Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
defensble position. My marriage ending had nothing to do with sex. Marriages ending usually don't. The sex, or lack thereof, is a symptom of larger issues. That I am wealthy and self made is good, that I am young enough to enjoy it is even better. My sons have a respect for people, not gender based. You earn respect based upon your conduct and actions. Common courtesy is for everyone. Respect is different. I have also taught them that decisions made on whims, foolish assumptions or being "in love" can be very costly and damaging long term. In the end my advice to them has been: Don't marry before the age of 35 and don't feel you have to get married at all, play as much as you can before you think you want to get married (yes, I mean casual sex, travel, etc.) since marriage is meant to be a commitment, buy a house and put their career first before getting married, when married put family and spouse first as long as they don't try to damage or impede your career as this will affect them and their family negatively, have a prenuptial agreement without question-if the other party does not agree to one then don't get married, seek counseling with your intended before getting married, understand the motivations of both parties seeking to get married. Of course, there is much other advice I have imparted to them while raising them alone.
PS: I have never uttered a negative word or inference about their mother as I wish them to have the best relationship possible with here. She defaulted on child support totally and completely since December of 1998, with no consequences, but I didn't make an issue of it since it only reflected upon her character. She has gone 6 months and more without contact with our sons and that has been her choice, and loss.
Statistics do reflect an accurate representation of the norm. Say what you will but they do, if collected and analyzed properly.
after lots of people started getting divorced/abandoned and welfare was having to pick up the bill. I bet women love it when this attitude (that if men have any problems then it is because men are collectively too lazy to fix them and therefore nobody else should worry about it) is applied to them
All people should wait, and I know women with deadbeat ex's.
The stat on the Parental Alienation Syndrome is not considered credible, because most states don't legally recognize it (the one that claims women turn children against men). You can't measure without a uniform standard, and PAS is so linked to male abusers (most of the PAS claimants hev at least one verified abuse case against the woman- the kids don't want to go near the guy because of that, and abuse of the mother is not relevant in most child custody cases if the child is not hit) that I would not even touch that with a 10 foot pole. And I had a crazy in-law who did try to alienate the child- I simply understand that PAS is not a relevant marker statistic for that behavior. A significant number of men and women bad mouth the exes, and we know that from far more credible studies (the ones that back mediation). So few women pay child support that the stats get distorted- in such a small population, it only take a few to distort. For instance, in a small population city, it only takes 1 or 2 deabeat males with large awards to up the percentage past 30 or 40%, while if you look at a bigger population those two guys are offset by larger numbers of "good" dads. On the other hand, most men don't abuse either (iffy study with a small population, and used problematic language as one marker), and that study claiming almost every female college student is sexually harrassed is bunk (their definition is too wide, and contains things not commonly considered sexual harrassment).
Most stats have to be carefully set in their environment to have meaning. Stats lie all of the time, and the same study can be used in different ways. The 50% of marriages end in divorce number is a good example. At any given time, there are X numbers of marriages (say 100), with some couples never divorcing-usually 60+, some couples divorcing fast (less than 5% within 2 years) and some couples having multiple divorces (the 15%+/- of the first cohort make up more than 62% of divorces for that cohort in the given year, due to repeats, while the rest simply stay married or have 1 divorce.). Most divorces in a given year are from remarriages, not first time marriages. So most divorces are repeat offenders, and most first marriages do NOT end in divorce. The 50% number is based on the total number at given time versus the divorces, even though the marriages are not all in the same cohorts.) You have the same problem with crime stats treating recidivists crimes as if each was from a new criminal.
Anybody who claims that statistics can't lie obviously has no understanding of how statistics are used. I recommend a small book called "How to Lie With Statistics". The related claim that statistics accurately represent a norm is absurd on the very face of it: any situation with a statistic other than 100% is proof positive that there is no meaningful norm, only variance.
Generalizing off of statistics in the neighborhood of 25%-40% is, at the very least, a dire insult to 25% of the population. More commonly, though, any interpretation of the numbers is not "fact" at all, but just speculation based on figures without stories.
This isn't so much of a letter on Cary's column as it is to the multitudes of male posters on this board and others I've read today on Broadsheet's Dinner Whores thread. I liked Cary's answer and I have known a few (although very few) women who have done crazy sex to get the wedding band and cut it off afterwards. But what I'd like to broach now is something radically different to address some of the repeating vitriol out there on the letter boards.
Is it any wonder that many women commodify sex when women have always been raised that way from the teen years on? Men, you really do make the rules regarding sex eventhough so many of you complain that women hold the key. Why? Because of your love of the word SLUT. Ask any man if he would seriously date a woman if she had sex on the first date, or first meeting, and the majority would say no. Oh, you might keep her around for a little while for some fun, but marriage material, no way. Of course there are the occasional longterm relationships that spring from a drunken hook-up, but for the most part, men consider anyone thats "easy" to not be relationship or mother-of their-children worthy. Because if her sexuality is her sole value and she "gives it away" so freely, she must not value herself.
Early on, women are taught that their sexuality is their most important asset. Not so long ago, and still in some cultures, men required virgin brides. Even with all the gains women have achieved in other parts of life over the last 40 years, the word Slut still is uttered easily by men and women. Female sexuality is still feared, eventhough its displayed everywhere by advertisers. We're seduced by it, but also enraged by it. Why else would men need women in burkas?
Girls are not taught to own their sexuality, only to preserve it for purity's sake. The current abstinance-only movement still targets girls more than boys. Teen girls are often treated as they are can only be victims of sex, that its only something done to them by aggressive boys, that they couldn't possibly have desires of their own except to maintain "purity". That to withhold sex is to respect yourself. True love waits. They are not taught to own their sexuality, only to manage it. How to say no. That their virginity is a "gift" to their future spouse. Once again, a commodity in exchange for a ring. The AO crowd teaches young girls that no man wants a used-up girl. Once again, their sexuality is something that is tangible, that only has so many go-arounds before it is worthless.
Please, lets not get into an STD and pregnancy debate here, I'm addressing desire and its restrictions alone...
Men can truly never understand the dilemna that women of any age face while dating. The dance hasn't changed at all for me in 20 years, only how I personally deal with the outcome of my choice.
Imagine being completely turned on by a guy, the date has gone well, you're making out and he's an awesome kisser, you really feel a connection but, whoa, you gotta put on the brakes and stop it if you want to see him again. Male friends have told me they will keep lightly pressuring the girl because its a game, to see if they can break her down since she clearly wants more and they know she's just saying no to adhere to the rules. Imagine what it is like to have to be the one to always say no no matter how much you want to keep going. That your whole worth to some men as a potential mate rides on you always having to deny your sexual feelings until HE feels its time-appropriate for you to display them.
Because your looks, your smarts, your personality never amount to the value of saying no that first time. No matter what. Instant slut, someone you'll point out to your friends at a bar as a great girl, but damn she's easy. Even women who seem to enjoy sex too much early on, when allowed to finally have sex, are suspect. Men only want you to enjoy yourself immensely after you've dutifully repressed yourself for weeks/months. Oh, and if he tries anything remotely kinky, you better act like its the first time thats ever happened.
Well, thats the position you've put women into. I've been called too prudish and too slutty in the same month. Please tell me how thats possible when I've reacted the same way in each circumstance. At times I've just went with my feelings because I could tell the rare, mind-blowing sex was right there in my grasp. I've had no regrets from those experiences because it was fantastic and I've learned much about myself that way, but you guessed it, no longterm romance ever sprang from it.
If men would only loosen the stifling reigns on female sexuality, then you wouldn't have to complain so much about it being a tit for tat bargaining chip, worth so many 4 star dinners before payout. If you'd only get over yourselves and allow women the freedom to have "high numbers", whatever that is these days, without being so insecure about how you stack up against them, you'd be getting laid more often and sooner.
But until the word slut is retired from our vocabulary as a quaint ol' term, you're going to have to deal with many women who've been raised to believe their sexuality is their supreme bargaining chip. It all depends on how fervent the message was and how independent the woman becomes as she ages as to whether she can break free of its bonds.
But of course, if she breaks free of those bonds before meeting you, you won't want to date her seriously...
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
219 Democrats and one Republican join in favor of the legislation, which passed by a narrow margin
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
Salon headlines in your mailbox
