Hillary Screams Sexism by Carey Roberts

I’m getting a little tired of the Women’s Libbers who play the sexism card as a cover for ineptitude and arrogance. “It does seem as though the press at least is not as bothered by the incredible vitriol that has been engendered by the comments by people who are nothing but misogynists,” Hillary Clinton angrily charged last week.

While I have high regard for Mrs. Clinton’s ambition, if she hadn’t been a feminist, she likely would have prevailed in the contest. She had the media coverage, fund-raising machinery, and connections with the Democratic Party establishment all going for her. So how did her feminist credentials doom her candidacy?

The answer can be summed up in three words: staff, strategy, and authenticity.

Clinton’s first gender-bender was the selection of her staff. The members of her inner circle were chosen because of their commitment to the feminist cause and loyalty to Mrs. Clinton. Their tableau graced the front page of the June 21, 2007 issue of the Washington Post: Patti Solis Doyle, Ann Lewis, Capricia Marshall, Mandy Grunwald, and the rest – all of them female.

Mrs. Clinton moved heaven and earth to portray her staff as more dedicated and competent than the competition. When Gentleman’s Quarterly planned to run an exposé on the infighting at Hillaryland, she went ballistic, threatening to deny the magazine access to husband Bill for an upcoming cover story.

But six months later the New York Times finally blew the lid off the story, running a front-page account detailing how the Clinton campaign was bereft of leadership and had “set itself apart for its level of disorder and dysfunction.”

Clinton’s second feminist-driven blunder was her demographic strategy. “Pander to the female electorate and to hell with the white males” seemed to be the campaign’s guiding principle.

Not only that, but regale your audience with stories that ridicule men. “Whenever you have trouble coping, just think of Snow White. She had to live with seven men.” was one of Hillary’s favorites.

That strategy translated into the overarching theme that women still get the short end of the stick – that in a country where women now dominate in colleges and universities, outlive men by four years, and control most of the discretionary spending.

Dissing the white male vote proved disastrous. Of the 16 primary races that Obama won by May 6, white males played a decisive role in 9 of those contests, compared to only 3 races in which a plurality of white females made a difference.

Hillary Clinton’s biggest problem, though, was her campaign lacked authenticity. Here’s a person whose entire career rode the coattails of husband Bill. Her political accomplishments were as scarce as an uncommitted super-delegate. Worse, author Carl Bernstein had rendered this damning verdict about her days as first lady: “For the first time in American history, a president’s wife sent her husband’s presidency off the rails.”

Despite that dismal record, Hillary’s campaign ironically harped on the theme of empowerment: “I am woman, hear me roar.” Remember the time she compared herself to JFK?

Yes, really.

The message of female empowerment often morphed into the narcissistic, “I am woman, I deserve to be president.” The heady mixture of gender empowerment and self-entitlement eventually came across as plain arrogance.

And whenever her girl-power campaign hit rough sledding, Hillary became the pitiable damsel-in-distress. Whether it was her “politics of pile-on” lament, the proud recounting of her psychological wounds, or her misting-up moment at a New Hampshire café, Mrs. Clinton never hesitated to play the victim card.

As her nomination prospects dimmed, Hillary’s image fell increasingly out of character. In the end she tried to channel Rocky Balboa — swigging a shot of Crown Royal, recalling fond childhood memories of learning to shoot a gun, and threatening to “totally obliterate” Iran.

Hillary Clinton once said she was running in order to “break the highest and hardest glass ceiling” in American life. But her numerous miscalculations prove there is no glass ceiling — only a divisive gender ideology that fosters a victim mindset and serves to keep women dependent on government largesse.

Misandry is the message

The family on the sofa is divided, but not equally. On one side a sullen, rather menacing father stares defiantly at the camera; on the other, a waifish, stressed-looking mother is shielding anxious children. The message of the advertisement is one we have heard or seen innumerable times in the media: domestic violence is only perpetrated by men, who are by nature disposed to controlling behaviours, while women and children (an inseparable unit) are always innocent victims.

I call it misandry, discrimination against men, but although the Ontario Human Rights Code bars “discrimination via signs or symbols,” I doubt that any charges of discrimination will be laid against the Canadian Women’s Foundation, which has been carpet-bombing the media with this ad. Its appearance in newspapers, bank statements and on the sides of buses is aimed at promoting awareness of domestic violence:

See Article

What Women Don’t Want

What Women Don’t Want by Marc H. Rudov

The Vaginal Parachute

Women don’t want penalties, or disincentives, for their Miss Behaving. And, judging by our overwhelmingly profemale reproductive, civil, workplace, and marital laws, women have prevailed.

Whether observing the behaviors of individuals, companies, or governments, one can conclude that economic incentives and disincentives are at the root of almost all decision making. Governments go to war to prevent destruction and loss. Companies leave states and countries with unfavorable taxes, low living conditions, and uneducated workforces. People pay their taxes on time to avoid penalties.

Yet, if a married woman becomes pregnant with another man’s child, she faces no penalties, which is why she willingly chooses such an immoral path. In fact, the “system” rewards her with child support from either the biological father — if she tags him with paternity — or her unsuspecting husband, who eventually will discover her infidelity, divorce her, and be forced to provide her a lucrative “vaginal parachute” for her soft landing into singledom. What a country!

Even a mouse has to navigate a difficult maze to earn a piece of cheese. For a woman in America, in contrast, the marital maze consists only of two adjoining doors — entrance and exit — and the cheese is freely available in exchange for zero effort. Congratulations to the male lawmakers who have built this marital maze and its lopsided incentive system.

Now comes the New York Times, with its latest slicing and dicing of the 2005 US Census data. The NYT’s new conclusion is that, on average, only 49 percent of American women are married and living with their spouses — a new low. Breaking it down by race, this 49 percent average is: 30 percent of black women, 49 percent of Hispanic women, 55 percent of non-Hispanic white women, and 60 percent of Asian women.

The article goes on to say that, despite the picture for married women, 53 percent of men are married and living with their spouses. But it does not segment these men by race, as it does for women, and it does not explain to whom this majority of men are married.

Sam Roberts, the article’s author, proudly quotes “independent” women who feel liberated by removing the shackles of marriage. Sadly, it mentions nothing about the deleterious effect of marital decline on children. Roberts should have included a sidebar about the growing trend of teenage girls beating the crap out of each other, videorecording said beatings, and posting the videos on the Internet for all to see. Could there be a correlation between such MissBehaving and a society that devalues men and marriage? I’ll bet the “progressive” policy wonks never considered that unintended consequence.

In essence, the marriage rate is declining because both men and women no longer have the same incentives or desires to commit to “happily ever after,” as they once did. From everything I can see, there are zero benefits to or incentives for men to be married. But, the same isn’t true for women. Because there no longer exists a social stigma for being divorced, women see matrimony and alimony in the same mental picture, as both words have the same ending: mon[e]y. Accordingly, the main reason for a woman to marry is to have legitimate children and a means to support them … and herself.

The policy wonks aren’t out of the woods, though. For the 37 percent of American children born out of wedlock, these progressives must construct DMV-style socialized programs to parent and feed them. What we all need, for a healthier society, are more government programs, higher taxes, and kids in therapy. Right?

NoNonsense Bottom Line

I have little use or patience for endless discussion and theorizing. I continue to see the professional and financial progress of “independent women” (read “Women to Rule Men by 2010″), and I am one of the biggest supporters of female achievement — which is why I constantly rail against entitled women. So, I propose the following steps that our misandric state and federal lawmakers, mostly men, can take before the next US Census:

• Abolish alimony

• Abolish child support — for divorced and unwed mothers

• Abolish presumed child custody for mothers

• Financially penalize wives who become extramaritally pregnant

• Make Roe v. Wade constitutional — give men the equal right to opt out of parenthood.

If the aforementioned five goals become reality, our entire society will change, and the next US Census will reflect those changes. Will this happen? Never. Always follow the money. Matrimon[e]y. Alimon[e]y. Always follow the money. Politicians want votes, not change — unless that change jingles. It turns out that women don’t want change, either, unless it jingles.

About the Author

Marc H. Rudov is a globally known radio/TV personality, relationship coach, and author of 100+ articles and the books Under the Clitoral Hood: How to Crank Her Engine Without Cash, Booze, or Jumper Cables (ISBN 9780974501727) and The Man’s No-Nonsense Guide to Women: How to Succeed in Romance on Planet Earth (ISBN 0974501719). Mr. Rudov, the 2008 recipient of the National Coalition of Free Men’s “Award for Excellence in Promoting Gender Fairness In The Media,” is a frequent guest on Fox News Channel’s Your World with Neil Cavuto and The O’Reilly Factor.

Rudov’s books, articles, blog, radio/TV archives, and podcasts are available at TheNoNonsenseMan.com.

Copyright © 2009 by Marc H. Rudov. All rights reserved.

Myths of Male Domestic Violence

SEATTLE—Domestic violence can happen to men, not only to women, according to Group Health research in the June American Journal of Preventive Medicine. “Domestic violence in men is under-studied and often hidden—much as it was in women 10 years ago,” said study leader Robert J. Reid, MD, PhD, an associate investigator at the Group Health Center for Health Studies. “We want abused men to know they’re not alone.” His findings confirm some common beliefs but also debunk five myths about abuse in men:

Myth 1: Few men experience domestic violence. Many do. In-depth phone interviews with over 400 randomly sampled adult male Group Health patients surprised Dr. Reid and his colleagues: 5% had experienced domestic violence in the past year, 10% in the past five years, and 29% over their lifetimes. The researchers defined domestic violence to include nonphysical abuse—threats, chronic disparaging remarks, or controlling behavior—as well as physical abuse: slapping, hitting, kicking, or forced sex.

Myth 2: Abuse of men has no serious effects. The researchers found domestic violence is associated with serious, long-term effects on men’s mental health. Women are more likely than men to experience more severe physical abuse, said Dr. Reid. “But even nonphysical abuse——can do lasting damage.” Depressive symptoms were nearly three times as common in older men who had experienced abuse than in those who hadn’t, with much more severe depression in the men who had been abused physically.

Myth 3: Abused men don’t stay, because they’re free to leave. In fact, men may stay for years with their abusive partners. “We know that many women may have trouble leaving abusive relationships, especially if they’re caring for young children and not working outside the home,” said Dr. Reid. “We were surprised to find that most men in abusive relationships also stay, through multiple episodes, for years.”

Myth 4: Domestic violence affects only poor people. The study actually showed it to be an equal-opportunity scourge. “As we found in our previous research with women experiencing domestic violence, this is a common problem affecting people in all walks of life,” said Dr. Reid. “Our patients at Group Health have health insurance and easy access to health care, and their employment rate and average income, education level, and age are higher than those of the rest of the U.S. population.”

To read more, click here.

Prostate Cancer and Breast Cancer Rates

Prostate Cancer incidence rates are comparable to Breast Cancer rates. Yet, federal funding is significantly higher for Breast Cancer research than for Prostate Cancer. In 2008, there were the same number of new cases of Prostate Cancer (186,320) as Breast Cancer (184,450), as estimated by the American Cancer Society.

• In 2007, Breast Cancer received almost two thirds more funding ($127.5 million) from the Congressionally Directed Medical Research Program as did Prostate Cancer ($80 million dollars) (59.5% difference).

• In 2007, Breast Cancer received more than twice as much funding ($707 million) as did Prostate Cancer ($305 million) from our nation’s medical research agency, the National Institutes of Health (231% difference).

Breast and Prostate Cancer scientists should not be made to compete for limited research funding. Scientists must feel encouraged to develop prostate cancer research. Both Breast Cancer and Prostate Cancer research funding must continue to grow. Breast Cancer and Prostate Cancer patients, equal in number, should receive equal and adequate funding and promotion for research.

How to Fnd a Good Wife (or Husband)

Article by David R. Usher

Excerpt:

One of the reasons marriage is on the rocks is because most of us are programmed from birth to fear the opposite sex and to adopt behavior patterns and beliefs that make it impossible to find a good marriage partner, and make us poor marriage partners as well.

Both men and women must fully understand that feminism is an optional illness. Anyone who wants a good marriage can set a path, beginning this moment, to achieve a happy book of life.

There are many very nice women out there. Men brought up under feminism tend to fall for feminist signals: the bellybutton show at the mall, makeup and cute clothing, “attitude”, or waifs needing to be saved from themselves.

There is no instruction manual on how to choose a good wife or husband (or how to prepare yourself to be one), so many go quietly about their lives.

Men in “protection mode” tend to vacillate wildly between avoiding meaningful relationships with women (to protect themselves from ending up another divorce statistic), going berserk latching on to one night stands, or trying to have affairs with married women (which safely cannot go anywhere). This inevitably ends up with a beleaguered trip to the men’s abuse center (more commonly known as a “bar”, and too often a terrifying trip for a paternity test.

Women also have problems finding good men. Many men are terrified of serious relationships and marriage, and justifiably so. Few men know what to look for in a woman, so they do not look seriously. Women who have one foot stuck in feminism are likely to present themselves in feminist ways that have the effect of attracting only men looking for a hookup.

Women stuck in feminist thinking have tremendous difficulty choosing a sane male or keeping one. Feminism expects women to be perfect, overly independent, and strong. At the same time, it tells they they should collapse in tears as victims when some wrong is imagined. Feminism dislikes men who are strong, and also denigrates wimpy feminist men who behave like servants and furniture around the house.

In feminist theory, there is no such thing as a “good man”. The emotions rule the intellect, with no exceptions. No wonder so many women become strippers."

Ask yourself these questions about the person you are considering as a potential marriage partner. For women, change the sex from “she” to he”.

• If she already has children, does she yell and scream at her kids or call them “stupid” frequently? If she does, you are next in line.
• If she is divorced, does she always talks badly about her ex? If she does, get to know him. If he’s not a jerk, run!
• If she has children does she exclude the father by always referring to them as “my children”.
• If she has children, is she encourage letting them see their father?
• If she has children, does she raise them by leading them into good behavior, or does she prefer scolding, punishing, or spanking them constantly?
• If she has children, does she insist on handling all discipline, and undercut you when you need to act? Is she willing to let you play a serious role as a parent, or is she just looking for a babysitter with no authority? (Note: you do not have to pretend to be the “real” parent. Both parents in a marriage must have equal parental authority, and both parents must uphold the other parent’s authority, otherwise children will “triangle” the parents off each other and manipulate them to get what they want, causing serious friction between the parents.)
• Is she unreasonably permissive or authoritarian in her style of child discipline?
• Does she take responsibility for her emotions, or hold everyone else responsible for them?
• Does she use false displays of anger to scare you into doing what she wants?
• Is everything a big deal and an emergency?
• When she makes decisions, does she do it calmly or with a lot of emotional involvement or indecision?
• When she does make decisions, does she constantly second-guess them and frequently change her mind later?
• Is she responsible, predicable, and reliable?
• When she makes a mistake, does she take full responsibility for it, apologize to anyone her decision might have impacted, and make reasonable amends?
• Does she respect you for not subscribing to feminism?
• Does she value your differences in interests, and take time to value them? Does she sometimes criticize you because your interests are different?
• Does she expect you to both have all the same interests?
• If you have as good a job as you can get given your employment qualifications, and you are taking steps to improve your career or earning ability, is she critical of you anyway?
• If you become unintentionally employed, and you are doing everything you can to seek reasonable temporary or permanent employment, does she belittle you anyway?
• Is she forgetful?
• Is she chronically late without good reason?
• Does she lock her keys in the car frequently, run out of gas frequently, miss highway exits often, have frequent migraine headaches, or fall up or down stairs a lot?
• Does she ever say “If you loved me, you would _____, to manipulate you into doing what she wants?
• Does she spend a lot of time feeling sorry for herself?
• Does she pout or burst into tears whenever things don’t go her way?
• Does she ever hint about attempting suicide to get you to do what she wants or to make you feel sorry for you?
• Does she expect you to “walk on eggshells” around her emotions?
• Does she say that she loves you one day, and hates you the next?
• When she has had a rough day, is she capable of letting you know nicely so you know not to bring up major items or disagreements for discussion?
• When you nicely let her know you have had a rough day and that you are in a bad mood, is she tactful in not pushing you?
• Does she have a lot of bad days? Is she in a bad mood much of the time?
• When she has a rough day, does she take it out on you, her children, her parents or friends, or her pets?
• Is her dog or cat friendly and well-balanced? If the animal spends a lot of time hiding and avoids her — pay attention to what the animal knows.
• If she was previously married, is she openly able to admit her mistakes that killed the last marriage? Is she repeating them on you?
• Is her use of alcohol, drugs, or pharmaceuticals associated with “having a bad day” or as an emotional prop? Does she ever get really drunk or high?
• When she gets angry or upset, does she leave and then disappear for hours or overnight without her whereabouts being known?
• Does she hide alcohol or drugs around the house and use them secretly? Does she hide her use of alcohol or drugs from you?
• When you go out, does she refuse to go to events where alcohol is not served? Does she bring alcohol herself if she does go?
• Do her closest friends drink a lot or use drugs?
• When you go to parties, do you see her finishing off other people’s drinks before leaving?
• Does she have a lot of mood-altering pharmaceutical drugs around the house? Does she frequently get prescriptions for more mood-altering pharmaceuticals? When she is having a bad day, does she run for a pill to fix the problem? Does she mix them with other drugs or alcohol?
• If she is in Alcoholics Anonymous or a similar program, has she been demonstrably clean and dry for at least four years? If she is in one of these programs, does she ever use any mood-altering chemicals, pharmaceuticals, or alcohol? Does she have any of these items around the house?
• When she has free time, does she prefer watching Oprah, Jerry Springer, feminist entertainment, or other trash TV?
• Are there trashy love novels laying around her house?
• Is her house a messy disaster area, or does she keep it insanely clean?
• Does she spend a lot of time writing in a diary that nobody is allowed to see?
• Does she muse about being a stripper or a prostitute? Has she ever been one?
• Does she muse about trading boyfriends for a few days, or being a swinger?
• Does she spend a lot of time with girlfriends who she is helping get divorces?
• Does she ever slap, hit, or kick you to get what she wants, or threatened to do so?
• Is she capable of calmly working out minor disagreements most of the time without losing her temper?
• When she is angry about something, does she often mis-state the events that transpired to justify her position or her anger?
• Does she ever go “off the wall”, running around the house or up the street yelling senselessly?
• Does she create situations in public embarrassing to you to manipulate you into doing what she wants?
• Does she ever pull the “invisible jury” on you or others to beat them into submission, i.e. “Everyone I know thinks that _____”?
• Does she threaten to throw you out or break off the relationship to get what she wants?
• Is she into “revolving door relationships”, throwing you out to get what she wants, and then begging you to come back or waiting for you to beg?
• Is she comfortable spending quality time at home with you and the kids, or is it just a place to crash and throw dirty clothes around?
• Is she “addicted to excitement”, i.e., arguing, fighting, crying, drinking, gambling, or chasing or flirting with other men?
• When things normal, happy, and going well, does she see that as “boring” and do things to create an uproar?
• Does she flirt with other men a lot?
• When you are in public, does she introduce you to her friends and make a place for you in the circle of conversation, or does she act as if you are not there?
• Does she make lists of things for you to do, and then get angry if you don’t do them according to her schedule? Or is she happy when you do something around the house to contribute, and show appreciation for it?
• When you do simple things such as cooking, housework, or driving, does she get angry if you don’t do things exactly her way? Does she move in and tell you she will do it if you do not want to do it her way?
• When you are discussing how something should be done, if you have more knowledge or experience on the subject than she does, is she willing to defer to you, or does she insist that you do it “her way” regardless of the consequences?
• Does she write up a “contracts” to make you do what she wants?
• Is she grateful for the good things in her life, or is her primary focus on the negative?
• Is her heart constant, or does she practice “conditional love”.
• Does she expect a conditional relationship: “If I do this, then you must do that”, or “if you don’t do this, then I will ____ ?
• Does she freely give to the relationship, while graciously appreciating your willing contributions?
• Are “rules” more important than maintaining a good relationship?
• Does she demand apologies when you have done nothing wrong?
• Does she regularly take minor issues and emotionally turn them into crisises of major proportion?
• If you are not doing anything wrong, do you find her secretly looking through your things frequently?
• Does she demand that you tell her everything about past girlfriends?
• Does she demand that you love her “her way”, or does she let you love her as you are naturally capable and demonstrably appreciate it?
• Is she as interested in growing a relationship above the beltline, or more interested in one below the beltline?
• Does she value and appreciate lovemaking as “your gift to her”, and accept it unconditionally, or does she see it as a chore that she has to do, and act resentful?
• Does she ever lie about using birth control, or appear like she does not care if she gets pregnant? Does she dislike it if you take birth control seriously?
• Does she appear pre-focused with having children – and you simply being a means to accomplish that end?
• Does she withhold sex to get what she wants?
• When she misunderstands something, or things don’t work out as she wanted, is her first response to become angry or combative and blame the situation on somebody else?
• Does she accept you for who you are today, or is she always saying things like “you should ______”.
• Does she fight constantly on the phone with her mother or father?
• Has ever said that she is looking for her “knight in shining armor”?
• Does she spend a lot of time focusing on male Hollywood stars or rich athletes, and muse about how much she would like to get one for herself?
• Does she lie on welfare forms to get additional benefits she is not entitled to?
• Does she lie to collect on car or house insurance?
• Does she have a lot of credit card debt and a nasty shopping problem?
• Is she happy living within her means? Does she talk about needing a rich guy to take care of her?
• Does she appear to be more interested in your money than you? Does she seriously muse about being rich one day?
• Does she spend a lot of money on lottery tickets, or gamble more than very occasionally?
• Does she expect you to “disappear” when an ex-boyfriend, ex-husband, her parents, or her friends come around?
• Are there certain days of the week that she does not want you to call her?
• Does she say she is too tired or sick to do things with you, but then she goes out to do something else instead?
• Does she lie about being sick to play hooky from work?
• If she is religious, is it to the extremes?
• If she is religious, does she live the principles or simply mutter the words and then do what she wants?
• If she is atheist, does she believe in a power higher than herself, and trust in that higher power to help her through difficult times?
• Does she work for a women’s abuse center or similar volunteer service?
• Is she an attorney or work for one as a paralegal?
• Is she overly anti-dependent (“I don’t need you”) or overly dependent (“I can’t live without you”)?
• Does she see marriage as a relationship of healthy interdependence, or an avenue for “being taken care of”?

Why Children Ruin Marriage

Article by Marc Rudov

There’s a question every man should ask his fiancée before their big wedding day; too bad he doesn’t ask it: Are you marrying me to become my wife or a mother? If she doesn’t immediately reply, without hesitation, “to become your wife,” cancel the wedding.

Why would I make such a bold assertion? It’s not just because all my assertions are bold. Marriage, as strictly defined, has nothing to do with children. That’s right. Yet, in the typical home, the husband and wife will allow their marriage to revolve around their children. Worse, when that marriage ends, and there’s a good chance it will, their divorce will revolve around their children, too.

In my observation, wives are more guilty than husbands of making children “priority #1.” This is because such behavior is socially acceptable and politically correct in a country that considers motherhood noble and fatherhood trivial. When I discussed my article “Are You Her Number One?” on various radio shows, many a female caller was outraged at the prospect that any man should outrank her children!

According to Harvard psychology professor, Daniel Gilbert, children take the happiness out of marriage. In fact, Gilbert claims that sadness increases with the number of children. Most people don’t like to admit this, because it would sound horrible, but it’s true.

Ignoring Their Wedding Vows

I’ve examined the vows of Jewish, Christian, and Islamic weddings — as well as the texts of numerous states’ marriage licenses and certificates. Nowhere in these vows or documents can I find the word children. In other words, marriage is a bond exclusively between a husband and a wife. It does not include children. It does not include in-laws. But, is this what really happens in marriages? Hell no.

Ask any woman whom she loves more, her husband or her children. I’m betting she’ll say, “my children, of course.” Her husband is, obviously, programmed to respond, “Well, that’s the way it is, right?” Yet, he’s the one with whom she created a sacred bond in marriage. But, if hubby says he loves his children more than his wife, he’s history. Double standard?

Based on the high divorce rate, the high adultery rate, and the high number of unhappily married women, why do people bother marching down the aisle at all? There’s no logic here. If one could lose money on Wall Street as easily, predictably, and consistently as he can in matrimony, there would be no Wall Street. But, people continue to marry. Why?

Women marry to have legitimate children and receive financial support for themselves and those children. I believe this because women bring 70% of divorces. Men, on the other hand, given the highly expected financial and child-custody losses, take huge matrimonial risk because they genuinely want to be married and to have families. There’s no other way to explain the respective nuptial decisions of men and women.

But, regardless of their financial or familial motivations for saying, “I do,” what men and women don’teach other. Somehow, the import and memory of these vows vanish when children arrive, and THAT is the problem. Children are born outside the bounds of marriage and must never be allowed to invade it. Alas, they’re allowed, even encouraged, to invade it. do, quite clearly, is adhere to the vows they took to forever cherish, love, and honor

The NoNonsense Bottom Line

I’m not suggesting for one minute that spouses not have children. That’s ludicrous. I am suggesting, though, that spouses gain perspective on where those children rank in the hierarchy: not at the top. Spouses must keep each other at the top, as they promised to do.

Now, if you’re concluding, while reading this, that I’m advising you to ignore, abandon, and mistreat your children, you’re not intelligent enough to marry or procreate! Parents own and run the home; children must respect them and their rules. Brats cannot survive in a home where parents honor and admire each other.

It is inexcusable to vow, on your wedding day, to place your spouse first and then violate that vow by subordinating your spouse to your children. Marriages disintegrate because they weren’t integrated in the first place — wherein the participants viewed their wedding vows as meaningless utterances. Finally, at the marriage’s end, there’s nothing but hatred and revenge between spouses — exactly what they promised would not happen.

Children don’t ruin marriage, unless their parents give them the power to do so. Spouses ruin marriage — way before they become spouses — by believing that children belong at its center. Again, if that were true, marriage vows would include children. They don’t.

So, don’t get married until you have enough maturity and conviction to treat your spouse as the most important person in the world — above and beyond your children — and receive the same treatment in return.

If your children ruined your marriage, you never had a marriage: She married you to become a mother!

Marc's website is thenononsenseman.com

About the Author

Marc H. Rudov is a globally known radio/TV personality, relationship coach, and author of 100+ articles and the books Under the Clitoral Hood: How to Crank Her Engine Without Cash, Booze, or Jumper Cables (ISBN 9780974501727) and The Man’s No-Nonsense Guide to Women: How to Succeed in Romance on Planet Earth (ISBN 0974501719). Mr. Rudov, the 2008 recipient of the National Coalition of Free Men’s “Award for Excellence in Promoting Gender Fairness In The Media,” is a frequent guest on Fox News Channel’s Your World with Neil Cavuto and The O’Reilly Factor.

Rudov’s books, articles, blog, radio/TV archives, and podcasts are available at TheNoNonsenseMan.com.

Copyright © 2009 by Marc H. Rudov. All rights reserved.

McCain Lampoons the Gender Wage Gap Myth

Excerpts:

"Ready for a morning chuckle to jump-start your day? Pay a visit to Hillary Clinton’s website that claims with a straight face, “Women still earn significantly less money than men for doing the same jobs.”

The first part of Hillary’s sentence is true – women indeed earn less than men. But the last four words – “for doing the same jobs” – is as laughable as Hillary’s dodging-sniper-bullets-in-Bosnia tale.

Let’s say you have a job opening and two persons apply who have identical skills and qualifications. Joe wants to be paid the prevailing wage, while Jackie says she is willing to work for only 77 cents on the dollar.

Who would you hire? Jackie, of course."

"Last month Senator McCain was campaigning in the hard-scrabble coal fields of Kentucky. He commented that if women want to overcome the gender wage gap, they would need more “education and training.” And knowing that Women’s Studies grads might not realize that coal mining is the economic mainstay of the region, McCain then deadpanned, “traditionally, women have not gone into that line of work.”

But the Funny-Fems reflexively insist the culprit is sex discrimination, not women exercising the right to choose their preferred work. So when they heard Senator McCain’s comments, they flew into a purple-passion rage. Within days MoveOn rolled out its propaganda machine, making the claim that “Study after study has shown that women are paid less than men for the same work.”

Article here