You’ve heard me talk about the differences between men and women (beyond the obvious physical ones). One of my listeners has come smack up against the one where guys talk about their sexual prowess, and she now questions her own position that intimate details are private matters. I have an answer for her:
Or watch other videos at youtube.com/DrLaura.
Read transcript here.TrackBack URI
A female professor from Oxford University in England, in an article published in the Journal of Population Economics, has decided that American and British men (who don’t mind lending a hand when it comes to housework), make the best husbands, while Australian men are the worst. She’s also “decided” that Norway, Sweden, and Northern Ireland, where men “lend a hand in housework,” are egalitarian countries which produce better husbands.
I say: unbelievable feminista hogwash!! The professor’s definition of a good husband is ridiculous. Men who are sexually faithful, who work hard to provide for and protect their families, who take care of the plumbing and the lawn are not good husbands, because they don’t do what used to be called “women’s work.” This is just one more salvo in the war against masculinity, in which men are completely emasculated because they’re told that they’re neither good men nor good husbands unless they fold the laundry.
When women call me complaining about such things (usually women who are at home), I ask them if they drive their husband’s route in traffic every day, or if they deal with difficult bosses or co-workers, or if they aren’t able to take breaks whenever they choose or take care of all the car and house repair issues. They say “no,” but expect him to do housework in addition to all his other responsibilities.
In those situations where both husband and wife have full-time jobs, and there’s a “war” about who’s going to take care of household chores, I say they should budget and pay for part-time housecleaning help, or one of them ought to reassess their life and decide if having no one at home to make a nest is worth the money they both make.
There are biological and psychological imperatives in females for nesting/child care, and in males for conquering/protecting. When these are turned inside out, there is usually (but not always) a reaction in the female to feel less respectful and sexual toward her mate. Women don’t stare at skinny guys with spectacles when they walk by, but they do stare at Bowflex-toned commercial male actors with huge pecs and biceps. Why? It’s the animal attraction of a male who, potentially, is sexually healthy enough to produce offspring and then provide and protect.
Women who want emasculated men generally have huge hostility issues with masculinity (which they got from their mothers or the feminist teachers of their women’s studies courses), and want to be able to control the man (never as much as their mother could) or are just too scared of their normal natural dependency on a real man.
A better study would be to find out what household situations make MEN happiest, because those are the ones which, overall, are going to attract the men who make the best husbands. Happy husbands spend more time with their families, and would swim through shark-infested waters for them. This particular study? Just another piece of feminist propaganda flotsam.TrackBack URI
Over the years, I’ve learned of many reasons to have babies:
1. a loving, married couple decide to begin or grow their family.
2. an unloving couple figure a baby will save the day and their marriage
(how do no sleep and ’round the clock feedings do that?)
3. some girls think that having a baby will make the boy love them.
4. some boys think getting a girl or girls pregnant is a sign of manhood.
5. some loving couples get surprised.
6. some folks make a baby in order to use the new baby’s blood or bone
marrow to save an existing child with a serious illness.
7. some unmarried women make babies in order to feel “fulfilled”
….and the list goes on.
What’s more worrisome than numbers 2-7 above is a new test to reveal the gender of a fetus in early pregnancy. The American-designed IntelliGender test kit (which can be used from 8 weeks after conception – that’s two months) went on sale in Australia last month. They’ll sell for about $125.
Since the kits do not test pregnancy, they don’t require state approval under the New Zealand Medicines Act. To use the new kit, the company says that a pregnant woman needs to mix her urine with the kit’s chemicals in the supplied container. If it turns green or black, the fetus is a boy; if it turns orange or yellow, it’s a girl. It’s purported to be 90% accurate, but no one has revealed the science of how this test works.
The Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and I are worried about what the test might lead to. “The concern we would have is that people would then terminate pregnancies on the grounds of sex selection,” said college president Dr. Ted Weaver. A spokesperson for the company suggests that it is unlikely that abortions would follow a test with only 90% accuracy. In fact, he said he’d be “amazed.” Then what is the test for?
Gee, he pointed out, for hundreds of dollars more, the woman intent on sex-selection abortions could pay for amniocentesis, or she could wait until she’s 5 months pregnant and have a state-funded ultrasound.
Is he kidding? Pay more money? Wait till more than half the pregnancy is under way?
This kit is FOR the purpose of sex-selection abortions. Just remember: ten percent of the time, you’ll abort – kill – the wrong (at least according to your desires) baby, and there is no guarantee that the next 10 times you try to get pregnant that the same thing won’t happen.
But don’t worry…be happy. Eventually, you could probably get the gender of baby you desire. I just hope your baby is understanding (once he or she grows up), and grateful that you terminated so many of his or her siblings to get to him. And I hope he lives up to your expectations. I wouldn’t want you to be disappointed that he or she just doesn’t have the personality, looks or smarts to justify what you did.TrackBack URI
“I love your show, but it makes me CRAZY when you subscribe to the double standard that men get a pass on being sexually cavalier but women are to be thoroughly and soundly condemned. Why, oh why, don’t you condemn the men as much as the women? Why aren’t they just as ‘piggy’ and deserving of condemnation? That societal attitude encourages men to attempt to use women sexually as their birthright and also encourages women to be insecure and distrustful of sex in general. You’re putting a sexual burka on women overall with that attitude.
I’m not advocating casual sex. I’m condemning the acceptance of a double standard. Come on! There are two sides of that coin and each should assume major responsibility for engaging in casual sex. Until the act is equally condemned, how can women take those rules seriously?”
This is a recent email from a listener taking me to task for what she perceives is a sort of anti-female, double standard mentality.
First of all, God and nature are responsible for the reality of a double standard. Women have breasts from which to suckle the baby born from their uterus after a nine month gestation. Women’s high-pitched voices and hearing are geared for the infant-mother bonding that miraculously takes place right after birth. Women’s temperaments to nurture, cuddle, coo, and protect are hardwired into their psychological programming. Women are different from men.
There is no question that men more easily dissociate love and sex. Young males in particular are open to sexual experiences for the challenge, orgasmic satisfaction, and status among other males. These qualities are not synonymous with femininity.
Women give themselves sexually to men out of love, a desperate desire to be wanted and loved, or for money. It is not typical, as it is with men, for a woman to feel proud of the number of men who have penetrated her; and the only women who look for the sexual challenge are those so twisted with anti-male rage that domination of a male is a form of psychological rape which satisfies that neurotic anger.
Males are generally out of control every which way until they fall in love and take on the obligations and responsibilities of a man committed to a woman and family. All the research demonstrates that men who are married make more money, are healthier and happier, and function better socially than “loner” men. In fact, the deranged males who perpetrate horrendous acts of violence are generally such loner males with no families to make them feel important, give them purpose and direction…and love.
Women are the taming and socializing force in society. Men will only do what women allow. Remember the ancient Greek classical play “Lysistrata”? The women in the town refused to have sex if their men continued to participate in war and violence. Poof, all the violence stopped. Women have always had the power over men; but feminism got women off the track of realizing that, and on the track to only hating or disdaining men.
Now, women have largely become “pigs.” Instead of embracing modesty, pride, values, and self-value, they parade around showing their bodies like Playboy bunnies, have sex before “hello,” shack up with men without marital commitment, make babies on their own (declaring that men/fathers aren’t necessary), use abortion as birth control, and don’t imagine feminine sweetness has any place in marriage and are bored with sex with their husbands but turn on to every other Tom, Dick, and Harry. That is why men have little respect for women these days.TrackBack URI
Lately I have chastised a number of male callers for being “wussy.” This label is often pinned on their wilted chests after I give some great advice which requires them to actually stand up at home and proclaim: “I am a man – not an animal!”…oh wait, that’s from the movie “Elephant Man.”
Well, basically the problem is that most men today are afraid of their women. Their wives can nag them into a grave and or cut ‘em off from any affection, attention, appreciation and sex. That’s pretty powerful stuff. And then women wonder why they don’t have passion and respect for their men.
I asked aloud on my radio program for men to tell me why they’ve cut off their own “giblets” by not taking care of business at home, even if their wives disagree with stuff that should be common sense (like the case of a 12 year old girl, who was wearing a thong and a short skirt which started and ended at her pubic area).
Neil, a listener, sent this answer: “As a faithful listener and devotee of your program, I have heard you scold men for being afraid of the wives/women, instructing them to act like or be a man. As a man, I heartily applaud your directives and only wish it were that easy – to simply snap out of a momentary distraction or passing lack of strength. Sadly and scarily, it is far from a mere lapse of attention or fortitude – we are in a veritable struggle for our male lives against an angry, entitled and politicized culture that belittles the role of fathers (sperm banks and single motherhood), demands equality just for starters and purveys an attitude of supremacy in schools (where two-thirds of today’s college grads are females), the workplace and at home.
“If only it were a matter of putting our collective foot down and simply demand respect, most of us men, husbands and fathers, would gladly oblige…stepping up to the plate to shoulder our responsibilities to protect and provide and lead – as we always have.
“But when you’re fighting with one arm tied behind your back, skating on a sheet of ice as the rules continually change without notice, there’s little chance of success.
“So, we back off, uncertain even of what it means to be a man; confused about what is expected, further unsure about what we will be allowed to do. And, while I pity the beaten man today, I fear even more for the women, families and societies of tomorrow, who will bear the consequences of all of this misguided anti-male/masculinity behavior today.”
I second his concern.TrackBack URI
I understand that Ann Coulter – not a woman to mince words – has been on numerous radio and television programs pointing out that most of the children and young adults with all sorts of emotional, educational, criminal, and relationship problems are the product of un-wed mothers. While on the television program “The View,” the one conservative co-host challenged Ms. Coulter by suggesting that this is the problem because of the men who walk away from their responsibilities. The audience went wild with enthusiasm, undoubtedly happy that the “blame” moved from women to men.
Frankly, my friends – that really doesn’t wash. Of course a man should feel and be morally responsible and obligated to the children of his loins. However, women’s bodies are the place where the creation and gestation of new life occurs – which gives them the greater obligation to be circumspect about when and with whom they have sexual intercourse. Many women, lesbian or heterosexual, are having babies without the participation of a father in the child’s life … on purpose! Many women have abortions against the wishes of the man who would be “father.” The situation is therefore quite complicated.
Yet the fact remains: the optimal circumstance in which to raise a child is in the bosom of a married mom and dad. Facts are facts, in spite of emotions. That there are exceptions gives hope to the few, and ignores the pain of the many.
I hold women more accountable for the well-being of children because they have the majority of the power; legally, physiologically, and emotionally.TrackBack URI
How many times have you inadvertently said something that caused your spouse to give you that unmistakable “look” – the one that an emailer refers to as “the look of death?” Today, I’m offering some tips to men and women about how not get yourself into those situations, and positive steps you can take so you never get that “look” again!
Or watch other videos at youtube.com/DrLauraTrackBack URI
I am so unbelievably sick of academic feminist organizations perpetually whining about their imagined assaults on girls in education. A long time ago, The American Association of University Women once had me give a keynote speech at one of their luncheons. I looked around the room of successful and powerful (mostly older) women, and wondered why they had to have a meeting to complain about how difficult it is for women to succeed…when we had a room chock full of women who had incredible accomplishments because of their efforts and sacrifices.
I didn’t get a standing ovation and never got invited back.
The truth interferes with the perpetual “we are victims” mentality of the feminist activists. Here are the facts:
* 2/3 of all learning disability diagnoses are for boys
* 70 percent of all D’s and F’s go home with boys (they’re not challenged appropriately)
* 90% of school discipline referrals are for boys (it’s hard to make boys sit still)
* 80% of all Ritalin takers are boys (yeah…drug the little buggers into submission – a kind of psychological castration, I’ve always thought)
* 80% of school drop outs…are…boys!
* Fewer than 40% of college students are currently males (making it harder for girls to find a date)
Girls, in general, are surpassing boys in school in all subjects except math and science - and that gap has been closing quickly
Other facts are that boys are more competitive, energetic, visual, physical, risk-taking and so on than are girls. Boys need a different learning environment than girls. The “girly”-oriented educational system in the United States demands that boys become like girls or be medicated.
Boys need more physical movement in the curriculum. They need recesses to work off that male energy, they appreciate reading more male-friendly subjects, they like projects, and they enjoy competing rather than cooperating and all getting the same grade. Boys do better with male mentors, and boys need teachers with more of a sense of humor toward “boy antics” without punishment or demeaning reactions.
I believe boys and girls should have separate classrooms, curriculum, teaching styles, and completely different academic environments.
The beginning of the feminist attack on the educational process proclaimed that girls were being short-changed. Maybe so…and, if so, maybe the best thing for girls is a girl-centered and oriented academic program.TrackBack URI