I'm pretty much done with the whole Spitzer thing, but I saw something this morning that I have to comment on. Let me preface this by saying that there was a time when I was a big Dr. Laura fan. I thought most of what she said made sense. Through age and education I've realized that a lot of what she says is skewed.
So, this morning, on The Today Show she was on a panel with others talking about the Spitzer case. In not so many words she basically partially blamed Spitzer's wife for his infidelity and illegal activity with a prostitute. Or better yet she was somewhat blaming women, in general, for their cheating spouses.
It's the typical- he is not getting what he needs at home so he strays. I do believe that strife at home can cause a spouse to go seek intimacy or even just sex elsewhere, but ultimately it is the choice of the unfaithful person to handle marriage problems in this manner. There are always other choices-discussions, counseling, or even divorce as other options.
When I listen to Dr. Laura now, she just seems a bit like a chauvinist.
Tuesday, March 11, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
I suspect that most troubled relationships are a two-way street. However, infidelity is a very bad way to resolve your troubles. In most if not all cases, the majority of the blame should fall on the person who breaks their vow. There is nothing that my wife can do or not do that would make it acceptable for me to cheat. Nothing.
GRRR!! She ticks me off! Like you, I was once a fan of hers because she seemed to make sense but now I can't stand to listen to her. She comes across as a total sexist against women. She is on the man's side most of the time claiming that most marital issues could be solved if the woman showed her husband more appreciation and stroked his ego more (of course that's not all that needs stroking...). That's a BIT simplistic and its a cop out for guys to cheat rather than participate in solving the problems.
I heard her on a radio show this morning and the host said "so basically you're saying boys will be boys..." and she agreed!
No wonder this crap keeps happening when people like her make excuses for men who violate their marriage vows and cause their children to be hurt, ashamed and humiliated.
I came here via Barbara's blog. Thanks barb!
I've always thought dr laura was a bit shrill. She strikes me as a woman who doesn't like women. She doesn't even seem to like being a woman. It's like she's saying women should do sexual things they don't want to, to keep their man ... ummm...that kinda sounds like something a man would say.
Maybe a man shouldn't ask or expect his wife to do things she doesn't want to. And if he's so stressed out by that that he has to go pay for it ... he should really take that money and put it to good use at a therapists office. But not Dr Laura's, LOL
Nothing like blaming the victim. I saw a really good looking guy on showbiz tonight and he was going on about how no man with any pride would go to a prostitute, and the female doctor was taking the same stance as dr laura! Weird! But they're both over 50 women, maybe that has something to do with it.
Sorry for such a long comment on my first visit!!!!! :)
I really don't get the prostitute thing, myself - nowadays, it is so easy to find women who will gadly jump right into bed with you, especially if they think that you are rich and powerful, as Spitzer is.
Dr. Laura says that ***IF*** you choose a good man ***AND*** you treat him right, he will not stray. Nowhere does she excuse men for their decisions to commit adultery. However, she recognizes that if a wife isn't living by her marital vows (which are more than just "forsaking all others"), THEN a man is more likely not to live by his, either.
But if you want to believe that women have no power in their relationships, or no ability to a choose a decent man, then go ahead. It is easier to bash Dr. Laura than admit that some wives may not be treating their husbands right.
Speaking of power - when women call Dr. Laura, she tells them what THEY can do to make things better. She can't very well tell their husbands what they can do if they aren't on the phone with her. When a man calls, she tells him what HE can do. It isn't a matter of bashing either sex.
I do think cheating is wrong and should not be excused. But if the refrigerator is empty, a lot of men are going to hit the drive-thru.
And lets not forget that there were *women* willing to have sex with a married man for money. Do they not have any responsibility for this?
Ken, if someone's solution to a troubled relationship is to cheat, that person is at fault. The couple may share the responsibility for their troubles, but not for actually cheating. Even if one cheats, that doesn't give the other the okay to do the same. It may be grounds to dissolve the relationship, but not violate a vow.
As far as the prostitutes culpability goes, it is insignificant next to that of the cheater. Yes, prostitutes do provide a service that could be used by people to violate their marriages, but there is nothing implicit in the business of prostitution that preys on the married. You can make a case that their income is derived from a practice that is harmful to society, but then you would have to apply the same logic to many more people than prostitutes. The bottom line is that they didn't take a vow. They provide a service for anyone, married or single, willing to pay can use (if they want to risk arrest, of course). The cheater is the one with the vow and the relationship and therefore the responsibility to safeguard those things.
Welcome Drowsey Monkey!! Thanks for the comment. I totally agree...maybe the money should be used for therapy! lol
Ken, thanks for the comment. Not really trying to bash Dr. Laura...just really commenting that I don't really agree with her anymore. She seems a bit extreme and like Barbara mentioned a bit sexist against women. Comment anytime...I love a good discussion. :)
Bob,
I agree with you...for prostitutes it's a job. They're not really going after married men per se.
Hiya, as the saying goes "it takes two to tango" - if all's well in a relationaship, I can't imagine anyone (lady or gentleman)
wanting to compromise that special relationship...
I guess I'm naive, but the prostitute ( I always call a spade a spade...) is only doing a job, for which, apparently there is a great demand..!
How dare anybody blame the only victims (wife and kids in this case)..!?!
Post a Comment