Monthly Archives: October 2009

Quote of the Week

Each year, the Great Pumpkin rises out of the pumpkin patch that he thinks is the most sincere….I don’t see how a pumpkin patch can be more sincere than this one.  You can look around and there’s not a sign of hypocrisy.  Nothing but sincerity as far as the eye can see.
               – Linus Van Pelt
                  From “It’s the Great Pumpkin, Charlie Brown”
                  Written by Charles M. Schulz

Happy Halloween!

Timeless Lessons from A Classic Story

I have watched film adaptations of Jane Austen’s Pride and Prejudice in all its incarnations many, many times, and I recently watched the 2005 film version again. I love the film…no matter what criticisms may be about a portrayal or a performance. I clearly have a profound attraction to this work.

First and foremost, I love the utter regard the men had for women, which is evident from how they addressed them: “Miss…” (and their first names if they were single) or “Mrs….” (and their last names if they were married). Men bowed upon entering and leaving a woman’s presence, and women curtsied, even under unpleasant conditions. Flirting was ever-so-subtle: a look, a light “accidental” touch of a hand. A man romantically yearned for and tried to earn the affections of a woman. The sweetness of the regard for women in this era (particularly in upper and middle classes) was something to be admired, and something we now miss. There was a clear distinction between a “good” woman and an easy, loose woman or whore.

That distinction is gone today. Now, women put down good money for music that represents them as whores without pay. So many young men are casual about women and sex in general, and sex is a casual expectation almost always fulfilled.

Young women scoff at dignity and modesty as just stupid, prudish, sexist notions. They “shack up” with some dude without a marital commitment, yet expect the love and respect, fidelity and loyalty to exist without the spoken vows, only to be disappointed, hurt, and generally confused.

There was a recent film comedy, called “Ghosts of Girlfriends Past,” in which Matthew McConaughey (in a twist on Dickens’ “A Christmas Carol”) got to go back into his life to see all his old girlfriends. There was one scene in the television ad for the movie which showed a seemingly endless dining table filled with hundreds of girls. Obviously, this was meant to show how shallow and manipulative he had been. To me, it just showed how many stupid girls there were (and are), “putting out” in a situation where there was clearly no respect, regard, or intent.

Men used to have to ask a woman’s dad for permission to “court” her, even when the woman was an adult! Now, all he has to do is show her a bedroom, back seat of a car, or a motel room, and the date is sealed. When men had to explain and express their intentions, they had to take the whole activity of dating much more seriously, as there were personal and social consequences to misleading a young lady. That reputation would annihilate any chances he might have had of marrying a good woman. He’d have to move states or provinces away. Now? That kind of rakish reputation makes girls/women want to line up to get some from an infamous entity.

The women’s revolution did not raise any consciousness worth elevating. It mostly diminished a woman’s sense of herself as special, minimized her value in the minds of men, put sex on the level of animals, created a nanny/baby-sitter/institutionalized day care financial boom (as women gave up the blessing of nurturing their own children), increased the use of abortion as a birth-control technique when an accidental pregnancy occurred with a guy who did not want fatherhood, created perpetually unhappy, angry, nasty wives, and made it very difficult for “nice girls” to be respected and cherished.

The last scene in Pride and Prejudice between the two now-married lovers has them discussing what she wants to be called by him when he is not using her given name. He suggests one name, and she rejects it sweetly, because it is what her father calls her. She then asks him what he will call her when he is angry. He, not being able to envision that situation, talks to her about always letting her know how lovingly important his happiness in wrapped up in her…forever…and he kisses her gently about her face as he says “Mrs. Darcy” over and over again. He gave her his heart, his life, his vows, and his name. And, in that era, giving a woman your name was the ultimate public and private statement of his total commitment to her, which makes that scene so moving to most of us, and infuriating to feminists who see that scene only as ripping away the woman’s identity.

I always cry at the end of the movie.

I cry also for what women have given up in exchange for wanting to have it all and not be subordinate to a man. I don’t know…I kinda think being on a pedestal is not subordinate. But what do I know? I’m only a recovered feminist.

Taking Food Out of the Mouths of Call Girls

I’m still laughing…I read an article last week in one of the online news reporting sites about a new book on economics, called Superfreakonomics.  In the book, the authors discuss the issue of prostitution in today’s economic climate.  As it turns out, prostitution was a profitable enterprise (focusing on mainstream sex acts) until the sexual liberation movement in the 1960s changed “the business of intimacy, and a generation of ‘free love’ altered the marketplace forever.”  The “modesty traditionally displayed by women in search of Mr. Right evolved to a bold pursuit of Mr. Right Now.”  The 1960s genesis of casual sex became prostitution’s direct rival.

So, prices for sex acts plummeted.  Hookers had competition from the average woman who would have sex for free (without even getting a dinner out of it). Being entrepreneurial, hookers then began to provide more unconventional sex -  the kind of things men can’t get from their girlfriends – and the price for those often depraved acts hauled the fees way back up.

As one call girl said:  “Thank God prostitution is illegal, ’cause if it weren’t, I wouldn’t be making $500 an hour; I’d probably be back doing what I was doing, which was working as a computer technician for a Fortune 500 company.” Of course, if you’re the prostitute for a state governor, you’ll probably get lots of media offers!

The call girl entrepreneur who was interviewed was asked whether or not she would suggest this “career” for her daughter.  She obfuscated like crazy, saying she hoped it would be only one of many, many options, and then the article ended with the revelation that she’s now quitting prostitution to go to school to study economics.  I guess morality finally caught up to her.

This is why I use the term “unpaid whore” for women who shack up with guys, rather than dignify themselves and sexual intimacy with a marital commitment.  I tell them that at the very least, they ought to be paid for sex, since it ultimately means nothing profoundly important to him past the orgasm.  Now I can mention that they are taking food out of the mouths of prostitutes and their families!!

Women cannot run away from their true nature, and our true nature (apart from any psychological problems) is to nurture and nest.  We can act like wild women and say it’s our right and freedom, but I take the calls every day from disillusioned, hurt women who did, in fact, expect love and loyalty from the men they had sex with.

So, ladies, have pity on the call girls and prostitutes.  Give them back their turf, and re-elevate womanhood so that men again have a mountain to climb and earn, and therefore value.


Pepsi’s iPhone App Under Fire

I Googled “PepsiCo and Apple iPhone” and found three million sites talking about PepsiCo’s promotional concept for Amp, their energy drink:  “AMP Up Before You Score.”  The app purports to help men pick up any one of 24 types of women and then get coached on “pick up and score some sex” lines.  The app then takes the coaching a step further, encouraging users who “score” to post details such as name, date and comments for their pals on Facebook and Twitter.  Apparently, a lot of people (mostly women) have criticized the app (mostly on Twitter), saying it contributes to the objectification of women.

Frankly, I think it is hilarious, and that women (especially the feminists) are being unbelievably hypersensitive and hypocritical.  Let me count the ways:

1. Women’s studies at colleges and universities objectify men as the “dark side.”
2. Women dress provocatively these days.
3. Women “hook up” (i.e., casual sex – no obligations, no dinner)
4. Women use abortion as birth control for any children conceived via
 casual sex, as opposed to marrying the father of the child.
5. Women “shack up,” have sex out of wedlock, and have babies out of wedlock.
6. Women today are so casual about sex that The Wall Street Journal reports that they have interfered with the earning abilities of call girls and prostitutes.
7. Porn movies star women.
8. The porn industry is owned and managed largely by female entrepreneurs who themselves are objectifying women.

So, what is the problem with an app that suggests pick-up lines?  If a woman is foolish enough to hear a come-on and drop her undies, well, that’s her choice, isn’t it?  Instead, she could tell the guy to “kiss off.”  She could wait to have sex until at least 1 ½ years into the relationship, with an engagement ring and a wedding date. 

I am not offended by this ad program.  After all, it worked.  Everyone is talking about it (even me).  I think it’s stupid, but I’m not offended.  But if any of those “lines” gets a guy some free sex, well it’s the woman’s damn fault, not PepsiCo’s.

Quote of the Week

I believe that UNICEF is the most important branch of the U.N.; they do exceptional work to help the neediest children of the world.
               – Liam Neeson
                  UNICEF Ambassador

October 24 is United Nations Day

To the Mother Whose Son Is Smoking Marijuana

I got this email from a listener after she heard a call I took on my radio program.  She titled the email “To The Mother Whose Son Is Smoking Marijuana.”  It speaks for itself:

Today you gave advice to a mother who found out her 16 ½ year old son is smoking marijuana.  You advised her to get him into a residential treatment program.   You stated that drug addicts lie, and she responded that she didn’t “see” him as a drug addict.  I am afraid she will not take your advice, and she may be in my situation in the future.

Today, I write this with a broken heart.  11 years ago, when my son was 17, I, too, found out that he was smoking marijuana.  He was on the academic honor roll and participated in sports – he wasn’t a drug addict!  I tried to get him into a residential program, but was told they would not accept him at his age unless he committed himself.  I took him to a counselor that the high school recommended and had him assigned a probation officer until he was 18.  I thought just like her that he was not a drug addict in my mind.  He grew up to be a responsible young man who owned his own business, but he continued to smoke marijuana. 

Six months ago, I received that phone call that no parent wants to receive.  My son was dead at the age of 28 from an accidental drug overdose (oxycodone), which the coroner told me is the most abused drug today.  I do not know if this was the first time or the hundredth time he used the drug, but I vowed that if I can save one child or one parent from experiencing what I am going through that I would share my story. 

Dr. Laura, you were correct.  She needs to deal with the issue NOW, while she still has some control.  My son was not a “drug addict” either.  The coroner called it “recreational drug use.”  Children need to know that tennis, hockey, and soccer are recreations, not drugs.  I hope that mother heeds your advice so that her son does not end up where mine is today, guilt-ridden and questioning “should I have done more?”

Baby Talking

Busy, busy mothers tuned in to their cellphones, BlackBerrys, iPods, iPhones, and chatty girlfriends, just don’t have the time to tune in to their children – that’s just reality!  And you can’t expect nannies (equipped with the same electronics) or day care workers with scads of kids to supervise or babysitters with other things to do to spend time tuning into your children either.  That’s just reality.

Why is this an issue?  Well, children just don’t develop their language, communication skills, sensitivity to eye contact and facial expressions without input, stimulation and attention.  This fact will surely dismay parents and liberal educators who say kids just need a few minutes of quality time a day, and they’ll be just fine.

According to Randi Jacoby, a speech and language specialist in New York, who was quoted in the New York Times:  “Parents have stopped having good communications with their young children, causing them to lose out on the eye contact, facial expression and overall feedback that is essential for early communication development.”

That means that, instead of you parents going off to work when you have babies or small children, and then handing them over to institutionalized care or the care of someone hired to watch them all day and report back to you about “food in and waste out,” you need to be home with your children, doing things like:

  • Recognizing that communication begins as soon as the baby is born.  The way you touch, hold, look at and talk to your baby helps him or her learn language.  Even though your child doesn’t necessarily understand what you’re saying, your calm, reassuring voice is what he or she needs to feel safe.  You cannot spoil babies with attention and responsiveness to their cries.
  • Talking all the time while you are doing things.  Talk about where you are going, what you will do when you get there, and who/what you’ll see.  Talk about cleaning up the dishes, preparing meals, putting on makeup – everything – all of this is attention.
  • Putting down the cellphone or other electronic device to look your child in the eyes as he or she tries to communicate or when you are engaging him.  Responding to a child’s communicative attempts with complete attention is a sign of interest and love, and it teaches communication.  It might even help you with your spouse!
  • Engaging your child in conversation, once he or she starts talking.  Expand what they are saying to help them learn to do the same.  For example, when your child says “Doggie,” respond with “Yes, that is a big black dog.”  Ask questions, play games, sing songs, recite nursery rhymes, and read books.

 Parenting is not about making sure your child lives through the day.  It’s about an investment of time, and loving energy to help them develop the skills they will need to function well in life.  Nannies, day care workers and babysitters just don’t fill the bill.  Nobody trumps a loving mom and dad.