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.
Tuesday, April 30, 2013
Thursday, April 18, 2013
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.
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.
Wednesday, April 17, 2013
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:
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:
Wednesday, March 13, 2013
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.
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.
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.
Thursday, March 07, 2013
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.
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.
Monday, February 25, 2013
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:
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?
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?
Thursday, February 21, 2013
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:
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:
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.
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.
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
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.
Tuesday, February 19, 2013
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:
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:
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.
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.
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
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.
Wednesday, January 16, 2013
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.
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.
Thursday, January 10, 2013
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.
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.
Wednesday, December 26, 2012
I Don't Like It When My Wife Makes That Promise
This is one of those times when I feel like some ungrateful murmurer, because I've been blessed so much but I'm going to grip anyway.
Some marriage-minded counselors and advice dispensers tell wives to tease their husbands, indicating what she's going to do later when they're alone, in private. This is supposed to be a turn on, and supposed to get the man to hurry home from where he is like a trained seal.
For me, it is a turn off. Why? More often than not... probably nine times out of ten, when my wife promises me sex at a specified later time (later that same day, or the next day), often while rejecting me at the moment, it doesn't end up happening. Something gets in the way, such as getting to the point in the day when I'm facing six hours of sleep or less, and since I'm already tired, she defers, claiming it to be for my own good. Or, believe or not, it is because she wants me to shave right before, and she doesn't want me to shave at that moment because she wants my shave to be closer for whatever will follow later (work or personal). Or because it is that time of the month. Or because she isn't feeling well. Or because, sleep and sex deprived, I'm grouchy and that turns her off.
The promise of getting it later is not done in a flirty way. My wife gave up flirting a long time ago, claiming she doesn't know how. It's more like scheduling a meeting.
So, her use of that tactic is a diversion rather than priming the pump.
Now I'm going to get into some details of what happened between us the other night in bed, so if you don't want to read that, you are warned. It isn't too graphic.
Some marriage-minded counselors and advice dispensers tell wives to tease their husbands, indicating what she's going to do later when they're alone, in private. This is supposed to be a turn on, and supposed to get the man to hurry home from where he is like a trained seal.
For me, it is a turn off. Why? More often than not... probably nine times out of ten, when my wife promises me sex at a specified later time (later that same day, or the next day), often while rejecting me at the moment, it doesn't end up happening. Something gets in the way, such as getting to the point in the day when I'm facing six hours of sleep or less, and since I'm already tired, she defers, claiming it to be for my own good. Or, believe or not, it is because she wants me to shave right before, and she doesn't want me to shave at that moment because she wants my shave to be closer for whatever will follow later (work or personal). Or because it is that time of the month. Or because she isn't feeling well. Or because, sleep and sex deprived, I'm grouchy and that turns her off.
The promise of getting it later is not done in a flirty way. My wife gave up flirting a long time ago, claiming she doesn't know how. It's more like scheduling a meeting.
So, her use of that tactic is a diversion rather than priming the pump.
Now I'm going to get into some details of what happened between us the other night in bed, so if you don't want to read that, you are warned. It isn't too graphic.
Monday, December 17, 2012
Why Some Husbands Start Hanging Out in Sports Bars
Overall, things really aren't bad in my life, and things are actually good for the most part in my marriage. At least, that's my perception. Maybe I'm delusional. Consider...
In a previous posting, I mentioned how I committed my wife. They didn't see a reason to keep her past the 72-hour hold, so out she came. She even joked about the experience. I couldn't laugh about it.
We discussed what needed to change about our lives to avoid getting to this point again.
And then I realized I had made a tactical error by not being the one to be hospitalized first. All of the changes we discussed are going to make things easier for her, but many of them are going to make things more difficult for me. As it was, before all of this happened, my father had expressed concern that I was going to wind up in an emergency room, as he did right before my mother gave birth to their third child.
We've put some of the changes into practice. Others we haven't. For example, we're still in the process of finding a marriage counselor (she wasn't happy with the one we went to last year). I'm not really sure what a marriage counselor can do.
The marriage counselor can't make my wife's physical condition, which I was mislead about, get better.
The marriage counselor can't find more time. In fact, the counseling is going to mean out time will be even more taxed.
Perhaps we're going to pick the kind of marriage counselor who is going to tell me to take on even more of a load? What am I going to do? Explicity say in front of my wife and the counselor that I've been a victim of fraud, and there's nothing I can do about it now because I don't want my kids to have a broken home, and after my kids are grown, the laws & courts would ---- me over too much for me to want to initiate divorce, seeing as how I will have been the sole income earner and we will be long past the magical ten-year mark?
The other day, my wife was looking for a home video and she was struck by how nice her breasts used to be. Actually, they've never been spectacular, but I was fine with that. Breastfeeding and a lot of pumping and starving herself (not while pregnant or breastfeeding, thankfully) took a mighty toll on her breasts. So now, or the first time, she's talking about getting implants/enchancement surgery sometime in the vague future. Geez. Look, I'm the kind of guy who still wears glasses because I'm too cheap to pay for laser eye surgery. I pointed that out to her. If I haven't spent the money on that, why would I want to spend the money on fake boobs? I also told her I was fine with the way she is. Really, what's been my alternative? Tell her she needs to have her breasts done and thereby further reduce the frequency of my access to her body? I also asked her who she is trying to attract. She already has me. She insists it is for her own image. I cited what Dr. Laura says... it is OK if it is to "fix something that was broken", not to turn perfectly fine B or C cups into something larger.
The rest of this is about marital sex, if you don't want to read, don't click through.
In a previous posting, I mentioned how I committed my wife. They didn't see a reason to keep her past the 72-hour hold, so out she came. She even joked about the experience. I couldn't laugh about it.
We discussed what needed to change about our lives to avoid getting to this point again.
And then I realized I had made a tactical error by not being the one to be hospitalized first. All of the changes we discussed are going to make things easier for her, but many of them are going to make things more difficult for me. As it was, before all of this happened, my father had expressed concern that I was going to wind up in an emergency room, as he did right before my mother gave birth to their third child.
We've put some of the changes into practice. Others we haven't. For example, we're still in the process of finding a marriage counselor (she wasn't happy with the one we went to last year). I'm not really sure what a marriage counselor can do.
The marriage counselor can't make my wife's physical condition, which I was mislead about, get better.
The marriage counselor can't find more time. In fact, the counseling is going to mean out time will be even more taxed.
Perhaps we're going to pick the kind of marriage counselor who is going to tell me to take on even more of a load? What am I going to do? Explicity say in front of my wife and the counselor that I've been a victim of fraud, and there's nothing I can do about it now because I don't want my kids to have a broken home, and after my kids are grown, the laws & courts would ---- me over too much for me to want to initiate divorce, seeing as how I will have been the sole income earner and we will be long past the magical ten-year mark?
The other day, my wife was looking for a home video and she was struck by how nice her breasts used to be. Actually, they've never been spectacular, but I was fine with that. Breastfeeding and a lot of pumping and starving herself (not while pregnant or breastfeeding, thankfully) took a mighty toll on her breasts. So now, or the first time, she's talking about getting implants/enchancement surgery sometime in the vague future. Geez. Look, I'm the kind of guy who still wears glasses because I'm too cheap to pay for laser eye surgery. I pointed that out to her. If I haven't spent the money on that, why would I want to spend the money on fake boobs? I also told her I was fine with the way she is. Really, what's been my alternative? Tell her she needs to have her breasts done and thereby further reduce the frequency of my access to her body? I also asked her who she is trying to attract. She already has me. She insists it is for her own image. I cited what Dr. Laura says... it is OK if it is to "fix something that was broken", not to turn perfectly fine B or C cups into something larger.
The rest of this is about marital sex, if you don't want to read, don't click through.
Sunday, November 25, 2012
And How Was YOUR Thanksgiving?
You may or may not recall this blog entry from a little over a month ago.
To make a long story short, I later found out she didn't much recall that weekend. After fighting with me and insisting I get therapy "or else," a little pill-popping fixed her right up. Or rather, it seemed to.
That terrible time was a giant red flag that should have brought life to a halt so that everything could get sorted out.
I don't have the energy to go into a long tale right now, but over the long holiday weekend, my wife tried to kill herself - or at least was desperately trying to get some attention/help. Based on some of her other actions during the crisis, I can't quite buy the "it was just for attention" thing, and yet if she had wanted to kill herself earlier in the week, she could have without being stopped.
I managed to drive her to the hospital myself and get her committed. At first, she blew up my phone with angry text after angry text about what a horrible, hateful person I am and what a terrible wife and mother's she's been, and how our marriage is over and how I picked the wrong woman to marry. Every 50th text or so would be something like "Can't you see I need you most at a time like this?" Mind you, this was both while I was in the room and when I was home gathering some of her stuff. But when I'd try to hug her or hold her hand, she'd push me away.
After a day of being there, she was getting better, and the next day she was like the woman I fell in love with and married. Or maybe she just knew that all she had to do was refrain from doing anything in front of the staff and then they'd have to let her out.
Where does this story wind up? Well, that will have to come later. As will something my in-laws told me that they really should have told me a lot earlier. Like, before I married into their family and made babies. But one thing's for sure... it was a Thanksgiving holiday I'll never forget.
To make a long story short, I later found out she didn't much recall that weekend. After fighting with me and insisting I get therapy "or else," a little pill-popping fixed her right up. Or rather, it seemed to.
That terrible time was a giant red flag that should have brought life to a halt so that everything could get sorted out.
I don't have the energy to go into a long tale right now, but over the long holiday weekend, my wife tried to kill herself - or at least was desperately trying to get some attention/help. Based on some of her other actions during the crisis, I can't quite buy the "it was just for attention" thing, and yet if she had wanted to kill herself earlier in the week, she could have without being stopped.
I managed to drive her to the hospital myself and get her committed. At first, she blew up my phone with angry text after angry text about what a horrible, hateful person I am and what a terrible wife and mother's she's been, and how our marriage is over and how I picked the wrong woman to marry. Every 50th text or so would be something like "Can't you see I need you most at a time like this?" Mind you, this was both while I was in the room and when I was home gathering some of her stuff. But when I'd try to hug her or hold her hand, she'd push me away.
After a day of being there, she was getting better, and the next day she was like the woman I fell in love with and married. Or maybe she just knew that all she had to do was refrain from doing anything in front of the staff and then they'd have to let her out.
Where does this story wind up? Well, that will have to come later. As will something my in-laws told me that they really should have told me a lot earlier. Like, before I married into their family and made babies. But one thing's for sure... it was a Thanksgiving holiday I'll never forget.
Sunday, October 21, 2012
Yes, I'm Still Alive
There is so much I could have blogged since my last posting, whether from stuff pulled from online sources or depressing you with accounts of my personal life. I'm not giving up on this blog. I still have much to say.
Things are rather bad at the moment in my marriage. While I admit, and have admitted to my wife my bad actions, she is focusing on mine and ignoring hers. I have held my tongue about so much and tried to be a good husband and father during this dark time, but I don't think she has held back at all. She has been cruel, disrespectful, and ungrateful and has stopped bothering to be a wife or mother. Clearly she's depressed, but she's not handling it. I have no idea how many pills she popping for how many different symptoms at this point, but I have reason to believe she just decided to resume or up her dosage of antidepressant. Don't know if that will help. Based on the medications she has herself on alone, I don't expect her to live a long life. Add in some of her behavior (letting herself lose more and more weight, for example... she's starting to look like a concentration camp prisoner on the History Channel) which will also kill her young, and it is a double whammy.
Geez, there is so much I would go back and tell myself during the time I making plans to marry her...
...about how many medications and treatments she was on.
...about how we would not be able to rely on her family.
...about how she would never, ever get over the fact that I was not a virgin.
...about how her being a virgin has less to do with virtue than it does with libido (see "medications").
...about how her idea of being a stay-at-home-mom was going to be too literal too much of the time.
...about how I will never be allowed to screw up without her harping on it and lecturing me for hours when I should be getting sleep, insisting I get therapy, and equating my behavior with her mother's alcoholism.
...about how sacrificing my savings, professional dreams, personal freedom, social time, hobbies, etc. would be met not with thanks and ongoing appreciation but with contempt and a demand I sacrifice more.
In other words, I would have told myself not to get married. When a marriage-and-family minded, churchgoing, somewhat-conservative Christian can't, in good conscience, endorse marriage, then we're a doomed culture.
Oh, I know... it has to be with the right person. The problem is, she's the "rightest" person by far. I doubt there was anyone else out there more right for me as a wife, and while I do have my faults, I'm not difficult to live with or high-maintenance. She has so many good qualities. If it doesn't work between us, it can't work for all that many people.
She's now threatening to take the kids and leave me. You'd laugh if you found out what tipped off this latest round. I've apologized, I've suggested ways I can prevent it from happening again, and after hours of her harping, I have agreed that I will go to counseling for me (not couples, as we did for something like three sessions before she realized we didn't have the problem she thought we did.) Her reactions have less to do with me than they to do with her brain chemistry, apparently, and whatever she's carrying over from her childhood. I have no idea how ME going a counselor is going to help. It is appearing to me like she married me under false pretenses, but I'm not going to leave her, at least not as long as the kids are minors. We have a long way to go. So what... I'm going to go to a counselor and tell him that my wife is cruel to me, married me under false pretenses, and that I'm not going to leave her... then what? I refuse to be medicated for reacting normally to this. Actually, I'm not going to tell him the false pretenses part if there is any chance that will ever be passed along to her, even if only as him getting her in there with me and insisting I tell her that. I just won't do it. I know she can't take back the things she's said to me... I will never forget them. Being a man, however, I can still do my "marital duty" should this latest crap smooth over... there's no way she'll be able to do the same if I speak all of my mind, and I really don't want to further degrade the conditions my kids are living in.
Speaking of that, I suppose I could be using this time to clean up the mess that his place has become in the last several days. Or, maybe I could get married and my wife could take care of the home while I earn income? Oh, right, supposedly I already did that.
Hmmm. I had only planned to come here and write a short note, but I've unloaded a little, haven't I?
Things are rather bad at the moment in my marriage. While I admit, and have admitted to my wife my bad actions, she is focusing on mine and ignoring hers. I have held my tongue about so much and tried to be a good husband and father during this dark time, but I don't think she has held back at all. She has been cruel, disrespectful, and ungrateful and has stopped bothering to be a wife or mother. Clearly she's depressed, but she's not handling it. I have no idea how many pills she popping for how many different symptoms at this point, but I have reason to believe she just decided to resume or up her dosage of antidepressant. Don't know if that will help. Based on the medications she has herself on alone, I don't expect her to live a long life. Add in some of her behavior (letting herself lose more and more weight, for example... she's starting to look like a concentration camp prisoner on the History Channel) which will also kill her young, and it is a double whammy.
Geez, there is so much I would go back and tell myself during the time I making plans to marry her...
...about how many medications and treatments she was on.
...about how we would not be able to rely on her family.
...about how she would never, ever get over the fact that I was not a virgin.
...about how her being a virgin has less to do with virtue than it does with libido (see "medications").
...about how her idea of being a stay-at-home-mom was going to be too literal too much of the time.
...about how I will never be allowed to screw up without her harping on it and lecturing me for hours when I should be getting sleep, insisting I get therapy, and equating my behavior with her mother's alcoholism.
...about how sacrificing my savings, professional dreams, personal freedom, social time, hobbies, etc. would be met not with thanks and ongoing appreciation but with contempt and a demand I sacrifice more.
In other words, I would have told myself not to get married. When a marriage-and-family minded, churchgoing, somewhat-conservative Christian can't, in good conscience, endorse marriage, then we're a doomed culture.
Oh, I know... it has to be with the right person. The problem is, she's the "rightest" person by far. I doubt there was anyone else out there more right for me as a wife, and while I do have my faults, I'm not difficult to live with or high-maintenance. She has so many good qualities. If it doesn't work between us, it can't work for all that many people.
She's now threatening to take the kids and leave me. You'd laugh if you found out what tipped off this latest round. I've apologized, I've suggested ways I can prevent it from happening again, and after hours of her harping, I have agreed that I will go to counseling for me (not couples, as we did for something like three sessions before she realized we didn't have the problem she thought we did.) Her reactions have less to do with me than they to do with her brain chemistry, apparently, and whatever she's carrying over from her childhood. I have no idea how ME going a counselor is going to help. It is appearing to me like she married me under false pretenses, but I'm not going to leave her, at least not as long as the kids are minors. We have a long way to go. So what... I'm going to go to a counselor and tell him that my wife is cruel to me, married me under false pretenses, and that I'm not going to leave her... then what? I refuse to be medicated for reacting normally to this. Actually, I'm not going to tell him the false pretenses part if there is any chance that will ever be passed along to her, even if only as him getting her in there with me and insisting I tell her that. I just won't do it. I know she can't take back the things she's said to me... I will never forget them. Being a man, however, I can still do my "marital duty" should this latest crap smooth over... there's no way she'll be able to do the same if I speak all of my mind, and I really don't want to further degrade the conditions my kids are living in.
Speaking of that, I suppose I could be using this time to clean up the mess that his place has become in the last several days. Or, maybe I could get married and my wife could take care of the home while I earn income? Oh, right, supposedly I already did that.
Hmmm. I had only planned to come here and write a short note, but I've unloaded a little, haven't I?
Thursday, August 16, 2012
Men Want Sex More Than Women
That men want sex more than women is a demonstrable and undeniable fact of life.
I'm talking about men as a group and women as a group. That has to be stated, because whenever anyone says that men want sex more than women, there'll usually be someone who says, "Nuh-uh! I want it more than my husband!" Yes, there are some women who want sex more than some men, but overall, men as a group want sex more than women as a group.
There are some people who deny this to be the case. Most of these people have come to cling to this false belief have done so after years and years of being brainwashed in graduate programs, or believing someone who has.
But facts are stubborn things.
The fact is, the overwhelming majority of customers for one of the world's oldest professions are men. Even most customers for male prositutes are other men.
Formal or informal polygamy is much more common than polyandry, and I suspect the fact I'm writing about has something to do with that in addition to the realities of social/political/religious inequalities between the sexes favoring men, the importance of a man believing his wife's child is biological offspring, or the fact that one man with three women can easily poduce three children in nine month's time but one woman with three men is much more likely to produce only one child in the same amount of time.
Worldly women know that they can have have sex any day they want to with no money or effort - not necessarily with a great partner, but with any number of grown men. But even the most skilled male seducer or pick-up artist knows he has to make certain efforts, follow cerstain steps, or spend some amount of money to have a good chance of having sex on any given day.
Guys, for the most part, are still expected to do the pursuing, whatever form that may take. It could be buying a drink, and it could be proposing marriage. One reason why is supply & demand. Men "demand" sex more than women supply sex... because men want sex more than women.
Dr. Drew Pinsky, no misogynist or conservative idealogue, notes that unlike with male homosexual couples, sex often (not always) fades away and ceases for long-term female homosexual couples.
You can argue that other factors come into play... morals, that sex costs women more when it comes to physical risks and emotional results... or something else. But that doesn't change the fact that, whatever those factors are, it all cashes out as men wanting sex more than women.
Why men want sex more than women and the implications of this fact for imporant and not-so-important matters of life is something I can write about later.
I'm talking about men as a group and women as a group. That has to be stated, because whenever anyone says that men want sex more than women, there'll usually be someone who says, "Nuh-uh! I want it more than my husband!" Yes, there are some women who want sex more than some men, but overall, men as a group want sex more than women as a group.
There are some people who deny this to be the case. Most of these people have come to cling to this false belief have done so after years and years of being brainwashed in graduate programs, or believing someone who has.
But facts are stubborn things.
The fact is, the overwhelming majority of customers for one of the world's oldest professions are men. Even most customers for male prositutes are other men.
Formal or informal polygamy is much more common than polyandry, and I suspect the fact I'm writing about has something to do with that in addition to the realities of social/political/religious inequalities between the sexes favoring men, the importance of a man believing his wife's child is biological offspring, or the fact that one man with three women can easily poduce three children in nine month's time but one woman with three men is much more likely to produce only one child in the same amount of time.
Worldly women know that they can have have sex any day they want to with no money or effort - not necessarily with a great partner, but with any number of grown men. But even the most skilled male seducer or pick-up artist knows he has to make certain efforts, follow cerstain steps, or spend some amount of money to have a good chance of having sex on any given day.
Guys, for the most part, are still expected to do the pursuing, whatever form that may take. It could be buying a drink, and it could be proposing marriage. One reason why is supply & demand. Men "demand" sex more than women supply sex... because men want sex more than women.
Dr. Drew Pinsky, no misogynist or conservative idealogue, notes that unlike with male homosexual couples, sex often (not always) fades away and ceases for long-term female homosexual couples.
You can argue that other factors come into play... morals, that sex costs women more when it comes to physical risks and emotional results... or something else. But that doesn't change the fact that, whatever those factors are, it all cashes out as men wanting sex more than women.
Why men want sex more than women and the implications of this fact for imporant and not-so-important matters of life is something I can write about later.
Tuesday, July 31, 2012
This is Exactly Why I Didn't Want This
I haven't had time to blog, in no small part because my wife has undergone a couple of surgeries and I'm helping her recover from them, because I love her and because it is my obligation as a spouse.
I beg your forgiveness if I sound like a jerk and unromatic as I vent here. I refuse to vent to her because I don't want to do anything that I know will hurt her feelings.
Wednesday, July 11, 2012
It’s Simple
Like most men, it really doesn't take much to keep me happy and satisfied. As long as my stomach is full, my testicles are empty, I have some time to myself, I have some guy time, I get to church fairly regularly, I can hug and kiss my wife and kids, I'm not being nagged, and I am being respected… life is good.
I don't need the latest electronics, motor vehicles, or expensive clothes.
I don't need season tickets for sporting events.
I don't need to travel. I don't need expensive food or food that is complicated to prepare. I can even buy and make my food myself. I don’t need to party. I don't need to use tobacco or to smoke anything. I don't need booze or gambling. There's no television show I just have to watch.
I do not get much guy time these days, and haven't for a long time. That's a problem. That may change soon. I hope it does.
I don't need the latest electronics, motor vehicles, or expensive clothes.
I don't need season tickets for sporting events.
I don't need to travel. I don't need expensive food or food that is complicated to prepare. I can even buy and make my food myself. I don’t need to party. I don't need to use tobacco or to smoke anything. I don't need booze or gambling. There's no television show I just have to watch.
I do not get much guy time these days, and haven't for a long time. That's a problem. That may change soon. I hope it does.
Monday, July 02, 2012
Crime is Down Which Should Be Surprising, Given That..
Report after report indicates that crime, especially violent crime, is down in recent years. The economy is terrible, and yet crime is down. There goes the common Leftist idea that that poverty causes crime (it is more likely that crime increases poverty, actually). Crime was also low during the Great Depression.
But some common ideas frequently promoted by social conservatives (and I can be considered a social conservative on most issues) also have to be questioned:
We are told that:
1. Unmarried men are more prone to violent crime because marriage tames men.
and
2. Viewing "adult" material makes men more disrespectful and violent towards women (at least, that's what some ugly stupid b---- told me... kidding... just kidding) and increases crime.
And yet...
A. We have more unmarried men than ever before. That is because of and increase in: 1) divorce, 2) shacking up, 3) men who never marry, 4) and the age at which men first marry.
B. Free/almost-free easily-accessed adult material of all sorts is ubiquitous and sources that are happy about that and dismayed by that both agree more and more people are viewing it.
C. Crime rates are down significantly.
Can anyone explain how all three of these things can be simultaneously true? Are we really to believe that crime rates would be down even more if A and B were not true... if all of the adult material went away and 21-year-old guys who aren't even Mormons or Baptists were getting married and staying married? And how can that be proven?
It is possible, even likely, that correlations have been blamed when other correlations are really the issue? For example, maybe being unmarried doesn't make a man more likely to commit violent crime - maybe committing violent crime makes a man less likely to attract and keep a wife? Of course, there are plenty of married men who commit violent crime and plenty of women who stick with violent men.
I have heard that more adult material actually correlates to a decrease in rape, which would help explain a drop in the violent crime rate.
Are the crime rates all cooked?
Can it all be attributed to "three strikes" getting the most active and violent criminals off the streets?
I'm beginning to suspect Sociology is nothing but a bunch of snake oil and that nobody really knows anything, and that any study dealing with sociological issues can be interpreted any conflicting way. As Dennis Prager (a social conservative who does not buy the "smut causes crime" line) says, either studies confirm common sense or they are wrong.
What say you???
But some common ideas frequently promoted by social conservatives (and I can be considered a social conservative on most issues) also have to be questioned:
We are told that:
1. Unmarried men are more prone to violent crime because marriage tames men.
and
2. Viewing "adult" material makes men more disrespectful and violent towards women (at least, that's what some ugly stupid b---- told me... kidding... just kidding) and increases crime.
And yet...
A. We have more unmarried men than ever before. That is because of and increase in: 1) divorce, 2) shacking up, 3) men who never marry, 4) and the age at which men first marry.
B. Free/almost-free easily-accessed adult material of all sorts is ubiquitous and sources that are happy about that and dismayed by that both agree more and more people are viewing it.
C. Crime rates are down significantly.
Can anyone explain how all three of these things can be simultaneously true? Are we really to believe that crime rates would be down even more if A and B were not true... if all of the adult material went away and 21-year-old guys who aren't even Mormons or Baptists were getting married and staying married? And how can that be proven?
It is possible, even likely, that correlations have been blamed when other correlations are really the issue? For example, maybe being unmarried doesn't make a man more likely to commit violent crime - maybe committing violent crime makes a man less likely to attract and keep a wife? Of course, there are plenty of married men who commit violent crime and plenty of women who stick with violent men.
I have heard that more adult material actually correlates to a decrease in rape, which would help explain a drop in the violent crime rate.
Are the crime rates all cooked?
Can it all be attributed to "three strikes" getting the most active and violent criminals off the streets?
I'm beginning to suspect Sociology is nothing but a bunch of snake oil and that nobody really knows anything, and that any study dealing with sociological issues can be interpreted any conflicting way. As Dennis Prager (a social conservative who does not buy the "smut causes crime" line) says, either studies confirm common sense or they are wrong.
What say you???
Thursday, June 28, 2012
Dealing With a Bratty Wife
Anyone have any advice of how to deal with a bratty (or bitchy, or whatever you want to call it) wife? It isn't so much that she's being a brat to me (she is, somewhat). It is that she's been bratty towards others, needlessly antagonizing them when they don't do what she wants, when she wants, how she wants. Example... she wanted her brother to babysit. He declined. She started ripping into him about what a loser she thinks he is, point out that she went to college, graduated, got her career going, and doesn't abuse alcohol or pot or illegal drugs (she just loads up on coffee, candy/sugar, and has multiple prescription pills she pops), while he is unemployed, has no college education, and has abused substances... but we still trust him to watch our kids for short amounts of time.
I gently asked if her treatment of her brother was going to make it more or less likely he will want to babysit for us in the future.
I'd like to apologize to her brother and others she's been acting this way towards lately, but I have a strong belief in marital unity and not going behind your spouse's back, and all of that. Besides, she should be the one apologizing, right? Do I encourage her to do so?
My wife has been especially stressed out because of a series of things, but currently it is about an impending surgery. But... dealing with stressful things is part of life and no excuse to antagonize people.
Any tips or suggestions about what to say/do towards her or the people she's antagonized?
Please don't say sex. I can't sleep with her brother. But seriously, sex doesn't relax her or put her in a better mood. It does relax me and put me in a better mood, though. And yes, I do realize I could have avoided dealing with a bratty wife by marrying someone else or not marrying at all. But here we are.
I gently asked if her treatment of her brother was going to make it more or less likely he will want to babysit for us in the future.
I'd like to apologize to her brother and others she's been acting this way towards lately, but I have a strong belief in marital unity and not going behind your spouse's back, and all of that. Besides, she should be the one apologizing, right? Do I encourage her to do so?
My wife has been especially stressed out because of a series of things, but currently it is about an impending surgery. But... dealing with stressful things is part of life and no excuse to antagonize people.
Any tips or suggestions about what to say/do towards her or the people she's antagonized?
Please don't say sex. I can't sleep with her brother. But seriously, sex doesn't relax her or put her in a better mood. It does relax me and put me in a better mood, though. And yes, I do realize I could have avoided dealing with a bratty wife by marrying someone else or not marrying at all. But here we are.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)