All men are so 'simple', really? (Re "The Proper Care and Feeding of Husbands"

First, I had a hard time deciding which forum this ‘belongs’ to. It’s based on a book (Cafe Society?) but I’m soliciting real life opinions (IMHO?) though it actually is a fairly important subject to most people (Great Debates?) and I fear it could turn into a battle (Barbecue Pit?)…so I’m tossing it here, sort of as a default. If wrong, my apologies to the Mod who has to move it.)
Inspired by a mention in another thread, I read “The Proper Care and Feeding of Husbands” by Dr. Laura Schlessinger – normally something I’d never read, not being a member of the Religious Right which is my impression of where her views fit.

Now, if I were to boil down her book into a few sentences, it would go:

Modern women have been misled into believing in a unisex world, and should get back to accepting that men and women are different in vitally important, non-changeable way, and adjust their behavior accordingly. Specifically, wives should devote themselves to meeting their husband’s basic needs as men, meaning you should give them affection and admiration and approval and acceptance. The best ways of doing this include praising them for they do right, being grateful for their efforts on supporting the household (her default audience seems to be Stay At Home wifes with Working Husbands), not nagging, keeping the household running so it’s decently clean and non-hectic, providing good home cooked meals most of the time, being attentive to his need for attention, not dumping too much of your own neediness on him, accepting him for who he is, and (very important) providing lots of good sex to show you still love and admire him.
Now, in truth I don’t have argument with much of the above, except that I wouldn’t have defined it as narrowly as ‘things a wife has to do to make her husband happy.’ More, ‘This is the way normally socialized and decent people treat the other normally socialized and decent people they care about and live with in order to make their lives nice and show you care.’ Well…except for the sex. :wink: I mean, if you’re living in your parent’s home, I hope you’d show respect, admiration, affection and what-all to both your parents, your siblings, any other household members. I hope you’d help to keep the house clean and neat, that you at least help out in the kitchen sometimes, etc. Ditto if you’re roommates or whatever. It’s a matter of being a pleasant to be around person, right?

But…Dr. Schlessinger takes it to such extremes. Her examples are always of women who are behaving as such utter bitches to men who are the salt of the earth, put upon heroes – it comes across as that is the way she sees things as being for the vast majority of the world today, at least in America. Really? Okay, I know a few women who fit into parts of the picture, but rarely ones who are evil in all those ways simultaneously. And those who are, aren’t generally married for long, you know?
However, my main point is, can she possibly be right that men are such utterly gormless simpletons that they will ‘nobly’ put with virtually unending amounts of such ‘abuse’ from their wives without complaining? And so ‘simple’ that she can deliver these blanket projections of how they will respond with forgiveness and eagerness and bliss as soon as the wife mends her way?

Forgive me, but throughout the book it sounded to me like she has men confused with dogs. “Pat him on the head, and he cannot help falling at your feet and worshiping you.” “Give him lots of sex, and he will crawl through broken glass to satisfy any whim you have.” “Show him you admire him and he will do anything you ask.” Stuff like that, over and over and over, in just such cut and dried terms.

She flat out says ‘Men are simple’ – meaning in terms of psychology – at least several dozen times in the course of the book. Women are complex and complicated in their desires, but men have these half-dozen or so wants, and if the wife meets those, the husband will love and worship her forever.

I just don’t buy it. Again, yes, I’m sure people who get love, affection, their living conditions needs (cleanliness, cooked meals, whatever) met are happier. And if you’re happier, you’re likely to treat the people who make you happy in nicer ways. But…

The way she makes everything so clear cut, black and white, carried to extremes just makes my skeptical nature rear up. I just don’t believe ‘all women are complex, and all men are simple’ can possibly be true, or even close enough to true to use it as your guidebook for living.

a) Appreciation is paramount for me. The “I get you” factor is so important my vocabulary lacks the words to properly describe it. Although none of us are as special and unique as we think, having someone understand what makes us tick is flattering, to say the least.

b)

This annoys the shit out of me. Sex should not be a favor or a reward. There is a term for a woman that “gives” sex in exchange for money or services. I don’t want to have sex with anybody that doesn’t want to have sex with me. I certainly don’t want any favors. Spare me your pity sex.

If that book were an accurate depiction of men, I would be married to a heterosexual man right now.

Love and kisses,

Kfl, accidental lesbian.

Someone else’s sexual orientation is none of my daggone business, but I find this too intriguing not to ask. “Accidental” lesbian? Do you mind if I ask you to explain? I’m not trying to be nosy or smart-alecky, just a curious heterosexual.

“Remember Ladies, Men are like kitchen tile, lay 'em right the first time and you can walk on them for years” - Rev. Billy C. Wirtz

I think that Men (being one myself) are almost that simple: Fuck us, feed us and let us play with our toys and we can be pretty damn easy to get along with.

Unclviny

I think she’s projecting a great deal based on her own life and marriage. She’s rather spastic, and very emotional and talkative, while on the other hand, her husband (from what I have heard) is a more typical older, laid back easygoing guy. (I believe he is somewhat older than her, but I don’t know by how much, maybe a decade?)

I think she’s projecting that part, too. From what I gather of their relationship and their life she’s like a little yappy ratdog who can’t control itself, jumps after every new smell, makes a mess and feels bad while her husband is like a very calm never ruffled always forgiving and supportive golden retriever.

How’s that for an analogy? :stuck_out_tongue: But seriously, she tries so hard, and she’s so emotional I think she would see that rather unemotional laid-back attitude as a noble thing. I don’t think it’s necessarily a male-female thing, but I’m sure she doesn’t see it that way.

Also, if she’s going by her callers, that’s a rather skewed sample of the population. Aren’t women more likely to call and ask for relationship advice? That’s only one side of the story, obviously. But we already know she has no conception of scientific methods of analysis (see Religious Right “studies” used as scientific sources for her parenting book).

:: puts ** unclviny ** on her * If I ever find myself single again call this man * list ::

What ? Easy men are my favorites ! Besides I’ve met him, he’s a cutie IMHO.

I don’t mind at all. I was one of those girls in high school who was, uh, “experimental”. And yet I always knew that I would end up with the white picket fence and 2.4 offspring, both fence and offspring produced with the help of my brawny-yet-intellectual husband. I spent my days ropin’ and rustlin’ the menfolk. I thought I was waiting for that De Beers silhouette moment. I even had a long-term relationship with a woman who broke up with me because she sussed out that what I really wanted was to be with a man (which was partly true).

Then I met Upside_Down_Amber. It was all as easy as rolling down a hill. She and I are now taking steps towards getting married. I take marriage very seriously, and I go into it believing and knowing that it is for life. Therefore, since I am going to be with a woman until I die, I call myself a lesbian. But I didn’t choose this for myself, I came into it by a lucky accident.

I know my earlier post was a little cryptic, but what I meant was: If men were that simple, I would have roped one before Amber even got to me. Luckily for me, that isn’t so.

Wouldn’t that just make you bisexual?

Back to the OP-what gets me is this attitude she seems to have, as described above, that somehow women, deep down, REALLY DO NOT LIKE SEX, and so they only put up with it so they can make their menfolk happy.

Da’hell? Women like sex too, you know. Yeesh.
It’s 2004, can we get rid of this stupid idea that sex is something that women submit to, grudgingly?

Please direct all favors of sexual nature to me.

Thank you. :smiley:

Thanks, kung fu lola!

Oh, dear lord, but Dr. Laura gets on my very last nerve and tapdances all over it.
She does this on her radio program, too. She absolutely demonizes women who call in and are concerned about their marital problems, and tries to convince them that it’s ALL THEIR FAULT!! How dare they have careers if they have a marriage? Why aren’t they HOME where their husbands need them? How dare they not quit and raise their children!! Evil, vile woman! You selfish person! Get out of that office and bake some cookies! Your problems will magically disappear if you just give up every sense of self you own and live only for your husband and children.

Look. I have a lot of respect for my sweetie, and I’d do just about anything to make him happy. I like cooking; I’d cook every night, if I could. As it turns out, I work a lot more hours than he does. Result? He cooks. Sex? HELL yes. It’s entirely possible I like sex more than he does. Well. Okay, I exaggerate. But not by much.Sorry, Dr. Laura, but I don’t use it as a “carrot” (pardon the pun) to get him to do things around the house. How 'bout it, baby? Put up some shelves, and you could get lucky!! Jeez, I would have to really think next to nothing of him as an intelligent human being if I thought that was the way life was supposed to work.
No. Love, trust and respect are earned, dammit, and nothing that woman says can make me think otherwise.

I read that book.
Believe me, its not as bad as some.
Such as The Rules For Marriage where the authors tell women that THEY are the ones who have toi do all the emotional work in the relationship.
Why?
Cause thats the way it is!
Gee, not like maybe trying to Change that eh?

And why are there all these books for women: How to get/keep/make happy/ a man?
Can you imagine any articles: How to get her to marry you?Notice you? Commit?
Blah.

Nature or nurture, it does seem reasonable to expect both partners to behave as if they recognize that the other may be stereotypically different (and I don’t mean that as a perjorative, e.g. men are more visually stimulated, or so I have read). So if men are more in tune to eye candy, then perhaps the woman may try to work out more; if women, as I’ve been told, are more in tune to mind candy, then perhaps the man should take some night courses in poetry writing, the art of conversation, and emotional sensitivity.

However, that doesn’t sound like the sort of thing the book is talking about. I get the impression that the doc wants women to do the dishes and put out and otherwise shut the hell up. I’m not comfortable with that.

I love that. Men are simple. All that espionage, intrigue, diplomacy, negotiation, double- and triple-crossing, and political scheming, not to mention some of the most intellectually, emotionally, and spiritually deep literature throughout history has been created and performed by a bunch of dim-witted goons whose primary means of communication is using sports cliches and farting.

I read the book recently, and have discussed it with the guy I was dating, and he agreed with a lot of the recommendations. He told me that for him at least, it was that simple. Treat your guy with respect, just as you want him to treat you. Don’t treat him like a girlfriend, or a moron. Acknowledge the fact that he has feelings that can be hurt just as yours can be, but that he will not express that hurt in the same manner you do. Don’t expect him to be a mindreader, and especially don’t play the game “if you really loved me you’d KNOW what I want for my birthday/anniversary/Christmas” Give the guy some hints!

As I read through it I saw a lot of things I could have done better in my marriage, and I’ll try not to make those mistakes again. But you have to remember that the book supposes a good man for a husband. My husband was NOT a good man, and those hints alone would not have saved my marriage unless he had been willing to make some serious changes. But there were things I could have done differently.

All day long I listen to women talk to their husbands as if they were children. I hear them belittle their husbands to their girlfriends. I hear them speak to their husbands with utter disdain, in front of me. Since I am looking for a good man myself, I’m often tempted to shake these women up by telling them “since you don’t seem to like your husband very much, can I take him off your hands?” But of course I can’t do that.

And I didn’t get the sense that the book recommends using sex to manipulate your man in an evil way. Rather, for women who have pretty much shut down the bedroom side of their marriage, making a concerted effort to rekindle that spark can do wonders for both of you. Yes, you may be tired. So set the clock early and start the morning right. Or just do it and be amazed at how much better you feel once you get into it and how much better you sleep afterwards! And a man who just had a great time in bed is going to be more inclined to do nice things for you than a man who has been told “don’t touch me, I’m tired!” for the 43rd time in a row. Seems like a win-win situation to me.

Maureen said, Love, trust and respect are earned, dammit, and nothing that woman says can make me think otherwise. That sounds pretty harsh to me…sort of like “I’ll respect you, honey, when you’ve met these expectations, and until then I’m gonna treat you like dirt”. That isn’t the way you meant that, surely? You really have to look behind your dislike of Dr. Laura to the core ideas behind the recommendations. None of them were anything that was out of line. If you love your man, show him, and give him the respect he deserves as the man you chose to spend your life with. Now if he’s a jerk, a**hole, philanderer or addict, then that’s a different story. But a good husband shouldn’t be treated like a depised, slightly retarded child.

Nonononoo!!! That is NOT the way I meant it at all. I meant that I expect to be married to my equal, not someone I trick into doing housework by using sex as a motivator. As for my respect- I’m sorry, but why would I be married to someone I have no respect for? Or demean either mentally or verbally by “patting him on the head and telling him what a good boy he is”? For that matter, if I did that, why would he marry ME? I can’t think of a man with any self respect who would put up with that kind of condescention.
As for “looking behind my dislike of Dr. Laura;” it dates pretty far back. About 10 years or so, when she was a local talk radio host. I listened to that woman every day. I heard her deride women for choosing to work outside the home while they had school age children every day. I heard her browbeat women who left their husbands as hussies who didn’t deserve the men they managed to get. Understand, I honestly gave her a fighting chance. I thought: “She’s joking. She can’t seriously be telling this woman to give up her job and stay home with her kids and cook for her husband, and everything will be both hunky and dory, and her hubby will quit cheating!” Guess what. She was.

I haven’t read the book and almost never listen to the program, 'cause Dr. Laura bugs the heck out of me, but one thing I’ve heard her harp on the last couple of times I have heard her is not using sex as a carrot, or so I understood. She was telling women to quit using sex as a weapon to get what they wanted, stop withholding it for every little thing, and just give the poor guy a little love. Anyway the impression I’ve gotten is that she feels that sex should not be used in that way, but freely given (something I happen to agree with, for once).

I’ve got the book on hold at the library, so sometime I’ll get a chance to read it and see what I really think.

DangerDad, not a Dr. Laura listener at all, likes to claim that men really are that simple (thoughts in order of frequency: 1. sex, 2. sex, 3. food). I think he’s only partly joking.

Reminds me of an exchange between Frasier and Daphne:

I used to listen to Dr. Laura for several years in the '90s, before she went over the deep end with religiosity. The thing she said that made me realize that we were not dealing with a rational human being, was during a rant on how rock music has ruined a generation of parents. She blasted The Rolling Stones for having lyrics in (I Can’t Get No) Satisfaction that go “I can’t get no girlie action.” (He says ‘gut reaction’.) And then she went on to blast The Beatles and With A Little Help From My Friends. "Know what those friends are? Do ya? PILLS!!!.

Click.

AAAWWW shucks! (U/V blushes and turns away) why is it that only the attached women say that kinda stuff to me? (but I’m not saying to stop or anything!).

Unclviny
(who couldn’t get laid in a women’s prison if he had a pocketful of pardons)

P.S. can I steal part of this for my Sig?