I write this, and so if you're in a relationship, then if she's like most women, she's going to expect you to put a lot of time and money into celebrating. You're expected to jump through hoops. Why???
Get out. Hit the eject button. And seriously consider not getting back into the relationship.
[This has been bumped up because you need to see it.]
Monday, February 12, 2018
Dr. Laura and the Dilemma of Facebook
[This is from July 2013, but I'm bumping it up because it is relevant.]
While I'm a huge fan of Dr. Laura Schlessinger and her media offerings, and agree with her on many important things, I do have my quibbles with what she tells listeners/callers. Many of those quibbles have to do with technology.
Dr. Laura started off her show yesterday talking about social media, and what not to put on your Facebook page (you know, pictures of you getting drunk… stuff like that). She again took the opportunity to say that people shouldn’t have personal Facebook pages. If her listeners didn’t, however, they wouldn’t be able to comment on her show’s Facebook page, which daily solicits comments on various topics.
What Dr. Laura may not know, because she makes it clear she doesn’t have a personal Facebook page, is that people can adjust their settings so that their Facebook pages are completely private. And yeah, I know there may be an occasional breech by a hacker, or an error on the part of Facebook, or one of those annoying deliberate overhaul of the settings Facebook seems to do every few months and it might “default” people into having things “public” that they want private. Even so, people can be limited about what they put into their Facebook to begin with.
In the third hour, she got a call from parent asking when a child should be allowed to be on social media. Dr. Laura said "18". She said it doesn't hurt the child to NOT be on social media.
I disagree. It can definitely hurt the child, because if someone isn’t familiar with current, commonly used ubiquitous technologies, it could be limiting to everything from their education, to keeping up on current events, their access to information, their employment, and their careers.
Dr. Laura said that if it hurts not having it, then every generation before this one would have been damaged. She has often said previously “I didn’t have an iPad or smart phone when I was growing up. Somehow I survived.”
This can be said about ANY technology or innovation when it comes to previous generations, from television to radio to automobiles to telephones to bicycles to public libraries to spears with sharpened stones as tips.
Technology is a tool. It can be used for good or ill. Humanity moves on, and if people are not going to avail themselves of widely used technologies, they can be left behind.
Think about this. The typical modern office uses desktop and/or laptop computers and usually smart phones and tablets as well. A business or most other organizations are going to have websites and quite often a dynamic presence in social networking services. If you were hiring someone for a job in such an office, all other things being equal about two candidates for the job, are you going to hire an Amish person who has no previous experience even with anything electrical, or the person who knows how to use social networking to the benefit of the office’s mission?
Even looking for a job has changed. Back “in the day”, Dr. Laura would have had to pound the pavement to submit applications, after finding job listings in newspapers. If someone stuck to that now, they’d be very limited compared to the person who can find AND apply for jobs anywhere in the world from their own home.
Yes, some people reveal too much online or do stupid or evil things with social networking. But did you know that, unless you have purchased your home in a revocable trust (something most people don’t do) it isn’t hard for people to find out where you live? That can be dangerous. So do we all go live in caves?
Parents should allow their kids to have a limited, monitored presence on social media so that the kids can learn how it works and what it can do. One of the benefits for me is that I have had edifying conversations with people I would not have otherwise met. A parent may worry that their kid will seek a work-around to subvert the monitoring by their parents, but if that’s the child’s mindset, they’re probably going to use social media anyway through a library or their friend’s house and there’s a bigger problem going on anyway.
ADDITION October 26, 2016: There's nothing wrong with adults already established or retired from their careers having Facebook accounts, either. Facebook is, basically, a web organization tool, bringing together many things that used to be offered by different services and tying them together. It can help small businesses, it can help families and friends stay in touch, and it can help people stay organized, Nobody has to place any private information there for public consumption. Dr. Laura will tell people to pick up the phone and call people or drive to see them in person. There is not always possible, and on Facebook a group of people can be engaged in a way that simply wouldn't be possible in-person. Facebook and other online tools should not replace in-person interaction. But they can augment them and "extend" them in beneficial ways. Technology marches on, like it or not.
I've written about Dr. Laura and technology before, here, here, here, here, and here.
While I'm a huge fan of Dr. Laura Schlessinger and her media offerings, and agree with her on many important things, I do have my quibbles with what she tells listeners/callers. Many of those quibbles have to do with technology.
Dr. Laura started off her show yesterday talking about social media, and what not to put on your Facebook page (you know, pictures of you getting drunk… stuff like that). She again took the opportunity to say that people shouldn’t have personal Facebook pages. If her listeners didn’t, however, they wouldn’t be able to comment on her show’s Facebook page, which daily solicits comments on various topics.
What Dr. Laura may not know, because she makes it clear she doesn’t have a personal Facebook page, is that people can adjust their settings so that their Facebook pages are completely private. And yeah, I know there may be an occasional breech by a hacker, or an error on the part of Facebook, or one of those annoying deliberate overhaul of the settings Facebook seems to do every few months and it might “default” people into having things “public” that they want private. Even so, people can be limited about what they put into their Facebook to begin with.
In the third hour, she got a call from parent asking when a child should be allowed to be on social media. Dr. Laura said "18". She said it doesn't hurt the child to NOT be on social media.
I disagree. It can definitely hurt the child, because if someone isn’t familiar with current, commonly used ubiquitous technologies, it could be limiting to everything from their education, to keeping up on current events, their access to information, their employment, and their careers.
Dr. Laura said that if it hurts not having it, then every generation before this one would have been damaged. She has often said previously “I didn’t have an iPad or smart phone when I was growing up. Somehow I survived.”
This can be said about ANY technology or innovation when it comes to previous generations, from television to radio to automobiles to telephones to bicycles to public libraries to spears with sharpened stones as tips.
Technology is a tool. It can be used for good or ill. Humanity moves on, and if people are not going to avail themselves of widely used technologies, they can be left behind.
Think about this. The typical modern office uses desktop and/or laptop computers and usually smart phones and tablets as well. A business or most other organizations are going to have websites and quite often a dynamic presence in social networking services. If you were hiring someone for a job in such an office, all other things being equal about two candidates for the job, are you going to hire an Amish person who has no previous experience even with anything electrical, or the person who knows how to use social networking to the benefit of the office’s mission?
Even looking for a job has changed. Back “in the day”, Dr. Laura would have had to pound the pavement to submit applications, after finding job listings in newspapers. If someone stuck to that now, they’d be very limited compared to the person who can find AND apply for jobs anywhere in the world from their own home.
Yes, some people reveal too much online or do stupid or evil things with social networking. But did you know that, unless you have purchased your home in a revocable trust (something most people don’t do) it isn’t hard for people to find out where you live? That can be dangerous. So do we all go live in caves?
Parents should allow their kids to have a limited, monitored presence on social media so that the kids can learn how it works and what it can do. One of the benefits for me is that I have had edifying conversations with people I would not have otherwise met. A parent may worry that their kid will seek a work-around to subvert the monitoring by their parents, but if that’s the child’s mindset, they’re probably going to use social media anyway through a library or their friend’s house and there’s a bigger problem going on anyway.
ADDITION October 26, 2016: There's nothing wrong with adults already established or retired from their careers having Facebook accounts, either. Facebook is, basically, a web organization tool, bringing together many things that used to be offered by different services and tying them together. It can help small businesses, it can help families and friends stay in touch, and it can help people stay organized, Nobody has to place any private information there for public consumption. Dr. Laura will tell people to pick up the phone and call people or drive to see them in person. There is not always possible, and on Facebook a group of people can be engaged in a way that simply wouldn't be possible in-person. Facebook and other online tools should not replace in-person interaction. But they can augment them and "extend" them in beneficial ways. Technology marches on, like it or not.
I've written about Dr. Laura and technology before, here, here, here, here, and here.
Wednesday, February 07, 2018
Men Should Protect Themselves
I first posted this here in 2008. It holds up. Minor changes may have been made here and there.
In previous posts, I wrote about laws and policies that could level the playing field somewhat between the sexes. Although those things are possible, I do not hold out much hope for them happening. Men should do what they can to protect themselves – their wallets, their hearts, their bodies, their autonomy - based on the way things are NOW.
Here are my suggestions:
1. Come up with a plan for your life. What are your priorities? What are your goals? What is your dream? What do you want to accomplish as far as family, friends, career, and hobbies? What kind of lifestyle do you want to have?
This will determine what you do and how you do it. Plans can change, but it is important to have a plan. If you want to serve God and get married and have kids, you are going to do things differently than if it want to travel as much as possible for pleasure, or if you want to reach the top of the corporate ladder.
There is no right or wrong answer to these questions – only what you need and want out of life. Don’t let other people tell you what you need, what you want, what you like – even if that other person has a vagina and is really, really hot. Only YOU know those things. One way for you to know is to look at your life so far and figure out what you have liked and what you have not.
If you want a career, pursue that career. If your highest priority is a career, serious, exclusive relationships can slow you down. They can distract you, take your time and energy, keep you from going where you need to go, putting in the hours you need to put in, socializing for the sake of networking, etc.
Plus, the more successful you are, the more options you will have in dates/finding a partner. Marriage-minded “ladies” like the security that comes with a man who is successful. “Golddiggers” are turned on by a fat wallet. Either way, it basically boils down to $$$.
In previous posts, I wrote about laws and policies that could level the playing field somewhat between the sexes. Although those things are possible, I do not hold out much hope for them happening. Men should do what they can to protect themselves – their wallets, their hearts, their bodies, their autonomy - based on the way things are NOW.
Here are my suggestions:
1. Come up with a plan for your life. What are your priorities? What are your goals? What is your dream? What do you want to accomplish as far as family, friends, career, and hobbies? What kind of lifestyle do you want to have?
This will determine what you do and how you do it. Plans can change, but it is important to have a plan. If you want to serve God and get married and have kids, you are going to do things differently than if it want to travel as much as possible for pleasure, or if you want to reach the top of the corporate ladder.
There is no right or wrong answer to these questions – only what you need and want out of life. Don’t let other people tell you what you need, what you want, what you like – even if that other person has a vagina and is really, really hot. Only YOU know those things. One way for you to know is to look at your life so far and figure out what you have liked and what you have not.
If you want a career, pursue that career. If your highest priority is a career, serious, exclusive relationships can slow you down. They can distract you, take your time and energy, keep you from going where you need to go, putting in the hours you need to put in, socializing for the sake of networking, etc.
Plus, the more successful you are, the more options you will have in dates/finding a partner. Marriage-minded “ladies” like the security that comes with a man who is successful. “Golddiggers” are turned on by a fat wallet. Either way, it basically boils down to $$$.
Tom Leykis is BACK - But The End is Near
Talk show host Tom Leykis returned to doing live shows this past Friday, February 2, after announcing he was going to make an announcement on Wednesday, January 31, and that announcement being that he was going to be back on Friday to make some announcements. Got that?
After being very sick for weeks, and having a bad voice as a result, it was good to hear him back on the show and seemingly healthy. He ended up doing a show for about four and a half hours.
The biggest announcement he had is that he's ending his self-titled show this year. He didn't provide an exact date, but he said the show would not exist in 2019.
From what he said, it sounds like there are multiple reasons for this.
After being very sick for weeks, and having a bad voice as a result, it was good to hear him back on the show and seemingly healthy. He ended up doing a show for about four and a half hours.
The biggest announcement he had is that he's ending his self-titled show this year. He didn't provide an exact date, but he said the show would not exist in 2019.
From what he said, it sounds like there are multiple reasons for this.
Tuesday, February 06, 2018
Recent Dear Abby Columns Should Be a Warning Against Marrying
A couple of recent Dear Abby columns caught my eye. You can really learn a lot about why you don't want to get married or have children by reading Dear Abby.
SPOIL ME, PLEASE, IN OHIO wrote:
SPOIL ME, PLEASE, IN OHIO wrote:
My husband and I have been happily married for seven years. He recently graduated from his final residency, and after 11 years of post-high school education, he is finally out practicing.
During all those years, I supported us financially.Awwww, how nice!
It's a Completely Different Culture Now
As Dr. Laura gets more and more experience dealing with callers who have been raised in a culture in which there is no discouragement of casual fornication (or shacking up), including teenaged fornication, she gets more likely to make a point of commenting on it when the caller or someone the caller is dealing with is involved in such behavior. (She seems to be somewhat wearied by the negative cultural shifts, which is certainly understandable as she deals with call after call with the ugly fallout of this societal breakdown.)
In the second hour of the show on Monday, August 10, 2015 [note that this entry has been bumped up] she had a call from a mother whose teen daughter had been staying with a friend, but slipped out and walked to a nearby home in which a boy was residing and had intercourse with him. It was presented as her first experience. Dr. Laura expressed disgust that the boy's parents were likely home and sleeping at the time; presumably the disgust was at the brazen flouting of morality and parental respect (which assumed the boy's parents would object, though it is entirely possible they wouldn't), because she expresses no disgust at the thought of grown, married people having sex while visiting and staying at a parental home. But I digress.
Dr. Laura urged the caller to ask her daughter how she felt about the experience. "Did she think it was love? Was it curiosity?"
That's where I want to scream at my listening device "How about IT FEELS GOOD!"?
She also threw in the "He's bragged to all of his friends" thing.
Dr. Laura often approaches this as though every teen girl is expecting that sex will always mean love, that no teen girl enjoys sex or ever puts her physical pleasure ahead of other considerations, and that teens still talk about sex the same way or that a teen girl is going to mind if other people know she had sex. There are other times Dr. Laura indicates that women enjoy sex but the way she talks about fornication, if it is all anyone heard from her on sexual matters, would give someone the impression that she doesn't think females enjoy sex. Females do enjoy fornication. Most don't enjoy it as much as marital lovemaking or might feel some negativity about it after it is over, especially if there is a breakup or a relationship doesn't actually form in the first place, but they do enjoy it if the guy is at all competent in what he's doing.
Yes, up into part of the 1960s, most girls didn't want people to know they'd fornicated, because most people lived their lives in the same rural community or urban neighborhood and there was a general cultural shame against fornication (sure, plenty of people were doing it, but they tried to keep it private) and if word got around, then the young men in the area would either not want her or the parents of the young man would strongly pressure him not to date her, but especially not to marry her. The school she attended and the religious congregation she attended might have taken action. It might even have been a criminal matter.
None of that is true anymore, at least in most places in the USA. As such, few girls who fornicate are going to mind if word spreads. Often, it isn't even talked about. It is just assumed that it is going on. There are teen girls who walk around school wearing condoms on their clothing to get attention (under the guise of trying to raise awareness in her peers); would such a girl give a rip if someone found out she was having sex?
But the way Dr. Laura often handles these calls, it is like she still thinks things are like they were when she was growing up. This time, she did go on to acknowledge that teen fornication is now seen as the norm and expected. During part of the call, though, I wanted to somehow break in and say something like, "Excuse me... she's a heterosexual girl who is turned on by males, this one in particular, and sex can feel good, even when it is fornication. It is like asking her why she stole the ice cream out of the freezer and if it tasted good while she ate it. Maybe she felt nervous, maybe a little guilty, or maybe she's worried about it going to her hips, but she liked the taste."
The frame of reference is way too different now. Saying something like "He doesn't love you! You're not going to have a lasting relationship with him! All of his friends know!" isn't going to have any dissuading effect on most teens these days. Rather, a better tactic, if religion isn't going to be invoked (and it's not a religious show, after all) is to convince teens that the risks (getting bonded to someone wrong for you, diminishing your ability to enjoy future intimate relationships, STDs, pregnancy) aren't worth the pleasure. Admit that it can feel good, but so can many other things that have a better time and place.
Anyway, I previously went over some of these issues in much depth here, and this is another entry that is relevant.
In the second hour of the show on Monday, August 10, 2015 [note that this entry has been bumped up] she had a call from a mother whose teen daughter had been staying with a friend, but slipped out and walked to a nearby home in which a boy was residing and had intercourse with him. It was presented as her first experience. Dr. Laura expressed disgust that the boy's parents were likely home and sleeping at the time; presumably the disgust was at the brazen flouting of morality and parental respect (which assumed the boy's parents would object, though it is entirely possible they wouldn't), because she expresses no disgust at the thought of grown, married people having sex while visiting and staying at a parental home. But I digress.
Dr. Laura urged the caller to ask her daughter how she felt about the experience. "Did she think it was love? Was it curiosity?"
That's where I want to scream at my listening device "How about IT FEELS GOOD!"?
She also threw in the "He's bragged to all of his friends" thing.
Dr. Laura often approaches this as though every teen girl is expecting that sex will always mean love, that no teen girl enjoys sex or ever puts her physical pleasure ahead of other considerations, and that teens still talk about sex the same way or that a teen girl is going to mind if other people know she had sex. There are other times Dr. Laura indicates that women enjoy sex but the way she talks about fornication, if it is all anyone heard from her on sexual matters, would give someone the impression that she doesn't think females enjoy sex. Females do enjoy fornication. Most don't enjoy it as much as marital lovemaking or might feel some negativity about it after it is over, especially if there is a breakup or a relationship doesn't actually form in the first place, but they do enjoy it if the guy is at all competent in what he's doing.
Yes, up into part of the 1960s, most girls didn't want people to know they'd fornicated, because most people lived their lives in the same rural community or urban neighborhood and there was a general cultural shame against fornication (sure, plenty of people were doing it, but they tried to keep it private) and if word got around, then the young men in the area would either not want her or the parents of the young man would strongly pressure him not to date her, but especially not to marry her. The school she attended and the religious congregation she attended might have taken action. It might even have been a criminal matter.
None of that is true anymore, at least in most places in the USA. As such, few girls who fornicate are going to mind if word spreads. Often, it isn't even talked about. It is just assumed that it is going on. There are teen girls who walk around school wearing condoms on their clothing to get attention (under the guise of trying to raise awareness in her peers); would such a girl give a rip if someone found out she was having sex?
But the way Dr. Laura often handles these calls, it is like she still thinks things are like they were when she was growing up. This time, she did go on to acknowledge that teen fornication is now seen as the norm and expected. During part of the call, though, I wanted to somehow break in and say something like, "Excuse me... she's a heterosexual girl who is turned on by males, this one in particular, and sex can feel good, even when it is fornication. It is like asking her why she stole the ice cream out of the freezer and if it tasted good while she ate it. Maybe she felt nervous, maybe a little guilty, or maybe she's worried about it going to her hips, but she liked the taste."
The frame of reference is way too different now. Saying something like "He doesn't love you! You're not going to have a lasting relationship with him! All of his friends know!" isn't going to have any dissuading effect on most teens these days. Rather, a better tactic, if religion isn't going to be invoked (and it's not a religious show, after all) is to convince teens that the risks (getting bonded to someone wrong for you, diminishing your ability to enjoy future intimate relationships, STDs, pregnancy) aren't worth the pleasure. Admit that it can feel good, but so can many other things that have a better time and place.
Anyway, I previously went over some of these issues in much depth here, and this is another entry that is relevant.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)