1 800 We Care

SAVE YOUR MONEY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
One of the Most useless time productions, without any kind of Intelligent reserch. Full of Rambleling. One Sided attempt of
“cure-Alls” which offerNO worthwile info. There are Better Book for Carinmg for your Cat or Other Animals, at Title Implyes!
Highly reccommended for Door Stops, Wasted Material. as Title Implies.
Rating: 1 / 5

This book might be regarded as a perfect demonstration of just how ubiquitous male-bashing is.

The author is a rarity – a woman whose heart SEEMS to be in the right place. SEEMS! SEEMS!

She actually states that men aren’t so bad, after all. In fact, she seems to think that men, in their own way, are good and the welfare of men is a necessary precondition for the welfare of women. This shouldn’t be such a difficult concept, but for the most part, it’s a VERY difficult concept for most women.

For that matter, the notion that men have needs that must be addressed is a very difficult concept for most men too – the ones that she interviews or quotes to this effect for the purpose of writing this book are exceptional in that respect.

Sometimes, someone will use an androgynous model of behavior to defend men and argue that men shouldn’t be bashed because men and women are virtually identical. But that’s as much of an intellectual atrocity as is the original sin.

Dr. Schlessinger is adamant that men and women are very different and that each gender has its share of good and bad points, which need to be acknowledged and respected.

Moreover, Dr. Schlessinger has no hesitation in blaming the feminist movement for marital difficulties. Sometimes, a male commentator or author will make the same point, but he’ll make it hesitantly, self-consciously, and always with the hasty interjection that the feminist movement has done a lot of good too. (Like WHAT?)

But as far as I can see, Dr. Schlessinger doesn’t even bother to make the obligatory obeisance to the monster. Maybe, as a woman, she feels uniquely situated not to have to do so.

And she does castigate the married members of her gender, repeatedly and forcefully, about the emotional ploys that they use against men and about the double-standards that they invoke in dealing with their husbands (“if he makes demands on me, he’s being controlling and abusive; if he objects to demands that I make on him, he’s being controlling and abusive”).

This perceived treachery will, no doubt, cause a lot of ire among women, but they needn’t bother. Men betray their own gender far more frequently than women betray theirs. One truth-telling female is but a grain of dust tossed on the other side of the scale.

And Dr. Schlessinger even suggests that the traditional lifestyle of wage-earning husband/stay-at-home wife will normally work with less stress than the other alternatives (duck again, Dr. Laura). She actually cites some sort of study that suggests that the traditional lifestyle is healthier for both men and women in terms of avoidance of stress and health malfunctions brought about by stress.

You hardly ever see such studies published or highlighted in the feminist-pandering press. And it does restore some of my faith in divine justice to contemplate scores of snarling career women and prissy househusbands suffering heart failure.

But Dr. Schlessinger’s effort is probably futile. As wholesome as the main body of her message is, few men or women will respect it. Male-bashing, androgyny, and the homosexualization of Western society are such firmly-entrenched social illnesses that they are perceived, in main, as NECESSARY – in the same way that an elderly man will say that his heartburn keeps him warm in the winter.

The deviates have such a firm grip on our judicial system and our culture that the entrenchment of gay marriage proceeds apace, in spite of widespread – but muted – popular opposition to it. The fact that Dr. Laura herself was forced off the TV airwaves for expressing her viewpoint on homosexuality – based on traditional Judeo-Christian ethics, yet her critics were successful in portraying it as “hate speech” – shows who’s routing whom in the culture war.

By contrast, male-bashing doesn’t even DRAW any real opposition, and females of all generations are intoxicated with the power and pleasure that it brings. So it’s not likely to disappear anytime soon.

And is Dr. Schlessinger even the right messenger? Does she even believe herself? She might be a sympathetic victim of lavender character assassination, but her on-air personality is one of supercilious arrogance – you’d think that she herself never took the easy way out, considering the haughty way that she lectures others.

And for all her talk about the joys of domesticity and motherhood, she is principally identifiable as a psychologist, author, and talk-show hostess. How much time did she actually spent raising her family?

Besides, she’s a black-belt in karate, and athletically-inclined females have terminal penis-envy. They are not bastions of pro-male sentiment.

Dr. Schlessinger stresses that female psychology is more complicated than male psychology, which is undoubtedly true. But I’m uncomfortable with her repeated emphasis on how SIMPLE men and their needs are – it’s interwoven into a largely pro-male text like fire-engine-red warning thread.

Does even Dr. Laura fully regard men as human beings? Consider the TITLE of this book. Does she think that her female readers are supporting husbands or house pets?

She might have provided the answer in one recent radio broadcast, where she expressed her belief in male simplicity with less elegance than she does in this book. Scolding a female caller for giving herself too readily , Dr. Laura insisted, “MEN ARE DOGS!”
Rating: 3 / 5

As is usual with Laura Schlessinger’s instant psychobabble, she offers immediate blame to women for all failing marriages. Her approach is not only blatantly one-sided, but she does an extreme disservice to women in problem marriages who have tried valiantly to hold things together in the face of men who are emotionally detached, unstable, or whatever the case may be. The issue is that not all women are to blame, and not all men are either. Each marriage should be considered individually, based on the facts particular to the couple. It is unfortunate that Laura Schlessinger dishes out more guilt to women whom already shoulder their fair share of guilt based on their roles of primary nurturers. But then, what could you expect from a psychologist that ’solves’ problems on the radio in five minutes?
Rating: 1 / 5